initial commit of ebook 28361HEADmain

9 files changed, 61174 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/28361-8.txt b/28361-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9b10038
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28361-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,19824 @@
+The Project Gutenberg eBook of British Socialism, by J. Ellis Barker
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+
+
+
+Title: British Socialism
+       An Examination of Its Doctrines, Policy, Aims and Practical Proposals
+
+
+Author: J. Ellis Barker
+
+
+
+Release Date: March 19, 2009  [eBook #28361]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BRITISH SOCIALISM***
+
+
+E-text prepared by Jeannie Howse, Carl Hudkins, jnik (media provider), and
+the Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team
+(http://www.pgdp.net)
+
+
+
+   +-----------------------------------------------------------+
+   | Transcriber's note:                                       |
+   |                                                           |
+   | Inconsistent hyphenation in the original document has     |
+   | been preserved.                                           |
+   |                                                           |
+   | This e-book has many unusual words and spelling that have |
+   | been retained.                                            |
+   |                                                           |
+   | Obvious typographical errors have been corrected. For     |
+   | a complete list, please see the end of this document.     |
+   |                                                           |
+   +-----------------------------------------------------------+
+
+
+
+
+
+BRITISH SOCIALISM
+
+An Examination of Its Doctrines, Policy, Aims and Practical Proposals
+
+by
+
+J. ELLIS BARKER
+
+Author of
+'Modern Germany: Her Political and Economic Problems, etc.'
+'The Rise and Decline of the Netherlands'
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+London
+Smith, Elder, & Co.
+New York: Charles Scribner's Sons
+1908
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+CHAPTER                                                           PAGE
+
+     I. INTRODUCTION--WHAT IS SOCIALISM?                             1
+
+    II. SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS OF PRESENT SOCIETY AND OF THE
+        SOCIETY OF THE FUTURE                                       10
+
+   III. THE GRIEVANCES OF THE SOCIALISTS                            30
+
+    IV. THE FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINES OF SOCIALISM                      50
+
+     V. THE AIMS AND POLICY OF THE SOCIALISTS                       92
+
+    VI. THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE WORKING
+        MASSES                                                     115
+
+   VII. THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS TRADE UNIONISTS
+        AND CO-OPERATORS                                           131
+
+  VIII. SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING LAND AND
+        THE LANDLORDS                                              145
+
+    IX. SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING CAPITAL
+        AND THE CAPITALISTS                                        152
+
+     X. SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING TAXATION
+        AND THE NATIONAL BUDGET                                    160
+
+    XI. SOCIALISM AND THE EMPIRE                                   170
+
+   XII. SOCIALIST VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND
+        FOREIGN POLICY                                            183
+
+  XIII. SOCIALISM AND THE ARMY                                     192
+
+   XIV. SOCIALISM AND THE MONARCHY                                 207
+
+    XV. SOCIALIST VIEWS ON PARLIAMENT AND THE NATIONAL
+        ADMINISTRATION                                            209
+
+   XVI. THE ATTITUDE OF THE SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE TWO
+        PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES                                     225
+
+  XVII. SOCIALISM AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT                             240
+
+ XVIII. SOCIALISM AND AGRICULTURE                                  261
+
+   XIX. SOCIALIST VIEWS ON BRITISH RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING           269
+
+    XX. SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON MONEY, BANKS, AND BANKING          278
+
+   XXI. SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON FREE TRADE AND PROTECTION          285
+
+  XXII. SOCIALISM AND EDUCATION                                    302
+
+ XXIII. THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS PROVIDENCE, THRIFT,
+        AND TEMPERANCE                                             311
+
+  XXIV. SOCIALIST VIEWS ON LAW AND JUSTICE                         325
+
+   XXV. SOCIALISM AND WOMAN, THE FAMILY AND THE HOME               330
+
+  XXVI. THE SOCIALIST ATTITUDE TOWARDS CHRISTIANITY AND
+        RELIGION                                                   354
+
+ XXVII. THE RELIGION OF SOCIALISM                                  364
+
+XXVIII. CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM                                        375
+
+  XXIX. SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM                                    381
+
+   XXX. SOCIALISM AND ANARCHISM                                    394
+
+  XXXI. SOCIALISM AND REVOLUTION                                   404
+
+ XXXII. STATE SOCIALISM                                            411
+
+XXXIII. THE SOCIALIST ORGANISATIONS: THEIR MUTUAL RELATIONS
+        AND THEIR POLICY                                           415
+
+ XXXIV. THE GROWTH AND DANGER OF BRITISH SOCIALISM                 431
+
+  XXXV. HOW THE PROGRESS OF SOCIALISM MAY BE CHECKED               440
+
+ XXXVI. IS SOCIALISM POSSIBLE?--A GLANCE INTO THE SOCIALIST
+        STATE OF THE FUTURE                                        444
+
+XXXVII. CONCLUSION                                                 470
+
+APPENDIX--OFFICIAL PROGRAMMES OF THE SOCIALISTIC ORGANISATIONS     481
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                       493
+
+ANALYTICAL INDEX                                                   509
+
+
+
+
+BRITISH SOCIALISM
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+INTRODUCTION--WHAT IS SOCIALISM?
+
+
+What is Socialism?
+
+It is exceedingly difficult to answer that question in a few words,
+for Socialism is exceedingly elusive and bewildering in its doctrines,
+its aims, and its proposals.
+
+Its opponents have described it as "a doctrine of sordid materialism
+and of atheism," they have denounced it as "the gospel of everlasting
+bellyful,"[1] and as "the coming slavery."[2] They have stated that
+Socialism means to abolish religion, that it "would try to put
+laziness, thriftlessness, and inefficiency on a par with industry,
+thrift, and efficiency, that it would strive to break up not merely
+private property, but, what is far more important, the home, the chief
+prop upon which our whole civilisation stands."[3]
+
+The Socialists, on the other hand, claim that "Socialism presents the
+only living ideal of human existence"[4]; that "Socialism is science
+applied with knowledge and understanding to all branches of human
+activity"[5]; that "Socialism is freedom,"[6] and that it is
+exceedingly just, for "the justice of Socialism will see all things,
+and therefore understand all things."[7] One of the Socialist leaders
+has told us "Socialism is much more than either a political creed or
+an economic dogma. It presents to the modern world a new conception of
+society and a new basis upon which to build up the life of the
+individual and of the State."[8] Another informs us "Socialism to
+Socialists is not a Utopia which they have invented, but a principle
+of social organisation which they assert to have been discovered by
+the patient investigators into sociology whose labours have
+distinguished the present century."[9] A third has stated that
+"Socialism is really neither more nor less than the science of
+sociology."[10] A fourth asserts that "it is a scientific scheme of
+national government entirely wise, just, and practical."[11] A fifth
+states "Socialism to me has always meant not a principle, but certain
+definite economic measures which I wish to see taken."[12]
+
+Other Socialists have taught that "Socialism is an ethical system
+founded on justice and truth; it is a heartfelt, soul-inspiring
+religion, resting upon the love of God."[13] "Socialism is a theory of
+social organisation, which reconciles the individual to society. It
+has discovered how the individual in society can attain to a state of
+complete development."[14] "Socialism is the right of the community,
+acting in its corporate capacity, to intervene in the lives and
+labours of men and women."[15] "Socialism is nothing but the
+extension of democratic self-government from the political to the
+industrial world."[16] "Socialism is an endeavour to substitute for
+the anarchical struggle or fight for existence an organised
+co-operation for existence."[17] "Socialism may be described as an
+endeavour to readjust the machinery of industry in such a way that it
+can at once depend upon and issue in a higher kind of character and
+social type than is encouraged by the conditions of ordinary
+competitive enterprise."[18] "Socialism is the development of policies
+concerning the welfare of society."[19] "It is not arbitrary
+destruction and reconstruction, but a natural process of
+development."[20] "The idea of Socialism will conquer the world, for
+this idea is nothing but the real, well understood interest of
+mankind."[21] "Its principles will carry the whole human race to a
+higher state of perfection."[22] "It is the great modern protest
+against unreality, against the delusive shams which now masquerade as
+verities."[23] "Socialism is of the character of a historical
+discovery."[24] "Socialism, the inspiring principle of all Labour
+Parties, whether they know it or not, is the next world movement--the
+movement of the constructive intellect."[25]
+
+Socialism is rich in promises, and its claims to our consideration and
+support are manifold. Are these claims justified or not? Are the
+Socialists or the Anti-Socialists right in their conception of
+Socialism?
+
+The Socialists maintain that all opposition to Socialism is based
+either on self-interest or ignorance, and principally upon the
+latter. Therefore one of the Socialist leaders wrote: "Those who wish
+to understand Socialism will be wise to study Socialist books and
+papers. One does not expect a true and fair account of any theory or
+cause from its enemies. The man who takes his ideas of Trade-Unionism
+from the Free Labour League, his ideas of Liberalism from the Tory
+papers, his ideas of South African affairs--or any other affairs--from
+the Yellow Press, will be misled into all manner of absurdities and
+errors. The statements of party politicians and party newspapers on
+most controversial subjects are prejudiced and inaccurate; but there
+is no subject upon which the professional misleaders of the people are
+so untrustworthy and so disingenuous as they are upon the subject of
+Socialism."[26] A leading Socialist organ complained: "Our opponents
+decline to deal with the fundamental principles of Socialism--its
+unanswerable indictment of the capitalist system, with all its
+concomitants of wage-slavery and slumdom; prostitution and child
+murder--and prefer instead to indulge in calumniation and
+misrepresentation of Socialism. We need not complain about that. It is
+a tribute to the soundness of the Socialist position, to the
+irrefutability of its principles, the impregnability of the rock of
+economic truth upon which it is based, that our enemies dare not
+oppose the principles of Socialism, dare not attempt to meet the
+charge Socialism levels against the existing order."[27]
+
+There is much truth in these complaints. The general public and most
+writers and speakers know very little about Socialism, because this
+most interesting subject has been very inadequately treated in the
+existing books.
+
+The existing books on Socialism describe, analyse, and criticise the
+Socialist doctrines only in the abstract as a rule. However,
+Socialism is not only an elaborate economic doctrine, it is at the
+same time a complete system of practical politics. Hence it does not
+suffice to study the doctrines of Socialism by themselves. In order to
+understand Socialism we must also investigate its practical proposals.
+
+Following the methods of our political economists, most writers on
+Socialism have, unfortunately, treated Socialism rather as a
+scientific abstraction than as a business proposition. Consequently
+the most important practical details of Socialism, such as: What are
+the views of the Socialist with regard to the Monarchy, the Army, the
+Banks, the National Currency, the Law, Education? what are their
+practical aims as regards Parliamentary Representation, Foreign
+Policy, Agriculture, Taxation, Old-age Pensions, Fiscal Policy? what
+are their relations with the Parliamentary Parties, the Trade-Unions,
+the Co-operators, etc? what is their attitude towards International
+Communism and Anarchism? is English Socialism an Evolutionary or a
+Revolutionary Movement?--these and many other questions are touched
+but lightly or are not touched at all.
+
+It is somewhat difficult to deal fully with the practical proposals of
+the Socialists, because the Socialists are very averse from
+formulating their aims and disclosing their plans. An English
+Socialist wrote: "To dogmatise about the form which the Socialist
+State shall take is to play the fool."[28] Another one stated: "It is
+quite impossible, at this time, nor would it be desirable, if
+possible, to lay down any hard and fast line as to the development of
+the details of Socialist organisation. Broad principles are all that
+can with any degree of confidence be spoken about. The details will
+arrange themselves, as the time arrives when it becomes necessary to
+settle them."[29] Gronlund, perhaps the most prominent American
+Socialist, stated: "Socialists do not profess to be architects. They
+have not planned the future in minute detail."[30] Herr Bebel, the
+leader of the German Social-Democratic Party, said on February 3,
+1893, in the Reichstag, replying to the Roman Catholics, "We do not
+ask from you the details of the future life of which you speak so
+incessantly. Why, then, do you ask us about the future society?"[31]
+Although we are told that "Socialism claims the consideration of
+mankind, because it comes forward and offers a complete scheme to
+improve the conditions of human life,"[32] Socialists carefully
+abstain as a rule from giving us the details of that scheme.
+
+The Socialists of all countries have very excellent reasons for
+keeping to themselves the details of their plans for the future.
+Nevertheless, a careful search through their numerous writings will
+enable us to obtain a fairly clear and comprehensive view of their
+political and economic plans and intentions.
+
+Great Britain does not as yet possess a great Socialist party but only
+a number of Socialist groups and factions which are totally at
+variance as regards their aims, policy, and tactics. "They differ as
+to the best means of getting what they want, and as to the best ways
+of managing the work, and as to the proper way of sharing the
+earnings. Some Socialists still believe that Socialism will have to be
+got by force. I think there are not many. Some are in favour of buying
+the land, the railways, the machinery, and other things; and some are
+in favour of taking them, by force, or by new laws. Then some say that
+there should be no wages paid at all, but that everyone should do an
+equal share of work, and take whatever he needed from the nation's
+goods. Others say that all men should do an equal share of work, and
+have an equal share of the goods, or of the earnings. Others say it
+would be better to pay wages, as now, but to let the wages be fixed by
+the Government, or by corporations, or other officials, and that all
+wages should be equal. Others, again, say that wages should be paid,
+that the wages should be fixed as above stated, and that different
+kinds of work should be paid for at different rates. In one kind of
+Socialism the civil engineer, the actor, the general, the artist, the
+tram guard, the dustman, the milliner, and the collier would all be
+paid the same wages. In another kind of Socialism there would be no
+wages, but all would be called upon to work, and all who worked would
+'take according to their needs.' In another kind of Socialism the
+civil engineer would be paid more than the navvy, the opera singer
+more than the milliner, the general more than the sergeant, and the
+editor more than the scavenger."[33]
+
+Notwithstanding these numerous and important differences, of which
+more will be learned in the course of this book, British Socialists
+are absolutely united in certain important respects. "The policies of
+Socialism are a changeable quantity, though the principle is as fixed
+as the Northern Star."[34] "Socialism is as flexible in its form as it
+is definite in its principles."[35]
+
+A superficial study of Socialism reveals to us not a single and
+generally accepted plan, but a confused and confusing mass of mutually
+contradictory plans and doctrines. Therefore he who wishes to know
+what Socialism is, must study the many-headed movement in its entirety
+and give an impartial hearing to all its advocates. We can understand
+Socialism only if we are acquainted with practically its entire
+literature.
+
+Unfortunately the literature of Socialism is very vast. A complete
+collection of modern Socialist literature would embrace at least
+thirty thousand items. Therefore a full analysis of international
+Socialism based upon the study of the original sources is a forbidding
+undertaking. I have consequently limited myself to the investigation
+of the British Socialist movement, although I have cast a cursory
+glance upon foreign Socialism whenever it seemed necessary to do so.
+
+I have consulted altogether about a thousand books and pamphlets, and
+have given representative extracts from four hundred or five hundred
+of those which seemed most proper to elucidate the subject of this
+book. Having given space to the views of all the Socialist groups,
+this book is a summary of the whole literature of British Socialism
+and a key to it. It is based exclusively on first-hand evidence, and
+every statement contained in it can instantly be verified by reference
+to the original sources indicated in the footnotes. In the
+Bibliography at the end of this volume the full title, publisher's
+address, and date of publication of all sources drawn upon are given,
+so that readers will have no difficulty in procuring any Socialist
+books they may want for further study.
+
+Most of the books quoted are unknown to booksellers, and are not in
+public libraries. Even the British Museum Library possesses only part
+of the publications used in this book, which is the first to exploit
+fully the whole Socialist party literature. Whilst most books on
+Socialism take note only of Socialist text-books addressed to
+students, the present volume considers chiefly the propaganda
+literature which is educating the Socialist rank and file and shaping
+its political views. For all practical political purposes the
+propaganda literature is undoubtedly by far the more important of the
+two to the statesman and the citizen.
+
+The present volume is the only book of its kind, and I hope that the
+Socialist movement in Germany, France, and the United States will be
+treated with similar completeness by writers of these countries. The
+perusal of the present volume will enable us to form an opinion of the
+merits or demerits of the Socialistic theories and practical plans,
+and make it possible for us to separate the grain from the chaff, the
+wisdom from the folly, in the teachings of the Socialists. Thus we
+shall be able to see which of their complaints and proposals are
+justified and practical, and which are unjustified and unpractical.
+
+Popular dissatisfaction, Socialistic and non-Socialistic, points to
+the existence of ills in the body politic, and the Socialistic
+agitation is exceedingly valuable inasmuch as it draws general
+attention to these ills. Some complaints of the Socialists will be
+found to be imaginary, others are very real.
+
+It would be a sterile undertaking merely to analyse and criticise
+Socialism and the Socialistic proposals. Therefore, after having
+described the policy, ideals, and aims of the Socialists, I mean to
+analyse the disease of which Socialism is a consequence and a symptom,
+and to propose practical measures for curing it.
+
+In the course of this book I shall show that Socialism seems likely to
+become a very great danger in this country--a far greater danger than
+is generally realised. Therefore its opponents will be wise not to
+sneer at Socialism, but to study it and to try to understand it. That
+task will be found worth our while, and only after it shall we be able
+to further Socialism if it is beneficial, to combat it if it is
+pernicious, and to correct it if it is only the misguided expression
+of genuine suffering and want. Indifference to a great and dangerous
+political movement such as Socialism may have the gravest
+consequences. Idlers do not make history. They suffer it.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1] Millar, _Socialism_, p. 21.
+
+[2] Herbert Spencer, _The Man versus the State_, p. 18 ff.
+
+[3] Roosevelt, Presidential Message, December 1907.
+
+[4] Walter Crane in Squire, _Socialism and Art_, Foreword.
+
+[5] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 256.
+
+[6] Kessack, _Capitalist Wilderness_, p. 2.
+
+[7] Ford, _Woman and Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[8] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 1.
+
+[9] Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 3.
+
+[10] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, Preface.
+
+[11] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[12] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 3.
+
+[13] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 1.
+
+[14] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[15] _Labour Record_, February 1907.
+
+[16] Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 15.
+
+[17] _Will Socialism benefit the British People?_ p. 4.
+
+[18] Ball, _The Moral Aspects of Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[19] Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[20] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 257.
+
+[21] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 13.
+
+[22] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[23] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. ix.
+
+[24] Lafargue, in Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 1264.
+
+[25] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 108.
+
+[26] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[27] _Justice_, October 19, 1907.
+
+[28] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 96.
+
+[29] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 44.
+
+[30] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 126.
+
+[31] Guyot, _Pretensions of Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[32] Hird, _From Brute to Brother_, p. 1.
+
+[33] Robert Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 15.
+
+[34] Williams, _Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 4.
+
+[35] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 1265.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS OF PRESENT SOCIETY AND OF THE SOCIETY OF THE
+FUTURE
+
+
+"We are not indebted to reason," wrote the greatest American
+Socialist, "for the landmarks of human progress, for the introduction
+of Christianity, the institution of the monastic orders, the Crusades,
+the Reformation, the American Revolution, or the abolition of slavery.
+Man is only irresistible when he acts from passion. The masses of men
+are never moved except by passions, feelings, interests."[36]
+"Socialism has the advantage of appealing to the interests as well as
+to the enthusiasm of all except the few who think the world good
+enough as it is.... It is, of course, to the discontented wage-workers
+that the Socialist can appeal with the greatest chance of
+success."[37] These indiscreet words, which might have been written by
+the most implacable of Anti-Socialists, sum up and explain the
+Socialistic agitation and tactics. They are a proclamation and an
+avowal, and the worst enemy of Socialism would have found it difficult
+to pen a more damaging statement. Socialists rely not on reason or
+justice, but on unreason and passion, for the victory of their cause;
+and that fact is very much to be regretted, for it is bound to create
+prejudice and suspicion, and to greatly weaken their case.
+
+The British Socialists, seeking to rouse the passions of men,
+habitually rely on exaggeration and misrepresentation. They do not
+tire of painting the present state of society in the darkest colours
+and of describing with an unbounded but hardly justifiable optimism
+and enthusiasm the advantages which will accrue to society when
+Socialism has come to rule. It will be seen that in describing society
+of the present and society of the future, Socialists let their
+imagination run riot in the most astounding fashion.
+
+To the Socialist modern civilisation is worse than a failure. "Our
+civilisation seems all so savage and bestial and filthy and
+inartistic; all so cowardly and devilish and despicable. We fight by
+cheatery and underselling, and adulteration and bribery, and unmanly
+smirking for our bone of a livelihood; all scrambling and biting round
+the platter when there is abundance for all, if we were orderly and
+courteous and gentlemanly; all crushing the weaker; all struggling to
+the platter-side for the privilege of wearing tall hats and of giving
+good advice to the poor dogs outside. We, the well-fed, shout lordily
+to the hungry and cheer them with legends to the effect that though
+the poor are juggled out of earth, they may be masters in Heaven. Our
+civilisation is barbarous."[38]
+
+    Where'er we go, to east or west
+      North or south, 'tis all the same;
+    Civilisation at it's best
+      Is savagery's newer name.
+    For we see on every hand
+      'Midst the whirr and noise of trade
+    The toilers, crushed and trampled, and
+      Into beasts of burden made.[39]
+
+"The one reality of the nineteenth century is the scramble for wealth;
+politics, literature, science, religion, art, are, apart from
+money-getting, mere lifeless wraiths."[40] Government in general, and
+British Government in particular, is vicious, tyrannous, and
+neglectful, and deserves the utmost contempt. "National Government is
+devised for other objects than the adjustment of essential, economic,
+and hygienic arrangements for the redemption of human life; to use it
+for such a purpose is gross tyranny and a deadly blow at the very
+foundations of morality and religion! Governments exist for quite
+other purposes than this--to pay a million pounds yearly to one family
+and its immediate parasites, to supply power of life and death over
+the people to the exploiting class and fat places to their satellites
+and creatures, to squander hundreds of millions on gunpowder and
+armaments, to use the whole socialised power of the nation to overawe,
+exploit, rob, and ruin the so-called lower races--all these are the
+proper objects of government according to our orthodox wiseacres, but
+to use the same obvious instrument adequately to protect human life at
+home, and that life, to quote Mr. Burns, 'the weakest, the smallest,
+and the dearest to us all,' is to undermine the foundations of British
+manliness and to poison the fountain of British liberty and greatness.
+Such is the curious _mélange_ of selfishness, hypocrisy, prejudice,
+ignorance, and incoherence which passes muster for argument amongst
+our anti-Socialist opponents."[41]
+
+British social legislation has been a failure. Never was the lot of
+the workers worse than it is now. "Your legislation for the past
+hundred years is a perpetual and fruitless effort to regulate the
+disorders of your economic system. Your poor, your drunken, your
+incompetent, your sick, your aged, ride you like a nightmare. You have
+dissolved all human and personal ties. The salient characteristic of
+your civilisation is its irresponsibility. The making of dividends is
+the universal preoccupation; the well-being of the labourer is no
+one's concern. You depend on variations of supply and demand which
+you can neither determine nor anticipate. The failure of a harvest,
+the modification of a tariff in some remote country dislocates the
+industry of millions, thousands of miles away. You are at the mercy of
+a prospector's luck, an inventor's genius, a woman's caprice--nay, you
+are at the mercy of your own instruments. Your capital is alive and
+cries for food."[42]
+
+Virtue has disappeared, religion is a fraud, clergy and priesthood are
+mercenary, cowardly, and interested time-servers. "The priests and the
+parsons are salary-slaves as much as the workers are wage-slaves. The
+majority of them dare not preach the Gospel of Humanity, Justice, and
+Socialism from their pulpits owing to their fear of their paymasters.
+Religion is divorced from business, politics, the administration of
+public authorities, the treatment of the aged worker, and written
+across the actions of the professing Christians is 'Self-interest;
+every man for himself and the Workhouse take the hindmost.'"[43]
+
+Life is hell, and only Socialism can regenerate the world.
+
+    Things are all wrong, and we must put them right
+    So say all Socialists, and truly too.
+    Man does not get the chance here to subdue
+    The brute in self; and hence the fearful blight
+    Which makes one sicken at the dreadful sight
+    Of all society in one hell stew.[44]
+
+Apparently all British workers spend their lives in terrible misery
+and constant privation. Hunger and despair are their constant
+companions, and they will see in Socialism their only salvation even
+if Socialism should destroy individual liberty, for to them individual
+liberty is a word without meaning. One of the most prominent British
+Socialists, Mr. Philip Snowden, M.P., in a pamphlet addressed to
+working men, writes: "Let those who fear that Socialism will destroy
+individual liberty and hinder intellectual development go with their
+talk to the machine-workers of our great northern towns, who are
+chained for eleven hours a day to a monotonous toil, with the eye of
+the overseer and the fear of dismissal spurring them on to an exertion
+which leaves them at the end of their day's work physical wrecks, with
+no ambition but to restore their wasted energies at the nearest
+public-house. Let them go with their talk of the blessings of
+civilisation to the pottery and chemical workers, whose systems are
+poisoned, whose sight is destroyed, where, through the bodies of the
+parents being saturated with poison, half the children are born dead,
+and of the rest not one in four lives to be five--tell them to hold
+fast to their share of the blessings of our glorious civilisation. Or
+go to the sweaters' victims, living, eating, working, dying in one
+room, for which a vampire landlord will take in rent one-half of all
+the family can earn by working day and night--talk to them of
+individual liberty and warn them of the tyranny of the coming
+Socialism. Or go on a bitterly cold winter morning to the dock gates
+of one of our great ports and see thousands of men waiting in the hope
+of a day's job, and watch how a few here and there of the strongest
+are selected, and the rest left to another day of hunger and despair;
+or, wait still, and see how a few remain behind in the hope that their
+mate may meet with an accident and 'they can snatch at the work he
+had.' Why, to talk of individual freedom and equality of opportunity
+under a system of cannibalistic competition like this is like the
+mocking laughter of a raving maniac gloating over the torture of the
+victim it holds in its murderous grip."[45] In another popular
+pamphlet the worker is told: "After all, John, does it not strike you
+that there is some foul iniquity in a system which allows one part of
+the community to do another portion of it to death and to rob and
+enslave those it is pleased to let live? Do you not see that those
+your capitalists find it convenient and profitable to employ may live;
+and that those they do not choose to employ must die? Do you not see
+that these are hurried and driven hither and thither in haggard,
+destitute misery; are thrust into festering heaps in your foul slums;
+into your gaols, and penitentiaries, and workhouses; that they wander
+in hopeless misery, hungering within sight of food, penniless amid
+plenty, enforcedly idle, and work to which they can have no access
+lying upon every hand of them, as though the world were under an
+enchantment and God were dead!"[46]
+
+The British working man, as he is generally known, is a manly and very
+independent personage. As a rule his master is more afraid of him than
+he is of his master. Yet, according to the picture drawn of him by the
+Socialists, he is a timorous, cowardly, whining, pitiful creature who
+has to cringe to his tyrannic employers:
+
+    See the toiler, how he slaves
+      For a trifle of his toil.
+    How disease and death he braves,
+      Yet the masters take the spoil;
+    And how often, cap in hand,
+      Trembling, pleading piteously,
+    He is forced to take his stand
+      In the mart of slavery.
+
+    Oh! ye tyrants of the earth,
+      Who make others' ruin your trade,
+    'Midst licentious love and mirth
+      Fashion, pomp, and church parade.
+    Do you never think, oh, tell
+      Of the hideous crime and shame
+    That has made this earth a hell
+      Of commercial fraud and shame?[47]
+
+During the week the British workers work at most five and a half days
+out of seven, and as a rule they work during from eight to ten hours a
+day. Generally speaking, the pace at which British workmen work is not
+forced. Except in a few special industries overwork among the working
+men is practically unknown. Besides, the pace at which work is
+performed is as a rule determined not by the employer, but by the
+employees. Nevertheless we read, "It is monstrous that, while some
+half million of men are vainly seeking employment, millions of their
+fellows should have no respite from arduous ill-requited toil and
+should be hastening to a premature death through overwork."[48] In
+prose and verse the British workers are constantly told that they are
+slaves[49] who are driven into starvation and suicide:
+
+    Let them brag until in the face they are black
+      That over oceans they hold their sway,
+    Of the flag of Old England, the Union Jack,
+      About which I have something to say.
+    'Tis said that it floats o'er the free; but it waves
+      Over thousands of hard-worked, ill-paid British slaves,
+    Who are driven to pauper and suicide graves--
+      The starving poor of Old England.
+
+        _Chorus._
+
+        'Tis the poor, the poor the taxes have to pay,
+        The poor who are starving every day,
+        Who faint and die on the King's highway--
+        The starving poor of Old England.
+
+    There's the slaves of the needle and the slaves of the mine,
+      The postmen, and the sons of the plough,
+    And the hard-worked servants on the railway line,
+      Who get little by the sweat of their brow.
+    'Tis said that the labourer is worthy of his hire;
+      But of whom does he get it? we'd like to enquire.
+    Not of any mill-owner, or farmer, or squire,
+      Who grind down the poor of Old England.[50]
+
+Now let us cast a glance at the Socialist picture of the society of
+the future under Socialistic rule.
+
+The first thing which Socialism would do would be to organise work,
+for "practical Socialism is a kind of national scheme of co-operation,
+managed by the State."[51] There would be no more employers, for
+"under Socialism all the work of the nation would be managed by the
+nation for the nation,"[52] and all would have plenty to eat, because
+"Socialism would leave no man to starve."[53] "All the work of the
+nation would be organised--that is to say, it would be ordered or
+arranged so that no one need be out of work, and so that no useless
+work need be done, and so that no work need be done twice where once
+would serve."[54]
+
+It is expected that the national organisation and administration of
+all the industries would prove more efficient than private enterprise.
+We are assured that "under Socialism the efficiency of production
+developed by Capitalism will not only be preserved but improved.
+Mechanical invention will be encouraged and utilised to the
+utmost."[55] Compulsory labour, State regulation of work, and
+increased production would lead to increased consumption and increased
+comfort. "Who would deny that, if it is everybody's duty to work, if
+the production of unnecessary--nay, even of injurious--articles is
+abolished, if production is organised in conformity with the real
+wants and pleasures of mankind--who would deny, I ask, that the
+standard of life of the whole human race might be raised infinitely
+above its present grade?"[56]
+
+Although Socialism would make work compulsory to all, and place every
+man, woman, and child under the direction of the great Socialist
+organisation with its army of officials, and although it would destroy
+individual liberty as at present understood, by placing the daily life
+of every citizen under Government regulations and restrictions, it
+would bring with it a greater liberty. Unfortunately the Socialists
+fail to say what that liberty consists in, and we must take their
+assurances in lieu of details. "Those who fear that Socialism will
+destroy individual liberty fail to distinguish between liberty and
+licence. Individualism is licence--it is the freedom of the individual
+to do as he likes without regard to the effect of his action on
+others, or even without regard to his own best welfare. Socialism is
+liberty; for it will restrict the freedom of the individual to inflict
+injury upon others or to do what is morally injurious to himself."[57]
+
+Socialism will release the British slaves out of their slavery, and
+restore them to everlasting freedom. "Such Socialism as we champion
+means for all future generations not slavery, but full and
+never-ending freedom."[58] "Socialism declares it to be the duty of
+man to remove all artificial barriers to the improvement of
+circumstances, in order that humanity, as a whole, may have freedom
+and all possible assistance to attain to its full stature, physically,
+mentally, and spiritually."[59]
+
+With the introduction of the Socialist _régime_ the earth would, as by
+a magician's wand, be transformed into a paradise. Over-population,
+bad harvests, the maladjustment of international demand and supply,
+and individual folly, laziness, wastefulness, improvidence, and
+passion would apparently no longer have the same unfortunate
+consequences which they have now. "The struggle for individual
+existence disappears...."[60] "The words 'poor' and 'charity' will be
+expunged from the dictionary as relics of a barbarous past."[61]
+"There would be no starvation, there would be no pauperism, there
+would be no sweaters; there would be no barefooted children in the
+streets; there would be no fraudulent trustees, no bankrupts; there
+would be no slums, no annual massacre of innocents by preventable
+disease; there would be hardly such a thing known as ignorance, there
+would be scarcely any drunkenness, and crime would shrink to
+microscopic dimensions."[62]
+
+"Practical Socialism would educate the people. It would provide cheap
+and pure food. It would extend and elevate the means of study and
+amusement. It would foster literature and science and art. It would
+encourage and reward genius and industry. It would abolish sweating
+and jerry-work. It would demolish the slums and erect good and
+handsome dwellings. It would compel all men to do some kind of useful
+work. It would recreate and nourish the craftsman's pride in his
+craft. It would protect women and children. It would raise the
+standard of health and morality; and it would take the sting out of
+pauperism by paying pensions to honest workers no longer able to
+work."[63]
+
+"There is something in Socialism to kill ignorance and to destroy
+vice. There is something in it to shut up the gaols, to do away with
+prostitution, to reduce crime and drunkenness, and wipe out for ever
+the sweater and the slums, the beggars and the idle rich, the useless
+fine ladies and lords, and to make it possible for sober and willing
+workers to live healthy, and happy, and honourable lives."[64]
+
+The Socialist Government would apparently be all-powerful and
+all-wise. At any rate, it would improve the character of the people.
+"Socialism would teach and train all children wisely; it would foster
+genius and devotion to the common good; it would kill scamping, and
+loafing, and jerrymandering; it would give us better health, better
+homes, better work, better food, better lives, and better men and
+women."[65]
+
+When Socialism is introduced and private capital abolished, the golden
+age of the world will begin:
+
+    When all mankind are workers,
+      And no drones in the hive;
+    Oh, what a happy, glorious time
+      They'll have who are alive.
+    This world will be a garden,
+      An Eden full of bliss;
+    Oh, brother--sister--won't you strive
+      For such a state as this?
+
+    There will be no starving children, no;
+      Nor tramps, nor beggars then;
+    No workhouses, nor prisons, and
+      No slums, nor sweater's den.
+    The land-grabber and the vampire,
+      And the fleecer of our toil,
+    Will all have ceased to crush us
+      In their vile rush for the spoil.[66]
+
+So far we have looked chiefly at the economic consequences which the
+introduction of Socialism is going to bring about. However, according
+to the Socialists, it is not true that "Socialism is merely sordid and
+material, and has no regard for the more ideal side of human
+interests. The Socialist recognises, far more than others, the higher
+ideals of human life as being its true end."[67] Therefore "Socialism
+seeks to improve the physical, mental, and spiritual environment of
+every man, woman, and child, so that all mankind may be purer,
+healthier, happier, stronger, nobler, and that each generation may be
+nearer perfection than the one immediately preceding."[68] In other
+words, "the creation of a higher type of mankind than the modern man
+will be the result of Socialism. Men will have no need to think, day
+in, day out, where to get the bread for to-morrow."[69] "Material
+conditions form the fundamental basis of human existence. When these
+become common property, free to all and abundant for all, they will
+cease to have that importance they now possess. The sordid struggle
+for mere material things will disappear; free play will be given to
+man's higher faculties, and the struggle, competition, or emulation
+between man and man will be for the realisation of his highest
+conceivable aspirations."[70]
+
+According to many Socialists, money and wages would disappear. Food,
+clothing, lodging, &c., would be given gratis to the citizens. "Under
+ideal Socialism there would be no money at all and no wages. The
+industry of the country would be organised and managed by the State,
+much as the Post Office now is; goods of all kinds would be produced
+and distributed for use, and not for sale, in such quantities as were
+needed; hours of labour would be fixed, and every citizen would take
+what he or she desired from the common stock. Food, clothing,
+lodging, fuel, transit, amusements, and all other things would be
+absolutely free, and the only difference between a prime minister and
+a collier would be the difference of rank and occupation."[71]
+
+Not only food, clothing, and shelter would be supplied gratis by a
+bountiful State to the people. In order to banish _ennui_ from among
+the workers, entertainments and amusements also would be provided,
+free of charge. Gratis travel on the railways would make life a
+permanent holiday, and the last cause of dissatisfaction would be
+removed by transferring the surroundings of the gratuitously
+maintained and amused people into a garden of Eden. "I would have the
+towns rebuilt with wide streets, with detached houses, with gardens
+and fountains and avenues of trees. I would make the railways, the
+carriage of letters, and the transit of goods as free as the roads and
+bridges. I would make the houses loftier and larger, and clear them of
+all useless furniture. I would institute public dining-halls, public
+baths, public washhouses on the best plans, and so set free the hands
+of those slaves--our English women. I would have public parks, public
+theatres, music-halls, gymnasiums, football and cricket fields, public
+halls and public gardens for recreation and music and refreshment. I
+would have all our children fed and clothed and educated at the cost
+of the State. I would have them all taught to play and to sing. I
+would have them all trained to athletics and to arms. I would have
+public halls of science. I would have the people become their own
+artists, actors, musicians, soldiers, and police. Then, by degrees, I
+would make all these things free."[72] In the words of the Socialist
+poet--
+
+    We'll grow up true men and women
+    And enjoy life from our birth.[73]
+
+Men, being no longer compelled to work hard for a living, will lose
+the desire for wealth and all that wealth supplies and will devote
+themselves more and more to the culture of their mind. "Under
+Socialism the possession of riches will cease to be a ruling passion,
+for honest labour will be a guarantee against want, and riches will no
+longer be the passport to social position. Under such conditions the
+possession of riches will be a superfluous burden which no sane man
+will wish to bear."[74] "When land and capital are the common property
+of all the people, class distinctions, as we know them at present,
+will no longer exist. The Mind will then be the standard by which a
+man's place among his fellows will be determined."[75] Hence
+"Socialism means the elevation of the struggle for existence from the
+material to the intellectual plane. Socialism will raise the struggle
+for existence into a sphere where competition shall be emulation,
+where the treasures are boundless and eternal, and where the abundant
+wealth of one does not cause the poverty of another."[76]
+
+The poet has described in a vision this phase of the golden age of
+Socialism as follows:
+
+    A strain of distant music
+      Floats on the gentle breeze,
+    Its captivating sweetness
+      Bends e'en the proudest knees;
+    Now soft as angel whispers,
+      Then, loud as trumpet's blast
+    It sounds the knell of sorrows
+      And pains for ever past.
+
+    Now sweeter and more varied,
+      The music doth appear;
+    Ten thousand harps Ćolian
+      Seem to be drawing near.
+    Ten thousand angels' voices
+      Are mingled with the strain,
+    Chanting the song of Freedom--
+      Justice has come to reign;
+
+    Telling of bounteous harvests,
+      Of waving golden corn,
+    Waiting the reaper's sickle,
+      And asking to be shorn;
+    Lands rich with milk and honey
+      Promised in days of yore;
+    Asking all those that hunger
+      To eat and faint no more.
+
+    The song grows loud and mighty
+      As thunder in the storm,
+    The tyrant quakes and trembles,
+      And hides his guilty form;
+    And stronger and still stronger
+      The joyous chorus grows--
+    Rejoice! all ye that labour,
+      Ye triumph o'er your foes.[77]
+
+"Socialism, being at the same time the sublimest science, art, and
+religion, will naturally elevate man. The British people will become a
+nation of scientists and philosophers who, throwing natural enjoyments
+aside, will lead a life of pure intellectual happiness. Mortal men
+will become demi-gods. Socialism will justify God's way to man."[78]
+"Socialism comes as the Angel of Light bearing to mankind this message
+of truth. Socialism, equipped with all the learning of the ages, takes
+up the ripest teaching of the poet, the philosopher, the economist,
+the scientist, the historian, and joins the conclusion of each
+together into one harmonious whole. Now we know that suffering,
+misery, and poverty are a violation of God's will. Now we know that
+the fulness of time has come for us to cast the last relic of our
+fallen nature from us and to follow the beckoning angel who is waiting
+to lead us back through the gates of Paradise into an Eden of
+intellectual joys."[79]
+
+    These things shall be! a loftier race
+      Than e'er the world hath known shall rise
+    With flame of freedom in their souls,
+      And light of science in their eyes.
+
+    They shall be gentle, brave, and strong,
+      To spill no drop of blood, but dare
+    All that may plant man's lordship firm
+      On earth, and fire, and sea, and air.
+
+    Nation with nation, land with land,
+      Unarmed shall live as comrades free;
+    In every heart and brain shall throb
+      The pulse of one fraternity.
+
+    New arts shall bloom of loftier mould,
+      And mightier music thrill the skies,
+    And every life shall be a song
+      When all the earth is paradise.
+
+    These things--they are no dreams--shall be
+      For happier men when we are gone.
+    These golden days for them shall dawn,
+      Transcending aught we gaze upon.[80]
+
+All men will be brothers. The difference among nations and races will
+disappear by the rule of love and justice. "Justice is to be the
+foundation on which we must build: not the kind of justice we have
+hitherto considered as sufficient for us, and which many countries
+pride themselves is their watchword and standard, but a justice that
+demands freedom for all."[81]
+
+    Equal rights it gives, my brothers,
+      To the eagle and the dove;
+    Right to air, and light, and knowledge,
+      Right to rise your toil above--
+    Hearken! hearken! O, my brothers,
+      For this new great Right is Love.[82]
+
+Wars will be abolished.
+
+    There's a good time coming, boys,
+      A good time coming;
+    The pen shall supersede the sword,
+    And right, not might, shall be the lord
+      In the good time coming.
+    Worth, not birth, shall rule mankind,
+      And be acknowledged stronger;
+    The proper impulse has been giv'n--
+      Wait a little longer.[83]
+
+Being a religion of peace and love, and preaching the brotherhood of
+man, Socialism will conquer the world. "Socialism with its promise of
+freedom, its larger hope for humanity, its triumph of peace over war,
+its binding of the races of the earth into one all-embracing
+brotherhood, must prevail."[84] "We mean the establishment of a
+political power which shall have for its conscious and definite aim
+the common ownership and control of the _whole_ of the world's
+industry, exchange, &c."[85]
+
+According to many Socialists, Socialism is not an original religion,
+but it is the most sublime form of Christianity. "Socialism is in
+accordance with the revealed will of God."[86] "Karl Marx was an
+utter pagan, but there is not an essential proposition in 'Das
+Kapital' that Jesus of Nazareth did not inculcate. Is it a question of
+rent? You are as much entitled to immunity from it as the birds of the
+air, or the grass of the fields. Is it a question of usury or
+interest? Lend, hoping for nothing again. Is it a question of profit
+or inequitable exchange? Do unto others as ye would that they should
+do unto you."[87] "Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism? Unless we are
+prepared to deny the truth of the Gospel, there can be but one
+answer--Yes. And Socialism naturally evolves from Christianity."[88]
+Socialism will mean the establishment of the rule of Christ upon
+earth. "The political democracy, dominated by the social ideal, will
+be the coming of Christ to rule the nations in righteousness."[89] The
+Socialist leaders see visions. "I do sometimes dream dreams, and I see
+a vision of what the world will be when this spirit of love and
+sacrifice which has actuated some noble spirits in all ages and which
+shone with the glory of full perfection in the life and example of
+Jesus of Nazareth--I sometimes see, as through a glass darkly, a
+vision of what the world will be when this spirit of love and
+sacrifice shall animate all men. I see our modern towns swept away,
+and in their place beautiful cities whose buildings reflect the pride
+of the community in their common life, and whose healthy homes show
+the value society attaches to the individual life. I see everywhere a
+change come over the face of the landscape; every meadow smiles with
+plenty, every valley blossoms as the rose, every hill is green with
+the glory of Lebanon. I see a revived art and a revived literature. I
+see a people healthy, happy, cultured, contented, whose wealth is
+life, full and free, 'whose ways are ways of pleasantness, whose
+flowery paths are paths of peace.' And my vision extends, though more
+dimly, beyond the confines of my own dear land, and I see this spirit
+of brotherhood among the nations has broken down international
+barriers, and international hatred is no more. The sword is beaten
+into a ploughshare, the spear into a pruning-hook, and the peoples of
+all lands are one, each freely sharing of its special bounties to add
+to the comforts of all."[90]
+
+The new Christian religion, like the old one, demands its saints and
+its martyrs, if not the reincarnation of Christ. "The only way to
+regain the earthly paradise is by the old, hard road to
+Calvary--through persecution, through poverty, through temptation, by
+the agony and bloody sweat, by the crown of thorns, by the agonising
+death, and then the resurrection to the New Humanity--purified by
+suffering, triumphant through Sacrifice."[91]
+
+The new Christ also has his forerunner and herald. "Mr. Keir Hardie,
+M.P., the leader of the Labour Party, resembles John the Baptist,"[92]
+and the Socialist leaders will do even greater things than did Christ.
+We are told: "When Christ told His disciples that it was possible for
+them to do greater things than they had seen Him do they must have
+been fairly staggered. Just think for a moment of the nature of the
+works He had done, most of them in their very presence. Those who are
+striving to obtain a better social order and provide a fairer
+distribution of the good gifts of God among the sons of men, these men
+I say, in so far as their efforts are successful, are doing greater
+things than Christ did when He performed the miracle of feeding the
+hungry."[93]
+
+"Man is only irresistible when he acts from passion. The masses of men
+are never moved except by passions feelings, interests. It is of
+course to the discontented wage-earners that the Socialist can appeal
+with the greatest chance of success."[94] All Socialists agree in
+depicting to the workers life in present society as hell incarnate and
+in giving a picture of life in the Socialist State of the future which
+resembles the descriptions found in the "Arabian Nights" tales. They
+only disagree in this: that some promise him heaven, whilst those
+possessed of less enthusiasm promise him only an earthly paradise.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[36] Gronlund, _The Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 187.
+
+[37] _Ibid._ p. 184.
+
+[38] _Forward_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[39] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 22.
+
+[40] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 140.
+
+[41] Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 6.
+
+[42] Glyde, _The Misfortune of being a Working Man_, p. 1.
+
+[43] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[44] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 1.
+
+[45] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, pp. 4-5.
+
+[46] Washington, _A Corner in Flesh and Blood_, p. 15.
+
+[47] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 29.
+
+[48] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 7.
+
+[49] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 18.
+
+[50] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 32.
+
+[51] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[52] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 7.
+
+[53] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 96.
+
+[54] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ pp. 5, 6.
+
+[55] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 74.
+
+[56] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 13.
+
+[57] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, pp. 12, 13.
+
+[58] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, p. 13.
+
+[59] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 1.
+
+[60] Engels, _Socialism: Utopian and Scientific_, p. 81.
+
+[61] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 170.
+
+[62] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[63] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 102.
+
+[64] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 89.
+
+[65] _Ibid._ p. 89.
+
+[66] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 8.
+
+[67] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 43.
+
+[68] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 1.
+
+[69] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 43.
+
+[70] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 44.
+
+[71] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 103.
+
+[72] _Ibid._ pp. 43, 44.
+
+[73] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 8.
+
+[74] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[75] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 24.
+
+[76] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[77] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 18.
+
+[78] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[79] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[80] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 14.
+
+[81] Ford, _Women and Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[82] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 31.
+
+[83] _Ibid._ p. 25.
+
+[84] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 104.
+
+[85] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[86] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 15.
+
+[87] Davidson, _The Gospel of the Poor_, p. 153.
+
+[88] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 16.
+
+[89] Snowden, _The Christ that is to be_, p. 13.
+
+[90] Snowden, _The Christ that is to be_, pp. 13, 14.
+
+[91] _Ibid._ p. 14.
+
+[92] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 4.
+
+[93] Ward, _Prevention is Better than Cure_, pp. 2, 5, and 6.
+
+[94] Gronlund, _The Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 184.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+THE GRIEVANCES OF THE SOCIALISTS
+
+
+"Socialism is not only a theory of another and better system of
+society: it is an indictment of the existing order."[95] The Socialist
+conception of society as at present constituted, given in the
+preceding chapter, will have prepared the reader to some extent for
+the Socialist grievances. These grievances are three in number, and
+may be summed up as follows:
+
+(1) The workers are for all practical purposes slaves who are kept in
+chains and forced to work by the capitalist class.
+
+(2) The rich men cause the poverty of the poor by defrauding them of
+the largest part of their wages.
+
+(3) The workers receive only from one third to one fourth of the wage
+which is their rightful due.
+
+Let us look into these grievances.
+
+According to the Socialist leaders, the workers--
+
+    Helots in hunger nursed
+    Slaves of their reign accursed[96]--
+
+keep the rich in affluence. Nevertheless they themselves are kept in
+poverty, degradation, and slavery by the capitalists whom they nourish
+by their labour. "The landlord owns the raw material and can live in
+idleness. The capitalist owns the machinery and can live in idleness.
+The worker has nothing, except his ability to work, and he cannot
+work without the consent of the landlord and the capitalist.
+Therefore, he is virtually a slave. He cannot control his own
+life."[97]
+
+As a matter of fact the position of the worker is worse than was that
+of the slave. "It did not always pay to starve a slave, because if he
+died you might have to buy another one. Therefore the lot of the slave
+under a good master was in many respects better than that of the
+proletariat in our great cities."[98] "Poverty rather than property is
+the reward of labour to-day."[99] "Poverty is our reward for creating
+plenty, and the class that lives in luxury by exploiting our labour
+contemptuously informs us that the law of supply and demand condemns
+us to suffer the most hideous privation whenever our excessive
+industry has created a glut of all the things that satisfy human
+needs."[100]
+
+The workers are unfree, being enslaved by the capitalists. It is true
+that they possess freedom of contract, but freedom of contract, like
+individual liberty, is an illusion, because the workers, being
+penniless, are compelled to accept whatever work is obtainable, and to
+be satisfied with whatever wages are offered. "The right to sell in
+the markets is now well established, but the chief difficulty with the
+majority of workers lies in the fact that they have nothing but their
+labour to sell, and a market is not easy to find even for that."[101]
+
+Although co-operation has made millions of workers in Germany, France,
+Belgium, and other countries prosperous and independent, independence
+is, according to the Socialists, for some unspecified reason,
+unobtainable for the workers of Great Britain, and co-operation is a
+failure. "The chance of the great bulk of the labourers ever coming to
+work upon their own land and capital in associations for co-operative
+production, has become even less hopeful than it ever was."[102]
+"Everywhere the workman is coming to understand that it is practically
+hopeless for him, either individually or co-operatively, to own the
+constantly growing mass of capital by the use of which he lives."[103]
+The advent of the great industry has not benefited but harmed him.
+"The supersession of the small by the great industry has given the
+main fruits of invention and the new power over Nature to a
+comparatively small proprietary class, upon whom the mass of the
+people are dependent for leave to earn their living."[104] "The worker
+is now a mere item in a vast industrial army over the organisation and
+direction of which he has no control. He is free, but free only to
+choose to which master he will sell his labour--free only to decide
+from which proprietor he will beg that access to the new instruments
+of production without which he cannot exist."[105]
+
+As the capitalist class owns the factories, workshops, &c., the worker
+has become to that class a slave in the full and generally accepted
+meaning of the word. "The effect of private property in land and
+capital is in all essential respects the same as was the effect of
+private property in human beings. In each case slavery is the result.
+The form may have changed, but the substance remains."[106] "The
+labourer to-day is a slave, and labour has become a mark of
+bondage."[107] Except for a slight difference in outward form, the
+British wage-slaves are no better off than were the black slaves on
+the sugar plantations in the past. "Much as the 'free-born Briton' may
+dislike to hear the painful truth recited, it is a fact, not to be
+controverted, that four-fifths of our total population are bound as
+completely and as miserably as ever was a black African slave to a
+Western planter. There is no real freedom which is not economic
+freedom. He is a slave who depends for his bread upon the will or the
+whim of a man like himself, or of a number of such masters."[108] In
+other words, capitalism and slave-owning are for all practical
+purposes synonymous words, as may be seen from the Socialist
+Catechism: "Q. What constitutes the chief difference between
+capitalism and slave-owning? A. The fact that the capitalist goes
+through the form of bargaining with the labourer as to the amount of
+the portion of the produce that shall be returned to him.--Q. What is
+this farce called? A. Freedom of contract.--Q. In what sense is it
+free? A. In this sense--that the labourer is free to take what is
+offered or nothing.--Q. Has he anything to fall back upon? A. He has
+absolutely nothing in countries where the tyranny of capitalism is
+untempered by any form of Socialism."[109]
+
+To those working men who might object that it is a gross exaggeration
+to say that the British worker is a slave, and that he is penniless,
+the Socialist agitator answers: "What? You are a free man and not a
+slave? There are no slaves in this country? What is a slave? One who
+works at the bidding of another, and only by permission of another,
+and for the profit of that other. Does not that fit your case exactly?
+Do you work when you like and idle when you like? Not you! You work
+when the capitalist requires your labour, when your services will be
+useful in making a profit for him. When that is not the case you can
+starve in the gutter, although there may be all the necessaries of
+life in profusion around you. These things do not belong to you,
+although you and your class have made them; they are so much wealth
+which your masters have acquired from your unpaid labour, things which
+you have produced, but for which you have never been paid, out of
+which you have been swindled by the natural operation of the system of
+wage-slavery of which you are the unconscious victim. From this
+condition of things there is no escape while the whole of the people
+do not own the means of production. Nothing but the abolition of the
+class ownership of the means of life, and the substitution of
+ownership of the whole people, will abolish this form of
+slavery."[110]
+
+The foregoing grievance is absurd. If regular work for a regular wage,
+agreed upon by contract, is slavery, then all salaried men from the
+Prime Minister and the Lord Chancellor downward are also
+"wage-slaves."
+
+The Socialist agitator, after having told the working men that they
+are no better off than negro slaves, then asks his hearers, as a rule:
+"Why is it that the producers in this country are the poorest of the
+population? Why is it that those who do not produce are the
+richest?"[111] The manner in which this question is put suggests the
+reply. Indeed, all Socialists agree in holding the rich responsible
+for the poverty of the poor, as the following utterances will show:
+"Socialism contends that the poverty of the poor is caused by robbery
+on the part of the rich. The mansion explains the hovel. Belgravia has
+its counterpart in Shoreditch. The factory, the foundry, the
+ship-building yard account for the shooting lodge, the yacht, and the
+tours in foreign lands. The long day's toil of one class renders
+possible the life-long play of the other."[112] "If you have no
+unemployed at the top of the social ladder you will have none at the
+bottom."[113]
+
+"The riches of the rich class are the cause of the poverty of the
+masses."[114] "You make the automobile, he rides in it. If it were not
+for you, he would walk; and if it were not for him, you would
+ride."[115] "Colossal poverty is the foundation of colossal wealth; he
+who would eliminate the poverty of the masses assails the wealth of
+the few."[116]
+
+The foregoing arguments, or rather assertions, may sound very
+convincing and may be exceedingly useful for propaganda purposes, but
+they are disproved by facts. If the existence of the rich were the
+cause of the poverty of the masses, the workers in countries which
+possess few rich capitalists, such as Ireland, Spain, Italy, Servia,
+and Bulgaria, should be exceedingly well off; the workers in the
+countries where the richest millionaires live, such as the United
+States, should be the poorest. In reality, the American workmen are
+the most prosperous, whilst the workers in Ireland and other
+millionaire-less countries are the poorest. Rich men are not the
+consumers, but merely the trustees and managers, of the national
+wealth which is invested chiefly in reproductive undertakings--mills,
+railways, mines, &c.--which supply comforts and conveniences to all.
+
+The capitalists, the employers, British Socialists say, have become
+rich by defrauding the worker of his wages. The worker must starve so
+that a few rich people may live in luxury, and things will become
+better for the worker only when there are no more rich men. "The gains
+of the capitalist are simply the losses of labour! The partly or
+wholly unearned incomes of the rich consist of the unpaid, withheld
+wages of the industrious poor."[117] "Only by living off another man's
+labour and denying another man the fruits of his toil can riches be
+acquired. Riches are directly responsible for poverty, and the art of
+being rich is the art of keeping one's neighbour poor. When there are
+no rich there will be no poor. To the wealth of the few, acquired at
+the expense of the many, and not to drink or want of thrift, are all
+the evils of our social life to be ascribed."[118] "Production is
+carried on to-day purely in the interest and for the profit of the
+class which owns the instruments of production."[119]
+
+    There are ninety-and-nine who live and die
+      In want and hunger and cold,
+    That one may revel in luxury,
+      And be wrapped in its silken fold;
+    The ninety-and-nine in their hovels bare,
+    The one in a palace with riches rare.[120]
+
+    Ye poor of wealthy England,
+      Who starve and sweat and freeze
+    By labour sore to fill the store
+      Of those who live at ease;
+    'Tis time to know your real friends,
+      To face your real foe,
+    And to fight for your right
+      Till ye lay your masters low;
+    Small hope for you of better days
+      Till ye lay your masters low.[121]
+
+The working men are, according to the Socialist agitators, "excluded"
+from property by the capitalist class which owns all the land,
+factories, machinery, &c. The capitalist class has thus reserved for
+itself a monopoly of all the instruments of production. Consequently,
+"the only means by which the excluded class can live is by working for
+the capitalist class--by getting some one or other of the capitalist
+class to allow them access to the tools and materials in his
+possession, and pay them wages in return for their labour."[122]
+However, the capitalists do not grant to the workers access to the
+instruments of production free of charge. They exact a toll from them,
+and employ them only if, by so doing, they can secure a profit for
+themselves. In the fact that an employer will engage workmen only if
+he can make a profit by their labour, the Socialists see a cruel
+injustice. "Your capitalist class draw upon this excluded horde of
+landless, toolless, foodless lack-alls, and do actually find work for
+as many as they can employ at a profit to themselves. This excluded
+class have no rights--not even the elementary right to exist. What God
+meant by creating them when He knew, or might have known, that
+everything belonged to the capitalists, nobody can understand."[123]
+"The whole of our industrial system is founded on a principle existing
+nowhere else in Nature, the principle of production and distribution
+for profit. If no employer can make a profit out of the worker's
+labour he is cast into the unemployed army."[124] "Seven out of every
+eight persons in your community, 37,500,000 of the men, and women, and
+children who form your nation, can lay no claim to any right to
+exist--exist only on sufferance. If one or other of the irresponsible
+persons who own the country can be induced to allow them to earn their
+bread, well and good; if not, they must die. At the present moment
+there are 700,000 persons shut out in this manner from any chance of
+obtaining food to eat. You call it being 'out of work,' and can see
+the spectral army, 700,000 strong, hungry and in want. They are not
+kept idle and hungry because there is no 'work.' The earth is there
+with all its boundless store that their 'work' would turn into wealth
+if they could but get at it. They are kept idle because those who own
+the country cannot find them employment at a profit to themselves,
+because the blind, fatuous insanity of your 'system of trade' makes no
+provision even for keeping its slaves in work."[125]
+
+According to the Socialists, the employer of labour has no right to
+work at a profit, and the capitalist has no right to demand rent or
+interest. "The great central truth of Socialistic economy, ever to be
+kept in mind, is Adam Smith's definition of wages: 'The produce of
+labour is the natural recompense or wages of labour.' From this
+'natural recompense' rent and profit are, in Socialist eyes,
+unnatural, illegitimate abstractions, to be recovered and added to
+wages as speedily as possible."[126] "Profit is the result of unpaid
+labour; it is the produce of the working man, for which the latter
+receives no equivalent. If he received his proper and just share, if
+the capitalist could not deprive him of this, then the capitalist
+could make no profit."[127]
+
+Not only are "rent" and "profit" illegitimate abstractions, but they
+are downright theft. Every landowner, every banker, every
+manufacturer, every shopkeeper is a thief. All business for profit is
+swindling. "Land-rent and capital-rent are thefts from the produce of
+labour."[128] "The manufacturer aims primarily at producing, by means
+of the labour he has stolen from others, not goods, but profits."[129]
+"What is successful business but cheating? What is the whole basis of
+capitalist industry but the use of the means of production, not for
+the legitimate end of producing wealth for use, but for the purpose of
+making profit for the few by despoiling, sweating, pillaging, and
+murdering the many?"[130]
+
+Even the more moderate Socialists complain that work is carried on by
+the employers only "at a profit to themselves," and they wish to
+abolish this state of affairs, which, they argue, is demoralising to
+the working men, and is the cause of low wages and unemployment. "The
+workman is called into the workshop when capital can profitably employ
+him, and turned adrift again the moment capital finds it can no longer
+turn his services to profitable account. He is not consulted as to
+when he shall be employed or when cast adrift. His necessities and
+those of his dependents are no concern of anyone save himself. He has
+no right to employment, no one is under obligation to find him work,
+nor is he free to work for himself, since he has neither the use of
+land nor the command of the necessary capital."[131] "So long as
+industry is carried on for profit instead of for use, for gain instead
+of for need, so long must the evils of low wages and no wages go
+on."[132]
+
+The grievance that the manufacturers manufacture "not for use but for
+profit" is ridiculous. The manufacturers manufacture things which the
+public will buy and use. There is consequently no distinction between
+manufacturing for use and manufacturing for profit, except this, that
+no manufacturer will give his time and trouble, and run considerable
+risks, without adequate compensation. The complaint must therefore be
+limited to the fact that the employer of labour makes a profit. The
+question now arises: "What does the manufacturer do with his
+earnings?" In the vast majority of cases he will use by far the larger
+part of his profits for renewing machinery and enlarging his works,
+and thus increase the national capital and the national power of
+production, spending privately only a director's salary which he would
+also receive as a director-employee of the Socialist commonwealth.
+"The employer who works without a profit breaks himself,"[133] and in
+breaking himself he breaks up the factory. Universal production
+regardless of profit would lead to universal bankruptcy, whilst the
+curtailing of profits may lead to a proportionate curtailment in the
+expansion of industry and in the production of articles for use, and
+to general poverty. It has the same effect whether the workers destroy
+the capitalist's capital or whether they break the machinery and
+devastate the corn-fields.
+
+The complaints of the Socialists as to the way in which the workers
+are exploited by the capitalist class are founded not only on
+arguments such as those given in the foregoing but on figures as well,
+and these are exceedingly curious and interesting. Under titles such
+as "How the Worker is Robbed,"[134] statements are made every day, and
+by all Socialists, which are to prove that the national income is
+inequitably divided between capitalists and workers. These statements
+are calculated to make every workman's blood boil, and they seem to
+confirm the contention of the Socialists that the capitalists
+inhumanely plunder the working masses. However, these figures are so
+palpably false and so grossly misleading that attention cannot
+sufficiently strongly be drawn to the deception which is constantly
+being practised upon the workers. I hope, therefore, that my readers
+will patiently and carefully consider the following.
+
+The figures relating to the yearly income of the "capitalist class"
+and the "working class" which are given in innumerable Socialistic
+writings, and which are brought forward at almost every Socialist
+meeting and lecture, are usually taken from a pamphlet entitled
+"Facts for Socialists from the Political Economists and
+Statisticians," published by the Fabian Society. The copy lying before
+me bears the notice, "Tenth Edition (Revised), 111th thousand, 1906."
+That pamphlet furnishes the statistical basis of fact to the Socialist
+agitation. Its effect may be measured by its enormous circulation. It
+contains a vast number of quotations from Blue-books, political
+economists, and statisticians; and a certain show of learning, of
+thoroughness, and of conscientiousness gives it at first sight the
+appearance of being a reliable and honest production. However,
+appearances are proverbially deceptive.
+
+According to "Facts for Socialists," the whole national income amounts
+to _1,800,000,000l._ per year (page 3), and is derived from the
+following sources:
+
+
+"I.--RENT
+
+"The total profits from the ownership of lands, houses, tithes, &c.,
+the rents of mines, quarries, ironworks, gasworks, waterworks, canals,
+fishings, shootings, markets, tolls, &c., must amount to at least
+_290,000,000l._[135]
+
+
+"II.--INTEREST ON CAPITAL
+
+"The profits of public companies, foreign investments, railways, &c.,
+assessed to income tax in the United Kingdom, the interest payable
+from British public funds and from Indian, Colonial, and Foreign
+Governments' funds, and the interest on capital employed in private
+undertakings of manufacture or trade cannot be less than
+_360,000,000l._ Adding hereto the rent (_290,000,000l._), we have a
+total of _650,000,000l._ for rent and interest together. This
+represents the proportion of the nation's income claimed from the
+workers, _not in return for any service rendered to the community, but
+merely as the payment for permission to use the land and the already
+accumulated capital of the country_.[136]
+
+
+"III.--PROFITS AND SALARIES
+
+"The numbers and total income of this large class cannot be exactly
+ascertained. It includes workers of all grades, from the exceptionally
+skilled artisan to the Prime Minister, and from the city clerk to the
+President of the Royal Academy. It is convenient for statistical
+purposes to include in it all those who do not belong to the 'manual
+labour class.' If we take the 'rent of ability' to have increased in
+the same proportion as the assessments to income tax, this prosperous
+body may be estimated to receive for its work as profits and salaries
+about _460,000,000l._ annually.[137]"
+
+Adding up the income from "Rent," "Interest and Capital," and "Profits
+and Salaries," the pamphlet continues:
+
+
+"THE CLASSES
+
+"The total drawn by the legal disposers of what are sometimes called
+the 'three rents' of land, capital, and ability amounts at present to
+about _1,110,000,000l._ yearly, or just under two-thirds of the total
+produce.
+
+
+"AND THE MASSES
+
+"Allowing for the increase since these estimates were made, we may
+safely say that the manual labour class receives for all its millions
+of workers only some _690,000,000l._"[138]
+
+In a short table the distribution of the national income is then given
+as follows:
+
+  Rent                                       Ł290,000,000
+  Interest                                    360,000,000
+  Profits and Salaries                        460,000,000
+                                            -------------
+
+    Total (that is, the income of the
+    legal proprietors of the three
+    natural monopolies of land, capital,
+    and ability)                            1,110,000,000
+  Income of manual labour class               690,000,000
+                                            -------------
+  Total produce                            Ł1,800,000,000[139]
+
+At first sight it seems outrageous that "the income of the legal
+proprietors of the three natural monopolies of land, capital, and
+ability" should come to _1,110,000,000l._ per annum, and the income of
+the manual labour class only to _690,000,000l._ per annum, about
+one-third of the whole, especially as we learn on page 4 of the
+pamphlet that the "idle rich" are only a small fraction of the
+community. This statement would prove the assertion that the idle rich
+are causing the poverty of the poor to be correct if it were honest
+and fair, but it is neither the one nor the other.
+
+In the first place the foregoing statement divides the nation into two
+classes "the masses" and "the classes": manual labourers and "the
+legal proprietors of the three natural monopolies." As the pamphlet is
+addressed to the uncritical body of general readers, and especially to
+working men, these will naturally divide, owing to the artful wording
+of the phrase, the national income between manual labourers and
+capitalist monopolists. According to this pamphlet everyone who is not
+a labourer is a capitalist monopolist. Therefore the capitalist
+monopolist class includes all lawyers and doctors, all parsons and
+clerks, all officers and salaried officials. Every business man, every
+farmer, every fisherman, every greengrocer, every baker, every
+butcher, every sailor, every cobbler, every chimney-sweep, every
+clerk, being not a wage-earning labourer, is "one of the legal
+proprietors of the three natural monopolies," or in plainer language,
+a monopolist. At least, the income of this very large class has
+barefacedly been credited to the capitalist class, whilst its members
+have been utilised (on page 4 of the pamphlet) to swell the ranks of
+the workers. This is dishonesty number one.
+
+The income of the exceptionally skilled artisans, who also form a very
+large class, is credited on page 7 to the "classes" under the heading
+"profits and salaries." They also are included among the
+"monopolists," although their number has likewise been utilised (on
+page 4) to swell the number of the workers. This is dishonesty number
+two.
+
+Let us now look at the result of the dishonest Fabian juggling with
+figures by comparing the statement regarding the national income
+contained in the Fabian pamphlet with a recent statement of Mr.
+Chiozza Money, M.P., who is a Socialist, and who divides the national
+income as follows:
+
+  Income of working class (33,000,000 people)
+                                        about        Ł650,000,000
+
+  Income of middle class (all except manual
+   labourers and the rich--small business
+   men, managers, clerks, public servants,
+   &c., with incomes up to Ł700--9,750,000
+   people)                              about         475,000,000
+
+  Income of rich (with incomes Ł700 and
+   above) (1,250,000 people)            about         600,000,000
+                                                   --------------
+  Total                                 about      Ł1,725,000,000[140]
+
+From the foregoing statement it appears that the rich draw not
+two-thirds, but only one-third, of the national income, and this fact
+should be carefully borne in mind in view of the contents of the
+following pages.
+
+The pamphlet states on page 6 that _650,000,000l._ per annum are paid
+in the shape of rent and interest, "not in return for any service
+rendered to the community, but merely as the payment for permission to
+use the land and the already accumulated capital of the country." The
+national capital is invested chiefly in perishable objects such as
+houses, factories, railways, steamships, mines, &c., which depreciate
+unless kept in proper repair. There is wear and tear in capital as in
+everything else. Capital is lost and destroyed every day. Lastly, the
+national capital is growing, and must continue growing, in accordance
+with the growing capital requirements of the time and the growing
+number of its inhabitants, or the country will decay. New houses, new
+factories, new railways, new steamships must be built and new mines be
+opened to increase the comfort of all. From _200,000,000l._ to
+_300,000,000l._ are thus reinvested every year in Great Britain, and
+only by this constant process of reinvestment is it possible to
+maintain and increase the productive power of the country for the
+benefit of all. The _200,000,000l._ to _300,000,000l._ which are
+yearly reinvested in reproductive undertakings are found by the
+capitalists, the trustees, directors and managers, not the consumers,
+of the national industry and of the national wealth. This sum comes
+out of their earnings, which thus benefit not only the capitalists but
+the whole nation. Much irrelevant statistical matter is given in the
+pamphlet, but this large item is left out. That is dishonesty number
+three.
+
+On page 6 the profits of public companies are treated as "Interest on
+capital," and interest on capital is disparagingly called "unearned
+income" on page 7. Most British industries are carried on by limited
+companies, and limited companies are as a rule formed in this way,
+that the partners in the former private enterprise become directors.
+As directors they receive a purely nominal salary. They work as much
+as they did whilst the business was a private concern, and their
+income depends on their usually very large holding of shares. The
+large director-shareholders, and their number is very great, earn
+their dividends by hard work. Nevertheless their whole income is
+included in the item "interest on capital," and called "unearned
+income." This is dishonesty number four.
+
+On page 7 the property of the "manual labour class," or the poor, in
+land and capital is given as follows:--
+
+In 1901 the deposits in P.O. Savings Bank were       Ł140,392,916
+    The deposits in Trustee Savings Banks were         51,966,386
+    Consols purchased for small holders were           14,450,877
+
+In 1900 the capital of Building Societies was          46,775,143
+    The funds of Trade-Unions, Co-operative,
+      Friendly, and Provident Societies were           72,219,991
+    The funds of Industrial Life Assurance
+      Societies were                                   22,998,793
+                                                     ------------
+              Total                                  Ł348,804,106[141]
+
+In reality the property of the "manual labour class" in land and
+capital amounts not to _348,804,106l._, but to at least
+_1,000,000,000l._[142] This is dishonesty number five.
+
+The imports of Great Britain are larger than the exports by about
+_150,000,000l._ The larger part of the money paid for these imports
+goes in wages paid to foreigners, and is paid away by the British
+capitalist class out of their earnings. British wage-earners surely
+cannot expect to be paid wages in respect of articles made abroad.
+However, no allowance for this large item has been made in comparing
+the appropriation of the national income between capital and labour.
+This is dishonesty number six.
+
+Between one hundred and two hundred million pounds of the national
+income is derived from foreign investments. The income derived from
+foreign investments should in fairness either be left out of the
+account or the income of foreign labour, received in respect of these
+investments, be added to the British labour income. In comparing the
+income of capital and labour, the pamphlet takes note of the earnings
+of British capital on all five continents and on the sea, and compares
+with it only the income of British labour--although foreign, not
+British labour, produces the foreign income of British capital.
+
+Giving as authority an ancient Board of Trade Return, and wishing to
+magnify the difference in the earnings of the idle rich and the
+industrious poor, the average yearly income of "those of the manual
+labour class who are best off" is given at _48l._ per adult. This
+means _18s._ per week. In view of the fact that most British workers
+earn between _1l._ and _2l._ per week, that in many Trade-Unions the
+_average_ wage is about _35s._ per week, the figures given are
+palpably wrong unless the female workers are included. Whether this is
+the case or no is not stated, but even if the wages of both sexes
+should be joined together they appear to be very considerably
+understated. This is dishonesty number seven.
+
+There are many more unfair, misleading, and dishonest statements in
+this pamphlet which it would lead too far to enumerate.
+
+Most of the important pamphlets issued by the Fabian Society are
+signed by their authors. The fact that the most effective, "Facts for
+Socialists," is unsigned seems to indicate that the author--apparently
+a well-known leader of the Fabians--had some sense of shame, and it is
+to be hoped that the Fabian Society will immediately, and publicly,
+repudiate this dishonest pamphlet.
+
+The statements contained in the pamphlet "Facts for Socialists," may
+be misleading and utterly dishonest, but they are very useful for
+propaganda purposes. Nothing is more likely to inflame the masses than
+to be told that the "idle rich" take more than two-thirds of the
+national income. The practical effect of this pamphlet may be seen in
+utterances such as the following: "It has been estimated that in our
+country of the wealth produced, one-third is enjoyed by those who earn
+it and two-thirds by those who have not laboured for it. To put it in
+other words, of every three pounds earned by labour, one pound goes to
+him who earned it and two pounds to others who have done nothing
+towards its production."[143] "For two-thirds of his time the worker
+is a slave, labouring not for himself but for others."[144] "On the
+average at the present time the workers produce nearly four times as
+much as they consume."[145] "Nearly two-thirds of the wealth produced
+is retained by an eighth of the population."[146] "The great mass of
+the people, the weekly wage-earners, four out of five of the whole
+population, toil perpetually for less than a third of the aggregate
+product of labour, at an annual wage averaging at most _40l._ per
+adult, and are hurried into unnecessarily early graves by the severity
+of their lives."[147] "Out of the wealth which his labour creates, the
+worker receives but one-third. He is paid one-third the value of his
+labour, and when he seeks to lay it out he is robbed of one-half its
+purchasing power, and all this is done by a Christian people."[148]
+"Q. How does the capitalist act? A. He extorts from those labourers
+who are excluded from the land a share of all that they produce, under
+threat of withholding from them the implements of production and thus
+refusing to let them work at all.--Q. On what terms does the
+capitalist allow the labourers to work? A. The capitalist agrees to
+return to them as wages about a quarter of what they have produced by
+their work, keeping the remaining three-quarters for himself and his
+class.--Q. What is this system called? A. The capitalist system."[149]
+"By analysing the returns of the income-tax, various economists show
+that the value received by the working class and the superintendents
+of labour amount to a third or less of the wealth produced. The
+income-tax returns, however, are not a very reliable test of the
+degree of exploitation, though, of course, they afford us valuable and
+incontestable evidence that the worker does not receive more than a
+third of what he produces. One to four, or one to five, in my opinion,
+expresses more accurately the rate of exploitation."[150]
+
+I am not prepared to give an estimate how the national income is
+distributed between hand workers, brain workers, and men who live on
+their income without doing any useful work, because such an estimate
+could be arrived at only by guesswork. However, it is quite clear that
+it is untrue that the wage-earners receive only one-third, one-fourth,
+or one-fifth of the wages which they ought to receive, as is
+constantly stated.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[95] _Justice_, October 19, 1907.
+
+[96] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 13.
+
+[97] _The Worker's Burden_, p. 1.
+
+[98] Hyndman, _Social Democracy_, p. 9.
+
+[99] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[100] _Protect the Home_, p. 1.
+
+[101] _John Ball_, p. 10.
+
+[102] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 12.
+
+[103] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 15.
+
+[104] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[105] _Ibid._ p. 12.
+
+[106] Keir Hardie, _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_ p.
+12.
+
+[107] McClure, _Socialism_, p. 27.
+
+[108] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 11.
+
+[109] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 5.
+
+[110] _To the Man in the Street_, Social-Democratic Federation
+Leaflet.
+
+[111] Hyndman in Debate, _Will Socialism Benefit the English People?_
+p. 5.
+
+[112] Leatham, _The Class War_, p. 4.
+
+[113] _Socialism, For and Against_, p. 6.
+
+[114] Snowden, _Socialists' Budget_, p. 11.
+
+[115] Debs, _Industrial Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[116] Kautsky, _Class Struggle_, p. 10.
+
+[117] Hall, _The Old and New Unionism_, p. 4.
+
+[118] Lister, _Riches and Poverty_, pp. 13, 14.
+
+[119] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[120] _Poems for Socialists_, p. 8.
+
+[121] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 25.
+
+[122] Washington, _A Corner in Flesh and Blood_, p. 14.
+
+[123] _Ibid._
+
+[124] Benson, _Socialism_, p. 5.
+
+[125] Washington, _Nation of Slaves_, p. 11.
+
+[126] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 30.
+
+[127] _Some Objections to Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[128] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 45.
+
+[129] Morris, _Useful Work and Useless Toil_, p. 30.
+
+[130] _Some Objections to Socialism_, p. 20.
+
+[131] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 52.
+
+[132] Hall, _The Old and New Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[133] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 6.
+
+[134] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 16 f.
+
+[135] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 5.
+
+[136] _Facts for Socialists_, pp. 6, 7.
+
+[137] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[138] _Ibid._ p. 8.
+
+[139] _Facts for Socialists_, pp. 8, 9.
+
+[140] See _Daily News_, November 28, 1907.
+
+[141] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 7.
+
+[142] See Mr. Quail's paper in the _Contemporary Review_ for August
+1907.
+
+[143] Ward, _The Ideal City_, pp. 5, 6.
+
+[144] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 15.
+
+[145] Quelch, _Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 5.
+
+[146] _Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 8.
+
+[147] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 8.
+
+[148] Keir Hardie, _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_ p. 7.
+
+[149] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 2.
+
+[150] Hazell, _Summary of Marx's "Capital,"_ p. 9.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+THE FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINES OF SOCIALISM
+
+
+In describing the doctrines of Socialism I do not mean to state in
+detail the whole of the Socialistic theories. Such a statement would
+fill a volume, it would be excessively tedious to most readers, and it
+is for all practical purposes quite unnecessary. A statement of the
+leading doctrines on which the activity of the Socialists is
+based--the doctrines which are constantly asserted and which are the
+fundamental dogmas of the Socialist faith--will enable us to obtain a
+clear view of the foundations upon which the theoretic fabric of
+Socialism is built, and to judge whether that foundation is scientific
+and sound, or unscientific and unsound.
+
+The basic doctrine of Socialism, upon which the great edifice of
+Socialistic theory has been reared, may be summed up in the phrase
+
+     "LABOUR IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF WEALTH"
+
+Therefore we read in the celebrated pamphlet "Facts for Socialists,"
+of which some important extracts were given in the preceding chapter:
+"Commodities are produced solely by the 'efforts and sacrifices'
+(Cairns), whether of muscle or of brain, of the working portion of the
+community, employed upon the gifts of Nature. Adam Smith 'showed that
+labour is the only source of wealth.... It is to labour, therefore,
+and to labour only, that man owes everything possessed of
+exchangeable value (McCulloch's 'Principles of Political Economy,'
+Part II., section 1). 'No wealth whatever can be produced without
+labour' (Professor Henry Fawcett (Cambridge), 'Manual of Political
+Economy,' p. 13),"[151]
+
+This statement is scarcely honest, for it quotes opinions of Adam
+Smith and others which are erroneous, as will be seen in the
+following, and which have been generally abandoned. This statement may
+impose upon the simple by its show of learning, but it is somewhat
+vague, for it only suggests, but does not distinctly assert, that
+manual labour is the only source of wealth. However, in most--one
+might say in nearly all--Socialist books, pamphlets, and declarations
+of policy we find the basic doctrine of Socialism asserted in a form
+which leaves no doubt that according to the Socialist theories the
+manual labour of the labourer is the only source of wealth.
+
+The founder of modern Socialism declared, "Labour is the only source
+of wealth,"[152] and his disciples--at least his British
+disciples--support that declaration. "All wealth is due to labour;
+therefore, to the labourers all wealth is due."[153] "Labour applied
+to natural objects is the source of all wealth."[154] The Socialist
+Party of Great Britain declares: "Wealth is natural material converted
+by labour-power to man's use, and as such is consequently produced by
+the working class alone."[155] The Independent Labour party asserts:
+"No man or class of men made the first kind of wealth, such as land,
+minerals, and water. Therefore no man or class of men should be
+allowed to call these things their own, or to prevent others from
+using them (except on certain conditions), as the landowners and
+mine-owners do now. The only class of human beings who make the
+second kind of wealth are the workers. Working men and women produce
+and prepare for us all those things which we use or consume, such as
+food, clothing, houses, furniture, instruments and implements, trams,
+railways, pictures, books, gas, drains, and many other things. They
+produce all the wealth obtained by toil from the land."[156]
+
+Those who maintain that labour, or, as some Socialists assert, the
+labourer's labour, is the only source of wealth, look merely at the
+mechanical factor, but omit the force which directs and controls it.
+The Socialistic argument "We can run the mills without the
+capitalists, but they cannot run them without us"[157] is misleading.
+Labour is certainly an indispensable ingredient in production, but it
+is no more indispensable than is direction, invention, and thrift.
+Hence it is as absurd to assert "All wealth is due to labour" as to
+say "All wealth is due to invention," or "All wealth is due to
+thrift." As the brain is more important than the hand, at least in a
+highly organised state of production, so invention, organisation,
+management, and thrift are more important than manual labour, because
+invention, organisation, management, and thrift alone enable manual
+labour, working with modern machinery, to be highly productive. In
+fact, it may be asserted that wealth is created not so much by labour
+as by the saving of labour. A factory-owner who is dissatisfied with
+the profits of his factory or with its products does not get better
+workers, but gets a better manager or better machinery, keeping his
+workers. This fact proves that labour is the least important factor in
+modern production. The doctrine "Labour is the only source of wealth"
+is untenable and absurd.
+
+Another fundamental doctrine of Socialism is that of
+
+     "THE IRON LAW OF WAGES"
+
+According to that law, "wages under competition can never be higher
+than that which will just support the labourer and enable him to renew
+his kind."[158] In the words of Lassalle, the inventor of the Iron Law
+of Wages, "the wages of the labourer are limited to the exact amount
+necessary to keep him alive."[159]
+
+The British Socialist writers tell us: "The average price of
+wage-labour is the minimum wage--_i.e._ that quantum of the means of
+subsistence which is absolutely requisite to keep the labourer in bare
+existence."[160] "The labourer cannot as a rule command more than his
+cost of subsistence in return for his labour. This principle, that the
+return to labour is determined by the cost of subsistence of the
+labourer, is generally known as 'The Iron Law of Wages.' But has not
+this law been discarded even by some Socialists? There have been
+attempts in some quarters to demonstrate that this law does not
+actually operate with the rigidity at first claimed for it; but in
+truth, it stands as firmly to-day as when insisted upon by
+Lassalle."[161] "Capitalism always keeps the wages down to the lowest
+standard of subsistence which the people will accept,"[162] for "the
+basis of wages is the cost of subsistence of the labourer. This is
+called the 'Iron Law of Wages.'"[163] "By the Iron Law of Wages the
+recompense of the workers always tends to the minimum on which they
+are willing to subsist. If they are content with water to drink and
+cabbage to eat, they may be sure that the means of buying whisky or
+roast beef will very soon be taken from them. Messrs. Rentmonger,
+Interestmonger, and Profitmonger will speedily scent additional swag,
+and they will have it, too."[164] "The 'Iron Law of Wages' reduces the
+wages to as near the level of the means of subsistence as local
+circumstances will admit of."[165] If these arguments were correct it
+would follow that the workers could cause their wages to rise by
+drinking wine instead of whisky, and by smoking Havana cigars instead
+of pipe-tobacco.
+
+This theory of wages is called the "Iron Law of Wages" because of its
+absolute and pitiless rigidity. For instance, the Iron Law of Wages
+will prevent lower prices of food benefiting the workman in any way.
+"If the working class is enabled to buy cheap bread, the operation of
+the 'Iron Law of Wages' will secure all the advantage for the
+capitalists, as it did in the days of the saintly Bright, when the
+corn laws were repealed. Capital is always the same in its effect on
+the working-class, whether manipulated by an individual capitalist,
+joint-stock enterprise, municipality, or government, and with each
+step in concentration the working-class gets relatively less and the
+master class gets richer, more corrupt, and more bestial, as recent
+events in Berlin and elsewhere show."[166] The "Iron Law of Wages" is
+irrefutable and irresistible. "Economists have come to talk about the
+'Iron Law of Wages' with as much assurance as if it were an
+irreversible law of Nature."[167]
+
+The Iron Law of Wages exists chiefly in the imagination of British
+Socialists. The general wage of British workmen living in towns ranges
+from, say _18s._ to more than _2l._ per week, and its amount does not
+depend on the cost of subsistence, but on the working skill and
+various other factors. If the Iron Law of Wages were correct, wages
+would be almost uniform. The Iron Law of Wages can possibly apply only
+to one small class of workers, the lowest and least skilled labourers,
+provided that unemployment is so great among them that they abandon
+collective bargaining and underbid one another down to the level of
+subsistence. When workers are organised, the Iron Law of Wages does
+not apply. The level of wages depends, broadly speaking, on supply and
+demand. Wages rise when two employers run after one workman; wages
+fall when two workmen run after one employer. An employer who engages
+a workman does not ask, "How much do you eat?" but "What can you do?"
+and he proportions the worker's remuneration not to his appetite, but
+to his ability and his value as a producer. The wages paid to married
+men and to unmarried men are identical in the same trade. If there was
+an "Iron Law of Wages," the wages of married men should be about twice
+as large as those of unmarried men.
+
+The Iron Law of Wages is manifestly absurd. It has therefore been
+officially abandoned by the German Socialists at the Halle Congress of
+1890 "as being scientifically untenable."[168] "German Social
+Democracy no longer recognises the Iron Law of Wages."[169] The
+British Socialists have not abandoned it, probably not because they
+believe it to be scientifically correct--no one can believe that--but
+because it is a plausible and effective means of poisoning the minds
+of the people.
+
+As regards the factors which determine wages, one of the foremost
+Socialist authorities says: "Thoughtful workmen in the staple trades
+have become convinced by their own experience, no less than by the
+repeated arguments of the economists, that a rising standard of wages
+and other conditions of employment must depend ultimately on the
+productivity of labour, and therefore upon the most efficient and
+economical use of credit, capital, and capacity."[170] In other words,
+productivity and profit determine wages, and it is ridiculous that
+Socialists argue: "Over 90 per cent. of our women do not drink, back
+horses, smoke, attend football or cricket matches, they do not stop
+off their work to watch England and Australia play at cricket, and the
+result is they are paid less wages than men in our factories for doing
+the same work."[171] Does Councillor Glyde really believe that women's
+wages would rise as soon as they took to smoking and drinking?
+
+
+THE LAW OF INCREASING MISERY
+
+According to this law the improvements in machinery, the increase of
+capital and increase of production do not benefit the worker. They
+only lead to a decline in wages and thus increase the workers' misery.
+"In proportion as the use of machinery and division of labour
+increases, in the same proportion the burden of toil also increases
+whether by prolongation of the working hours, by increase of the work
+exacted in a given time, or by increased speed of the machinery,
+&c."[172] "The faster productive capital increases, the more does the
+division of labour and the employment of machinery extend. The more
+the division of labour and the employment of machinery extend, so much
+the more does competition increase among the labourers and so much the
+more do their average wages dwindle. And thus the forest of arms
+outstretched by those who are entreating for work becomes ever denser
+and the arms themselves grow ever leaner."[173] "The more the worker
+labours the less reward he receives for it; and that for this simple
+reason, that he competes against his fellow-workmen and thus compels
+them to compete against him and to offer their labour on as wretched
+conditions as he does, and that he thus, in the last result, competes
+against himself as a member of the working-class."[174] "The worker in
+the factory gets, as a worker, absolutely no advantage from the
+machinery which causes the product of his labour to be multiplied a
+hundredfold."[175] "John Stuart Mill, it will be remembered,
+questioned whether mechanical invention had lightened the labours of a
+single human being."[176] "With increasing powers of production, the
+worker's share, and therefore his purchasing power, grows less."[177]
+"Wage-labour rests exclusively on competition between the
+labourers."[178] "The iron law of competition means, and must mean,
+continued degradation for the workers, even though their physical
+condition in youth may be improved."[179] "The worker in the factory
+is now seen to work no shorter hours or gain no higher wages merely
+because the product of his labour is multiplied a hundredfold by
+machinery which he does not own. 'The remuneration of labour as such,'
+wrote Cairnes in 1874, 'skilled or unskilled, can never rise much
+above its present level.'"[180]
+
+The celebrated "Doctrine of Increasing Misery" stands in diametrical
+opposition to those facts with which nowadays every child is
+acquainted. During the time when our Socialists have been preaching
+the "Doctrine of Increasing Misery" working hours have been very
+greatly diminished and wages have not been reduced, but have risen by
+about 100 per cent. During the same time working hours in Germany have
+also been reduced and wages have risen up to 400 per cent.[181] The
+German Socialists have been honest enough to abandon the Doctrine of
+Increasing Misery under the guidance of Bernstein; the French have
+dropped it under the guidance of Sorel; the Dutch have seen its
+absurdity, guided by Vandervelde, their foremost leader. The British
+Socialists, on the other hand, have not abandoned it, though they must
+see its absurdity, probably because, though palpably and ridiculously
+false, the Doctrine of Increasing Misery is considered to be a useful
+and effective part of the Socialist agitator's stock-in-trade.
+
+The next doctrine to be considered is
+
+
+THE SURPLUS-VALUE DOCTRINE
+
+The Socialists argue that the position of the worker cannot improve
+because the capitalist, possessing the monopoly of property, pockets
+all that the worker produces except the mere cost of his subsistence,
+which, owing to the "Iron Law of Wages," is given to the workman in
+the form of wages. "The amount of wealth which the labourer produces
+in the time for which he has sold his labour-force is out of all
+proportion to what it costs to produce and maintain his labour-force
+for that time. This, the difference between what he produces and his
+own cost of production, is surplus-value, and is taken and divided up
+by the capitalist into rent, interest, profit. This surplus-value,
+then, this profit, is so much robbery effected by taking advantage of
+the necessity of the proletarian--the naked propertyless
+labourer."[182] "All that the worker produces beyond what is
+absolutely necessary to keep himself and his offspring in life, this
+surplus beyond subsistence--this difference between the recompense of
+labour and its products--this unrighteous subtrahend, this swag, is
+the booty alike of slavelord, serflord, and drudgelord, or
+capitalist."[183] The question now arises: "How does the capitalist
+secure this surplus-value of labour without paying for it? If the
+workman is free, why cannot he insist on receiving, not the mere
+exchange-value of his commodity--'labour-power'--but the full value of
+the labour he expends for the capitalist? The capitalist obtains this
+surplus-value owing to his monopoly of the means of production. The
+labourer cannot, as a rule, command more than his cost of subsistence
+in return for his labour--although his wages, like the prices of all
+commodities, sometimes rise above this and sometimes fall
+below--because, although apparently free, he is really not free. He
+must sell his labour-power in order to live; he has no other commodity
+to dispose of. Consequently he must accept the terms that the
+purchaser will offer, subject only to two conditions--his own cost of
+subsistence and the fluctuations of the market."[184] "Owing to the
+monopoly of the means of production in the past, industrial inventions
+and the transformation of surplus income into capital have mainly
+enriched the proprietary class, the worker being now dependent on that
+class for leave to earn a living."[185]
+
+The Surplus-Value Doctrine, like the preceding doctrines, is founded
+rather upon imagination than upon fact. In the first place, it is
+absurd to speak of a "capitalist class" which, having a "monopoly of
+the means of production," exploits "the naked and propertyless
+labourer." This picture is a fancy picture. In the second place,
+"class" is not synonymous with "caste." The population is not divided
+into two rigidly defined and limited castes of capitalists and
+wage-earners. There is neither a monopoly of capital nor a monopoly of
+labour. Capital is founded by thrift. Most respectable workmen are
+capitalists to a greater or lesser extent. Every day workmen become
+capitalists. It should not be forgotten that many of the wealthiest
+men, such as Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Krupp, the first
+Rothschild, Sir Thomas Lipton, Passmore Edwards, and many others, have
+risen from the ranks and were working men--and every day capitalists
+lose their money and become workmen. Workmen may become capitalists by
+thrift. Co-operating workmen in England, France, Germany, and other
+countries own vast industrial undertakings, banks, &c. In those
+districts where thrift and co-operation are general (France,
+Switzerland, Holland) the "naked and propertyless labourers"
+disappear, whilst in equally prosperous districts where improvidence
+is general, they are many. The prosperity of the working classes in
+France, Switzerland, Holland, and other countries disproves the
+assertion that the workman is condemned to everlasting poverty because
+of the Surplus-Value Doctrine.
+
+Assertions in support of the "Surplus-Value Doctrine" such as
+"Carnegie and other millionaires have wrung their wealth literally out
+of the bodies of the underfed"[186] are as malicious as they are
+untrue. Men like Carnegie and Krupp have not "wrung their wealth out
+of the bodies of the underfed," but out of Nature. They have created
+vast industries in barren places, and the industries which they have
+created nourish now tens of thousands of working men. Men like Krupp
+and Carnegie have diminished misery, not increased it. Their capital,
+created by their brains with the assistance of labour out of Nature,
+has rather enriched labour than that labour has enriched Carnegie and
+Krupp. Their wealth is not dead wealth; it produces wages and articles
+of use. The "Surplus-Value Doctrine" is a grotesque distortion of, and
+an unjustified protest against, the fact that manufacturers and other
+organisers and directors of labour will not work for nothing.
+
+We have seen in the foregoing that, according to the fundamental
+Socialist doctrines, "labour is the only source of wealth." We have
+also seen that, according to the "Iron Law of Wages" and the "Law of
+Increasing Misery," the workmen are condemned to great, permanent, and
+constantly increasing misery. Further, we have learned that, according
+to the "Surplus-Value Doctrine," all the fruit of their labour, minus
+the cost of their bare subsistence, is taken from the workers by the
+capitalists. Hence it is only natural and logical that the assertion
+of the fundamental doctrines, namely--
+
+  1. Labour is the only source of wealth,
+  2. Wages maintains mere animal existence,
+  3. The misery of the workers is constantly increasing,
+  4. The position of the worker is hopeless,
+
+has led to this fifth doctrine:
+
+
+THE LABOURER IS ENTITLED TO THE ENTIRE PRODUCT OF HIS LABOUR
+
+This doctrine is put forth by practically all British Socialists, not
+only as a doctrine but also as a demand. For instance "the New School
+of Trades-Unionists declare themselves in open and uncompromising
+revolt against the established relations between capital and labour;
+and they expound a new political economy which says that nothing less
+than the full fruits of industry shall be reckoned the fair reward of
+the producing class. They want the whole four-fourths of their
+earnings, instead of the one-fourth at present doled back in
+wages."[187] This demand must have precedence over all other measures
+whatsoever, for "until you have settled the material question as to
+how the producers of wealth are to get for themselves the full value
+of what they produce by their labour, it is impossible to settle
+anything else."[188]
+
+According to many Socialists, Socialism would immediately abolish
+their grievances and give to the worker the entire produce of his
+labour. "At present the frugal workman only gets about one-third of
+his earnings. Under Socialism he would get all his earnings."[189]
+"Under the new order all will be productive workers, receiving an
+equivalent for what they produce--not merely one-half of it as now
+under the wage-system--in some form."[190] Under the heading "Basis of
+the Fabian Society," the Fabian Society publishes a statement of the
+fundamental principles of that Society in which we read: "If these
+measures" (confiscation of all private property) "be carried out,
+without compensation (though not without such relief to expropriated
+individuals as may seem fit to the community), rent and interest will
+be added to the reward of labour, the idle class now living on the
+labour of others will necessarily disappear, and practical equality of
+opportunity will be maintained by the spontaneous action of economic
+forces with much less interference with personal liberty than the
+present system entails."
+
+The absurdity of the demand for "the entire product of labour," which
+is raised by Socialists on behalf of the labourer is clear even to the
+most superficial thinker. The majority of Socialists know quite well
+that writing off, repairs, renewals, the replacing of machinery, the
+enlargement of factories, &c., cannot be done gratis, that the
+distribution of the whole produce of labour to the workers can be
+effected only by neglecting and destroying the means of production.
+
+The impossibility of giving to the worker the "whole product of his
+labour" by abolishing the private capitalist is clearly recognised and
+honestly admitted by the German Socialists. Kautsky, for instance,
+writes: "If the income of the capitalists were added to that of the
+workers, the wages of each would be doubled. Unfortunately, however,
+the matter will not be settled so simply. If we expropriate
+capitalism, we must at the same time take over its social
+functions--among these the important one of capitalist accumulation.
+The capitalists do not consume all their income; a portion of it they
+put away for the extension of production. A proletarian _régime_ would
+also have to do the same in order to extend production. It would not
+therefore be able to transfer, even in the event of a radical
+confiscation of capital, the whole of the former income to the working
+class. Besides, a portion of the surplus value which the capitalists
+now pocket, they must hand over to the State in the shape of taxes.
+For these reasons our Socialists are guilty of wilful deception if
+they tell the workers that under a Socialist _régime_ their wages
+would be doubled and trebled."[191] Nevertheless, the doctrine and the
+demand that "the labourer is entitled to the entire product of his
+labour" is not abandoned by British Socialists, apparently because it
+is extremely useful for arousing the passions of the workers against
+the capitalists in accordance with Gronlund's advice,[192] and for
+bringing new adherents to the Socialist camp.
+
+Only the Fabian Society, the more scientific section of the English
+Socialists, has mildly protested against this absurd doctrine and
+demand, but that protest has not been heeded. In a little-read
+pamphlet of that Society, the following statement may be found: "The
+Fabian Society steadfastly discountenances all schemes for securing
+to any person or any group of persons the entire product of their
+labour. It recognises that wealth is social in its origin and must be
+social in its distribution" (which means in plain English, must be
+preserved by the thrifty few, official or non-official, for the use of
+the unthrifty many), "since the evolution of industry has made it
+impossible to distinguish the particular contribution that each person
+makes to the common product, or to ascertain the value."[193]
+Notwithstanding these emphatic statements, the Fabian Society
+preserves with characteristic duplicity[194] the statement in its
+programme that "rent and interest, will be added to the reward of
+labour."
+
+Most British Socialist writers are not aware, or rather pretend not to
+be aware, of the necessity of preserving and increasing the national
+capital. In "Land, Labour, and Liberty," we read: "Whilst in 1845 the
+total wealth of this country was estimated at _4,000,000,000l._, it is
+now estimated at over _12,000,000,000l._ The monopolist classes,
+without denying themselves anything, and whilst producing
+comparatively nothing, have piled up an additional eight thousand
+millions. The superfluous handful of mere possessors remain the
+flowers and foliage of society; the three-quarters of the nation of
+indispensable producers remain the manure."[195] This writer, like
+most Socialists, though acknowledging the enormous growth of the
+national capital of Great Britain, pretends that the "monopolist
+classes" have not denied themselves anything. If that were true, the
+national capital would still amount to only _4,000,000,000l._ as in
+1845. Great Britain would have few factories, no new machinery, no
+steamships, and but a very few miles of railway. But for the
+self-denial, the thrift of the "superfluous handful of mere
+possessors," Englishmen would still live in the Hungry Forties and
+Great Britain would be able to nourish only about 20,000,000 people as
+she did in 1845. National capital and the comforts and conveniences
+which it supplies to all are at least as much the result of thrift,
+inventiveness, enterprise, and wise direction as of manual labour.
+
+The foregoing shows that, to say the least, the grievances of the
+Socialists are greatly--one might almost say grotesquely--exaggerated,
+and that they are largely founded on a perversion of facts; a
+perversion which can be easily explained by the desire of the
+Socialist leaders to arouse the blind passions of the discontented
+wage-earners in accordance with Gronlund's advice, quoted on page 10.
+
+The next doctrine which should be considered may be summed up in the
+words:
+
+
+"THE EXISTING MISERY CAN BE ABOLISHED, NOT BY INCREASING PRODUCTION,
+BUT BY ALTERING THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE WEALTH PRODUCED"
+
+"The Socialist emphatically denies the assertion that the poor must
+always be with us. The productive capacity of society is now so great
+that none need want, and all are able to earn their livelihood, and
+more, except where they are prevented from doing so by sickness,
+infirmity, or by the existence of laws and customs which the individual
+cannot himself, acting alone, remove."[196] "There is a demand for the
+labour of every man under any well-ordered social system. If there is a
+waste of men now, it is the fault of the wage system."[197] "Sufficient
+wealth is produced in this country to-day which would, under a
+well-ordered state of society, enable every man, woman, and child to
+have a sufficiency of all things essential to a healthy human life.
+To-day the people produce this wealth, and, after they have produced
+it, quite two-thirds of it is taken from them by a very small section
+of the people. Consequently we have a very few rich, and many that are
+poor."[198] "We may claim to have solved the problem of how to produce
+enough, and the question which confronts us is how to bring
+distribution into line with the productive capacity of our
+people."[199] "The old argument that there is not enough work to do
+cannot be seriously listened to by anyone who has walked through a
+London or Manchester slum. There is work in the world for all, just as
+there is wealth in the world for all, and every man has a right to
+work, just as he has a right to wealth."[200] "The chief problem is not
+the production of more wealth, but its equitable distribution."[201]
+
+The increase of production and therefore of reproductive capital in
+the form of machinery, mines, railways, ships, &c., in which most of
+the "Surplus-Value" is invested, is explained to be a matter of
+secondary consideration and importance, and it is stated that the
+world suffers rather from over-production than from under-production.
+"The tendency of the conditions of employment under present
+circumstances, under the capitalist system, always is for production
+to outstrip consumption."[202] "Our power to produce has always, since
+the beginnings of capitalism, shown a tendency to grow more rapidly
+than our power to consume."[203] "Then because there is a plethora of
+goods and a dearth of purchasers, the workshops are closed and Hunger
+lashes the working population with his thousand-thonged whip. The
+workers, stupefied by the dogma of work, do not understand that the
+cause of their present misery is the overwork that they have inflicted
+on themselves during the time of sham prosperity."[204] "For some
+insane reason the capitalist has thought of nothing but
+production."[205] "If, by a fiat from heaven, the wealth of the world
+were doubled to-morrow and the present system of capitalistic monopoly
+and commercial competition were allowed to continue, the social misery
+would, in a very short time, reappear in a form even still more
+accentuated, were that possible. Individualism, commercialism,
+capitalism--call it what we may--has demonstrably produced the
+evil."[206]
+
+
+THE EXISTING CAPITALIST SYSTEM IS RESPONSIBLE FOR POVERTY, WANT, AND
+UNEMPLOYMENT
+
+Unemployment is largely caused by commercial crises, commercial crises
+are caused by over-production, over-production is caused by the fact
+that the national industries are divided and the industrial output is
+regulated not by the nation in accordance with the national demand but
+by irresponsible private individuals whose aim is profit, not the
+fulfilment of a national demand. "The causes of commercial depression
+lie in the non-consumption of the incomes of our millionaires."[207]
+Another Socialist writer asserts: "Our era is cursed with crises
+occurring far more frequently than plagues and causing as much misery.
+Economists say that these crises are caused by over-production.
+Private enterprise compels every producer to produce for himself, to
+sell for himself, to keep all his transactions to himself, without
+regard to anybody else in the wide world. Merchants have got no
+measure at hand by which they can, even approximately, either
+estimate the effective demand of their customers or ascertain the
+producing capacity of their rivals. Production by all these
+manufacturers is, and must necessarily be, absolutely planless. This
+planless production must end in the market being overstocked with
+commodities of one kind or another; that is, that it must end in
+'over-production.' In the trade which has been thus overdone, prices
+fall and wages come down; or a great manufacturer fails and a smaller
+or greater number of workmen are discharged. Crises are therefore the
+direct result of private enterprise."[208] "Why are men--men that is
+who are able and willing, nay, eager and anxious, to work--unemployed?
+Because, it is said, there is nothing for them to do. Nothing for them
+to do? Is all the necessary work of the world, then, already finished,
+so that there is nothing more remaining for anyone to do? No; it is
+not because all the necessary and useful work is done that men are
+unemployed, it is because all the means of production--all the
+machines, tools, and implements of labour and all the raw
+material--are owned by a class, and may only be used by permission of
+that class, and when that class can make a profit out of their
+use."[209] "It is indisputable that modern poverty is artificial. It
+is neither the result of divine anger nor the niggardliness of Nature.
+It is the product of the private ownership of land and capital by
+which men are prevented from earning their living unless the
+proprietary class can make profit from their labour. The inevitable
+result of this system is that in all industries and at all times there
+are more men seeking employment than there is employment for.[210]"
+"Your system of private ownership, in conferring the possession and
+control of the nation's storehouse of wealth and of the instruments by
+which all further wealth must be obtained from it, upon your
+capitalist class, has reduced the nation at large into nothing more
+nor less than an elaborate machine which your capitalists use for
+extracting wealth from the earth for their own benefit.... It is not
+well that by a foolish and wicked system of government, one small
+class of the community should be enabled to organise its production in
+such a manner that the full stream of wealth is diverted into their
+own possession whilst the mass of the nation by whose labour it is
+obtained are defrauded of it, and brought into a state of subtle
+slavery worse both in kind and degree than could be possible under any
+system of direct and open slavery."[211] "Unemployment is an
+inevitable feature of capitalism, and is impossible of removal without
+at the same time abolishing the capitalist system that produces it.
+That is a fact known to any Socialist with the most elementary
+knowledge of the economics of capitalism. Unemployment is caused by
+the exactions of the capitalist class. The prime cause of unemployment
+is the robbery of the workers by which the capitalist class
+appropriate the whole of the wealth produced by the workers, returning
+to them just as much on the average as will keep them physically fit
+to continue working. The difference between the quantities produced
+and consumed by the working class (a difference continually increasing
+with every increase in the productivity of labour) represents a
+surplus which all the waste and all the luxury of its owners cannot
+absorb, with the result that the markets are glutted with an excess of
+commodities. Thus the 'over-production,' the crisis, and the
+slackening of production involving an increase of unemployment."[212]
+
+Employers of labour profit directly from unemployment, and will
+therefore presumably do all they can to bring it about. "Employers and
+other well-to-do people have no interest in finding work for the
+workless. They benefit from the unemployment of the poor."[213] The
+foregoing statement is as malicious as it is absurd. Employers do not
+desire unemployment, partly from humanitarian reasons, partly because
+it is a loss to them. The father of English Socialism taught: "The
+labourer perishes if capital does not employ him. Capital perishes if
+it does not exploit labour."[214] In other words, unemployed labour
+means unemployed capital; besides, those business men who do not
+actually dismiss their workers suffer also through unemployment,
+because the unemployed are supported by the rates.
+
+The doctrines that "the existing misery can be abolished, not by
+increased production but by altering the distribution of the wealth
+produced," and that the "capitalist system is responsible for want,
+poverty, and unemployment," are manifestly unsound. A larger
+consumption of food, clothing, &c., can be effected only by a larger
+production. Gluts and crises, with consequent unemployment, occur, not
+through general over-production, which would benefit all, but by
+ill-balanced production, as the following example will prove: Imagine
+an island off the African coast on which there are two villages, the
+inhabitants of which require only two commodities, loin-cloths and
+mealies. One village manufactures loin-cloths, the other raises
+mealies, and these are exchanged against each other. These villages
+fulfil the Socialistic ideal. There are no capitalists and no
+middlemen, and production is only "for use," not "for profit."
+Balanced over-production will result in this, that every native will
+have a superabundance of loin-cloths and food. But supposing that the
+agriculturists go in for loin-cloth making, finding that occupation
+more congenial, and that they abandon much agriculture; or supposing
+that inclement weather, or a plague of grasshoppers, should seriously
+curtail the harvest, then there will soon be a glut of loin-cloths and
+a crisis. The cry of over-production will arise among the loin-cloth
+makers, but that cry will be unjustified and absurd. The more the
+people make the more they will have, provided production is properly
+balanced. The doctrine that we suffer from over-production and that
+the capitalist system is at fault, that altered distribution rather
+than increased production will abolish misery, and that Socialism can
+prevent want and unemployment by a scientific organisation of
+production, is wrong.
+
+Socialists may, of course, argue, "In the Socialist State production
+would be organised, and controlled, and properly balanced and
+harmonised," an argument which is irrelevant with regard to the
+over-production doctrine, and which besides is unsound, although it
+may be found in most Socialistic writings. As production is
+world-wide, the Socialists' control of production would also have to
+be world-wide. It would involve not only the control of all human
+energy throughout the world, but also the control of the seasons, of
+the weather, of insect plagues, of fashions, of appetite, &c.
+
+The foregoing proves that "men can never become richer till the
+produce of their labour increases. The more they produce the richer
+they will be, provided there be a demand for the produce of their
+labour. If a shoemaker makes four pairs of shoes in a day he will be
+twice richer than he would be if he made only two pairs in a day,
+provided that an increased demand is co-existing. The question,
+therefore, 'How can we become richer?' is reduced to this one, 'How
+can we increase the produce of labour and at the same time maintain an
+equivalent demand for that produce?'"[215] The doctrines that want and
+unemployment are due to over-production and to the capitalist system
+are wrong.
+
+We now come to the
+
+
+DOCTRINE OF THE CLASS WAR
+
+Having, by the fundamental doctrines enumerated in the foregoing,
+proved that all misery of the working masses is caused by the
+existence of a capitalist class which has enslaved the workers, the
+Socialists conclude that there is a natural antagonism between capital
+and labour; that social life is dominated by the Class War.
+
+"The Socialists say that the present form of property-holding divides
+society into two great classes."[216] "Capitalist society is divided
+into two classes: owners of property and owners of no property."[217]
+"Society is to-day divided into two classes with opposing interests,
+one class owning the means of life, and the other nothing but their
+power to work. Never in the history of society was the working-class
+so free from all traces of property as to-day."[218] "There are in
+reality but two classes, those who live by labour and those who live
+upon those who labour, the two classes of exploiter and
+exploited."[219] "Society has been divided mainly into two economic
+classes, a relatively small class of capitalists who own tools in the
+form of great machines they did not make and cannot use, and a great
+body of many millions of workers who did make these tools and who do
+use them, and whose very lives depend upon them, yet who do not own
+them."[220]
+
+It is usually said that society has three classes, but Socialists
+maintain that there are in reality only two classes. William Morris
+still divided society into three groups, which, however, at closer
+inspection will be found to form but two classes. According to Morris,
+"Civilised States consist of (1) the class of rich people doing no
+work, who consume a great deal while they produce nothing. Therefore,
+clearly they have to be kept at the expense of those who do work, just
+as paupers have, and are a mere burden on the community. (2) The
+middle class, including the trading, manufacturing, and professional
+people of our society. It is their ambition and the end of their whole
+lives to gain, if not for themselves, yet at least for their children,
+the proud position of being obvious burdens on the community. Here
+then is another class, this time very numerous and all-powerful, which
+produces very little and consumes enormously, and is therefore
+supported, as paupers are, by the real producers. (3) The class that
+remains to be considered produces all that is produced and supports
+both itself and the other classes, though it is placed in a position
+of inferiority to them, real inferiority, mind you, involving a
+degradation both of mind and body. To sum up, then, civilised States
+are composed of three classes--a class which does not even pretend to
+work, a class which pretends to work but which produces nothing, and a
+class which works."[221] In other words, William Morris divided
+society into two classes: propertied non-producers and non-propertied
+toilers.
+
+According to practically all living English Socialists, there are but
+two classes in society. "Modern society is divided into two
+classes--the possessors of property and the non-possessors: the
+dominant class and the subject class; the class which rules and the
+class which has to obey. He who possesses sufficient wealth to
+exercise control over the labour of others, to exploit that labour for
+his own profit, belongs to the one class; he who possesses nothing but
+the power to labour contained in his own body, and who is therefore
+compelled to sell that labour power in order to live, belongs to the
+other. It is this struggle and conflict between these two classes
+that Socialists call the class war, a recognition of which is
+essential to a clear conception of what the Socialist movement
+involves."[222] "Society is divided into two opposite classes, one,
+the capitalists and their sleeping partners the landlords and
+loanmongers, holding in their hands the means of production,
+distribution, and exchange, and being therefore able to command the
+labour of others; the other, the working class, the wage-earners, the
+proletariat, possessing nothing but their labour power, and being
+consequently forced by necessity to work for the former."[223] "In
+society there is an antagonism of interests, manifesting itself as a
+class struggle between those who possess but do not produce, and those
+who produce but do not possess."[224] "The people of this unfortunate
+country have been aptly divided by Mr. Gladstone into the 'masses' and
+the 'classes'--that is to say, into those who live by their own labour
+and those who live on the labour of others. Among the latter tribe of
+non-producers are included all manner of thieves, pick-pockets,
+burglars, sharpers, prostitutes, Peers of Parliament, their families
+and menials, all, or nearly all, the 'six hundred and odd scoundrels
+of the House of Commons,' the twenty thousand State parsons, who every
+Sunday shamelessly travesty the Christian religion in the interest of
+the 'classes.'"[225]
+
+The theory of dividing society into two classes, capitalists and
+workers, or as others put it, "exploiters and exploited," is
+manifestly absurd, and its absurdity has been pointed out by a few
+Socialists. "It is not true that there are only two great economic
+classes in the community. The Communist Manifesto, even in its day,
+admitted as much, but made no place for the fact in its theories.
+There is an economic antagonism between landlords and capitalists as
+well as between capitalists and workmen."[226] Besides, most
+capitalists are workers, and probably the great majority of English
+workers are capitalists to a larger or smaller extent.
+
+Now let us study the Socialists' description of the hostile forces
+which are engaged in the Class War.
+
+According to the Socialist teaching, the property-owners as a class
+are useless idlers who impoverish the workers and who shamelessly
+spend their whole income on demoralising luxuries. "The idlers and
+non-workers produce no wealth and take the greater share. They live on
+the labour of those who work. Nothing is produced by idleness; work
+must be done to obtain a thimble, a pin, and even a potato for dinner.
+The non-workers get the greater share of the wealth, and the greater
+part of this share is wasted. Therefore it is not good to have any
+people in the land who do not work. Only those who are old or sick
+should be kept by the toil of the rest."[227] Taking their figures
+from the pamphlet "Facts for Socialists," of which details have been
+given on pp. 41-48, the Independent Labour party states under the
+heading of "Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers": "The total incomes of
+persons in the United Kingdom amount in round figures to
+_1,800,000,000l._ How is this wealth distributed? 250,000 persons
+actually receive a total of _585,000,000l._--that is, one-thirtieth of
+the population receive one-third of the national income. Nearly the
+whole of these large incomes are unearned--_i.e._ they are made up of
+rents, interest, dividends, &c. This small class of rent and interest
+receivers perform no useful function. We may describe these people as
+social parasites, absolutely useless, yet levying toll to the extent
+of _6s. 8d._ in every _20s._ value of wealth created."[228] "At
+present more than _600,000,000l._ of the national income goes in the
+form of unearned rent and interest to support an idle class who spend
+it mainly on profitless and demoralising luxuries."[229]
+
+The foregoing extracts make it clear that, in the eyes of Socialists,
+practically all citizens, manual labourers excepted, are "drones and
+parasites." Directors, managers, doctors, chemists, ships' captains,
+teachers, &c., and even workmen of exceptional ability also, rob the
+general body of workers of half their wages and subsist only owing to
+the monopoly of property-holders who control the distribution of
+wealth. Upon these curious premisses are based the conclusions: "The
+profits and salaries of the class who share in the advantages of the
+monopoly of the instruments of production, or are endowed by Nature
+with any exceptional ability of high marketable value, amount
+according to the best estimate that can be formed, to about
+_460,000,000l._ annually, while out of a national income of some
+_1,800,000,000l._ a year the workers in the manual labour
+class--four-fifths of the whole population--obtain in wages not more
+than _690,000,000l._ It may be safely said that the workers from top
+to bottom of society pay a fine of one-half the wealth they produce to
+a parasitic class before providing for the maintenance of themselves
+and their proper dependents."[230] "It is this robbery and waste on
+the part of the minority which keeps the majority poor."[231] "So long
+as the instruments of production are in unrestrained private
+ownership, so long must the tribute of the workers to the drones
+continue, so long will the toiler's reward inevitably be reduced by
+their exactions."[232]
+
+"Socialism regards the capitalist proper not as a useful captain of
+industry, but as a mere share-holding, dividend-drawing parasite upon
+labour, and the Socialist party presses forward to his elimination
+from the field of production."[233] "The workers who have produced all
+this wealth only get a part--the smallest part at that--of the wealth
+they produce. Now we Socialists say that this wealth produced by the
+labour of the workers should belong to them, and not to the
+capitalists who produce nothing. Seeing that the interest of the
+worker is to get as much of this wealth, and on the other hand the
+capitalist wants as much of this wealth, as he can get, therefore we
+say that the interests of the workers and of the capitalists are not
+identical, but opposite."[234] "The interest of the working class can
+only be served even in the smallest degree by the curtailment of the
+power of the master class; that every material advance is useless
+except in so far as it helps to effect other achievements, and that
+the realisation of Labour politics, the well-being of the working
+class, can only be accomplished by its complete emancipation from
+capitalism."[235] In other words, the Socialist writers quoted agree
+in this: that the lot of the wage-earners can be improved only by
+taking the wealth from the rich. In order to introduce Socialism the
+present social order must be overturned. With this object in view they
+have addressed declarations of war to the owners of property.
+
+We owe to Marx not only the Class War doctrine, but also a declaration
+of war to the propertied class: "The Communists everywhere support
+every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political
+order of things. In all these movements they bring to the front, as
+the leading question in each, the property question, no matter what
+its degree of development at the time. Finally they labour everywhere
+for the union and agreement of the democratic parties of all
+countries. The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims.
+They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the
+forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling
+classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have
+nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working
+men of all countries, unite!"[236]
+
+Marx's disciples have issued similar declarations. For instance, in
+the official programme of the Social Democratic Federation we read:
+"The Social Democratic Federation is a militant Socialist organisation
+whose members, men and women, belong almost entirely to the working
+class. Its object is the realisation of Socialism, the emancipation of
+the working class from its present subjection to the capitalist class.
+To this end the Social Democratic Federation proclaims and preaches
+the Class War."[237] "There is no way in which the Class War can be
+avoided. You cannot have the reward of your labour and the idler have
+it too. There is just so much wealth produced every day. It may be
+more, it may be less; but there is always just so much, and the more
+the capitalist gets the less you will get, and _vice versa_. We preach
+the gospel of hatred, because in the circumstances it seems the only
+righteous thing we can preach. The talk about the 'Gospel of Love' is
+simply solemn rubbish. It is right to hate stealing, right to hate
+lying, it is right to hate meanness and uncleanness, right to hate
+hypocrisy, greed, and tyranny. Those who talk of the Gospel of Love
+with landlordism and capitalism for its objects want us to make our
+peace with iniquity."[238] "The Class War is inevitable under the
+present form of property-holding, and for it there can be neither
+truce, quarter, nor ending, save by the extinction of the class
+system itself. The identity of interests between capitalism and
+labour is a shibboleth that can only be given any sane meaning at all
+in the cynical sense that the interests of the wolf and the lamb are
+also 'identical' when the wolf has got the lamb inside him."[239]
+
+The doctrine of the Class War is a holy faith, the expropriation of
+property-owners is a divine task. "Unless we hate the system which
+prevents us from being what we otherwise might have been, we will not
+be able to strive against it with the patient, never-flagging zeal
+which our work, to be well done, requires. And to keep alive and
+undimmed this flame of hatred, divine not diabolical, we require to
+not only look around us, but especially to look back upon the world as
+it has been and to the example of those who have fought the good
+fight. To Socrates, to Savonarola, to John Ball, Wat the Tyler, and
+Jack Cade, in our land the first forerunners of Socialism; to Bruno
+and Vanini, to Cromwell, Milton, Hampden, and Pym, to John Eliot,
+Harry Vane; to Defoe, Mure, and Thomas Spence; to Ernest Jones,
+Bronterre O'Brien, and Robert Owen; to Wolfe Tone and Robert Emmet; to
+Allen, Larkin, and O'Brien; to Vera Sassoulitch, Marie Spiridonova,
+Sophia Perovsky; to Karl Marx."[240] The company of reformers and
+revolutionists seems somewhat mixed.
+
+The doctrine that the interests of employers and employees are
+irreconcilably opposed, not identical, is false, Socialist rhetoric to
+the contrary notwithstanding. As soon as a calamity threatens
+capital--for instance, a rise in raw cotton or a cotton
+famine--masters and men are seen to be in the same boat and devise
+combined measures for meeting the difficulty. The doctrine of the
+Class War is opposed to common experience and to common-sense.
+
+Let us now take note of the doctrine
+
+
+PRIVATE PROPERTY IS IMMORAL AND PRIVATE WEALTH IS A CRIME
+
+In the Class War right is, according to the Socialists, on the side of
+the propertyless. Not only are the owners of property objectionable in
+their persons, being "drones and parasites" who squander the earnings
+of the poor on riotous living, as we have learned in the foregoing
+pages, but private property as an institution is immoral in itself and
+ought to be abolished. No man has a right to be rich; no man can
+become rich honestly. Hence it follows that all rich men are robbers,
+thieves, and swindlers. "The poor owe no duty to the rich, unless it
+be the duty which an honest man owes to the thief who has robbed him.
+The rich have no right to any of their possessions, for there is but
+one right, and that is the right of the labourer to the fruits of his
+labour, and the rich do not labour. No man has any right to be rich.
+No man ever yet became rich by fair means. No man ever became rich by
+his own industry."[241] "No man or class of men made the first kind of
+wealth, such as land, minerals, and water. Therefore no man or class
+of men should be allowed to call these things their own."[242] As
+private property is immoral in itself, it is doubly immoral to lend
+out such property and to charge rent or interest for the use of it.
+Mr. G.J. Wardle, M.P., said, in a recent speech at Glasgow, that rent
+"was social immorality, and the State or society which allowed crimes
+of that kind to go on unpunished could never be a moral society. The
+same thing applied to interest on money. From the moral standpoint
+interest is unearned by the man who gets it, and it does not matter
+how that is cloaked over, that is the fact. Nowadays it was counted
+the greatest virtue to lend at so much per cent. That was a socially
+immoral proceeding, and because it was socially immoral it ate like a
+canker into the heart of society. As Socialists they objected to
+profit."[243]
+
+There are Socialists who preach the same doctrine of immorality and
+criminality of private property in more decided terms. They assert
+that it is criminal and immoral to make a profit as a compensation for
+the work of directing and taking heavy capital risks in productive
+business because such profits are opposed to the principle, "The
+labourer is entitled to the whole product of his labour" (see page
+61). "A man has a 'right' to that which he has produced by the unaided
+exercise of his own faculties; but he has not a right to that which is
+not produced by his own unaided faculties; nor to the whole of that
+which has been produced by his faculties aided by the faculties of
+another man."[244] "Everyone who pockets gains without rendering an
+equivalent to society is a criminal. Every millionaire is a criminal.
+Every company-chairman with nominal duties, though his salary be but
+_400l._, is a criminal. Everyone who lends his neighbour _5l._ and
+exacts _5l. 5s. 0d._ in return, is a criminal."[245] "When Proudhon
+advanced the somewhat startling proposition, 'Property is theft,' he
+merely stated positively what good, orthodox Adam Smith, in his
+'Wealth of Nations' set forth more urbanely when he wrote, 'The
+produce of labour (it is clear from the context that he meant the
+whole produce), is the natural recompense or wages of labour.'"[246]
+"'Property' is theft, said Proudhon, and surely private property in
+the means of production is not only theft, but the means of more
+theft."[247]
+
+Starting from the premiss that profit is immoral, the philosopher of
+British Socialism logically concludes: "The cheapest way of obtaining
+goods is not to pay for them, and if a buyer can avoid payment for the
+goods he obtains, he has quite as much right to do so as the seller
+has to receive for them double or treble their cost price and call it
+profit."[248]
+
+Private property being, according to the Socialist doctrines, immoral
+and criminal, it follows that
+
+
+"PRIVATE PROPERTY OUGHT TO BE ABOLISHED"
+
+Let us take note of an utterance in support of that doctrine: "If the
+life of men and women were a thing apart from that of their
+neighbours, there would be no need for a Socialist party nor any call
+for social reform. But man is not an entity; he is only part of a
+mighty social organism. Every act of his has a bearing upon the like
+of his fellow. It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the
+moral title to private property in anything. Private property exists
+entirely on sufferance. Private property therefore cannot be justly
+allowed when it interferes with the law of our social life or
+intercepts the progress of social development."[249]
+
+Let us now consider the doctrine
+
+
+"COMPETITION SHOULD BE REPLACED BY CO-OPERATION"
+
+Socialists teach: "Under Socialism you would have all the people
+working together for the good of all. Under non-Socialism you have all
+the persons working separately (and mostly against each other), each
+for the good of himself. So we find Socialism means co-operation and
+non-Socialism means competition."[250] "Socialism is constructive as
+well as revolutionary, and Socialists propose to replace competition
+by co-operation."[251]
+
+The question now arises: "On what ground do capitalists defend the
+principle of competition? A. On the ground that it brings into play a
+man's best qualities.--Q. Does it effect this? A. This is occasionally
+its result, but it also brings out his worst qualities by stimulating
+him to struggle with his fellows for the relative improvement of his
+own position rather than for the absolute advancement of the interests
+of all."[252]
+
+"Apart altogether from its injustice, competitive capitalism, regarded
+as a system of serving the community, is a business bungle. What the
+party of the Fourth Estate objects to in the existing commercial and
+industrial system is, not merely the stealages which go on under the
+guise of rent, profit, and interest, but the enormous waste arising
+from lack of consolidation and co-operation in the processes of
+production and distribution."[253] "During the last half-century we
+have lost more by our 'business principle' of dividing up our national
+work into competing one-man and one-company speculations, and
+insisting on every separate speculation paying its own separate way,
+than by all the tariffs and blockades that have been set up against
+us."[254] "In our age there is, as we have seen, throughout our whole
+economic sphere, no social order at all. There is absolute social
+anarchy. Against this anarchy Socialism is a protest."[255] "There is
+only one remedy for both the waste and the stealages, and that is the
+substitution of public enterprise with organisation for private
+enterprise with competition."[256] "Socialism means the socialising of
+the means and instruments of production, distribution, and exchange.
+For the individual capitalist it would substitute, as the director and
+controller of production and distribution, the community in its
+organised capacity. The commercial and industrial chaos and waste
+which are the outcome of monopolistic competition would give place to
+the orderliness of associated effort, and under Socialism society
+would for the first time in history behave like an organism."[257]
+Private capitalism and consequent competition are responsible not only
+for waste and muddle, but also for the adulteration of food and other
+necessaries of life. "Every man who knows anything of trade knows how
+general is the knavish practice of adulteration. Now all adulteration
+is directly due to competition. Did not Mr. John Bright once say that
+adulteration is only another form of competition?"[258]
+
+There is much truth in the contention of the Socialists that
+co-operation is mightier, and often better, than free competition.
+However, that is no new discovery, and the introduction of Socialism
+is not needed to bring about co-operation. In Germany, Switzerland,
+and Denmark national and private co-operation are far more developed
+than in Great Britain, and waste, muddle, and stealages are rare in
+those countries, although none of these is ruled by a Socialist
+Government. Co-operation, national as well as private, is developing
+also in Great Britain, and it will continue to develop as its value
+becomes more and more understood. It is a curious fact that
+Socialists, though they recommend co-operation in the abstract, oppose
+it in the concrete for similar reasons. They fear that satisfied and
+prosperous co-operators will oppose Socialism.[259]
+
+The assertion that adulteration is due to competition is not founded
+upon fact. Adulteration springs from many causes, and would continue
+to flourish even under the Socialistic _régime_. If all cowkeepers
+were salaried officials of the Socialist State or municipality, they
+might nevertheless mix water with the milk to obtain milk for their
+own consumption and that of their families, and to diminish the labour
+of milking. Adulteration may be abolished by efficient supervision and
+well-devised and rigorously enforced sanitary laws.
+
+Let us now glance at the doctrine
+
+
+"THE SOCIALIST STATE WILL ARISE BY NATURAL DEVELOPMENT, AND IT WILL
+HANDLE BUSINESS MORE EFFICIENTLY THAN DO PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS"
+
+"The State now registers, inspects, and controls nearly all the
+industrial functions which it has not yet absorbed. The inspection is
+often detailed and rigidly enforced. The State, in most of the larger
+industrial operations, prescribes the age of the worker, the hours of
+work, the amount of air, light, cubic space, heat, lavatory
+accommodation, holidays, and meal-times; where, when, and how wages
+shall be paid; how machinery, staircases, lift-holes, mines, and
+quarries are to be fenced and guarded; how and when the plant shall be
+cleaned, repaired, and worked."[260] "Step by step political power and
+political organisation have been used for industrial ends, until a
+Minister of the Crown is the largest employer of labour in the
+country, and at least 200,000 men, not counting the army and navy, are
+directly in the service of the community, without the intervention of
+the profit of any middleman."[261]
+
+From the fact that the State inspects many things and carries on some
+business, it does not by any means follow that the State should
+inspect all things and could efficiently carry on all business.
+Questions such as "If the State can build battleships and make
+swords, why not also trading ships and ploughshares,"[262] are
+ridiculous. One might as well ask, "If Messrs. Whiteley or Marshall
+Field can supply furniture, houses, dresses, and funerals, being
+universal providers, why not also battleships, armies, and colonies?"
+It is also not true that the State or municipal corporations have more
+business ability than private business men. As an example of
+successful business management Socialists are fond of pointing to the
+Post Office, and of asserting that no private company could work as
+efficiently and as cheaply. These statements are erroneous. The
+success of the British Post Office, as of every post office, is due
+not to ability but to monopoly, as the following example will prove.
+Private individuals in Germany discovered some years ago a flaw in the
+legislation regarding the Post Office which enabled them to compete
+with the Imperial Post Office, not in postal business between
+different towns, but in local delivery. Private post offices sprang up
+in many towns and began to deliver letters at the rate of two pfennigs
+(one farthing) each. Although the German Post Office is the most
+efficient Post Office in Europe, it could not compete with these
+private post offices, and, after lengthy competition, steps had to be
+taken to extend the postal monopoly to town deliveries. The British
+Post Office, like most public offices, is a most conservative
+institution. Every progress and every reform had to be forced upon it
+by outside agitation. Services such as money delivery at private
+residences, cash on delivery parcels, &c., which other countries have
+enjoyed during several decades, are stubbornly denied to England.
+Private competition would probably have furnished these conveniences
+long ago. In London the Messenger Boy Company competes with the Post
+Office in the carrying of express letters, and various private
+carriers compete with it in delivering parcels, and in both instances
+the private trader supplies a better and cheaper service than the
+Government Post Office. A comparison of the Post Office telephone in
+England and the private telephone in America shows the great
+superiority of the latter. The slow and ultra-conservative British
+Post Office supplies no proof that the Government would handle
+production and distribution better than private enterprise. On the
+contrary.
+
+British Socialists claim unanimously that their theories and demands
+are founded upon science. "The Socialist doctrine systematises the
+industrial changes. It lays down a law of capitalist evolution. It
+describes the natural history of society. It is not, therefore, only a
+popular creed for the market-place, but a scientific inquiry for the
+study. Like every theory in Sociology, it has a political bearing, but
+it can be studied as much detached from politics as is Darwinism."[263]
+Do the fundamental doctrines of British Socialism bear out the claims
+of its champions? The foregoing pages prove that the scientific basis
+of Socialism, or rather of British Socialism, consists of a number of
+doctrines which cannot stand examination and which are disproved by
+daily experience and by common-sense.
+
+The question now suggests itself: "How is it that the British
+Socialists base their demands on pseudo-scientific doctrines of
+obvious absurdity?"
+
+British Socialism has been imported from Germany. Marx, Engels,
+Lassalle, Rodbertus, and various other Germans are the fathers of
+modern scientific Socialism. "To German scholars is largely due the
+development of Socialism from the Utopian stage to the scientific.
+Universality is its distinguishing feature."[264] "Karl Marx and
+Frederick Engels in 1847 laid, through the 'Communist Manifesto,' the
+scientific foundation of modern Socialism."[265] "And 'Capital,' Karl
+Marx's great work, has become the loadstar of modern economic
+science."[266] Karl Marx's "Manifesto" appeared in 1847; the first
+volume of his "Capital" was published in 1867. Since the appearance of
+the former sixty years, and since the publication of the latter forty
+years, have passed by. Much has changed in the world, but the Marxian
+doctrines have remained unchanged.
+
+The worst about speculative doctrines is that time is apt to disprove
+them.
+
+Whilst the German Socialists have thinkers in their ranks who have
+adapted the older Communist theories to present conditions, leaving
+out those theories which are palpably false, English Socialists have
+stood still and are satisfied to repeat those ancient doctrines which
+the Germans have abandoned long ago. English Socialists try to impose
+upon an uncritical public by parading the worn-out stage properties of
+the forties. Marx is to the vast majority of British Socialists still
+an oracle and the fountain head of all wisdom. "Marx is the Darwin of
+modern sociology."[267] "All over the world his brain is put on pretty
+much the same level as Aristotle's."[268] "Modern Socialism is based,
+nationally and internationally, theoretically and to a large extent
+practically, on the writings of Karl Marx. These writings have been
+expounded, and where necessary applied, extended, and amplified, to
+meet conditions which have developed since his death nearly a quarter
+of a century ago, in every civilised country. It is safe to say that
+no one who does not understand and accept in the main the views set
+forth by Marx, comprehends the real position of capitalist Society,
+nor, what is even more important, can fully master the problems of
+the coming time."[269] "The Social-Democratic Federation, which is by
+far the oldest and still the most active Socialist organisation in
+this country, bases its teaching to-day, as it has always done, upon
+the words of Karl Marx."[270]
+
+Most active Socialists in Great Britain think Marx and Lassalle
+infallible. It is true that the Fabian Society has pointed out "the
+necessity of maintaining as critical an attitude towards Marx and
+Lassalle, some of whose views must by this time be discarded as
+erroneous or obsolete,"[271] but that protest appears to have been
+left unheeded by most British Socialists. In fact, the abandonment of
+revolutionary Marxianism has caused the Fabians to be treated with
+open hostility by the other Socialist sections. The reasons for that
+hostility are obvious. The doctrines of Marx and Lassalle, though they
+are, to say the least, erroneous and obsolete, are admirably fitted to
+inflame the passions of the masses. Their doctrines may not be true,
+but they are useful to professional agitators. Independent Socialists
+in all countries have not disguised their opinion of Marx's "Capital,"
+which, in the words of an English Socialist, "is not a treatise on
+Socialism; it is a jeremiad against the bourgeoisie, supported by such
+a mass of evidence and such a relentless Jewish genius for
+denunciation as had never been brought to bear before."[272]
+
+British Socialism is neither scientific nor sincere. Its leaders know
+that the Iron Law of Wages (see p. 53), the Law of Increasing Misery
+(see p. 56), and other doctrines, which are exceedingly useful to the
+agitator who wishes to poison the mind of the masses, have been thrown
+into the lumber room in Germany and most other countries (see the
+writings of Bernstein, Jaurčs, and others), but they do not abandon
+them. Apparently it is their policy rather to create strife and
+confusion than to alleviate existing misery. That attitude must have
+covered English Socialists with ignominy in the eyes of foreign
+Socialists. The very humiliating treatment which the English
+Socialists received at the International Socialist Congress in
+Stuttgart of 1907 from their Continental comrades suggests that the
+curious attitude and the not very estimable tactics of British
+Socialists have not found the approval of their Continental
+colleagues.
+
+The doctrines of the English Socialists with regard to property are
+identical with those of most Anarchists (see Eltzbacher, "Der
+Anarchismus"). For instance, Proudhon taught: "We rob (1) by murder on
+the highway; (2) alone, or in a band; (3) by breaking into buildings,
+or scaling walls; (4) by abstraction; (5) by fraudulent bankruptcy;
+(6) by forgery of the handwriting of public officials, or private
+individuals; (7) by manufacture of counterfeit money; (8) by cheating;
+(9) by swindling; (10) by abuse of trust; (11) by games and lotteries;
+(12) by usury; (13) by farm rent, house rent, and leases of all kinds;
+(14) by commerce, when the profit of the merchant exceeds his
+legitimate salary; (15) by making profit on our product, by accepting
+sinecures, and by exacting exorbitant wages."[273] "What is property?
+It is robbery."[274] "Property, after having robbed the labourer by
+usury, murders him slowly by starvation."[275] Practically the
+identical doctrines are propounded by British Socialists. Further
+instances of the resemblance between Socialism and Anarchism will be
+found in Chapter XXX, "Socialism and Anarchism."
+
+Society is at present based upon individualism. In their anxiety to
+prove the failure of modern civilisation British Socialists deny that
+the world has progressed under individualism. "Not by individual
+selfishness, or national selfishness, has the progress of the human
+race been advanced."[276] And they boldly declare that all history,
+having been written by men of the dominant class, is a deception. "Are
+we then to understand that the whole of history, so far, has been
+written from the point of view of the dominant class of every age?
+Most assuredly so; and this applies to well-nigh the whole of the
+sources of past history."[277]
+
+The foregoing should suffice to make it clear that the Socialist
+agitation is not based on irrefutable scientific doctrines, as
+Socialists pretend, but on deception. It may be said that no agitation
+is free from deception, that the end justifies the means, that
+Socialism means for the best. We have been told "Socialism is a
+religion of humanity. Socialism is the only hope of the race.
+Socialism is the remedy--the only remedy--which Lord Salisbury could
+not find."[278] We must look into the practical proposals of British
+Socialism in order to be able to judge its character.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[151] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 3.
+
+[152] Hazell, _Summary of Marx's "Capital,"_ p. 1; Macdonald,
+_Socialism_, p. 54.
+
+[153] _Socialism made Plain_, p. 8.
+
+[154] Hobart, _Social-Democracy_, p. 7.
+
+[155] _Manifesto_, Socialist Party of Great Britain, p. 8.
+
+[156] _What Socialism Means_: Independent Labour Party Leaflet, No. 8,
+p. 3.
+
+[157] Debs, _Industrial Unionism_, p. 20.
+
+[158] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, 1368.
+
+[159] _Ibid._ 807.
+
+[160] _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, p. 17.
+
+[161] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 15.
+
+[162] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 163.
+
+[163] Quelch, _Economics of Labour_, p. 13.
+
+[164] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 107.
+
+[165] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 99.
+
+[166] _Socialist Standard_, December 1907.
+
+[167] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 32.
+
+[168] Stegman und Hugo, _Handbuch_, p. 473.
+
+[169] _Christliche Arbeiterpflichten_, p. 15.
+
+[170] Webb, _Industrial Democracy_, p. 548.
+
+[171] Councillor Glyde, _A Peep behind the Scenes on a Board of
+Guardians_, p. 5.
+
+[172] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, p. 12.
+
+[173] Marx, _Wage, Labour, and Capital_, pp. 23, 24.
+
+[174] Marx, _Wage, Labour, and Capital_, p. 22.
+
+[175] _English Progress towards Social-Democracy_, p. 12.
+
+[176] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 99.
+
+[177] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, p. 8.
+
+[178] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[179] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, p. 12.
+
+[180] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 9.
+
+[181] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 528.
+
+[182] Quelch, _Economics of Labour_, p. 18.
+
+[183] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 3.
+
+[184] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 15.
+
+[185] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 19.
+
+[186] _Clarion_, November 29, 1907.
+
+[187] Hall, _The Old and New Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[188] _Socialism and the Single Tax_, p. 6.
+
+[189] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 189.
+
+[190] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 86.
+
+[191] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, pp. 7, 8.
+
+[192] See _ante_ p. 10.
+
+[193] _Report on Fabian Policy_, p. 8.
+
+[194] See Chapter XXXIII.
+
+[195] Hall, _Land, Labour, and Liberty_, p. 5.
+
+[196] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 66.
+
+[197] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 86.
+
+[198] _Rich and Poor_, Introd.
+
+[199] Martyn, _Co-operation_, p. 3.
+
+[200] Lister, _Riches and Poverty_, p. 12.
+
+[201] Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 16.
+
+[202] _Socialism and the Single Tax_, p. 7.
+
+[203] Kessack, _The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way Out_, p. 9.
+
+[204] Lafargue, _Right to Leisure_, p. 11.
+
+[205] Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[206] Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 16.
+
+[207] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 67.
+
+[208] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, pp. 32, 33.
+
+[209] Social-Democratic Federation, _The Unemployed_, leaflet.
+
+[210] Smart, _The Right to Work_, p. 3.
+
+[211] Washington, _A Corner in Flesh and Blood_, p. 12.
+
+[212] _The Socialist Standard_, December 1907.
+
+[213] _Why Labour Men should be on Town Councils_, p. 2.
+
+[214] Marx, _Wage-Labour and Capital_, p. 12.
+
+[215] L'Auton, _The Nationalisation of Society_, p. 4.
+
+[216] Jaurčs, _Studies in Socialism_, p. 1.
+
+[217] _Handbuch für Sozialdemokratische Wähler_, 1903, p. 233.
+
+[218] _Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 7.
+
+[219] _The Socialist Standard_, December 1907.
+
+[220] Debs, _Industrial Unionism_, p. 4.
+
+[221] Morris, _Useful Work_ versus _Useless Toil_, pp. 22, 25.
+
+[222] _The Class War_, p. 1.
+
+[223] _Programme and Rules, Social-Democratic Federation._
+
+[224] _Socialist Standard_, October 1, 1907.
+
+[225] Davidson, _The New Book of Kings_, p. 115.
+
+[226] Macdonald, _Socialism and Society_, pp. 111, 112.
+
+[227] _What Socialism Means_, p. 3.
+
+[228] _Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers_, p. 2.
+
+[229] _After Bread, Education_, p. 12.
+
+[230] _Capital and Land_, p. 13.
+
+[231] Morris, _Useful Work versus Useless Toil_, p. 26.
+
+[232] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 8.
+
+[233] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 4.
+
+[234] _The Socialist_, October 1907.
+
+[235] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 42.
+
+[236] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, pp. 30, 31.
+
+[237] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 1.
+
+[238] Leatham, _The Class War_, p. 10.
+
+[239] Hall, _The Old and the New Unionism_, p. 4.
+
+[240] Leatham, _The Class War_, p. 11.
+
+[241] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[242] _What Socialism Means_, p. 3.
+
+[243] _Forward_, November 23, 1907.
+
+[244] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 58.
+
+[245] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 166.
+
+[246] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 4.
+
+[247] McClure, _Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[248] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 98.
+
+[249] Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, pp. 3, 4.
+
+[250] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[251] Hyndman, _Social-Democracy_, p. 24.
+
+[252] Joynes, _The Socialists' Catechism_, p. 13.
+
+[253] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 3.
+
+[254] _Fabianism and the Fiscal Question_, p. 19.
+
+[255] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 41.
+
+[256] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 3.
+
+[257] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 4.
+
+[258] Blatchford, _Competition_, p. 15.
+
+[259] See Chapters VII & XXIII.
+
+[260] _English Progress towards Social-Democracy_, p. 14.
+
+[261] _Ibid._ p. 13.
+
+[262] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 15.
+
+[263] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[264] McClure, _Socialism_, p. 13.
+
+[265] Kautsky, _The Class Struggle_, p. 24.
+
+[266] Kautsky, _The Socialist Republic_, p. 21.
+
+[267] Hyndman, _Historic Basis of Socialism_, p. 435.
+
+[268] _Justice_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[269] _Justice_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[270] _The Social Democrat_, November 1907, p. 676.
+
+[271] _Report on Fabian Policy_, 1896, p. 6.
+
+[272] G.B. Shaw, quoted in Jackson, _Bernard Shaw_, p. 100.
+
+[273] Proudhon, _What is Property?_ pp. 252-256.
+
+[274] _Ibid._ p. 37.
+
+[275] _Ibid._ p. 184.
+
+[276] Snowden, _The Christ that is to be_, p. 6.
+
+[277] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 32.
+
+[278] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 11.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+THE AIMS AND POLICY OF THE SOCIALISTS
+
+
+Those people who formerly called themselves Communists now call
+themselves Socialists. Marx and Engels wrote in their celebrated
+"Manifesto": "The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the
+single sentence: Abolition of private property."[279] The policy of
+modern British Socialism may be summed up in the identical words.
+Indeed, we are told by one of its most eager champions that "The
+programme of Socialism consists essentially of one demand--that the
+land and other instruments of production shall be the common property
+of the people, and shall be used and governed by the people for the
+people."[280] "We suggest that the nation should own all the ships,
+all the railways, all the factories, all the buildings, all the land,
+and all the requisites of national life and defence."[281]
+
+According to the Socialist doctrines which have been given in Chapter
+IV, private property is the enemy of the workers. Therefore they quite
+logically demand that all private property must be abolished. "The
+problem has to be faced. Either we must submit for ever to hand over
+at least one-third of our annual product to those who do us the favour
+to own our country without the obligation of rendering any service to
+the community, and to see this tribute augment with every advance in
+our industry and numbers, or else we must take steps, as
+considerately as may be possible, to put an end to this state of
+things."[282] "The modern form of private property is simply a legal
+claim to take a share of the produce of the national industry year by
+year without working for it. Socialism involves discontinuance of the
+payment of these incomes and addition of the wealth so saved to
+incomes derived from labour. The economic problem of Socialism is thus
+solved."[283]
+
+A general division of the existing private property among all the
+people is not intended, because it is considered to be impracticable.
+"Socialism does not consist in violently seizing upon the property of
+the rich and sharing it out amongst the poor."[284] "Plans for a
+national 'dividing up' are not Socialism. They are nonsense. 'Dividing
+up' means individual ownership. Socialism means collective
+ownership."[285] "It is obvious that, in the present stage of economic
+development, individual ownership is impossible. All the great means
+of production are collectively owned now. Individual liberty based
+upon individual property is therefore out of the question, and the
+emancipation of the working class can only be achieved in social
+freedom, based upon social property, through the transformation of
+privately owned collective property into publicly owned collective
+property."[286]
+
+Starting from these premisses, the Socialists arrive at the demand
+that "all the means of production and distribution, all the machinery,
+all the buildings, everything that is necessary to provide the
+fundamental necessaries of life, must be common property."[287] "We
+want all the instruments for the purposes of trade to be the property
+of the State. With that will have come at the same time the abolition
+of power permitting any individual to exact rent or interest for the
+loan of land or of the implements of production. The abolition of all
+private property will mean the extinction of the parasite."[288] "The
+overthrow of capitalism and the establishment of a system of society
+based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means
+and instruments for producing and distributing wealth, by and in the
+interest of the whole community: That is Socialism."[289] "The Fabian
+Society aims at the reorganisation of society by the emancipation of
+land and industrial capital from individual and class ownership, and
+the vesting of them in the community for the general benefit. The
+Society accordingly works for the extinction of private property in
+land, and of the consequent individual appropriation, in the form of
+rent, of the price paid for permission to use the earth, as well as
+for the advantages of superior soils and sites. The Society, further,
+works for the transfer to the community of the administration of such
+industrial capital as can conveniently be managed socially."[290]
+"Here in plain words is the principle, or root idea, on which all
+Socialists agree--that the country and everything in the country shall
+belong to the whole people (the nation), and shall be used by the
+people and for the people. That principle, the root idea of Socialism,
+means two things: (1) That the land, and all the machines, tools, and
+buildings used in making needful things, together with all the canals,
+rivers, roads, railways, ships, and trains used in moving, sharing
+(distributing) needful things, and all the shops, markets, scales,
+weights, and money used in selling or dividing needful things, shall
+be the property of (belong to) the whole people (the nation). (2) That
+the land, tools, machines, trains, rivers, shops, scales, money, and
+all the other things belonging to the people, shall be worked,
+managed, divided, and used by the whole people, in such way as the
+greater number of the whole people shall deem best."[291]
+
+A perusal of the party programmes and other Socialist documents
+contained in the Appendix will show that the abolition of all private
+property, and its transference to the State, is the aim of all the
+Socialist organisations and parties, and no further extracts need be
+given in order to prove the unanimity of the Socialists on this point.
+
+The question now arises: How is this transference of all private
+property to the State to be effected? Will the present holders of
+property be fully compensated, partly compensated, or not compensated
+at all? Do the Socialists aim at purchase or at confiscation of
+existing private property. Will they respect existing rights, or are
+they bent upon open or more or less disguised spoliation?
+
+It is, unfortunately, very difficult to obtain a plain and
+straightforward answer upon this important point. Instead of giving
+this answer, British Socialists loudly protest that it is not their
+aim to destroy or abolish property. As nobody has suspected the
+Socialists to be foolish enough to abolish or destroy property--which
+means the instruments of production, such as factories, machines,
+railways, &c., by the use of which the people live, and thus bring
+starvation upon themselves--their eagerness to explain that they do
+not intend to abolish or destroy property can only be explained by the
+surmise that they hope shallow simpletons will say, "The Socialists
+have no intention to take our capital away from us by force and
+without compensation, for they have declared that they do not intend
+to abolish property." A few of these declarations should here be
+given: "So far from abolishing property, Socialism desires to
+establish it upon the only basis which makes property secure--that of
+service, of creative service."[292] "Socialism does not propose to
+abolish land or capital. Only a genius could have thought of this as
+an objection to Socialism."[293] "Socialism is far from aiming at the
+destruction of private property. Its object is to increase private
+property amongst those whose property is so limited that they have a
+difficulty in keeping themselves alive."[294] Another Socialist makes
+the very irrelevant and unnecessary observation: "It is a firm
+principle of Socialism never to interfere with personal property in
+order to investigate its origin or to arrange it in a different way.
+Never and nowhere! And whoever asserts to the contrary either does not
+know the principles of Socialism or willingly and knowingly asserts an
+untruth. The Socialists deem an investigation into the origin of an
+acknowledged personal property an unnecessary trouble. They consider
+the personal property an accomplished fact and respect it: so much so,
+that they consider stealing a crime."[295] Mr. Blatchford informs us,
+"We do not propose to seize anything. We do propose to get some things
+and to make them the property of the whole nation by Act of Parliament
+or by purchase."[296]
+
+As regards the question whether compensation or no compensation will be
+given, our Socialist leaders give us very vague and unsatisfactory
+replies, which rather contain highly respectable but perfectly
+irrelevant commonplaces than definite proposals. Most Socialists will
+answer the plain question of confiscation or no confiscation with a
+quibble or a conundrum, as the following examples will show: "One view
+of Socialism is that it is a scheme of confiscation of property from
+one class to give it to another class--that Socialists are Dick Turpins
+made respectable by using Acts of Parliament instead of pistols. Now
+the real fact is that the Socialist has come to put an end to Dick
+Turpin methods. Socialism is a rational criticism of our present
+methods of production and distribution. It desires to say to the
+possessors: Show us by what title you possess; and it proposes to pass
+its judgments upon the axiom that whoever renders service to society
+should be able to have some appropriate share in the national
+wealth."[297] In other words, an inquisitorial tribunal with arbitrary
+powers would be empowered to confiscate at will. "Socialism is not a
+plan to despoil the rich: it is a plan to stop the rich from despoiling
+the poor. Socialism is not a thief; it is a policeman."[298] "Do any
+say we attack private property? We deny it. We attack only that private
+property for a few thousand loiterers and slave-drivers which renders
+all property in the fruits of their own labour impossible for millions.
+We challenge that private property which renders poverty at once a
+necessity and a crime."[299] "Socialism would not rob anyone. It would
+distinguish between the lawful possessor and the rightful possessor,
+and it would compel the 'lawful' possessor to restore to the rightful
+possessor the property of which he had robbed him."[300] "We do not
+propose to rob the rich man of his wealth; we deny that it is his
+wealth. Wealth is a social product, and therefore belongs to society.
+It is not an act of brigandage to demand that society shall own and use
+what society has created."[301]
+
+Some Socialists consider the question of compensation or no
+compensation as one of very minor importance. "The question of
+compensation need not greatly worry us. Socialists hold that
+plutocrats owe all their wealth to society; and therefore that society
+has the right at any moment to take it back."[302] The more cautious
+and moderate French and German Socialists are apt to promise
+compensation in terms such as the following: "We declare expressly
+that it is the duty of the State to give to those whose interests will
+be damaged by the necessary abolition of laws which are detrimental to
+the common interest compensation as far as it is possible and
+consistent with the interests of all."[303]
+
+It will be observed that the plain word compensation is circumscribed
+by the phrase, "compensation as far as it is possible and consistent
+with the interests of all." In other and plainer words, compensation
+is to be arbitrarily given, and its proportion to the property
+acquired is apparently to be determined not by its value or by
+fairness and equity, but by the will of those who may be in power.
+
+English Socialists, on the other hand, are apt to recommend a far more
+drastic treatment of property-owners. "We claim that land in country
+and land in towns, mines, parks, mountains, moors, should be owned by
+the people for the people, to be held, used, built over, and
+cultivated upon such terms as the people themselves see fit to ordain.
+The handful of marauders who now hold possession have, and can have,
+no right save brute force against the tens of millions whom they
+wrong."[304] The most moderate school of British Socialism, the Fabian
+Society, favours in its statement of policy given under the heading
+"Basis of the Fabian Society" the expropriation of all private
+capital "without compensation, though not without such relief to
+expropriated individuals as may seem fit to the community." In other
+words, expropriated property-owners may, or may not, be given
+something to protect them from starvation, not as a matter of right,
+but of charity.
+
+Most Socialists who favour compensation recommend that it should be
+given only in the form of consumable articles such as food, clothes,
+&c., or in bonds which are changeable only into consumable articles.
+"Rothschild will be paid in bread and meat and luxury and wine and
+theatre tickets."[305] "When capitalistic property shall have been
+socialised, the holders of compensation deeds will not be able to
+purchase either fresh means of production or producers; they will only
+be able to buy products."[306]
+
+Some Socialists suggest that the bonds given in exchange for property
+acquired by the State might be cancelled later on. The property-owners
+could be deprived of their possessions without any difficulty, either
+gradually by taxation or at one blow by confiscation at the option of
+the men in power. "When the entire capitalistic property takes the
+form of State bonds, the property which it is impossible to ascertain
+to-day would then be known to everybody. It would only be necessary to
+decree that all bonds are to be registered in the name of the owner,
+and it would be possible to estimate exactly the capitalist income and
+the property of everyone. It would then also be possible to screw up
+the taxes to any extent without fear of their being evaded by any
+concealments. It would then be also impossible to escape them by
+emigration, since it is the public institutions of the country, and in
+the first place the State, from which all interest comes, and the
+latter can deduct the tax from the interest before it is paid out.
+Under these circumstances it would be possible to raise the
+progressive income and property tax as high as necessary--if necessary
+as high as would come very near, if not actually amount to,
+confiscation of the large property."[307] The foregoing is a simple
+plan of swindling property-owners out of their holdings.
+
+Some of the more moderate Socialists argue: "There is much to be said
+in favour of the liberal treatment of the present generation of
+proprietors and even of their children. But against the permanent
+welfare of the community the unborn have no rights."[308] On the other
+hand, Bax, the philosopher of British Socialism, quite logically and
+honestly states that the idea of compensation has no room in the
+Socialist code of ethics, that the bourgeois idea of compensation on
+grounds of justice is irreconcilable with the Socialist conception of
+justice. He says: "Between possession and confiscation is a great gulf
+fixed, the gulf between the bourgeois and the Socialist worlds.
+Well-meaning men seek to throw bridges over this gulf by schemes of
+compensation, abolition of inheritance, and the like. But the
+attempts, as we believe, even should they ever be carried out
+practically, must fall disastrously short of their mark and be
+speedily engulfed between the two positions they are intended to
+unite. Nowhere can the phrase 'He that is not for us is against us' be
+more aptly applied than to the moral standpoint of modern
+individualism and of modern Socialism. To the one, individual
+possession is right and justice, and social confiscation is wrong and
+injustice; to the other, individual possession is wrong and injustice,
+and confiscation is right and justice. This is the real issue. Unless
+a man accept the last-named standpoint unreservedly, he has no right
+to call himself a Socialist. If he does accept it, he will seek the
+shortest and most direct road to the attainment of justice rather than
+any longer and more indirect ones, of which it is at best doubtful
+whether they will attain the end at all. For be it remembered the
+moment you tamper with the sacredness of private property, no matter
+how mildly, you surrender the conventional bourgeois principle of
+justice, while the moment you talk of compensation you surrender the
+Socialist principle of justice, for compensation can only be real if
+it is adequate, and can only be adequate if it counterbalances, and
+thereby annuls, the confiscation. It is just, says the individualist,
+for a man to be able to do what he likes with his own. Good; but what
+is his own?"[309] "The great act of confiscation will be the seal of
+the new era; then and not till then will the knell of civilisation,
+with its rights of property and its class society, be sounded; then,
+and not till then, will justice--the justice not of civilisation but
+of Socialism--become the corner-stone of the social arch."[310]
+
+I think the straightforwardness of Bax is preferable to the crooked
+and insincere explanations and proposals of the British and foreign
+Socialist given in the foregoing. Bax's opinion is irrefutable.
+According to the doctrines of Socialism given in Chapter IV., labour
+is the source of all wealth; the greater part of the products of that
+labour is dishonestly abstracted from the labourer by the capitalist
+class, which has converted the result of that labour into property.
+Hence Socialists think with Proudhon, and they very often openly
+declare, that property is theft. Capitalist society will not
+compensate the thief when taking from him his booty. Socialism will
+not compensate property-owners when taking away their property.
+Besides, compensation would be utterly opposed to the root idea of
+Socialist justice. At present expropriation without indemnity is
+called theft, but it would not be called theft under a Socialist
+_régime_. The chapter on "Law and Justice under Socialism" will make
+that quite clear.
+
+Socialism teaches that no man is entitled to anything except that
+which he has made himself. "No man has a right to call anything his
+own but that which he himself has made. Now, no man makes the land.
+The land is not created by labour, but it is the gift of God to all.
+The earth belongs to the people. For the nonce please take the
+statement on the authority of Herbert Spencer, All men 'have equal
+rights to the use of the earth.' So that he who possesses land
+possesses that to which he has no right, and he who invests his
+savings in land becomes a purchaser of stolen property."[311] "No man
+made the land, and laws and lawyers notwithstanding no man has any
+moral right before God to call a solitary strip of God's earth his
+than has the burglar to call his stolen goods his personal property.
+It is therefore evident that the bite named 'rent' given to landlords
+for permission to live upon and use God's free gift to man is as much
+the fruit of robbery, the spoil of plunder, as is the result of a
+burglar's night's marauding, a common pickpocket's day's
+'takings.'"[312] Capital is in the same position as land, for "Land
+and capital are indistinguishable."[313]
+
+The more honest Socialists agree with Bax that compensation for
+property acquired would be inadvisable and impracticable. "In a
+pamphlet called 'Collectivism and Revolution' M. Jules Guesde said,
+'Expropriation with indemnity is a chimera. And whatever regret one
+may feel, however difficult may appear to peaceful natures the last
+method, we have no other way than to retake violently that which
+belongs to all, by--let us say the word--the Revolution.' He added,
+'Capital which it is necessary to take from individuals, such as the
+land, is not of human creation; it is anterior to man, for whom it is
+a _sine qua non_ of existence. It cannot therefore belong to some to
+the exclusion of others, without the others being robbed. And to make
+the robbers deliver up, to oblige them to restore in any and every way
+is not so much a right as a duty, the most sacred of duties."[314] A
+respected English Socialist says bluntly, "How to secure the swag to
+the workers is the problem."[315] A Christian Socialist clergyman
+sarcastically proposes: "If you are a Christian and love your rich
+neighbour as yourself, you will do all you can to help him to become
+poorer. For if you believe in the Gospel, you know that to be rich is
+the very worst thing that can happen to a man. That if a man is rich,
+it is with the greatest difficulty that he can be saved; for 'it is
+easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich
+man to enter into the Kingdom of God' (Mark x. 25). This is startling
+now, but it was not less strange and startling to the disciples who
+'were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can
+be saved?' But the needle's eye has not grown any larger since then,
+and the camels certainly have not grown smaller! All true Christians
+then must desire to relieve the rich man of his excess for his own
+sake, since the inequality that ruins the body of Lazarus ruins the
+soul of Dives; and Dives is the more miserable of the two, because the
+soul is more precious than the body."[316]
+
+The abolition of private property requires also the abolition of the
+right of inheritance, as otherwise capital might again be accumulated
+in the hands of the thrifty and the enterprising. Therefore the
+manifesto of Marx and Engels already demands the "abolition of all
+right of inheritance."[317] Other Socialists say that this right
+should not be abolished. "Socialists used to insist upon the abolition
+of the right of inheritance and bequest. But if what I gain by my own
+labour is rightfully my property--and the Co-operative Commonwealth
+will, as we have seen, declare it to be so--it will be inexpedient in
+that Commonwealth to destroy any of the essential qualities of
+propertyship; and I can hardly call that my property which I may not
+give to whom I please at my death. No man in a Co-operative
+Commonwealth could acquire so much more wealth than his fellows as to
+make him dangerous to them."[318] "Socialists do not object to
+property; they are not opposed to private property. They are therefore
+not opposed to inheritance. The right to acquire and hold involves the
+right to dispose by will or by gift. We only object to such a use of
+property as enables classes for generation after generation to live on
+the proceeds of other people's labour without doing any useful service
+to society."[319] This very diplomatic sentence may be explained in a
+variety of ways. Probably it means that holders of property of large
+size could summarily be deprived of their possessions by order of the
+Government, as has been indicated by that writer in another passage
+(see page 97). Such a power would make the right to hold and to
+bequeath property a farce. Property could be held then only on the
+same terms on which, I believe, it is held by Central African negroes.
+Another Socialist states, "If I am entitled to what I produce, then it
+follows that I am entitled to dispose of all that I produce;" and then
+denies the right to personal property by continuing: "The Socialists
+say, 'Not thine or mine, but ours.'"[320]
+
+It would be only logical that the Socialist State, after abolishing
+private property by following the principle "not thine but ours,"
+should not allow its re-creation and re-accumulation. "This pernicious
+right (wrong) of inheritance must be abolished. It is the means by
+which the 'classes' perpetuate their robbery of the 'masses' from
+generation to generation and age to age. The disinherited would of
+course have the community to look to for sound education in youth,
+suitable employment in years of maturity, generous pension in old age,
+&c., and to what else can any rational human being lay just
+claim?"[321] Some Socialists argue that in the Socialist State "there
+will be nothing to bequeath, unless we choose to regard household
+furniture as a legacy of any importance. This settles the question of
+the right of inheritance, which Socialism will have no need to abolish
+formally."[322] "Socialism condemns as reactionary and immoral all
+that tends to the debasement of humanity. It condemns our industrial
+and commercial system as a degrading system--degrading both to the few
+who amass wealth and to the many who by their labour enable the few to
+lay up riches. It is degrading to those who rob and to those who are
+robbed; to those who cheat and to those who are cheated; to those who
+swim and to those who sink; to those who revel in luxury and to those
+who, barely sustaining their own lives, are compelled by their toil to
+supply luxuries for others to enjoy."[323] Therefore Socialism means
+to abolish the present system root and branch, and the most
+straightforward Socialists are frankly in favour of the most thorough
+measures for abolishing private property.
+
+Children and poets proverbially speak the truth. Let us see what the
+Socialist poets think of the expropriation of property-owners.
+
+Some of the poets tell the workers that the labourers not only produce
+all the wealth, but are also all-powerful, and, if they wish to, they
+can do what they like with the country.
+
+    Shall you complain who feed the world--
+    Who clothe the world, who house the world?
+    Shall you complain who are the world
+      Of what the world may do?
+    As from this hour you use your power,
+      The world must follow you.
+    As from this hour you use your power.
+      The world must follow you.[324]
+
+Others remind them of their grievances, and urge them to drive the
+rich man out of the country:
+
+        Think on the wrongs ye bear,
+        Think on the rags ye wear,
+    Think on the insults endured from your birth;
+        Toiling in snow and rain,
+        Bearing up heaps of gain,
+    All for the tyrants who grind ye to earth.
+
+    Your brains are as keen as the brains of your masters.
+      In swiftness and strength ye surpass them by far,
+    Ye've brave hearts that teach ye to laugh at disasters,
+      Ye vastly outnumber your tyrants in war.
+        Why, then, like cowards stand.
+        Using not brain or hand,
+    Thankful, like dogs, when they throw ye a bone?
+        What right have they to take
+        Things that ye toil to make?
+    Know ye not, boobies, that all is your own?[325]
+
+    Arise, unite each scattered band,
+    To sweep all masters from our land,
+    Then shall each mine and loom and field
+    Its produce to the workers yield.[326]
+
+Others, again, urge the workers to seize all property and to make the
+rich man work for them.
+
+    They're never done extolling
+        The nobility of work;
+    But the knaves! they always take good care
+        Their share of toil to shirk.
+    Do they send their sons and daughters,
+        To the workshop or the mill?
+    Oh! we'll turn things upside down, my lads;
+        It will change their tune, it will![327]
+
+    We'll drive the robbers from our lands, our meadows and our hills;
+    We'll drive them from our warehouses, our workshops and our mills;
+    We'll make them fare upon their bonds, their bankbooks and their bills,
+        As we go marching to liberty.[328]
+
+Some Socialists believe that they will come to power suddenly and by
+violence, and abolish private capital at a stroke. Others are inclined
+to think that they will only gradually abolish it. Karl Marx was of
+the latter opinion. Therefore he wrote in his "Manifesto": "The first
+step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the
+proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of
+democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest,
+by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all
+instruments of production in the hands of the State--_i.e._ of the
+proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total
+of productive forces as rapidly as possible. Of course in the
+beginning this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads
+on the rights of property and on the conditions of bourgeois
+production: by means of measures therefore which appear economically
+insufficient and untenable, but which in the course of the movement
+outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social
+order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the
+mode of production. These measures will of course be different in
+different countries. Nevertheless in the most advanced countries the
+following will be pretty generally applicable:
+
+1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land
+to public purposes.
+
+2. A heavy progressive or graduated income-tax.
+
+3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
+
+4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
+
+5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State by means of a
+national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
+
+6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the
+hands of the State.
+
+7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the
+State; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the
+improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
+
+8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial
+armies, especially for agriculture.
+
+9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual
+abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more
+equable distribution of the population over the country.
+
+10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of
+children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of
+education with industrial production, &c."[329]
+
+Marx's programme has served as a model to the English Socialists, as
+the following demands of some of our Socialists will show: "The
+things you will be working for will be something like this. Shorter
+hours is the first thing, then a tax on landlords, then abolition of
+the House of Lords and the Monarchy, then more Home-Rule and more
+Local Government, then extension of municipal operations, the
+socialisation of coal stores, dairy farms, bakeries, laundries,
+public-houses, cab-hiring, the slaughter of cattle and the sale of
+butcher meat, the building and letting of houses--in short, the taking
+over by the local bodies of as many departments of production and
+distribution as need be. By this time the Class War will be shaping
+for a last great engagement."[330]
+
+"As stepping stones to a happier period we urge for immediate
+adoption: The compulsory construction of healthy artisans' and
+agricultural labourers' dwellings in proportion to the population,
+such dwellings to be let at rents to cover the cost of construction
+and maintenance alone. Free compulsory education for all classes,
+together with the provision of at least one wholesome meal a day in
+each school. Eight hours or less to be the normal working day in all
+trades. Cumulative taxation upon all incomes above a fixed minimum not
+exceeding _500l._ a year. State appropriation of railways with or
+without compensation. The establishment of national banks which shall
+absorb all private institutions that derive a profit from operations
+in money or credit. Rapid extinction of the National Debt.
+Nationalisation of the land and organisation of agricultural and
+industrial armies under State control on co-operative principles. By
+these measures a healthy, independent, and thoroughly educated people
+will steadily grow up around us, ready to abandon that baneful
+competition for starvation wages which ruins our present workers,
+ready to organise the labour of each for the benefit of all,
+determined, too, to take control finally of the entire social and
+political machinery of a State in which class distinctions and class
+privileges shall cease to be."[331]
+
+The Social-Democratic Federation demands the following immediate
+reforms: "The socialisation of the means of production, distribution,
+and exchange to be controlled by a democratic State in the interests
+of the entire community, and the complete emancipation of labour from
+the domination of capitalism and landlordism with the establishment of
+social and economic equality between the sexes. Abolition of the
+Monarchy. Democratisation of the governmental machinery, viz.
+abolition of the House of Lords, payment of members of legislative and
+administrative bodies, payment of official expenses of elections out
+of the public funds, adult suffrage, proportional representation,
+triennial Parliaments, second ballot, initiative and referendum.
+Foreigners to be granted rights of citizenship after two years'
+residence in the country, on the recommendation of four British-born
+citizens, without any fee. Canvassing to be made illegal. Legislation
+by the people in such wise that no legislative proposal shall become
+law until ratified by the majority of the people. Legislative and
+administrative independence for all parts of the empire.
+
+"Repudiation of the National Debt. Abolition of all indirect taxation
+and the institution of a cumulative tax on all incomes and
+inheritances exceeding _300l._
+
+"Extension of the principle of local self-government. Systematisation
+and co-ordination of the local administrative bodies. Election of all
+administrators and administrative bodies by equal direct adult
+suffrage.
+
+"Elementary education to be free, secular, industrial, and compulsory
+for all classes. The age of obligatory school attendance to be raised
+to sixteen. Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher
+education, both general and technical, and all such education to be
+free. Free maintenance for all attending State schools. Abolition of
+school rates, the cost of education in all State schools to be borne
+by the National Exchequer.
+
+"Nationalisation of the land and the organisation of labour in
+agriculture and industry under public ownership and control on
+co-operative principles. Nationalisation of the trusts, of railways,
+docks, and canals, and all great means of transit. Public ownership
+and control of gas, electric light, and water-supplies, tramway,
+omnibus, and other locomotive services, and of the food and coal
+supply. The establishment of State and municipal banks and pawnshops
+and public restaurants. Public ownership and control of the lifeboat
+service, of hospitals, dispensaries, cemeteries and crematoria, and
+control of the drink traffic.
+
+"A legislative eight-hour working day or forty-eight hours per week to
+be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to be
+inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law. Absolute
+freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee against
+any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or infringe it.
+No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until sixteen years
+of age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law. Public provision of useful work at
+not less than trade-union rates of wages for the unemployed. Free
+State insurance against sickness and accident, and free and adequate
+State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers. Public
+assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights. The
+legislative enactment of a minimum wage of _30s._ for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work.
+
+"Abolition of the present workhouse system, and reformed
+administration of the Poor Law on a basis of national co-operation.
+Compulsory construction by public bodies of healthy dwellings for the
+people, such dwellings to be let at rents to cover the cost of
+construction and maintenance alone, and not to cover the cost of the
+land. The administration of justice to be free to all; the
+establishment of public offices where legal advice can be obtained
+free of charge."[332]
+
+Mr. Blatchford suggests the following: "The public maintenance and the
+public education of children. The public provision of work for all.
+The taxation of the land and of all large incomes. The confiscation of
+unearned increment. Old-age pensions. The minimum wage. Compulsory
+land cultivation. Universal adult suffrage. The second ballot. The
+payment of election expenses. The nationalisation of the railways and
+of the land. The nationalisation or municipalisation of trams, gas,
+water, bread, liquor, milk, coal, and many other things. The abolition
+of hereditary titles and of the House of Lords."[333]
+
+The general policy which the Socialists should follow was summed up by
+Marx in the following way. "The Communists everywhere support every
+revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order
+of things."[334] "Socialism is the only hope of the workers. All else
+is illusion. Workers of all lands, unite! You have nothing to lose but
+your chains. You have a world to win."[335]
+
+"This is the final struggle. The extinction of classes must follow the
+overthrow of the last form of class domination and the emancipation of
+the last class to be set free. Rally then, fellow workers, to the
+standard of the international class-conscious proletariat, the Red
+Flag of Social-Democracy. 'Workers of all countries, unite! You have
+nothing to lose but your chains, you have a world to win!'"[336] "The
+land of England is no mean heritage."[337]
+
+"What has hitherto prevented the workers from combining for
+the overthrow of the capitalist system? A. Ignorance and
+disorganisation.--Q. What has left them in ignorance? A. The system
+itself, by compelling them to spend all their lives upon monotonous toil
+and leaving them no time for education.--Q. What account have they been
+given of the system which oppresses them? A. The priest has explained
+that the perpetual presence of the poor is necessitated by a law of God;
+the economist has proved its necessity by a law of Nature; and between
+them they have succeeded in convincing the labourers of the hopelessness
+of any opposition to the capitalist system.--Q. How is it that the
+labourers cannot see for themselves that they are legally robbed? A.
+Because the present method of extracting their surplus value is one of
+fraud rather than of force, and has grown gradually."[338]
+
+The philosopher of British Socialism well sums up the aims and policy
+of the Socialists. He says: "What is vital in Socialism? In the first
+line, I take it, come
+
+"1. The collectivisation of _all_ the instruments of production by
+_any_ effective means;
+
+"2. The doctrine of the Class War as the general historical method of
+realising the new form of society;
+
+"3. The principle of internationalism, the recognition, _i.e._ that
+distinction of nationality sinks into nothingness before the idea of
+the union of all progressive races in the effort to realise the ideal
+of true society as understood by the Social-Democratic Party;
+
+"4. The utmost freedom of physical, moral, and intellectual
+development for each and all consistent with the necessities of an
+organised social State.
+
+"The Socialist's adhesion to the doctrine of the Class War involves
+his opposition to all measures subserving the interest of any section
+of capitalism. This coupled with his 'Internationalism' leaves him no
+choice but to be the enemy of 'his country' and the friend of his
+country's enemies whenever 'his country' (which means of course the
+dominant classes of his country, who always are for that matter his
+enemies) plays the game of the capitalist. Let us have no humbug! The
+man who cannot on occasion be (if needs be) the declared and active
+enemy of that doubtful entity, 'his country,' is no Social
+Democrat."[339]
+
+"Justice being henceforth identified with confiscation, and injustice
+with the right of property, there remains only the question of 'ways
+and means.' Our bourgeois apologist, admitting as he must that the
+present possessors of land and capital hold possession of them simply
+by right of superior force, can hardly refuse to admit the right of
+the proletariat organised to that end to take possession of them by
+right of superior force. The only question remaining is, How? And the
+only answer is, How you can."[340]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[279] Page 17.
+
+[280] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[281] _Clarion_, October 11, 1907.
+
+[282] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 10.
+
+[283] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 26, 27.
+
+[284] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 99.
+
+[285] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 1.
+
+[286] _Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 39.
+
+[287] Kirtlan, _Socialism for Christians_, p. 15.
+
+[288] Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[289] _Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 9.
+
+[290] _Basis of the Fabian Society._
+
+[291] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 10.
+
+[292] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 103.
+
+[293] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[294] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 3.
+
+[295] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 9.
+
+[296] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[297] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 103.
+
+[298] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[299] _Socialism made Plain_, p. 10.
+
+[300] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[301] Hobart, _Social-Democracy_, p. 7.
+
+[302] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 94.
+
+[303] Jaurčs, _Practical Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[304] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 8.
+
+[305] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 105.
+
+[306] Jaurčs, _Practical Socialism_, p. 5.
+
+[307] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 10.
+
+[308] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 10.
+
+[309] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, pp. 75, 76.
+
+[310] _Ibid._ p. 83.
+
+[311] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 6.
+
+[312] Muse, _Poverty and Drunkenness_, p. 9.
+
+[313] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 7.
+
+[314] Guyot, _Pretensions of Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[315] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 9.
+
+[316] Dearmer, _Socialism and Christianity_, pp. 17, 18.
+
+[317] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 22.
+
+[318] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p 105.
+
+[319] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 105.
+
+[320] _Socialism, For and Against_, p. 9.
+
+[321] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 158.
+
+[322] Bebel, _Woman_, pp. 231, 232.
+
+[323] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[324] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 56.
+
+[325] _Ibid._ p. 30.
+
+[326] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 33.
+
+[327] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 43
+
+[328] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 7.
+
+[329] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, pp. 21, 22.
+
+[330] Leatham, _The Class War_, pp. 13, 14.
+
+[331] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 10.
+
+[332] Programme, _Social-Democratic Federation_.
+
+[333] _Clarion_, October 18, 1907.
+
+[334] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 30.
+
+[335] _Motto of The Socialist_, weekly, taken from Marx and Engels'
+_Manifesto_.
+
+[336] _The Class War_, p. 2.
+
+[337] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 10.
+
+[338] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 5.
+
+[339] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, pp. 101, 102.
+
+[340] Bax, _Ethics of Socialism_, p. 82.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE WORKING MASSES
+
+
+Before investigating the attitude of British Socialism towards the
+working masses, it is necessary to take note of its doctrines
+regarding work.
+
+Most thinkers, from the time of King Solomon, Socrates, and Confucius
+down to the present age, have seen in work conscientiously performed a
+blessing; many, probably most, British Socialists declare it to be a
+curse and a vice. The leading English philosopher of Socialism, for
+instance, tells us: "To the Socialist labour is an evil to be
+minimised to the utmost. The man who works at his trade or avocation
+more than necessity compels him, or who accumulates more than he can
+enjoy, is not a hero but a fool from the Socialists' standpoint."[341]
+A leading French Socialist informs us: "Through listening to the
+fallacious utterances of the middle-class economists, the workers have
+delivered themselves body and soul to the vice of work."[342] When Mr.
+Victor Grayson, M.P., a Socialist, in a speech ventured to refer to
+work as "one of the greatest blessings and privileges ever conferred
+on humanity," one of the Socialist papers wrote: "Victor Grayson is
+simply an agent of the capitalist class. Is Mr. Victor Grayson, M.P.,
+trying to allure the capitalist class by picturing work as a blessing,
+or is he trying to get the worker to look upon work through a rosy
+mist conjured from the brains of the capitalist's agent who is
+saturated with capitalist philosophy? It is time the Beatitudes were
+extended or revised. How would this do?--'Blessed is the worker who
+works (for the capitalist), for he shall inherit the kingdom (of
+starvation and misery under capitalism).' 'Blessed is work in itself,
+because it enables (the capitalist) to live in peace and happiness.'
+Since work is a blessing, it follows that whatever saves work is a
+curse. All the beautiful machinery which the working class have shed
+their life blood to produce, to develop which an army of them have
+been sacrificed under capitalism by the capitalists; this which the
+workers of ages and ages have contributed their mite towards; have
+laboured long and suffered silently to create; this is an
+evil!!!"[343]
+
+British Socialists do their utmost to convert the workers into
+shirkers by teaching them not only that work is an evil in itself, but
+by constantly admonishing them, "on scientific grounds," to work as
+little as possible during the time they are employed. "It is the
+interest of the employer to get as much work out of his hands as
+possible for as little wages as possible. It is the interest of the
+workers to get as high a wage as possible for as little labour as
+possible."[344] "The workers have been taught by the practical
+economists of the trade-unions, and have learnt for themselves by
+bitter experience, that every time any of them in a moment of ambition
+or good will does one stroke of work not in his bond, he is increasing
+the future unpaid labour not only of himself, but of his
+fellows."[345]
+
+The Independent Labour Party has issued a leaflet entitled "Are you a
+Socialist?" in which the question occurs, "Do you believe that every
+individual should have sufficient leisure to cultivate his higher
+faculties and enjoy life to the fullest extent?" and the answer is,
+"If you say 'Yes,' join the Independent Labour Party and help to carry
+its principles into effect."[346]
+
+Many Socialists promise the workers that the Socialist State of the
+future will abolish the curse of work by greatly diminishing the hours
+of labour. A leading English Socialist writer says: "It is as plainly
+demonstrable as that twice four make eight that a due system of
+organised effort would enable your 43,000,000 of people to win from
+Nature an overflowing superfluity of all that man desires, without
+one-fourth the effort put forth now to win a beggarly subsistence so
+far short of what your community requires that 13,000,000 of your
+people live continually upon the very verge of starvation."[347] A
+leading American Socialist promises somewhat vaguely, "A few hours of
+work will secure to everybody all necessaries, decencies, and comforts
+of life."[348] William Morris tells us that four hours' work will
+suffice, and that it will not all be "mere machine-tending."[349]
+Morrison-Davidson prophesies that the "hours of labour will probably
+not exceed a minimum of two and a maximum of five daily."[350] Hyndman
+feels quite certain that "two or three hours' labour out of the
+twenty-four by all adult males would be enough to give the whole
+community all the wholesome necessaries and comforts of life,"[351]
+and Bax thinks that "In a perfectly organised Socialist State men
+never worked more than two or three hours a day."[352] Yves Guyot
+wittily says: "There is no reason why their demands should not go
+further. Zero alone can bid them defiance."[353] It is worth noting
+that many Anarchists also promise a great lessening of the hours of
+labour when the State has been destroyed. Kropotkin, for instance,
+requires only from four to five hours' work.[354] Agitators desirous
+to secure the support of the workers cannot be too lavish in their
+promises.
+
+In the Socialist State of the future a few hours' work every day will
+give boundless prosperity to all, for "Wealth may easily be made as
+plentiful as water at the expense of trifling toil."[355] "Under
+Socialism, nineteen-twentieths of the people will be better off
+materially than they are to-day, for they will be equal partners in
+all the productive and distributive wealth of the community."[356]
+"Comparative affluence would be enjoyed by each member of the
+community."[357]
+
+In the Socialist commonwealth of the future "all wages will be
+immediately increased," for "the social community will apply itself to
+raise all salaries of workers and peasants."[358] "In a Socialist
+State you will have everyone paid a living wage. The surplus will be
+dispensed by the State, bringing happiness to the whole
+community."[359]
+
+The British national revenue amounts at present only to a little more
+than _140,000,000l._ By the abolition of the private capitalists and
+landowners the Socialist Government of Great Britain "would at once
+find themselves in possession of a revenue amounting to some
+_900,000,000l._ per annum, and would probably be puzzled for a time
+how to dispose of it and prevent themselves being buried under its
+accumulation."[360] This is neither a joke nor a misprint, for the
+well-known writer, author of countless Socialist pamphlets, continues:
+"After a variety of attempts to dispose of it by dividing into good
+fat salaries among those of your community who had had least to do
+with its production, after the usual custom, I believe means would be
+employed ultimately for inducing them to keep it under by increasing
+the wages of the workers, which is another way of saying that those
+whose labour had produced the wealth would be allowed to enjoy it,
+which would be something quite novel."[361]
+
+The Socialist Government would not only diminish the working hours
+making them from three to five hours a day, but would also double and
+treble wages, partly in order to get rid of the glut of money flowing
+into the National Exchequer, partly because the workers would
+presumably receive the whole produce of their labour (see Chapter IV.)
+in the form of wages as soon as the private capitalists were
+eliminated. Repairs, renewals, replacement of capital losses, and the
+extension of national industry, which are at present effected out of
+the savings of private capitalists, would, under the Socialist
+_régime_, apparently no longer be required, and direction,
+supervision, and distribution would apparently no longer cost
+anything. The workers are quite seriously told by the philosopher of
+British Socialism, collaborating with the editor of "Justice": "Under
+present conditions the total wealth produced would, if equitably
+divided, amount to a value equal to more than _200l._ per year per
+family. But to suppose that any mere distributive readjustment is what
+is meant by Socialism is to entirely misunderstand what Socialism
+really involves. Socialism means the complete reorganisation of
+production as well as distribution. With production scientifically and
+socially organised, the productivity of labour would be quintupled,
+and the amount of wealth would be increased in proportion."[362] In
+other words, there would be _1,000l._ a year for each family. Another
+Socialist more plainly states: "At the present hour it is calculated
+that the wealth of the United Kingdom exceeds 2,000 millions per year.
+This divided among forty millions gives _250l._ per family. It is said
+that the abolition of waste labour and the absorption of the idle
+classes would quadruple the production. One thousand pounds per year
+per family is a very good standard of comfort under a co-operative
+system of living."[363]
+
+The two estimates agree in this, that the Socialist family of five
+should receive in wages _1,000l._ per annum, or about _3l. 10s._ per
+working day. In another chapter we shall learn that in the Socialist
+State only the young and strong would work, and they would work, as we
+have seen in the foregoing pages, between three and four hours a day.
+In other words, the worker who earns now, say, _10d._ an hour, would,
+under the Socialist commonwealth, receive _1l._ per hour. Who would
+not be a Socialist?
+
+A leading German Socialist has endeavoured to gauge the effect of
+Socialism upon the working classes. In making his calculations he has
+borne in mind the necessity of providing for the wear and tear of
+capital, and for other expenditure, and he has arrived at the
+conclusion: "A generous sick insurance will have to be set up, as well
+as an invalid and old-age insurance for all incapacitated workers, &c.
+Thus we see that not much will remain for the raising of the wages
+from the present income of the capitalists, even if capital were
+confiscated at a stroke, still less if we were to compensate the
+capitalists. It will consequently be necessary, in order to be able to
+raise the wages, to raise at the same time the production far above
+its present level."[364]
+
+The value of high wages lies in the produce they buy. It is of course
+quite clear that a nation, in order to consume more, must also produce
+more. It would be interesting to know whether leading Socialists, such
+as Messrs. Bax, Quelch, and Hazell, who must be acquainted with the
+sober estimates of the German Socialists, honestly believe that under
+a Socialist _régime_ _1,000l._ per annum will be available per family,
+or whether these statements have only been made to obtain supporters
+on the not very honourable principle, _Vulgus vult decipi,
+decipiatur_.
+
+Let us now look into the practical proposals of the Socialists to the
+workers.
+
+In the official programme of the Social-Democratic Federation[365] the
+following "Immediate Reforms" concerning the workers are demanded:
+
+"A legislative eight hours' working day, or forty-eight hours per
+week, to be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to
+be inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law. Absolute
+freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee against
+any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or infringe it.
+No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until sixteen years
+of age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law. Public provision of useful work at
+not less than trade-union rates of wages for the unemployed. Free
+State insurance against sickness and accident, and free and adequate
+State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers. Public
+assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights. The
+legislative enactment of a minimum wage of _30s._ for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work."
+
+It will be noticed that imprisonment is to be inflicted upon employers
+who allow their men to work overtime. Would there also be
+imprisonment for workers working undertime? Similar demands have been
+made by other Socialist bodies. Let us look more closely into some of
+those demands which are to be fulfilled forthwith.
+
+
+OLD-AGE PENSIONS
+
+With the same recklessness with which the Socialist leaders promise to
+the working man a large income in return for three or four hours'
+daily work in the golden age of Socialism, they try to dazzle him with
+promises of wonderful old-age pension schemes which are to be carried
+out in the immediate future. Mr. Smart thinks "The smallest sum upon
+which an old man can exist, even when his lodging is provided by his
+friends, is _7s._ a week. The pension, therefore, should not be less
+than this amount, and should be obtainable at sixty years of age. The
+annual cost for a universal system would be, with the necessary
+administrative expenses, about _60,000,000l._"[366] To Councillor
+Glyde the pensionable age of sixty seems to be too high, and the
+pension too low. Therefore he proposes that "Old-age pensions of at
+least _7s. 6d._ per week should be provided for all aged workers over
+fifty-five years of age."[367] But why should a working man have to
+wait till he is fifty-five before receiving a pension? In another
+pamphlet, Mr. Glyde amends his scheme and tells us, "To give a pension
+of _7s. 6d._ per week to all who wished to give up work at fifty years
+of age would have very satisfactory results. In the first place, it
+would make the aged workers happy and comfortable. In the second
+place, it would help to solve the unemployed question by the steady
+withdrawal of the aged workmen from the labour market, give them
+purchasing power, and thus find a home market for the productivity of
+the younger, able-bodied workers. Thirdly, it would prevent the
+competition for jobs, and the playing off against the younger workmen
+by the employers of the cheaper-paid labour of those who cannot as
+they formerly could, so that there would be less strikes, reduction in
+wages, and petty tyranny practised upon the younger generation of
+workers. Fourthly, it would cause the abolition of workhouses, with
+their great army of expensive, well-paid officials. There would be no
+need for workhouses, because cottage homes would be provided for those
+who were infirm and feeble, on the lines of the present homes for
+children; an infirmary for those who were sick and invalids, and
+asylums for the imbecile. Thousands would be cared for by relatives
+and friends. Fifthly, by Imperial funds being used for old-age
+pensions, the Poor rate could be reduced from _6d._ to _1s._ in the
+pound. These reforms could be carried out without a single farthing
+extra taxation, nor anyone being any worse off than formerly, by the
+practice of economy."[368] To pension all workers at fifty would cost
+about _100,000,000l._ a year, and I think it would be very difficult
+to save that amount on a budget of _140,000,000l._ unless army, navy,
+and civil service were abolished. Mr. Morrison Davidson is neither
+satisfied with a pension of _7s. 6d._ a week nor with the pensionable
+ages of sixty, fifty-five, or even of fifty. He proposes, therefore,
+that "Superannuation _on full pay_ will take place at, say, forty-five
+or, at the most, fifty."[369]
+
+
+UNEMPLOYMENT
+
+In the Socialist State of the future there would be no unemployed
+workers. Many Socialist writers make forecasts such as the following:
+"Under Socialism all the work of the nation would be organised--that
+is to say, it would be 'ordered,' or 'arranged,' so that no one need
+be out of work and so that no useless work need be done, and so that
+no work need be done twice where once would serve."[370] "There would
+be a mathematical ordering of production determined by the demands of
+the consumer."[371] "Periods of glut and want of work will be
+impossible in the new community."[372]
+
+It is already difficult enough even for the ablest manager to secure
+constant employment to workers in a moderate-sized manufactory, shop,
+or office. A Socialist Administration composed of fallible men would
+have to control and satisfy the whole national demand and supply. It
+would have to sow and to reap, to dig for coal and ore, to fish, to
+manufacture and to distribute everything wanted and made by all the
+people. At the same time it would have to control the vast
+international trade on the regular flow of which constant employment
+in Great Britain necessarily depends. To satisfy every demand by an
+adequate supply, it would therefore have to direct and control not
+only all British industries, but also the fashions and the seasons in
+Great Britain and in all the countries which stand in commercial
+relations with the United Kingdom. The British Socialist
+Administration would not only have to provide a sufficient cotton crop
+in the United States, a sufficient wool crop in Australia, a
+sufficient wheat crop in Canada, but it would also have to provide an
+adequate demand for British cotton goods in India and China, for
+British coal on the continent of Europe, &c. It would have to provide
+sufficient sun in America to produce an adequate cotton crop and
+sufficient rain in India to enable the natives to buy part of that
+cotton crop in the shape of manufactured articles made in Lancashire.
+Unless the Socialist Administration controls not only all foreign
+tariffs but also Nature the world over, there might be unemployment in
+a socialised Great Britain--and worse.
+
+The doctrines of English Socialism may be summed up in a single
+phrase. Every existing evil is due solely to the capitalistic system,
+and every existing evil can be abolished only by Socialism.
+Unemployment is no exception to the rule. Our Socialists have, for
+reasons which will presently be given, concentrated much energy upon
+convincing the working masses that unemployment is due solely to
+private property in land and capital. The Social-Democratic Federation
+has shown that "The existence of an unemployed class is an essential
+characteristic of the capitalist system."[373] The Fabian Society in
+congress assembled has registered the declaration: "That the existence
+of a class of unemployed willing but unable to find work is a
+necessary result of the present industrial system, in which every
+improvement in machinery throws fresh masses of men out of work"
+[would improved machinery not have the same effect in the Socialist
+commonwealth?] "and the competition of capitalists for the market
+produces recurring commercial crises; that, consequently, unemployment
+can only be abolished with the complete abolition of the competitive
+system, and can only be limited in proportion as order and regulation
+are introduced into the present competitive confusion."[374] Yet the
+same Fabian Society frankly admits in another pamphlet that "No plan
+has yet been devised by which the fluctuations of work could be
+entirely prevented, or safe and profitable employment found for those
+rendered idle by no fault of their own. It is easy enough to demand
+something should be done, and I entirely agree with agitating the
+subject; but something more than agitation is required. It is of no
+use urging remedies which can be demonstrably proved to be worse for
+the patient than the disease itself. I fear that if we were given full
+power to-morrow to deal with the unemployed all over England, we
+should find ourselves hard put to it how to solve the problem."[375]
+At the last Conference (1907) of the Social-Democratic Federation the
+resolution was moved, "That this Conference reasserts its statement
+that unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and
+capital."[376]
+
+The emphatic statements contained in the foregoing declarations that
+unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and capital are
+absurd. If the private ownership of land and capital were the cause of
+unemployment, unemployment should be almost equally great in all
+civilised countries, because in all civilised countries land and
+capital are in private hands. Whilst in Great Britain unemployment is
+a fearful and permanent evil, it has been practically unknown during a
+long time in Germany, where there has been for many years so great a
+scarcity of labour that immigration is greater than emigration.[377]
+Whilst in capitalist Great Britain employment is so bad that from
+200,000 to 300,000 people have to emigrate every year, employment in
+capitalist Germany has been excellent, and in the capitalist United
+States it has been so good that they have absorbed during a number of
+years almost 1,000,000 immigrants per year. These facts prove that
+private ownership of land and capital and over-production have nothing
+to do with unemployment, which is, as a rule, due not to
+over-production but to ill-balanced production, as has been proved on
+page 70 of this book. In the case of a country such as Great Britain,
+unemployment is due principally to the insufficiency and insecurity of
+her markets for her manufactured goods and to the decay of her
+agriculture.
+
+The various Socialist organisations have so constantly preached the
+doctrine that unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and
+capital that the Trade Unions have at last come to believe it. Owing
+to Socialist inspiration, the Trade Union Congresses have passed
+resolutions in favour of the nationalisation of land and of the other
+means of production at most of the meetings since 1888, and a
+Socialist weekly has been able to assert that "Every member of the
+Socialist Labour Party, either by Trade Union Congresses or by
+Independent Labour Party programme, is committed to the
+nationalisation of land and the instruments of production."[378] To
+the delight of the Socialists, resolutions of the Trade Unions urging
+the nationalisation of all land and capital are becoming more and more
+emphatic. In the "Social Democrat" for October 1907 we read, under the
+heading "Trade Unionists and Unemployment," the following: "The
+resolution on unemployment passed at the Bath Trade Union Congress
+shows that the Trade Unionists are falling into line with Social
+Democrats on this question, and that they are beginning to see that
+Trade Unionism alone is no solution for this evil. After referring to
+the failure of the Unemployed Workmen Act, and the niggardly manner of
+doling out the grant of _200,000l._, the resolution goes on to say
+that 'This Congress, recognising that unemployment is now permanent in
+character in busy as in slack seasons, in summer and in winter, and is
+common to all trades and industries; also that this is due to industry
+being unorganised and carried on for private profit and is bound to
+continue, and indeed become more accentuated as the development of
+machinery and other wage-saving methods proceeds, calls the attention
+of the Government to its neglect of the interests of the people in not
+grappling with this social evil, and urges it to at once embark upon
+work of public utility with the object of (a) absorbing the present
+unemployed labour, (b) laying the foundation for a permanent
+reorganisation of industry upon a co-operative basis.'"[379]
+
+The Socialists have been anxious to convince the workers that
+unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and capital, and
+that all unemployed should be relieved by the State because "A really
+adequate system of helping the unemployed will completely alter the
+relation of power between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. It will
+make the proletariat masters in the factory. If the workers sell
+themselves to-day to the employer, if they allow themselves to be
+exploited and oppressed, it is the ghost of unemployment, the whip of
+hunger, which compels them to it. If, on the other hand, the worker is
+secure in his existence, even when not in work, then nothing is easier
+to him than to disable the capitalist. He no longer requires the
+capitalist, while the latter cannot conduct his business without him.
+When the matter has gone so far as that every employer, whenever a
+dispute breaks out, will get the worst of it and be forced to yield,
+the capitalists may certainly continue to be managers of the
+factories, but they will cease to be their masters and exploiters. But
+in that case the capitalists will recognise that they only carry the
+burdens and risks of the undertakings without receiving any advantage,
+and will be the first to give up capitalist production and insist on
+being bought out."[380] "The right to work is a charter of industrial
+freedom, the emancipation of labour from capitalist tyranny. Till it
+is obtained there can be neither social nor moral progress. When it is
+obtained all other things become possible."[381]
+
+The British Labour Party has drafted a Bill which, asserting the right
+to work, makes provision of work for the unemployed compulsory and
+enables the local authorities compulsorily to acquire land with a view
+of setting the unemployed to work.[382] The Annual Conference of the
+Independent Labour Party of 1907, going a step further, demanded the
+erection of a national department for creating work and giving a
+living wage to the unemployed. It resolved:
+
+"This Conference welcomes the news that a Bill to secure the right to
+work is to be introduced into Parliament by the Labour party,
+expresses the hope that every effort will be made to secure its
+passing into law, and declares in favour of the establishment of a
+properly equipped and financed national department for dealing with
+the whole problem of unemployment on the basis of putting useful work
+at a living wage within the reach of every worker, and of training
+such as require to be taught in husbandry, and other forms of work
+upon the land."[383]
+
+There is a great danger in these proposals.[384] Creating work for the
+unemployed may not cure, but may aggravate, the disease which springs
+not from private property in land and capital, but from an
+insufficient outlet for British manufactures. If the disease is
+wrongly treated, the unemployed may become an incubus which will
+cripple both workers and capitalists.
+
+A champion of the policy of _laisser faire_ argues: "The State cannot
+make work, if by work is meant the doing of something that somebody
+wants done. It is of course true that the State can take on new
+functions, and do more of the work that is now left to private
+enterprise. But that would not make additional employment; it would
+only transfer employment from one set of men to another. When the
+State or the municipality, instead of seeking to do the thing that is
+wanted in the most economical and most efficient manner, deliberately
+picks out the least competent workmen and sets them to work on things
+that are not wanted, no new wealth is created, and the previous
+creation of wealth is diminished, because the taxpayer has been
+deprived of the means of employing as many persons as he would have
+employed. Artificial jobs may be created for the unemployed, who will
+be perfectly conscious that these jobs are artificial, and thus the
+independent and self-respecting workman will be arbitrarily deprived
+of his job. It cannot be too often repeated that the so-called 'right
+to work,' on which Socialists are fond of insisting, means in practice
+the right to deprive another man of his job."[385] These arguments are
+fallacious. There is work such as the reclamation of the foreshore,
+draining of bogs, constructing canals, planting of forests, &c., which
+are, as general experience shows, rather the province of the community
+than of the private individual. Unemployment may be relieved by the
+State and the local authorities if discretion be used. Proposals to
+create work of this kind for the genuine unemployed, and to provide
+compulsory labour for idlers and loafers, have been advanced by many
+Socialists and non-Socialists, and these proposals are worth
+considering and adopting.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[341] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 94.
+
+[342] Lafargue, _Right to Leisure_, p. 11.
+
+[343] _The Socialist_, October 1907.
+
+[344] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 13.
+
+[345] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 145,
+
+[346] _Are you a Socialist?_ p. 1.
+
+[347] Washington, _A Nation of Slaves_, p. 5.
+
+[348] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 170.
+
+[349] Morris, _A Factory as it Might Be_, p. 10.
+
+[350] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 170.
+
+[351] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, p. 10.
+
+[352] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 58.
+
+[353] Guyot, _Pretensions of Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[354] Kropotkin, _Conquęte du Pain_, p. 239.
+
+[355] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 11.
+
+[356] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 10.
+
+[357] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 159.
+
+[358] Jaurčs, _Practical Socialism_, p. 6.
+
+[359] _Socialism, For and Against_, p. 11.
+
+[360] Washington, _Milk and Postage Stamps_, p. 5.
+
+[361] _Ibid._ p. 5.
+
+[362] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 17.
+
+[363] A.P. Hazell, _Summary of Marx's "Capital,"_ p. 17.
+
+[364] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 18.
+
+[365] See Appendix.
+
+[366] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, p. 12.
+
+[367] Councillor Glyde, _A Peep Behind the Scenes on a Board of
+Guardians_, p. 27.
+
+[368] Councillor Glyde, _Britain's Disgrace_, pp. 31, 32.
+
+[369] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 170.
+
+[370] Robert Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 13.
+
+[371] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[372] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 192.
+
+[373] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 5.
+
+[374] _Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions_, p. 11.
+
+[375] Webb, _Socialism True and False_, pp. 8, 9.
+
+[376] _Report of 21th Annual Conference, 1907, Social-Democratic
+Federation_, p. 17.
+
+[377] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 546.
+
+[378] _New Age_, November 30, 1907.
+
+[379] _Social Democrat_, October 1907, p. 580.
+
+[380] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 6.
+
+[381] Russell Smart, _The Right to Work_, p. 15.
+
+[382] A Bill to Provide Work through Public Authorities for Unemployed
+Persons.
+
+[383] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference, 1907_, p.
+54.
+
+[384] See Thorold Rogers, _Work and Wages_, p. 557.
+
+[385] Cox, _Socialism_, pp. 37, 39, 40.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS TRADE UNIONISTS AND CO-OPERATORS
+
+
+The British Socialists have during many years attacked and denounced
+the Trade Unionists and the Co-operators, firstly, because the trade
+unionists and co-operators are "capitalists," and therefore traitors
+to the Socialist cause; secondly, because Socialism unconditionally
+condemns providence and thrift among the working men, as will be seen
+in Chapter XXIII.
+
+Although the Socialists pretend that they denounce co-operation and
+thrift, and even abstinence from alcoholic drink, on economic and
+scientific grounds, their real reasons are political. Socialism can
+flourish only if the masses are dissatisfied. The Socialists are
+therefore little interested in improving the position of the worker,
+but very greatly in increasing his poverty, unhappiness, and
+discontent. Socialism is revolutionary, and the Socialists know that
+people who are well off are not revolutionists. For tactical reasons,
+therefore, the Socialists oppose and denounce thrift, co-operation,
+and abstinence, qualities which are found pre-eminently in
+co-operators and trade unionists.
+
+The trade unionists, the aristocracy of British labour, are too
+conservative, too temperate, too cautious, too prosperous, and too
+little revolutionary for the taste of Socialists. The Socialists
+complain: "The British trade union suffers from three fatal defects:
+(1) It is anti-revolutionary. It disavows the fact of the class
+struggle. It accepts the capitalist system as a permanency. The rules
+and constitutions of many unions explicitly refer to the 'just rights
+of the employer,' and those who do not set forth any such statement
+openly, admit it in actual practice. The capitalist class, as voiced
+by the capitalist press, recognise in these unions the bulwark of
+present-day society against the advance of Socialism. (2) The British
+trade union method of organisation is a complete negation of the
+solidarity of labour. Each trade or section of a trade has its own
+particular and autonomous organisation. Even trades which are most
+closely connected are divided into separate unions, each union
+ignoring the interest of the rest, making its own special contracts
+with the capitalists, and assisting them by remaining at work when
+their fellow-workers in a kindred trade are on strike. The most
+noteworthy example of this form of inter-trade treachery was offered
+in the case of the engineers' strike of 1897-8, when the Boilermakers'
+Society by remaining at work were the means of defeating the
+Amalgamated Society of Engineers and of forcing them to return to work
+on the masters' terms. (3) The British trade union refuses to admit to
+its ranks those teeming millions of workers whom it terms
+'unskilled.'"[386]
+
+Other Socialists complain: "Trade unionism recognises the present
+system of society, justifies capitalism, and defends wage-slavery, and
+only seeks to soften the tyranny of the one and assuage the evils of
+the other. Social Democracy aims at destroying the whole system."[387]
+"We are never allowed to forget the splendid incomes earned by these
+aristocrats of labour, a mere tenth of the whole labour class. The
+trade unionist can usually only raise himself on the bodies of his
+less fortunate comrades."[388] "The old-fashioned policy of the
+English trade unions has made them _guilds of privileged_, rather
+than fighting representatives of their class."[389]
+
+Similar complaints are raised against the co-operators. "Co-operation,
+though regarded by the individual trader as an enemy, does not
+necessarily enter into conflict with the capitalist at all. Indeed, so
+far as it transforms workmen into shareholders, it forms a bulwark for
+capitalism, the same as the creation of small landholders or any other
+class of small proprietors would do."[390] "At present the
+co-operative societies in England are very apathetic with regard to
+political affairs."[391] "In spite of abstract resolutions, our trade
+unionists are devoted to the wages system; still our co-operators
+yearn after dividends; still the mass of our producers admire the men
+who rise upon their shoulders to place and pay. The twin curses of
+democracy, slavishness and jealousy, are curiously blended in their
+views of social and political life. They envy capacity; they bow down
+before successful blackguardism."[392]
+
+Some Socialists have called for the unification of all the trades
+unions, arguing "Union has failed to adapt itself to changed
+conditions. Just as budding industrial development called into being
+the shop union, and further industrial expansion meant development of
+the union to the local and then the national organisation, so the
+exigencies of our time demand a working-class union--one union, not
+eleven hundred, as now."[393] Others have bespattered the unions with
+insults, and some do so still. A very violent Socialist organ recently
+wrote: "Our trade union leaders are not so corrupt as those of
+America? Are they not? As a matter of fact, the corruption is tenfold
+greater. The difference is that here it is legalised and respectable.
+In America the corruption takes the form of a wad of dollar notes
+pushed into the fakir's hands in a dark corner. In this country our
+trade union leaders are openly corrupted in the face of day by
+positions on conciliation boards, Justiceships of the Peace, Cabinet
+positions" [this is a hit at Mr. John Burns], "and well-paid jobs in
+the Labour Department of the Board of Trade. Are Shackleton, Bell, and
+Barnes honester men than Gompers, Mitchell, and Tobin? As Dr. Johnson
+very coarsely expressed it: 'It is difficult to settle the question of
+precedence between a bug and a louse.'"[394]
+
+To the more far-sighted Socialists the folly of attacking the powerful
+trade unions, with their 2,000,000 members, was perfectly clear. One
+of the Socialist leaders wrote: "Of all the blind, fatuous policies in
+the world, that of decrying trades unionism by professing Socialists
+is about the worst; and the next worst thing is the trades unionist
+abusing Socialism."[395] Some Socialists recommended changing the
+policy of denunciation for a wiser one: "We have to _convert_ the
+trade unions, not to _antagonise_ them"[396]; and their conversion was
+thought to be all the more easy because, to quote Ben Tillett, "The
+whole of the trades union movement has been tinged with Socialism;
+unconsciously the guides of the working classes have always marched
+towards the goal of Socialism."[397]
+
+With this object in view the trade unionists were urged to reform
+their tactics, to abandon the economic struggle in the form of
+strikes, and to enter upon the more efficacious political struggle
+with the employers of labour in the House of Commons. "To go on
+following the old beaten paths of trade unionism is simply to go on
+exhausting the possibilities of error for an indefinite period. If the
+new unions are simply to play the part of regulators of wages, as
+trade and prices rise and fall, they will be of very slight advantage
+to the workers compared with what they might accomplish if they took a
+broader view of their opportunities and their duties. What they have
+to do, and that now, is to use the power which organisation gives them
+to get control of the political machinery of the country and use it
+for the advancement of their class. By this means they could, if they
+chose, achieve as much in a year or two as would be gained in a
+century by the old methods of trade agitation and strikes."[398] "If
+the Labour party had a tithe of the money that the unions have spent
+upon getting thrashed and starved and defrauded, it would be a party
+to wonder at and be proud of. The miners of Yorkshire have spent
+_212,000l._ on six strikes--all of which have been lost. Do you call
+this industrial warfare? Insanity and suicide--that is what it is. The
+engineers spent three-quarters of a million on the great lock-out.
+That is a sum in itself, the ransom of all the workers from the bonds
+of wage-slavery. What can the engineers show for their money to-day?
+Ask them! We could capture the British Parliament with that sum _plus_
+a little brains and courage."[399] The Fabian Society has issued
+numerous pamphlets in which it has shown how the position of the
+workers might be improved, and in these it has at every opportunity
+urged upon every worker to join a union, and has urged upon the trade
+unions to better the position of the workers by relying upon political
+action.[400]
+
+In pursuance of this policy the railway employees were told by the
+Socialists, when the difference between the British railway companies
+and their workers had been arranged: "You men must cling tight to the
+union and keep fostering the discontent of your fellows, not only with
+the sectional wrongs which affect you personally, but with the brutal
+system of competition of which your own wrongs are but one fractional
+consequence. Stick to the Labour party. You have two representatives
+in Parliament. Run some more. You need not bother now to build up a
+strike fund. Spend the money in politics. The more men you get in the
+House, the better chance you will have of convincing a Government
+arbitrator of the justice of your claims."[401]
+
+Wishing to secure the support of the trade unionists and the
+co-operators, the Socialists began to preach that there was no
+antagonism between Socialists, trade unionists, and co-operators, and
+to stretch out a hand towards them. "Socialist influence makes its way
+in the union. The trade unions generally must sooner or later
+become--they already in some instances are to-day--part and parcel of
+the working-class Socialist movement, or must cease to exist as class
+organisations. Co-operation is in its inception Socialist. That is to
+say, that all co-operation implies co-operative effort and social
+union."[402] Another Socialist writer said: "I am sorry that some
+Socialists used to cry down the co-operative movement. I know it has
+some serious defects, but it has taught the workers of this country
+what they can do when they choose. If any power could induce trade
+unionists, co-operators, and Socialists to unite, a co-operative
+commonwealth would be flourishing in this country before the rich and
+educated classes had rubbed open their drowsy eyes."[403]
+
+The recommendations which the Socialists addressed to the trade
+unionists to increase their political power, and to improve their
+economic position by the use of their political power, became louder
+and louder. They were told that the capitalists were the enemies of
+both trade unionists and Socialists, and that co-operation would be of
+the greatest benefit to both bodies. The Socialist group of the London
+Society of Compositors, for instance, argued:
+
+"It is unfortunate that after some dozen years or more of Socialist
+propaganda there should still be considerable bitterness existing
+between trade unionists and Socialists. The cause of the unpopularity
+of the Socialists was not due to any desire on their part to irritate
+trade unionists, but arose out of the stupid prejudices of the
+spokesmen and leaders of the trade unionists themselves. Socialists
+are staunch trade unionists. The New trade unionism is evidence of
+this, for Socialists are responsible for calling it into existence.
+The movement which is now gaining ground in favour of federation among
+trade unionists generally, is one of Socialist origin. Trade unionists
+look solely to unionism to maintain their miserable standard of
+living, ignorant of the economic laws working against them. Socialists
+accept unionism as only one method to maintain their present standard
+of comfort.
+
+"Both Socialists and trade unionists have a common enemy, a common
+want, and a common economic force which continually and relentlessly
+drives them in one direction. Both are driven to defend attacks
+against their standard of living by the capitalist, and the one point
+of agreement between Socialists and trade unionists, therefore, is
+that they both desire to maintain and increase their present standard
+of living. Trade unionists enter a union to resist the exactions of
+the capitalists, and to baulk attempts on their part to reduce wages.
+Socialists enter a union for precisely the same reason. If they would
+view Parliamentary action from the standpoint of the collective
+welfare of the people, they would soon realise its far-reaching
+effects. A legal forty-eight hour working week, for instance, would
+bring benefit to all and raise the standard of all by giving more
+leisure; thereby affording workers an opportunity of obtaining fresh
+air and following artistic and intellectual pursuits.
+
+"One of the strongest agents which work in favour of the capitalists
+is the necessity of the workers to find food and clothing for their
+families. This evil can be met by the State proposal which is now
+making such headway in England--namely, Free Maintenance for Children.
+The old-fashioned prejudices, fostered by the capitalists and their
+hangers-on, that it is degrading to accept anything from the State, is
+fast dying out in the face of free education, free libraries, free
+maintenance for all sickened with infectious fevers. Free maintenance
+for children would be a tax on that surplus wealth which the
+capitalists and the aristocracy share between them. To the worker,
+free maintenance for his children would be equivalent to an additional
+income. His standard of living would rise. No doubt the capitalist
+would reduce his wages as much as possible, but the worker would then
+be able to fight him on more equal terms. His children being well
+cared for, he would be able to hold out against the capitalist for an
+indefinite period.
+
+"The Housing Question is also worthy of attention. Trade unionism
+should require the State to erect buildings to be let at a sum which
+would cover cost of construction and maintenance alone. This would
+give them a stationary rent, and when locked out by their employers,
+they, as unemployed workers, would not be so liable to be turned into
+the street.
+
+"The workers, unconscious of economic development, unfortunately side
+with one political party or the other, not seeing that the one must
+inevitably be as antagonistic to their interests as the other. Tory
+and Liberal politically represent two classes, who divide the spoils
+between them. One is connected by tradition with the soil, the other
+with commerce. When they have a quarrel, it is as between kites and
+crows for the possession of prey. To assert that a Tory is better than
+a Liberal, or a Liberal better than a Tory, is like affirming that one
+exploiter is less a thief than another. Until trade unionists form
+themselves into an independent party, there can politically be no
+common agreement between them and Socialists, because, while they
+support the capitalist class they are placing power into the hands of
+the exploiting class, who is the common enemy. Co-operation between
+Socialists and trade unionists should be adopted whenever possible,
+and, when occasion offers, an alliance should be entered into for
+common purposes. In America a large section of trade unionists have
+already recognised that the class war is inevitable under the present
+system of exploitation, and they have entered into an active alliance
+with the Socialist party. It is to be hoped that the trade unions of
+Great Britain will ere long see their way to follow the example set by
+their American brethren in the United States."[404]
+
+Another writer urged: "Is it not time that we combined and strove for
+something higher, wider, and more far-reaching? Let the trade unionists
+unite, combine, federate; not for constantly squabbling with the
+capitalist over the spoil which the workers alone create, but to secure
+for the latter, organised, the control of their own tools and raw
+materials--of the mines, the railways, the factories, the shipping, the
+land--of all those things which only have value through their labour.
+Let the co-operators co-operate with each other, with trade unionists,
+and Social Democrats for the same object. Let us all agitate, educate,
+and organise to form the workers of the world into a gigantic Trade
+Union, an International Co-operation, a Social-Democratic
+Commonwealth."[405]
+
+Since the time when these words were written attempts have constantly
+been made by the Socialists to co-operate with the unionists, and, at
+least outwardly, their relations have become intimate. Many Socialists
+have high hopes for a united Socialist Labour party. At a recent
+conference of the Social-Democratic Federation the chairman declared,
+in his opening address: "There can be but one Independent Labour
+Party, and there ought to be a united Socialist party. Not many years
+will pass before the new Labour party will join the Socialist
+movement, but in the meantime everything seems ripening for a united
+Socialist party, consolidating both forces and funds, preventing
+overlapping and removing friction. Never were the times so favourable
+to Socialism. In spite of the boycott, the misrepresentation, the
+influence of the temporal powers against us, the word Socialism is no
+longer unknown or feared. In the workshop, the mine, the train, or the
+tram, men are eagerly discussing Socialism. The workers need grumble
+of their chains no longer; they can fling them off at will; for they,
+and they alone, hold the keys of freedom. This poor blind Samson is
+waking up and groping his way; Socialists must be ready to lead
+him."[406]
+
+Socialism has of late years strongly permeated the unions. Will it
+succeed in capturing them? The Socialists are very optimistic on that
+point. "The outlook is full of promise for the political Labour
+movement. It only requires the adoption of a candidate by the united
+local societies to turn every trade union institute or office, miners'
+lodge and branch meeting-room into a committee-room, and when the call
+is made by the Parliamentary group there will be plenty of voluntary
+workers. The great fact stands out prominently: Labour is moving; and
+that fact points to stirring times and a new phase in the history of
+the nation."[407]
+
+The character of the trade unions has undoubtedly been greatly changed
+through Socialist agitation. The trade unionist has almost ceased to
+be an individualist. "The modern trade unionist is out for a political
+revolution. He has dismissed, as an obsolete absurdity, the idea of
+paying for his benefits, pensions, sick-pay, unemployed relief, out of
+his union subscriptions. He intends to combine with his fellows of all
+trades in a demand for Parliamentary legislation which will provide
+these benefits out of national funds, mainly by way of a graduated
+income-tax. So he demands old-age pensions and an Unemployed Act. He
+has given up the tedious task of bargaining with his master for higher
+wages and shorter hours; he intends to compel him by the more drastic
+method of an eight-hour day and a minimum wage and State Arbitration
+Act."[408] There is much truth in this description. As the real nature
+of the relations between the trades unions and the Socialists is known
+to only a few, the following documents should be of great interest:--
+
+"In consequence of a decision of the International Socialist Bureau
+(June 9, 1907), its secretary sent a circular to the affiliated
+parties in order to obtain from them official notes on the relations
+between the political Parties and trade unions of their country, and
+he received the following replies from the Social-Democratic
+Federation, the Labour party, and the Independent Labour Party:--
+
+"'Although from its formation in March 1881 the Social-Democratic
+Federation has strongly opposed the abstention of the older trade
+unions from politics, and has still more strongly objected to the very
+close alliance which some of its leading members have made with the
+capitalist Liberal party, resulting in high office and even Cabinet
+rank'" [another hit at Mr. John Burns] "'for those who have thus
+deliberately betrayed the interests of their fellows and supporters of
+the working class; nevertheless, we have never at any time failed to
+help in every way possible, personally and pecuniarily, every strike
+which has taken place since 1881 (even in spite of our doubting the
+value of the mere strike as a weapon against organised capitalism),
+and our organisation has invariably agitated in favour of every
+Parliamentary measure accepted by the trade unions which could at all
+help the trade unionists and the workers at large. Our relations with
+the trade unions may therefore be described as friendly whenever they
+take action against capitalism, and appreciative of their increasing
+tendency towards Socialism. We always recommend all workers to join
+the trade union of their trade. No Socialist propaganda is officially
+carried on by the trade unions, but as quite 75 per cent. of the
+members of the Social-Democratic Federation are also trade unionists
+in their respective trades, by their agency Socialist thought is
+steadily permeating the ranks of trade unionism. As also the older
+leaders, brought up entirely in the bourgeois school of thought and
+action, die or are superannuated, there can be no doubt whatever that
+they will be succeeded by Socialists, and in fact they are being so
+replaced at the present time. Trade union Socialist leaders, of
+course, will then use the trade union organisation to spread
+Socialism. So far as they have been elected to executive office, they
+do this even now.--H.W. LEE, Secretary.'
+
+"'The Labour party is a federation of Socialist societies and trade
+union organisations. Trade unions are directly affiliated, their
+membership forming, together with the membership of the Socialist
+organisations, the membership of the Labour party. In some cases
+Socialist propaganda is conducted by the trade unions, several of them
+embracing the Socialist basis in their rules.--J.S. MIDDLETON, for J.
+RAMSAY MACDONALD.'
+
+"'The Independent Labour Party is affiliated to the Labour party,
+which is a federation of trade unions, co-operative societies, and
+Socialist societies, for political action. The Independent Labour
+Party consists of individual members, and not of federated
+organisations. Our membership is only open to Socialists individually.
+Our association with the trade unions comes through the Labour party,
+with which both we and they are affiliated. The trade unions of Great
+Britain do not carry on any specific Socialist propaganda among their
+members, although several of the unions state in their constitution
+that they believe in Socialism. Many Socialist speeches are made from
+trade union platforms and demonstrations held under the auspices of
+trade unions.--FRANCIS JOHNSON, Secretary.'"[409]
+
+The foregoing three letters are most interesting and most important,
+and they should be carefully read because they prove that the forces
+of trade unionism and Socialism are commingling, and that the trade
+unionists may reckon upon the support of the Socialists whenever they
+come into conflict with capitalists. Although in constructive policy
+Socialism and trade unionism are as yet things apart, they possess a
+common working basis as soon as trouble occurs between capital and
+labour.
+
+To increase the intimacy between them and the representatives of
+labour pure and simple, and to accustom them to co-operation, the
+Socialist cannot do anything better than to cause conflicts to arise
+between capital and labour. Therefore it is only natural that the
+Socialists will urge the trade unionists to make great, and ever
+greater, demands upon capital; that every concession will only be
+considered as a stepping-stone to a further concession. Every conflict
+between capital and labour, everything that will increase the
+dissatisfaction of the workers, will serve the Socialists, because it
+will cause the workers to believe in the doctrine of the Iron Law of
+Wages, in the Law of Increasing Misery, and in the promised Socialist
+paradise. Therefore the Socialists will do all they can to embitter
+the relations between capital and labour, and to bring about strikes.
+For instance, at the time when, in the autumn of 1907, the differences
+between the British railway companies and the men were acute,
+practically the whole Socialist press urged the railway servants to
+declare a strike, and the settlement of the difficulty by Mr. Lloyd
+George was greeted with derision and regret. Mr. Bell, who had
+accepted the settlement, was treated with contempt, and the result of
+the Railway Conference was declared to be the Sedan of the British
+trade union movement.[410]
+
+Owing to the persistent agitation of the Socialists, the trade unions
+are becoming permeated with Socialism. Of late years there have been
+few great strikes in Great Britain, but, unless the relations between
+Socialists and trade unionists alter, it seems likely that great and
+violent industrial disputes will occur in the near future.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[386] _S.L.P. Bulletin No. 2, 1907._
+
+[387] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 10.
+
+[388] _English Progress towards Social Democracy_, p. 8.
+
+[389] _S.L.P. Bulletin No. 1, May 1907._
+
+[390] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 16.
+
+[391] John Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 10.
+
+[392] Hyndman, _Darkness and Dawn of May Day, 1907_, p. 2.
+
+[393] J. O'Connor Kessack, _The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way
+Out_, p. 15.
+
+[394] _S.L.P. Bulletin No. 2._
+
+[395] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 1.
+
+[396] Quelch in _The Socialist_, November 1907.
+
+[397] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[398] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 13.
+
+[399] _Clarion_, November 29, 1907.
+
+[400] _The Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, What it Means and How to
+Make Use of it_; _How Trade Unions Benefit Workmen_; _Eight Hours by
+Law: A Practical Solution_; _Cottage Plans and Common Sense_; _Houses
+for the People_; _The Case for a Legal Minimum Wage_.
+
+[401] _Clarion_, November 15, 1907.
+
+[402] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 40.
+
+[403] Dennis Hird, _From Brute to Brother_, p. 14.
+
+[404] _Socialism and Trade Unionism: Wherein do they Differ?_ pp. 2-8.
+
+[405] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 16.
+
+[406] Opening Address, Chairman Hartley at Annual Conference,
+_Social-Democratic Federation Annual Report, 1906_, pp. 3, 4.
+
+[407] John Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 15.
+
+[408] _New Age_, November 30, 1907.
+
+[409] _Social Democrat_, September 1907, pp. 548, 549.
+
+[410] See the _Labour Leader_, _Clarion_, _Justice_, _Socialist
+Standard_, _Socialist_, &c., for November 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING LAND AND THE LANDLORDS
+
+
+British Socialists, as we have learned in Chapter IV.,[411] adopting
+the celebrated formula of Proudhon, have proclaimed "Property is
+theft," and they are of opinion that property in land is a
+particularly heinous form of theft. Therefore they demand the
+restitution of the land to the people, not as a matter of expediency
+but as a matter of right. "Man has a right only to what his labour
+makes. No man 'makes' the land."[412] "Land is the gift of Nature. It
+is not made by man. Now, if a man has a right to nothing but that
+which he has himself made, no man can have a right to the land, for no
+man made it."[413] "The land belongs by inalienable right not to any
+body of individuals but to all."[414]
+
+    O high cliffs looking heavenward,
+      O valleys green and fair.
+    Sea cliffs that seem to gird and guard
+      Our island once so dear,
+    In vain your beauty now ye spread,
+    For we are numbered with the dead;
+      A robber band has seized the land,
+    And we are exiles here.
+
+    The ploughman ploughs, the sower sows.
+      The reaper reaps the ear;
+    The woodman to the forest goes
+      Before the day grows clear,
+    But of our toil no fruit we see;
+    The harvest's not for you and me:
+      A robber band has seized the land,
+    And we are exiles here.[415]
+
+Appealing to the passions, hatred, and greed of their followers, and
+relying on their credulity, Socialist leaders proclaim not only that
+the landlords are useless, but also that the people will have the land
+rent free as soon as the present owners have been expropriated. "The
+landlord, _qua_ landlord, performs no function in the economy of
+industry or of food production. He is a rent-receiver; that, and
+nothing more. Were the landlord to be abolished, the soil and the
+people who till it would still remain, and the disappearance of the
+landowner would pass almost unnoticed."[416] "Rent is brigandage
+reduced to a system. So long as the English people are content to be
+tenants-at-will on their own soil, and to pay for the privilege, they
+will remain virtually slaves."[417] "The tenant earns the rent. The
+landlord spends it. If the tenant had not to pay the rent he could
+spend it himself, and so it would get spent, and get spent by the man
+who earns it and has the best right to spend it."[418]
+
+Whilst some Socialist agitators are unscrupulous enough to make their
+followers believe that in the Socialist State they may have land for
+the asking, others are so unkind as to destroy that pleasing illusion.
+For instance, we learn from a Fabian pamphlet, "A Socialist State or
+municipality will charge the full economic rent for the use of its
+land and dwellings, and apply that rent to the common purposes of the
+community."[419] Another Socialist authority very pertinently remarks:
+"It is of not the least consequence to the person who rents the land
+whether he pays the rent for it to an individual or whether he Pays it
+to the State,"[420] and therefore it is clear that statements such as
+"If the tenant had not to pay the rent he could spend it himself," are
+merely meant to deceive the simple. Tenants, instead of paying their
+rent to a human landlord, would have to pay it to an impersonal State
+or municipality, and the latter might prove as grasping and as
+heartless as rating committees are now.
+
+Others base their demand for the spoliation of landlords upon the
+Bible and upon the ideal of a "Divine brotherhood," forgetting that
+the Bible contains a commandment "Thou shalt not steal," as well as
+many warnings against lying, deceit, cant, and covetousness. One of
+the champion Bible-Socialists, for instance, writes: "If all men are
+brothers, as Christ undoubtedly taught, then the land, the source of
+wealth, the means by which men can earn their livelihood, should not
+be the property of any set of individuals, but should belong to the
+whole community. The fact of a man being born into the world gives him
+the divine right to the opportunity of earning his living, and that
+right cannot be enjoyed so long as there is a single man on earth
+deprived of access to the land from which to earn his bread. When the
+spirit of brotherhood prevails, it will be a simple and a natural
+thing to arrange that these things shall be used not in the interests
+of the few, but for the common good. There are innumerable signs that
+the hearts and minds of men are now turning in this direction, and
+that they are coming to see that the only just and permanent
+arrangement is the divine solution of working on the basis of
+universal brotherhood."[421] There is a fraternity among Sicilian
+bandits. The "Divine brotherhood" of the writer would be based on
+robbery, and have robbery as its object.
+
+Others demand the confiscation of all land by relying upon
+misrepresentation: "If the injustice of the land monopoly is great in
+the country, by robbing the grower of his improvements or scaring him
+from making any, by robbing the nation of its own legitimate
+independent food supply, and by laying waste vast tracts of the
+surface, the injustice is even greater in the towns, if only by reason
+of the greater numbers whose interests are now involved: (1) by
+flooding the town labour markets with surplus labourers, and so--by
+their competition between each other for jobs of any sort at any
+terms, rather than starve--keeping wages down at the privation point;
+(2) by robbing the town workers of that proper and legitimate home
+market which a flourishing and proportionately numerous agricultural
+population would afford; (3) by the bloated rentals in cities, only
+made possible by driving and crowding the people into our unnaturally
+swollen centres; and (4) by the continuous re-investment of those
+enormous rent extortions in all those secondary monopolies of transit,
+finance, and business generally, which can only arise from the primary
+monopoly of the soil, and which complete this devil's chain of the
+subjection of labour and the dependence of the community."[422]
+
+The complaints that land is going out of cultivation, that the British
+home market has been spoiled, and that towns are overgrown and
+overcrowded are unfortunately only too well justified, but these
+phenomena are not due to private property in land. Private property in
+land is universal, but the desertion of the country and overcrowding
+in towns are not universal. These evils are to be found chiefly in
+Great Britain, because British economic policy, whilst fostering trade
+and the manufacturing industries, has deliberately sacrificed to them
+the rural industries. That fact is acknowledged by many Socialists,
+as will be seen in Chapter XXL., "Some Socialist's Views on Free Trade
+and Protection."
+
+The question now arises: How do the Socialists propose to deal with
+the land and the owners of land? Mr. Blatchford informs us: "The
+titled robbers of England have always done their robberies in a legal
+manner. We propose to enforce their cessation in a legal manner. We
+respect the law, and mean to use it. We are not mere brigands. We are
+the new police; our duty is to 'arrest the rogues and dastards'; our
+motto is, 'The law giveth and the law taketh away, blessed be the name
+of the law.'"[423] A leading Christian-Socialist clergyman tells us
+"As for compensation, from the point of view of the highest Christian
+morality, it is the landlords who should compensate the people, not
+the people the landlords. But practically if you carry out this reform
+by taxation, no compensation would be necessary or even
+possible."[424] Mines and mine-owners are to be treated in the same
+way as land and land-owners. "The minerals should be at once taken
+over without compensation; the present owners should think themselves
+well off if they escape paying compensation for previous robbery of
+the people."[425] Views such as those expressed in the foregoing are
+held not only by some unscrupulous agitators. At the last Annual
+Conference of the Independent Labour Party the following resolution
+was carried: "This Conference, being of opinion that the high price of
+coal is a serious menace to the nation, and bears extremely hard upon
+householders and especially upon the working classes of the country,
+declares in favour of the nationalisation of the mines and
+municipalisation of the coal-supply."[426] At the last Annual
+Conference of the Miners' Federation of Great Britain, various
+resolutions urging the nationalisation of all mines were proposed and
+carried. Mr. W.E. Harvey, M.P., for instance, moved "That the members
+of Parliament supported by this federation be instructed to direct the
+attention of the Government to bring in a Bill for the nationalisation
+of land, mines, and mining royalties, as we believe that it is only by
+such reforms that the workers can obtain full value for their
+labours."[427] It will be observed that nothing is said about
+compensation in this resolution, which was passed unanimously.
+
+How is the nationalisation of the land to be effected? "The land of
+every country belongs of natural and inalienable right to the whole
+body of the people in each generation. We say therefore, 'You need not
+kick the landlords out; you must not buy them out; you had better tax
+them out.'"[428] "If the people rose in revolt, took up arms,
+confiscated the lands of the nobles, and handed them over to the
+control of a Parliament, that would not be brigandage; it would be
+revolution. But if the people by the exercise of constitutional means,
+passed an Act through Parliament making the estates of the nobles the
+property of the nation, with or without compensation, that would be
+neither brigandage nor revolution; it would be a legal, righteous, and
+constitutional reform. We propose to be neither revolutionaries nor
+brigands, but legal, righteous, and constitutional reformers."[429]
+Legality implies and presupposes justice, but Socialist law and
+justice are different from that conception of law and justice which
+has been held hitherto. Chapter XXIV. will make that point clear.
+
+The foregoing should suffice to show that the Socialists intend to
+abolish private property in land by "taxing landowners out of
+existence."
+
+They apparently forget that not all the owners of land are rich; that
+many small farmers, shopkeepers, artisans, &c., own freehold land and
+freehold houses; and that the insurance companies have a very large
+proportion of their funds invested in land and on the security of
+land. A confiscation of land would therefore ruin a vast number of
+hard-working people. It would cripple some insurance companies and
+ruin others. Hence the savings of thrifty workers would be confiscated
+or destroyed by the State together with those of the larger
+capitalists.
+
+The Socialists are not entirely agreed as to the way by which the
+abolition of private ownership in land should be effected, but some
+interesting proposals will be found in Chapter X., "Socialist Views
+and Proposals regarding Taxation and the National Budget." The purely
+agricultural aspect of the land question is treated in Chapter XVIII.,
+"Socialism and Agriculture," and in Chapter XXI., "Some Socialist
+Views on Free Trade and Protection."
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[411] Page 81.
+
+[412] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 61.
+
+[413] _Ibid._ p. 60.
+
+[414] Washington, _A Corner in Flesh and Blood_, p. 60.
+
+[415] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 6.
+
+[416] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[417] Davidson, _Book of Lords_, p. 25.
+
+[418] Blatchford, _Land Nationalisation_, p. 9.
+
+[419] Sidney Webb, _Socialism, True and False_, p. 19.
+
+[420] _Socialism and the Single Tax_, p. 7.
+
+[421] Ward, _Are All Men Brothers?_ pp. 14, 15.
+
+[422] Hall, _Land, Labour, and Liberty_, p. 12.
+
+[423] Blatchford, _Some Tory Socialisms_, p. 6.
+
+[424] Headlam, _Christian Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[425] _Forward_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[426] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference, 1907_, p.
+59.
+
+[427] _Times_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[428] Headlam, _Christian Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[429] Blatchford, _Some Tory Socialisms_, p. 3.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING CAPITAL AND THE CAPITALISTS
+
+
+We have seen in Chapter VIII. that Socialists claim that "Man has a
+right to nothing but that which he has himself made," that therefore,
+"No man can have a right to the land, for no man made it." May, then,
+owners of property keep at least that part of their property which is
+not invested in land?
+
+The reply is, of course, in the negative. "As land must in future be a
+national possession, so must the other means of producing and
+distributing wealth."[430] "Supposing we assume it true that land is
+not the product of labour and that capital is; it is not by any means
+true that the rent of land is not the product of labour and that the
+interest on capital is. Since private ownership, whether of land or
+capital, simply means the right to draw and dispose of a revenue from
+the property, why should the landowner be forbidden to do that which
+is allowed to the capitalist, in a society in which land and capital
+are commercially equivalent? Yet land nationalisers seem to be
+prepared to treat as sacred the landlords' claim to private property
+in capital acquired by thefts of this kind, although they will not
+hear of their claim to property in land. Capital serves as an
+instrument for robbing in a precisely identical manner. In England
+industrial capital is mainly created by wage workers--who get nothing
+for it but permission to create in addition enough subsistence to
+keep each other alive in a poor way. Its immediate appropriation by
+idle proprietors and shareholders, whose economic relation to the
+workers is exactly the same in principle as that of the landlords,
+goes on every day under our eyes. The landlord compels the worker to
+convert his land into a railway, his fen into a drained level, his
+barren seaside waste into a fashionable watering-place, his mountain
+into a tunnel, his manor park into a suburb full of houses let on
+repairing leases; and lo! he has escaped the land nationalisers; his
+land is now become capital and is sacred. The position is so glaringly
+absurd and the proposed attempt to discriminate between the capital
+value and the land value of estates is so futile, that it seems almost
+certain that the land nationalisers will go as far as the Socialists.
+Whatever the origin of land and capital, the source of the revenues
+drawn from them is contemporary labour."[431]
+
+Most Socialists think it wiser to tax capital gradually out of
+existence than to confiscate it at one stroke. "The direct
+confiscation of capital affects all, the small and the great, those
+unable to work and the able-bodied, everybody in an equal way. It is
+difficult by this method, often quite impossible, to separate the
+large property from the small invested in the same undertakings. The
+direct confiscation would also proceed too quickly, often at one
+stroke, while confiscation through taxation would permit the abolition
+of capitalist property being made a long-drawn process, working itself
+out further and further in the measure as the new order gets
+consolidated and makes its beneficent influence felt."[432]
+
+The argument that excessive taxation would drive capital out of the
+country is laughed at by Socialists. A Socialist pamphlet says: "It is
+true that the land-sweaters and labour-skinners whom the people keep
+on electing to rule and rob them can still frighten noodles by
+threatening that they will run away from the country and take their
+capital with them; that
+
+    They'll ship the mines and farms to Amsterdam,
+    The houses and the railways to Peru,
+    The canals and docks to Russia,
+    The woods and workshops off to Prussia,
+    And all the enterprise and brains to Timbuctoo.
+
+"We calmly reply that there is not one single service that all the
+landlords, financiers, and their lesser parasites pretend to perform
+for society that could not be performed far more efficiently and
+infinitely more cheaply without them."
+
+    Straightway those rich men started
+      To move their capitals.
+    On board of ships they carted
+      Their railways and canals;
+    With mines mine-owners scurried.
+      The bankers bore their books.
+    With mills mill-owners hurried.
+      The bishops took their crooks.[433]
+
+The despoiled capitalists might leave the country, but they would have
+to leave in the country all their property except perhaps a few
+valuables which they might remove.
+
+Property being theft, capitalists as well as landowners are thieves
+who possess no claim whatever to consideration or even to mercy. "To
+talk about 'the respective claims of capital and labour' is as
+inaccurate as to talk about the 'respective claims' of coals and
+colliers, or of ploughs and ploughmen. Capital has no claims. This is
+not a quibble. The distinction between capital and the capitalists is
+one of vital importance. Capital is a necessary thing. The capitalist
+is as unnecessary as any other kind of thief or interloper. The
+capitalist, though as loud as greedy in his 'claims,' has no rights at
+all."[434]
+
+"Do you mean to say, then, that the capitalist does not perform a
+useful function in running a risk for the profit he receives?--No. In
+so far as he exercises the function of management and receives
+remuneration for this, his remuneration is not profit at all, but
+wages of superintendence, and the functions of management would be
+undertaken by the organised society of the future through its
+appointed representatives. As to any necessary risks, all individuals
+would be relieved from this under Socialism, as it would be borne by
+the whole of society."[435] "If capitalists attempt to justify their
+way of making profit by saying that they have to run risks sometimes,
+that a part of their property might occasionally be lost, we answer
+that labour has nothing to do with that."[436]
+
+Capital large and small is the result of thrift. If capital is theft,
+then thrift also is theft. The thrifty investor, being an immoral
+person, has no right to protest against the confiscation of his
+property. "By capitalist I mean the investor who puts his money into a
+concern and draws profits therefrom without participating in the
+organisation or management of the business. Were all these to
+disappear in the night, leaving no trace behind, nothing would be
+changed."[437] Nothing would be changed for the Socialist agitator,
+the loafer, and the tramp. On the contrary, they would profit from the
+ruin of the industrious and the thrifty. The fact that honest and
+hardworking men who do their duty to their family and who wish to
+leave their children provided for should have the result of the
+economy of a lifetime confiscated matters little to the Socialist
+leaders. According to the Socialist doctrines the industrious and the
+thrifty are thieves and exploiters of those workers who have never
+saved a penny. On the other hand, those men who live from hand to
+mouth, who work only a few days each week and loaf on the remaining
+days, who waste all their earnings in drink, gambling, and
+music-halls, and who possess nothing they can call their own, are
+honest and excellent citizens. They are entitled to the savings of the
+thrifty.
+
+In accordance with the Socialist principles stated in the foregoing,
+all shareholders, being merely exploiters of labour, would be
+expropriated. "Are shareholders in companies useful in organising
+labour?--As a rule they employ others to organise labour, and the work
+done by the company would go on just as well if the shareholders
+disappeared."[438] Besides, "Stocks when analysed, in nine cases out
+of ten simply mean the right to squeeze tribute out of workers who are
+nominally free. By far the greatest part of what is set down as
+national 'capital' is merely slave flesh-and-blood."[439]
+
+Holders of Government stocks would be treated no better than
+landowners and shareholders. Foremost among the "immediate reforms"
+demanded in the programme of the Social-Democratic Federation[440]
+ranges the "Repudiation of the National Debt." The repudiation of the
+National Debt has during many years been demanded, and is still
+demanded, by the Social-Democratic Federation, as may be seen from a
+recent issue of "Justice," its weekly publication, in which we find
+the following statement: "The National Debt is simply a means of
+extracting unearned incomes from the people of this country. It is
+idle to nationalise or municipalise industries by means of loans on
+which interest is paid. Such interest would be only another form of
+rent and profit. When capitalism is abolished, every one of its many
+forms will necessarily have to go."[441]
+
+The repudiation of the National Debt is demanded by many Socialist
+leaders and leading writers. "The National Debt (falsely so-called) has
+already been paid thrice over in usury. All future interest-payments
+should be held as part of the principal."[442] "The few thousand
+persons who own the National Debt, saddled upon the community by a
+landlord Parliament, exact _28,000,000l._ yearly from the labour of
+their countrymen for nothing."[443] "Outside the land monopoly, the
+most infamous source of usury is unquestionably the so-called 'National
+Debt.' There the whole of the capital is absolutely spurious. The real
+capital consisted of the gunpowder and the lead which Sovereigns and
+statesmen expended so liberally about a century ago in attempting to
+murder liberty on the Continents of Europe and America. Our war debt is
+the most stupendous monument of human crime and folly in existence; and
+worst of all, the 'butcher's bill' has already been paid by the unhappy
+toilers thrice over in usury."[444] "The entire national liability has
+been discharged to the moneylenders by the people once during the last
+thirty-seven years. We repay public debts once every thirty-seven years
+without wiping out a penny of the said debts. We pay away in blank
+usury _20,000,000l._ per year on this one head, or enough to provide
+old-age pensions for three-fourths of our aged poor in the United
+Kingdom on the basis of _7s. 6d._ per head per week."[445] "236,514
+blackmailers suck the udder of industry through the convenient teat of
+what, with audacious cynicism, is called the 'National Debt.'"[446]
+
+The largest part of the National Debt was not created by "murdering
+liberty" but by fighting the armies of the French Revolution and of
+Napoleon I. Besides, the defence against the French Revolution and
+Napoleon was not a "crime," but a necessary duty. Furthermore, the
+holders of the National Debt are not "blackmailers" but industrious,
+useful, and thrifty citizens, or the children and descendants of
+industrious, useful, and thrifty citizens.
+
+About one-half of the National Debt is held by thrifty wage-earners,
+as all the money deposited in the savings banks, and most of the
+savings deposited with friendly societies, &c., is invested in
+Consols, and as a very large part of the assets of the industrial and
+other insurance societies consists of Government Stocks. Property
+being theft, and thrift being akin to it, the thrifty workman whose
+savings are invested in Consols has apparently no right to complain of
+being robbed of his savings by the Socialists.
+
+Some Socialist agitators have the audacity to tell the thrifty worker
+that he will not suffer, but benefit, by the confiscation of his
+savings. "Opponents try to scare this man against Socialism by the
+fear of losing his interest. Granting for a moment he would do so,
+would he not gain by the general abolition of interest, &c., which
+would double his wage in common with that of all workers?"[447]--The
+worker is to be indemnified for his positive and certain loss in
+property through the confiscation of his savings, or at the least of
+the interest paid on them, by a problematical rise in general wages
+which would benefit the unthrifty quite as much as the thrifty. But if
+the promised doubling of wages should not take place, what will
+happen? The Socialist agitators will explain that they are sorry to
+have made a mistake, whilst the thriftless are squandering the
+property of the thrifty.
+
+According to the Socialist teachings, the capitalist is a perfectly
+useless being in the national household. "Does he himself want to
+work: to do something useful? Far from it. His money works for him;
+his money makes money, as the saying is."[448] Most capitalists--and I
+think the large majority of wage-earners are capitalists to some
+extent--are engaged in useful productive work of hand or brain.
+However, the capitalist of the Socialist imagination, the wealthy man
+who lives without any work, who studies the money market and Stock
+Exchange quotations, and who is occupied solely in investing and
+reinvesting his money to the best advantage, is an extremely useful
+member of society. It is of the utmost consequence to all workers, and
+to the whole nation, that the national capital should grow, that
+mines, railways, ships, machinery, houses, &c., should multiply and be
+constantly improved. Now the thrifty, not the wasteful, preserve and
+increase the national capital. Wise and cautious capitalists in
+enriching themselves will enrich the nation. Careless ones will lose
+their money and impoverish the nation. The wealth of France has, to a
+very large extent, been created by cautious and far-seeing _rentiers_,
+and thus France has become the banker among nations.
+
+Socialists teach that the wealth of the few causes the poverty of the
+many; that therefore the private capitalist should be destroyed. Why,
+then, are the workers most prosperous in those countries which possess
+the wealthiest capitalists, such as France and the United States, and
+why are they poorest in countries, such as Turkey and Servia, where
+wealthy capitalists do not exist? And may not the destruction of the
+capitalists reduce Great Britain to the level of Turkey and Servia?
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[430] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 9.
+
+[431] _Capital and Land_, pp. 5, 6.
+
+[432] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 11.
+
+[433] Blatchford, _The Clarion Ballads_, p. 9.
+
+[434] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[435] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 17.
+
+[436] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 11.
+
+[437] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[438] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 3.
+
+[439] Davidson, _The Gospel of the Poor_, p. 54.
+
+[440] See Appendix.
+
+[441] _Justice_, October 19, 1907.
+
+[442] Davidson, _The Democrat's Address_, p. 5.
+
+[443] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 8.
+
+[444] Davidson, _The Gospel of the Poor_, p. 49.
+
+[445] McLachlan, _Tyranny of Usury_, p. 13.
+
+[446] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 76.
+
+[447] _Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers_, p. 1.
+
+[448] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 10.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING TAXATION AND THE NATIONAL
+BUDGET
+
+
+To Socialists taxation is chiefly a means for impoverishing the rich
+and the well-to-do. It is their object to transfer by taxation the
+wealth from the few to the many, as they believe that the
+impoverishment of the rich will mean the enrichment of the poor.
+Therefore they do not aim at economy in national and local
+expenditure. On the contrary, they wish to spend as much as possible.
+As money is to be obtained solely from the rich, "An increase in
+national taxation has no terrors for Socialists."[449] Every increase
+in expenditure is greeted by them with joy, and wastefulness in
+national and local undertakings is rather encouraged than condemned.
+"Socialists look to the Budget as a means not only of raising revenue
+to meet unavoidable expenditure, but as an instrument for redressing
+inequalities in the distribution of wealth."[450] Let us first look
+into the financial views of the Socialists, and then into their
+positive proposals.
+
+"The purpose of Socialism is to transfer land and industrial capital
+to the people. There are two ways in which, simultaneously, this
+object may be carried out. The one way is by the municipal and
+national appropriation--with such compensation to the existing owners
+as the community may think fit to give--of the land and industrial
+concerns. The second method is by taxation. Taxation has its special
+sphere of usefulness in helping the community to secure some part of
+its own by diverting into the national purse portions of the rent,
+interest, and profit which now go to keep an idle class in luxury at
+the expense of the industrious poor."[451]
+
+"The existence of a rich class, whose riches are the cause of the
+poverty of the masses, is the justification for the Socialist demand
+that the cost of bettering the condition of the people must be met by
+the taxation of the rich. The Socialist's ideas of taxation may be
+briefly summarised as follows: (1) Both local and national taxation
+should aim primarily at securing for the communal benefit all
+'unearned' or 'social' increment of wealth. (2) Taxation should aim
+deliberately at preventing the retention of large incomes and great
+fortunes in private hands, recognising that the few cannot be rich
+without making the many poor. (3) Taxation should be in proportion to
+ability to pay and to protection and benefit conferred by the State.
+(4) No taxation should be imposed which encroaches upon the
+individual's means to satisfy his physical needs."[452]
+
+"To the Socialist taxation is the chief means by which he may recover
+from the propertied classes some portion of the plunder which their
+economic strength and social position have enabled them to extract
+from the workers; to him, national and municipal expenditure is the
+spending for common purposes of an ever-increasing proportion of the
+national income. The degree of civilisation which a State has reached
+may almost be measured by the proportion of the national income which
+is spent collectively instead of individually. To the Socialist the
+best of Governments is that which spends the most. The only possible
+policy is deliberately to tax the rich, especially those who live on
+wealth which they do not earn; for thus, and thus only, can we reduce
+the burthen upon the poor."[453]
+
+The Fabian Society suggests the following reform of national taxation:
+"In English politics successful ends must have moderate beginnings.
+Such a beginning might be an income-tax of _2s. 6d._ in the pound.
+Unearned incomes above _5,000l._ a year would pay _2s. 6d._ in the
+pound, below _5,000l._ a year _1s. 8d._ in the pound. The estate duty
+might be handled upon similar principles. Estates between _500,000l._
+and _1,000,000l._ would be charged twelve and a half per cent, instead
+of seven and a half, and estates exceeding _1,000,000l._ fifteen per
+cent, instead of eight."[454] The Fabian Society does not disguise its
+aim in proposing the foregoing: "These suggestions are doubtless
+confiscatory, and that is why they should recommend themselves to a
+Labour party. But even so, the confiscation is of a timorous and a
+slow-footed sort. The average British millionaire dies worth about
+_2,770,000l._, on which the death duty would be _415,500l._, leaving
+the agreeable nest-egg of _2,254,500l._ to the heirs. Even if we
+assume that the inheritance passes to one person only, so as to be
+subject to the highest rate of duty, it would not be until five more
+lives had passed that it would be reduced to a pitiful million. The
+most patient Labour party might not unreasonably demand something a
+trifle more revolutionary than this."[455]
+
+According to the above proposals the income-tax would return
+_47,600,000l._ per annum. This sum seems far too moderate to most
+Socialist writers. Councillor Glyde, for instance, gives in a widely
+read pamphlet elaborate tables in which the produce of a graduated
+income-tax is carefully calculated. The Fabian Society would make "a
+moderate beginning" by taxing large incomes _2s. 6d._ in the pound.
+Councillor Glyde would begin by levying a _3s._ income-tax on them.
+Taxation of incomes in accordance with his proposals would bring in
+_70,281,839l._ per annum.[456]
+
+Mr. Smart, of the Independent Labour Party, gives lengthy details of a
+taxation reform scheme in which figure a foundation-tax, a special
+property-tax, and a super-tax. Large incomes would have to pay 17-1/2
+per cent., or _3s. 6d._ in the pound, and his property and income tax
+would bring in _78,000,000l._ per annum.[457]
+
+Mr. Philip Snowden, M.P., submits a different scheme of taxation.
+There is to be an income-tax of _1s._ in the pound and a graduated
+super-tax up to _6s._ in the pound. Whilst the three authorities
+mentioned so far propose to take from the large incomes _2s. 6d._,
+_3s._, and _3s. 6d._ in the pound as a "moderate beginning," Mr.
+Snowden would, presumably also as a "moderate beginning," take _7s._
+in the pound from them. He is quite touched with his own generosity
+and magnanimity, for might he not demand at once _17s._ or _20s._ in
+the pound? "To console the possessors of incomes in the higher grade,
+say _50,000l._ a year, to the payment of an income-tax of _1s._ in the
+pound, we may remind them that they still retain _33,500l._ a year,
+which is a very generous payment by labour to them for the privilege
+of seeing them exist in gorgeous splendour and sumptuous
+idleness."[458]
+
+The proposals regarding the estate duty to be charged also vary. The
+Fabian Society proposes a maximum of 15 per cent. Mr. Smart would be
+satisfied with a graduated estate duty with a maximum of 25 per cent,
+instead of the present maximum of 8 per cent.[459] Mr. Snowden
+proposes a scale of duties which ranges from 1 per cent, up to 50 per
+cent.[460]
+
+Besides the very greatly increased income-tax and estate duty, there
+would be, according to Mr. Snowden, a land value tax of a penny in the
+pound of its capital value, which is equal to 10 per cent. annual
+value. It is to be the small beginning of the policy of taxing
+landowners out of existence, to be speedily followed by confiscation.
+"The annual value of land being _250,000,000l._, the produce of the
+land value tax would be _25,000,000l._ a year."[461] The author
+justifies the creation of that tax as follows: "Liverpool, London,
+Glasgow owe their existence and their prosperity to their respective
+situations, which are natural advantages and which ought not in
+justice to be enjoyed solely by those who live upon the sites. Every
+town and village in the country contributes to the prosperity of every
+other part. The nation is a unit; its resources and its obligations
+should be mutually shared."
+
+"Land values are so obviously not created by individual effort that
+the justice of taking the increment for the use of the community
+appeals to those who may have some difficulty in grasping the working
+of the 'unearned increment' in commercial concerns, where, however, it
+operates just as truly though not so obviously. The imposition of an
+Imperial tax of one penny in the pound on the capital value of the
+site would be a beginning, but by no means the end, of the process of
+diverting socially-created rent of land into the public exchequer.
+Taxation will do something towards that end; but taxation would be a
+long, irritating, and untrustworthy way of trying to secure the whole
+annual value of the land for the community."[462] "The taxation of
+land values is not a land reform. To get the full usefulness and the
+full value of the land for the community there is no way but for the
+State to own the land."[463]
+
+The contemplated reform of taxation will not be limited to taxing the
+rich and the well-to-do out of existence. Relief will be afforded to
+the masses by the repeal of all duties on food, and, indeed, of all
+indirect taxation. "The reforms which the Labour party will endeavour
+to obtain from the Government, in which it believes it will be
+expressing the democratic sentiment of the country, are:
+
+1. Repeal of the duties on foods.
+
+2. A minimum wage of _30s._ to all workers in Government employ or
+working under a contractor for the Government.
+
+3. Old-age pensions of _7s._ a week for persons over sixty."[464]
+
+Practically all Socialists agree that all indirect taxation should be
+abolished. "Indirect taxation has nothing whatever to recommend it to
+an intelligent people, however advantageous it may be to the
+well-to-do. Indirect taxation violates every principle of sound
+economy."[465] "Its maintenance is excused on the ground that indirect
+taxation is the only means by which the working class can be made to
+contribute to the cost of national government at ah. The poorer
+working classes should not be taxed by the Government at all."[466]
+"Under a just system of taxation all indirect taxation for revenue
+purposes would be abolished."[467] "With 43 per cent, of the working
+classes living in poverty, with an average wage over the whole working
+class not sufficient to provide themselves with the standard of
+workhouse comfort, it becomes a crime to tax them for the protection
+of their property and the enjoyment of their privileges"[468]--Is it
+true that, as Mr. Snowden, M.P., writes, the whole working class of
+Great Britain is so badly paid that it cannot provide for itself the
+standard of workhouse comfort? How then can he reconcile with that
+assertion the following statement which he gives in the same book a
+few pages further on: "Experts assign the proportion of the total
+annual drink bill of the United Kingdom contributed by the
+wage-earning classes at _100,000,000l._ A committee of the British
+Association, reporting on the 'appropriation of wages,' in 1882 said
+that 75 per cent, of the total consumption of beer and spirits, and 10
+per cent. of the wine bill, might be assigned as the shares of the
+working class."[469]
+
+As a matter of fact experts estimate that the British working men
+spend even more than _100,000,000l._ per year on drink, and that they
+spend about _50,000,000l._ on betting. It is really very inartistic
+for a professional agitator to tell us that the British workers are
+too poor to pay any taxes, that it is a "crime" to tax them at all,
+and then to remind us that the same starving ill-used workers can
+afford to spend more than the amount of the whole nation's Budget in
+drink and betting, that about one-sixth of the workman's wages are
+spent at the public-house, that many workmen spend the larger half of
+their income in drink, and that the British nation is the most drunken
+in the world, although drink is far more expensive in Great Britain
+than in any other country.
+
+With part of the money taken by means of extortionate taxation from
+the rich, whole sections of the population are to be bribed into
+supporting Socialism. "Two objectionable heads of revenue would find
+no place in a Socialist national balance-sheet--the profit from the
+Post Office and the stamp duties. Improvements in the wages and
+conditions of labour in the lower grades of the postal service would
+absorb a considerable part of the present annual profit of
+_5,000,000l._ and the rest might, with benefit, be utilised for
+cheapening the cost to the public of postal rates and services."[470]
+
+Mr. Snowden, in promising in one phrase the repeal of stamp duties and
+cheapening of postage, very likely thought that that step would
+relieve the poor. He apparently imagined that duty stamps were
+identical with postage stamps. If he had known that stamp duties are
+largely derived from Stock Exchange transactions and the sale of every
+kind of property on a large scale, from legal documents, &c., he would
+probably have proposed that they should be increased tenfold in order
+to strike another blow at private property, not that they should be
+abolished. Even the policy of confiscation requires an elementary
+knowledge of facts.
+
+Furthermore, "The Socialist Budget would provide for a very
+considerable increase of the grants-in-aid, retaining for the central
+Government just sufficient control or inspection over the expenditure
+as would not interfere with the reasonable freedom of the local
+authority."[471] "Control which would not interfere" is at present
+illogical and impossible, because the one excludes the other. It may
+be possible in the Socialist State of the future, because logic will
+have to be abolished in it. At all events it seems clear that Mr.
+Snowden wishes to secure the support of the local authorities by the
+same curious means by which he strives to secure the support of the
+Post Office servants.
+
+The foregoing extracts should suffice to show that the Socialists mean
+to ruin the owners of property of every kind by indirect confiscation
+in the form of extortionate taxation, which is to be constantly
+increased and which may be followed by direct confiscation, and that
+they rely upon force for achieving their aim. Capitalists may leave
+the country, but they must leave their capital behind, and their
+disappearance, Socialists assert, will be no loss. "The vast majority
+of our employers are routineers, who could no more contribute an
+intelligent statement of their industrial function to this paper than
+a bee could write the works of Lord Avebury. Routineers can always be
+replaced, and replaced with profit, by educated functionaries.
+Consequently when the employers threaten us with emigration, our only
+regret as to the majority of them is that it is too good to be
+true."[472] "Supposing those who have the money were to threaten to
+leave the country and to take their money with them, would not that
+upset your plans? Money is not wealth. You would have cause to
+rejoice. So would the country which was fortunate enough to see its
+capitalists emigrate."[473]
+
+According to the Socialist teaching, the workers maintain the
+capitalists. The brain is mightier than the hand, though the brain
+requires the hand. In reality it rather seems that the capitalists
+maintain the workers. It cannot too often be pointed out that those
+countries which have many wealthy capitalists are highly civilised and
+prosperous, and their workers are well off. On the other hand, those
+countries which have few or no wealthy capitalists are little
+civilised and poor, and their workers are exceedingly badly off. The
+masses may conceivably rob the capitalists of their property, and try
+to manage the national capital themselves, but whether they will
+benefit by spoliation remains to be seen. Lacking direction,
+foresight, unity, organisation, discipline, and thrift, the masses
+will probably quickly waste the national capital, and national ruin
+and distress and starvation will be the consequences of wholesale
+robbery.
+
+The confiscation experiment has often been tried in the past, and it
+has always failed. The last time it has been tried was at the time of
+the French Revolution. The money secured by robbery was recklessly
+squandered. Production was neglected, and the people became poorer
+than ever. In the country agriculture came to a standstill, weeds grew
+where corn had been growing, gardens became a natural wilderness, and
+wolves roamed in thousands.[474] The great manufacturing towns were
+dead, manufacturers in Paris who had employed sixty or eighty men
+employed but ten.[475] The people in town and country were starving.
+Many lived on roots and bark. Many of the poor in Paris waited outside
+the slaughter-houses and lapped the blood from the gutters like dogs.
+
+Private capital has existed in all countries and at all times, because
+it is a plant of natural growth. One can destroy it, but it will ever
+grow again.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[449] Snowden, _Socialist Budget_, p. 1.
+
+[450] _Ibid._
+
+[451] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 2.
+
+[452] _Ibid._ pp. 7, 8.
+
+[453] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 4.
+
+[454] _Ibid._ pp. 4, 5.
+
+[455] _Ibid._ p. 5.
+
+[456] Glyde, _A Peep Behind the Scenes on a Board of Guardians_, pp.
+28,29.
+
+[457] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, pp. 14,15.
+
+[458] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, pp. 78, 79.
+
+[459] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, p. 8.
+
+[460] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 81.
+
+[461] _Ibid._ p. 82.
+
+[462] _Ibid._ pp. 82, 83.
+
+[463] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 84.
+
+[464] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, p. 15.
+
+[465] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 15.
+
+[466] _Ibid._ p. 31.
+
+[467] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[468] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 17.
+
+[469] _Ibid._ pp. 21, 22.
+
+[470] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 71.
+
+[471] _Ibid._ p. 59.
+
+[472] G.B. Shaw in the _New Age_, November 30, 1907.
+
+[473] Wheatley, _How the Miners are Robbed_, p. 12.
+
+[474] Vandal, _Avčnement de Bonaparte_, 1903, vol. i. p. 25.
+
+[475] Schmidt, _Tableaux de la Révolution_, vol. iv. p. 383.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+SOCIALISM AND THE EMPIRE
+
+
+Most British Socialists object to the Empire on various grounds, and
+desire its downfall and dissolution. According to their views Great
+Britain should, in the first place, give up her non-self-governing
+colonies. Let us take note of some Socialistic pronouncements to that
+effect:
+
+"Governments have no right to exist except with the consent of the
+governed, and the British have no more right to dominate other peoples
+than other peoples have to dominate us. What we can only hold by
+maintaining an alien garrison had better be given up. The people of
+these islands would not be losers, but the gainers by such a
+course."[476] "Is it possible for a self-governing people to rule a
+subject race, and yet keep its own love for liberty? Neither the
+Greeks nor the Romans could do it, and we are not doing it very well
+ourselves. The reason is obvious. No nation can play the part of the
+despot (even the benevolent despot) abroad and that of the democrat at
+home."[477] "Socialists should oppose the creation of empires on this
+simple ground--that empire-building is accompanied by terrible misery
+and suffering for those subject races, as they are called, which are
+the chosen victims sacrificed on the altar of cupidity and
+pride."[478] "A people gain power and influence in the world in
+proportion as they solve for themselves the great problems of
+democratic self-government. We shall do more to civilise Africa by
+civilising the East End of London than by governing from Cape to
+Cairo."[479] "It is not only impossible for one nation to civilise
+another by governing it; it is wrong that it should attempt to do so.
+Conquest may have opened up one civilisation to another in times long
+antecedent to the steam engine and a world commerce, but to-day its
+only effect is to crush out and level down all national life to the
+dead uniformity of an alien political routine."[480]
+
+"What is the attitude of Socialism towards backward races, savage and
+barbaric peoples who are to-day outside the civilised world? The
+position of Socialism towards these races is one of absolute
+non-interference. We hold that they should be left entirely alone to
+develop themselves in the natural order of things; which they must
+inevitably do or die out. It is the duty of Socialists to support the
+barbaric races in their resistance to aggression."[481] "It is the
+duty of International Socialists, the only international
+non-capitalist party, to denounce, and wherever possible to prevent,
+the extension of colonisation and conquest, leaving to each race and
+creed and colour the full opportunity to develop itself until complete
+economic and social emancipation is secured by all."[482] "Duty, like
+charity, begins at home, and if the civilisation of the blacks is to
+be purchased only by the destruction of our own democratic spirit, the
+balance to the world is of evil, not of good. There is another view of
+Imperialism expressed with brutal candour by Mr. Rhodes when he said
+that the flag was our best commercial asset, that trade follows the
+flag. Trade does no such thing. Trade follows business enterprise.
+Imperialism is, indeed, a policy of industrial deterioration, and by
+impoverishing the skill of the country and encouraging the worst
+forms of financial capitalism, must crush out every budding hope that
+labour has of becoming economically and politically free."[483]
+
+The foregoing extracts should suffice to show that there is among
+British Socialists a strong desire to abandon the non-self-governing
+colonies.
+
+The attitude of the British Socialists towards the great
+self-governing dominions is not much more favourable than it is
+towards tropical colonies. Their attitude is one of hardly disguised
+hostility, which appears to spring partly from jealousy of the
+colonists, partly from hatred of the British capitalists who have
+invested money in the colonies. The loss of British capital invested
+in the colonies would probably be greeted with jubilation by the
+Socialists. "The well-to-do sections of society in Great Britain have
+found a secure and profitable outlet for their capital in loans and
+advances to the colonists alike as organised communities and as
+individual property-owners. But the drain for interest and dividends
+to England on this account is heavy, and is severely felt at times of
+depression, such as that which Australia as a whole has been suffering
+from during the recent seven years of almost continuous drought. It
+seems tolerably certain, therefore, that this comparative handful of
+colonists, eleven millions in all, of which only four millions in
+Australia, will in time to come, and as the Labour party and
+Socialists gain strength, repudiate, or at any rate reduce, these
+onerous obligations. It is also probable that with regard to
+Australia, as the white population does not increase and England's day
+as a colonising power proper is practically over (having no longer any
+agricultural population to send out as emigrants), this huge territory
+will not be permanently left at the sole dog-in-the-manger control of
+its present handful of inhabitants. We may expect, at least, that
+Australia will not be permanently able to retain its position without
+an infusion of entirely fresh blood, and should other peoples require
+an outlet in that direction, the present preposterous policy will have
+to be abandoned."[484]
+
+Socialists seem, on the whole, to be opposed to the federation of the
+British Empire. "The Labour party approaches Imperial problems with
+the politics of the industrious classes as guide on the one hand, and
+the internationalism of its nature as guide on the other."[485] Its
+"internationalism" apparently prevents it from approving of any
+practical scheme of Imperial Federation. Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P.,
+of the Labour party, has not expressed actual hostility to the Empire.
+In fact, he has even declared: "Socialism did not intend to re-write
+history. It accepted the facts of life, and one of these facts was
+that we were responsible for the Empire, and, whether we liked it or
+not, we had to rule that Empire. He was overjoyed the other day to
+find that at Stuttgart their Dutch and German and French friends were
+fully aware of the fact that, if Socialism was to play the proper part
+that belonged to it, it must devise a colonial policy."[486]
+Nevertheless, Mr. Macdonald's views do not appear to be very
+practical, as will be seen in the following pages.
+
+"These free colonies, though of enormous extent, count for little in
+the matter of population. Their wealth is out of all proportion to
+their numbers, as their pretensions are out of all proportion to their
+power. That they will play any very great part in the future of the
+world, either federated to the mother country or in any other way,
+seems exceedingly improbable."[487] "Imperialism is crudely
+ineffective. Imperial Federation would give the colonies a fuller
+sense of independence and liberty, and thus far would benefit them.
+But Imperial Federation is not approved on this account, but because
+it is supposed to be a way of uniting the Empire. That, it will not
+do: it will very likely do the opposite. In whatever form it comes, it
+will give to the independent interests of the colonies new importance.
+We shall then hear less of the Empire and more of Canada, or New
+Zealand, or South Africa, and a great danger will arise that a purely
+sectional view of Imperial interests may secure the support of the
+might and the arrogance of the whole Empire."[488] "Canada has almost
+claimed that it is a right of self-governing States to be allowed to
+make treaties for themselves. When that happens, the colonies might as
+well sever themselves from the mother country altogether. For under
+present circumstances the authority which makes treaties is the
+authority which ultimately controls armies. To give any of our
+colonies the power to embroil us in war, or to determine our relations
+with European Powers, is to give the first shattering blow to Imperial
+solidarity."[489]
+
+Nearly all British Socialists passionately oppose the retention of
+India. They never tire of condemning British rule in India, and of
+endeavouring to incite the native races to rebellion. According to the
+assertions of Socialists, the British Government has "manufactured"
+famine and plague in India, and its rule is the worst, the most cruel,
+and the most pernicious form of despotism which the world has seen.
+
+Mr. Hyndman says: "India is the greatest and most awful instance of
+the cruelty, greed, and short-sightedness of the capitalist class of
+which history gives any record. Even the horrors of Spanish rule in
+South America are dwarfed into insignificance in comparison with the
+cold, calculating, economic infamy which has starved, and is still
+deliberately starving, millions of people to death in British
+India."[490] "I charge it against the British Government, at this
+moment, that the economic condition of India is much more horrible
+than ever it was. I declare that the despotism of Russia is more
+apparently cruel, but the actual economic effect of the British
+Government's rule in India is more desperate than anything in the
+situation in Russia."[491]
+
+Mr. Hare also speaks of "famine made by Government"[492]--India
+suffers from two great evils: famine and the plague. India is very
+densely populated. The natives live chiefly upon rice, and rice
+requires an enormous quantity of moisture. If rain fails, there is
+famine, and no Government can prevent it, though it may alleviate it.
+Therefore all rice countries--China, India, Japan--are periodically
+stricken by famine. It is difficult enough, and taxes the resources of
+a country to the utmost, to feed in a barren country an army of
+500,000 men who are closely assembled. It is impossible to feed a
+population of 60,000,000, even if funds and stores of food are
+unlimited. With the most perfect system of harbours, canals, railways,
+&c., the distribution of food for 60,000,000 people offers
+insurmountable obstacles. Plague is caused by infection, and may be
+stamped out by the observance of those sanitary rules which Indians
+refuse to observe. Cases of plague are not reported to the
+authorities, but are hidden from them, so that the sanctity of the
+home may not be defiled by the entrance of a medical man.
+Nevertheless, Socialists never tire of preaching: "If there is one
+disease which is more directly the outcome of poverty than any other,
+it is the plague."[493] "Just think of 250,000 people dying of
+manufactured black plague in one month. It is not the people of
+England who benefit by our murderous despotism in India. It is not the
+working classes who would suffer if India were relieved from its
+present frightful oppression. If the present trade is beneficial, it
+is beneficial to the wealthy rather than to the workers."[494] "If
+ever there was a population in the history of the world possessed of a
+remarkable climate, with a fruitful soil, with all the opportunities
+for making wealth, and having been the source of wealth to the peoples
+who have traded with them for centuries, the population of India is
+that people and Hindostan is that country which ought to be supremely
+wealthy."[495]
+
+Socialists have done all in their power to arouse the hostility of
+Europe and America against Great Britain by denouncing British
+misrule, cruelty, and tyranny in India. "I rejoice, as an Englishman,
+that I have done my share for nearly thirty years to expose in Europe,
+America, and Asia the systematic rascality of my aristocratic and
+plutocratic countrymen."[496] "I appeal to this International
+Socialist Congress to denounce the statesmen and the nation guilty of
+this infamy before the entire civilised world, and to convey to the
+natives of India the heartfelt wish of the delegates of the workers of
+all nations here assembled that they may shortly, no matter in what
+manner, free themselves finally from the horrors of the most criminal
+misrule that has ever afflicted humanity."[497]
+
+Socialists unceasingly work for the overthrow of British rule in
+India. Theirs is a larger humanity. They wish to bring about a rising
+of the Indian population, and they seem to care little if the 250,000
+British people residing in that country are incidentally
+exterminated. Their hatred of the "capitalist" Empire is apparently
+greater than their sense of humanity and duty towards their own
+countrymen.
+
+At a recent Socialist meeting in connection with the unrest in India,
+Mr. Hyndman submitted the following motion: "This meeting of the
+citizens of London expresses its deepest sympathy and admiration for
+Lajpat Kai, Adjit Singh, and the Sikh leaders at Rawal Pindi,
+Amritsar, and Lahore, now undergoing imprisonment without trial, at
+the command of Mr. John Morley and the Liberal Government, and sends
+its cordial greetings to the agitators all over India who are doing
+their utmost to awaken their countrymen of every race and creed to the
+ruinous effect of our rule, which, by draining away _35,000,000l._
+worth of produce yearly from India without return, has manufactured
+poverty upon a scale unprecedented in history and is converting the
+greatest Empire the world has ever seen into a vast pauper warren and
+human plague farm. This meeting further records its fervent hope that
+this infamous British system which crushes all economic, social, and
+political life out of 230 millions of people will ere long be
+peaceably or forcibly swept away for ever."[498] Proceeding, Mr.
+Hyndman said: "I may mention I have just finished a pamphlet on India
+I have written for the International Socialist Congress at Stuttgart,
+which is going to be translated by the International Socialist Bureau
+into German and French, and I will take care it is translated into
+some other languages--Eastern languages--including the Japanese
+language."[499]
+
+Attempts to incite the native Indians to rise in rebellion and to
+massacre the British garrison and the British people residing in India
+are not restricted to Mr. Hyndman. We read in the leading Socialist
+monthly: "The maintenance of British rule in India means that the
+working people of Great Britain are engaged in helping their
+masters--the class which robs them--to plunder the unfortunate people
+of India of over thirty millions sterling every year. We desire to see
+the people of India, as of every other country, not only possessed of
+national independence and political rights, but of social and
+economical liberty and equality. We assert the right of the Indian
+people to manage their own affairs, and ardently desire the
+destruction of British rule there."[500] From the official organ of
+the Independent Labour Party we learn that that party also "has
+declared itself wholly in favour of constitutional government in India
+and the social emancipation of the poverty-stricken Indian people. We
+believe that Mr. Hardie has had that purpose solely in view, and the
+party will stand solidly with him in conveying to the Indian people
+the strongest expression of the sympathy and support of British
+Socialists in their struggle against social and political
+oppression."[501] If British subjects are murdered in India by the ten
+thousand, we may thank our revolutionary Socialists.
+
+Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., of the Labour party very sensibly
+recommends with regard to India: "The Government should win the
+confidence and assent of the people."[502] He then continues: "The
+immediate reforms necessary are a lightening of India's financial load
+by relieving it of the Imperial burdens which it now unjustly bears,
+and a readjustment of taxes; the extension of local and State
+self-government and further opportunities for natives to be employed
+in public offices; the freeing of the press."[503] It is easy to
+formulate a policy by expressing generous abstract sentiments. Is Mr.
+Macdonald aware that "the lightening of India's financial load" would
+mean its transference to English shoulders, that the granting of
+self-government and the freeing of the press might lead to a position
+which would put before this country the alternative of a war of
+repression in India or of its abandonment, and that the abandonment of
+India would ruin Lancashire?
+
+We have taken note of the destructive part of the policy which
+Socialists wish to pursue towards the Empire. Now let us take note of
+their constructive proposals, though these are not nearly as numerous
+as their destructive ones.
+
+Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., of the Labour party, is dissatisfied with
+Imperial administration in its present form. He would democratise it
+and replace the present Imperial Governors by labour men and Socialist
+agitators and orators. "The Crown cannot be the custodian of an
+Imperial policy, though it may be an Imperial link--and even in this
+respect its influence is greatly exaggerated at home."[504] "The real
+difficulty lies in securing the confidence of the Imperial States for
+whatever authority is to be custodian of the Imperial standard.
+Downing Street is ignorant of colonial opinion and needs. Above all,
+Downing Street is the surviving symbol of the era of the British
+'dominions' and the real 'colonies.' The Imperial States will not
+repose confidence in Downing Street, therefore Downing Street cannot
+remain the custodian of Imperial standards. What is to take its
+place?"[505]
+
+"The failure of our Empire, except to produce mechanical results, such
+as keeping warring tribes at peace, is largely owing to the fact that
+the Empire is governed by the most narrow-visioned of our social
+classes. National pride may be a valuable possession, but when it
+becomes a consciousness of racial superiority it ceases to be an
+Imperial virtue. Thus it is not only in its origin, but also in its
+present administration, that the Empire in a special sense is a
+perquisite of the rich classes, and the influence of the Labour party
+on Imperial politics must be to democratise the _personnel_ of the
+Imperial machine. A trade union secretary could govern a province
+_prima facie_ better than the son of an ancient county family or
+someone who was a friend of the Colonial Secretary when he was passing
+time at Balliol. We honestly think that the colonies appreciate our
+aristocracy, but the colonies laugh at our amiable illusions."[506]
+
+Is Mr. Macdonald sure that the dominions and colonies would welcome a
+change, and that "trade union secretaries" in their very narrow circle
+of activity might not become even more "narrow-visioned" than our
+present pro-consuls? At the same time it cannot be doubted that all
+labour leaders and Socialist agitators will highly approve of his
+proposals to make all vice-royalties and governorships their
+"perquisites." Apart from a few not very practical proposals,
+Socialists follow not a constructive, but a purely destructive, policy
+with regard to the Empire, which in their eyes is merely a capitalist
+institution. Pursuing consciously or unconsciously a policy of
+revolutionary anarchism, they would break up the Empire and even Great
+Britain herself. Therefore many Socialists advocate the legislative
+independence of both Ireland and Scotland, although some preach,
+"'Home Rule' _per se_ will not rid Ireland of Lord Deliverus and the
+gang he represents; the remedy for Ireland's distress, as the early
+leaders of Irish discontent perceived, is release from the grip of the
+brigands who stole the nation's heritage. In other words, the real
+object of the Irish movement is Socialism; their cause is ours, and
+our paths lie side by side. But they too have been tricked and led
+astray by the old political will-o'-the-wisp, the seeming angel of
+'Liberty' translated in their case to 'Home Rule.' For many years now
+they have pursued this shifty light through the arid desert of
+politics, and unless they can come to a clear understanding of their
+own original purpose again, and join with their English Socialist
+comrades to find a way out of our common difficulties, they are like
+to abide in that dreary desert for ever."[507]
+
+Whilst the vast majority of British Socialists are unpatriotic,
+anti-national, and anti-Imperial, and would act as traitors to their
+country, the powerful Socialist party of Germany is strongly, one
+might almost say passionately, national and Imperial. Many German
+Socialists are enthusiastic supporters of the German Navy League, and
+they would not hesitate in depriving, if possible, and if need be by
+force, Great Britain of those colonies which her Socialists desire to
+get rid of.
+
+The attitude of German Socialists towards their Fatherland, Empire,
+colonial possessions, and native races, may be gauged from the words
+of Herr Bernstein, one of her most prominent Socialist leaders: "The
+national quality is developing more and more. Socialism can and must
+be national. Even when we sing _Ubi bene, ibi patria_ we still
+acknowledge a _patria_, and therefore, in accordance with the motto
+'No rights without duties,' also duties towards her. To-day the
+Social-Democratic party is, and that unanimously, the most decided
+Imperial party that Germany knows. No other party is so keen to make
+over more and more legislative authority to the Empire and to widen
+its competence as the Social-Democratic party. The idea that in a
+country there exists a powerful party which is only waiting for war in
+order to make difficulties for its own Government, to set on foot a
+military strike and such-like, this idea may become the greatest
+menace to peace by being a spur to adventurous politicians to work
+towards a war with that country. But the home Government knows very
+well that the declaration that the Social-Democrats would, in case of
+need, give their lives for the independence of Germany against a
+foreign Power is by no means a free pass for them to take war
+easily."[508]
+
+In another periodical Herr Bernstein wrote: "The advantages of
+colonial possessions are always conditional. At a given period a
+nation can only sustain a certain quantity of such possessions. As
+long as she was ahead of all other nations in productive power,
+England could support a much larger amount than any other modern
+nation. But the time of her industrial supremacy has passed away, or
+at least is nearing its end. Protectionism on the Continent and in the
+United States may protract the advent of the inevitable in some
+degree. But its hour will strike one day, and when the advantages
+which free trade secures her to-day disappear, she would either have,
+I believe, to free herself of part of her colonial burdens or lose
+more and more of her trade, and with it her regenerative force. So
+much for England. With Germany the question is quite different.
+Although her rural population is now decreasing, she could, with a
+yearly increase of about 800,000, well stand more colonial possessions
+than she actually holds, nor would the costs and outlays for her
+colonies press very hard on her finances. Where two civilisations
+clash, the lower must give way to the higher. This law of evolution we
+cannot overthrow, we can only humanise its action. To counteract it
+would mean to postpone social progress."[509]
+
+It is sad to compare the sane, manly, national, and patriotic attitude
+of German Socialists with the foolish, anti-national cosmopolitanism
+of British Socialists, who, parading beautiful motives of the largest
+humanity, would not hesitate to sacrifice their country and their
+countrymen, their Empire and their colonies.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[476] Quelch, _Social Democracy and the Armed Nation_, p. 14.
+
+[477] _Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency_, p. 10.
+
+[478] Norman, _Empire and Murder_, p. 3.
+
+[479] _Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency_, p. 15.
+
+[480] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[481] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 36.
+
+[482] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 14.
+
+[483] _Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency_, pp. 12, 13.
+
+[484] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 8.
+
+[485] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 108.
+
+[486] _Labour Leader_, October 10, 1907.
+
+[487] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 8.
+
+[488] _Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency_, p. 5.
+
+[489] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, pp. 76, 77.
+
+[490] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 12.
+
+[491] Hyndman, _The Unrest in India_, p. 13.
+
+[492] Hare, _Famine in India_, p. 17.
+
+[493] Hyndman, _The Unrest in India_, p. 7.
+
+[494] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[495] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[496] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, pp. 11, 12.
+
+[497] _Ibid._ p. 14.
+
+[498] Hyndman, _The Unrest in India_, p. 1.
+
+[499] _Ibid._ p. 4.
+
+[500] _Social-Democrat_, July 1907, pp. 393, 394.
+
+[501] _Labour Leader_, October 11, 1907.
+
+[502] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 104.
+
+[503] _Ibid._ p. 105.
+
+[504] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 70.
+
+[505] _Ibid._ pp. 67, 68.
+
+[506] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, pp. 27, 28.
+
+[507] Thompson, _That Blessed Word Liberty_, p. 10.
+
+[508] Ed. Bernstein in the _Sozialistische Monatshefte_, translated in
+the _Social-Democrat_, July 1907.
+
+[509] _Nation_, October 12, 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND FOREIGN POLICY
+
+
+"Socialism," Mr. Ramsay Macdonald writes, "has a great part to play
+immediately in international politics. It alone can banish national
+jealousies from the Foreign Offices; it alone offers the guarantees of
+peace which are a necessary preliminary to disarmament. Socialism has
+a world policy as well as a national one--a corollary to its belief in
+the brotherhood of man."[510] These words contain assurances, not a
+plan, and therefore we must inquire, What is the foreign policy of
+Socialism?
+
+As regards foreign policy one may divide the Socialists into two
+classes: revolutionaries and visionaries. It will be seen in the
+following pages that the aims of both are similar.
+
+The foreign policy of the revolutionary Socialists of Great Britain is
+based on the celebrated "Communist Manifesto" of Marx and Engels,
+which contains the following programme regarding foreign policy: "The
+Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by
+this only: in the national struggles of the proletarians of the
+different countries they point out and bring to the front the common
+interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all
+nationality."[511] "The Communists everywhere support every
+revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order
+of things. In all these movements they bring to the front, as the
+leading question of each, the property question, no matter what its
+degree of development at the time. Finally, they labour everywhere for
+the union and agreement of the democratic parties of all countries.
+The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly
+declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow
+of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a
+Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but
+their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries,
+unite!"[512]
+
+In accordance with the foregoing proclamation of Marx and Engels, the
+philosopher of British Socialism teaches: "For the Socialist the word
+'frontier' does not exist; for him love of country, as such, is no
+nobler sentiment than love of class. Race pride and class pride are,
+from the standpoint of Socialism, involved in the same condemnation.
+The establishment of Socialism, therefore, on any national or race
+basis is out of the question. The foreign policy of the great
+international Socialist party must be to break up these hideous race
+monopolies called empires, beginning in each case at home. Hence
+everything which makes for the disruption and disintegration of the
+empire to which he belongs must be welcomed by the Socialist as an
+ally. It is his duty to urge on any movement tending in any way to
+dislocate the commercial relations of the world, knowing that every
+shock the modern complex commercial system suffers weakens it and
+brings its destruction nearer. This is the negative side of the
+foreign policy of Socialism. The positive is embraced in a single
+sentence; to consolidate the union of the several national sections on
+the basis of firm and equal friendship, steadfast adherence to
+definite principles, and determination to present a solid front to the
+enemy."[513]
+
+The head of the Social-Democratic Federation informs us: "We have
+never failed to hold up before the people the high ideal of a complete
+social revolution, which shall replace the capitalist sweating system
+and its terrible class war by the happiness, contentment, and glory of
+a great co-operative commonwealth for all mankind."[514]
+
+Faithful to the teaching of Karl Marx, Mr. Tom Mann proclaims: "We do
+not want any walls built round cities or nations for fear of invasion;
+what we do now stand in urgent need of is an international working
+alliance among the workers of the whole world. The only position of
+safety will be found in international action among the organised
+workers of the world."[515]
+
+These being the doctrines of revolutionary Socialism, it is only
+natural that many British Socialists take the enemy's part in case of
+war.[516]
+
+The foreign policy of the visionary Socialists is based on the idea of
+human brotherhood and the equality of men of all races, creeds, and
+colours. "Socialism is brotherhood; and brotherhood is as wide as the
+heavens and as broad as humanity. The growth of international
+Socialism is the promise of the realisation of the angels' natal song:
+On earth, peace; Good will toward men. Socialism will remove the
+causes of international antagonism and make the interests of all
+nations the same."[517] "Socialism implies the inherent equality of
+all human beings. It does not assume that all are alike, but only that
+all are equal. Holding this to be true of individuals, the Socialist
+applies it also to races. Only by a full and unqualified recognition
+of this claim can peace be restored to the world. Socialism implies
+brotherhood, brotherhood implies a living recognition of the fact that
+the duty of the strong is not to hold the weak in subjection but to
+assist them to rise higher and ever higher in the scale of humanity,
+and that this cannot be done by trampling upon and exploiting their
+weakness, but by caring for them and showing them the better
+way."[518] Thus Socialism will bring to the world eternal peace. In
+the words of the poet:
+
+    There's a good time coming, boys,
+      A good time coming;
+    And war in all men's eyes shall be
+      A monster of iniquity,
+    In the good time coming.
+      Nations shall not quarrel then,
+    To prove which is the stronger;
+      Nor slaughter men for glory's sake--
+    Wait a little longer.[519]
+
+The ideas expressed in the above are very noble, but they seem to be
+hardly in accordance with historical experience or with human nature
+as we know it. The race war on the Pacific coast, and the murderous
+attacks by strikers on free labourers who have taken their place which
+are of frequent occurrence in all countries, show that even Socialists
+are apt to rely rather on threats, violence, and superior force than
+on brotherliness and reason, although the Chinaman and the Japanese
+have, according to the Socialist doctrines given in the foregoing, as
+much right to earn a living as any white man.
+
+"Socialism is essentially international. It recognises no distinction
+between the various nations comprising the modern civilised world. 'My
+country, right or wrong,' the expression of modern patriotism, is the
+very antithesis of Socialism.... This internationalism means liberty
+and equality between nations as between individuals, and amalgamation
+as soon as feasible, and as close as possible, under the red flag of
+Social Democracy, which does not recognise national distinctions or
+the division of progressive humanity into nations and races."[520]
+"The new community will be built up on an international basis. The
+nations will fraternise together, will shake hands over old quarrels,
+and unite in gradually extending the new State over all peoples of the
+earth."[521]
+
+"Nationalisation is only the beginning of Socialism. Once let any
+nation be thoroughly imbued with the Socialist spirit, it will become
+a missionary nation. It will preach the glad tidings of salvation to
+people of other tongues, and that which was national shall become
+universal: East and West, North and South, all shall realise, all
+shall rejoice in, the glorious brotherhood of man."[522]
+
+The "brotherhood of man" reminds one of the French Revolution. Like
+the French Revolution, Socialism has imposed upon itself the mission
+to convert the world to its doctrine, and people may again be placed
+before the alternative "La Fraternité ou la Mort."
+
+    Let despots frown and tyrants sneer,
+      The red flag is unfurled;
+    We'll to our principles adhere
+      And socialise the world.[523]
+
+Being anxious to "socialise the world," Socialists eagerly note every
+progress of Socialism in foreign countries from Paris to Pekin. For
+instance, we read in the "Reformers' Year Book": "The belief that the
+quick-witted Japanese would, at the beginning of their new
+civilisation, avoid the evils of European capitalism by accepting a
+scheme of Socialism is not being fulfilled. The dividend-hunter, who
+has been to Europe and received a business training, is fastening the
+chains of monopoly upon the people. To meet this growing danger there
+is already a thriving Socialist-Labour party, which has a daily
+newspaper, the 'Hikari' ('Light')."[524] To facilitate the
+"socialisation of the world" and the introduction of "the brotherhood
+of man" by making Socialism truly international, Socialists are urged
+to study Esperanto, which apparently is to be the international
+Socialist language of the future. The "Clarion" and other Socialist
+papers regularly contain articles written in Esperanto, and the
+anti-patriotic writings of Hervé and Gohier--an extract from the
+writings of the former will be found in Chapter XIII.--have been
+translated into Esperanto, apparently in the hope that these
+incendiary pamphlets may help in bringing about the great Socialist
+revolution.
+
+Among the 'immediate reforms' demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation (see Appendix) are to be found the
+demands: "The people to decide on peace and war. The establishment of
+international courts of arbitration." In view of these demands, which
+are made by most Socialist organisations, it is quite natural that
+Socialists condemn the secret action of diplomacy. For instance, a
+Socialist writer remarks on the Anglo-French agreements: "Are we the
+masters of our destinies, when a Delcassé may at any moment immerse us
+in international troubles of the first magnitude? Lord Lansdowne, as
+the accomplice of Delcassé, was equally guilty, and Sir Edward Grey,
+by now securing this triple alliance without the consent or the
+knowledge of the 150 millions of people whom it most vitally concerns,
+completes a trio of international plotters and murderers."[525]
+
+Many Socialists believe that wars may soon be abolished by
+international agreement, either among the nations or among the working
+masses, who will force their views upon the governments. According to
+a very prolific Socialist writer, "There are many signs and portents
+to-day that the evil of war, which is not more deeply rooted than was
+slavery a hundred years ago, will, ere long, meet a similar
+fate."[526] And what are the "signs and portents" upon which the
+belief is based that war will be abolished? "It is a significant fact
+that whenever the working classes meet to discuss this question of
+war, they invariably express themselves in favour of its speedy end. A
+few days ago, when the Trades Union Congress met at Liverpool, when
+delegates were present representing some two millions of the organised
+workers of the country, the representative of the Navvies' Union
+declared, amid the resounding cheers of the Congress, that it was
+impossible for a man to be a Christian and in favour of war at the
+same time."[527] The Navvies' Union will no doubt play a great part in
+the foreign policy of the Socialist commonwealth, but is the
+importance of their declaration not exaggerated? Wars begin, as a
+rule, by an act of aggression. What would the Navvies' Union and the
+Trades Union Congress have said if the secretary had read a telegram
+stating that British ships had been fired upon and sunk by an enemy,
+or that British territory had been invaded and British blood had been
+spilt? I fear that eternal peace is not yet in sight, notwithstanding
+the "sign and portent" of the statement made by the representative of
+the Navvies' Union. Indeed, clear-headed foreign Socialists are aware
+of the very limited usefulness of Peace Conferences, and they deride
+disarmament proposals, such as that submitted to the last Hague
+Conference by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman.
+
+An exceedingly able article in the foremost Socialist organ of Germany
+gave, early in the spring of 1907, the following views on the probable
+result of The Hague Conference and on the British proposals regarding
+the limitation of armaments, views which are particularly interesting
+because they show the sound good sense of the German Socialists and
+the difference between the political views of German and British
+Socialists. The article stated:
+
+"Just as the first Hague Conference of 1898 in reality achieved
+nothing more than a few secondary amendments to the law of nations,
+conformity with which was left completely to the fancy of the
+individual Powers, so the second Hague Conference will, it is highly
+probable, result in nothing further than a few general peace
+assertions and international arrangements which, when it comes to a
+war, will not outlive the first interchange of shots. Certainly the
+English Premier is right. There does exist among the thoughtful
+persons in all European States an intellectual tendency towards the
+peaceful settlement of differences between the nations and the
+diminution of the gigantic military and naval armaments. But this body
+of thoughtful people is--as the last elections in Germany have again
+proved--on the whole rather small; and above all, these thoughtful
+people do not belong to the economically powerful class who determine
+the policy of Governments.
+
+"The old ideologic conception of the English free trade doctrine, that
+the free exchange of goods between the nations leads to the abolition
+of war, to the brotherhood of humanity, that conception which found
+its most original expression in Dr. Bowring's exclamation 'Free trade
+is Jesus Christ,' still haunts some people's minds. With the greatest
+number of the liberal advocates of disarmament, their point of view
+originates simply in the consideration that the strong naval and
+military armaments demand more and more, not only from England's
+purse, but from her human material, while, on the other hand, England
+possesses all that she can expect, and has, on that account, not much
+more to gain. All over the earth's surface she has the most valuable
+colonies, and is, since the alliances with Japan and France, in a
+perfectly secure position, which awakens in her the wish to
+consolidate her position and to economise her finances for the
+upholding of her supremacy. It is that satisfied state of mind which
+makes the fortunate winner of the game say, 'Let us leave off; I am
+tired of playing now.' English capitalists feel themselves in a safe
+position. Nothing can easily go wrong at present. The thing is,
+therefore, to secure what they have got and to diminish the heavy
+burdens. This desire is comprehensible--only the other Powers will
+probably not respect it.
+
+"The working-class party is very much in sympathy with the disarmament
+idea in itself. For this party is the most consistent opponent of
+militarism, and demands in its programme not only the formation of a
+citizen army in place of the standing army, but also that questions of
+peace and war should be determined by the people themselves, and that
+all international differences should be settled by arbitration. But no
+amount of sympathy can get over the fact that in the present
+capitalist world there is very little chance of a general disarmament
+of the Powers. The conception that war is only a product of human
+unreason is on the same level as the idea that revolutions are only
+mental aberrations of the masses. War is rooted in the opposing
+interests of the nations, as are revolutions in the opposing interests
+of the classes."[528]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[510] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 120.
+
+[511] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 1
+
+[512] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 31.
+
+[513] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, pp. 126, 127.
+
+[514] Debate, Hyndman, _Will Socialism Benefit the English People?_
+Introduction.
+
+[515] Mann, _International Labour Movement_, p. 6.
+
+[516] See, for instance, Hyndman in _The Transvaal War and the
+Degradation of England_.
+
+[517] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[518] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 10.
+
+[519] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 25.
+
+[520] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 31.
+
+[521] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future_, p. 235.
+
+[522] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[523] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 13.
+
+[524] _Reformers' Year Book, 1907_, p. 195.
+
+[525] _Social-Democrat_, September 1907, p. 534.
+
+[526] Ward, _The War Drum shall Throb no Longer_, p. 13.
+
+[527] _Ibid._ p. 14.
+
+[528] _Vorwärts_, March 10, 1907, translated in the _Social-Democrat_,
+April 1907, pp. 220-224.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+SOCIALISM AND THE ARMY
+
+
+Most Socialists, British and foreign, are opposed to the existing
+armies, for two reasons:
+
+(1) Because they wish to overturn practically all existing
+institutions from the Monarchy downwards, and they fear that the
+military may defend the _status quo_;
+
+(2) Because they aim at the abolition of States and of nationality and
+at the disappearance of frontiers, as the ideal Socialist State of the
+future would, for economic and political reasons, have to embrace the
+world.
+
+The Socialist State of the future, embracing the whole universe, can
+be created only after the existing States have been overturned.
+Therefore the more immediate aim of Socialists is to seize upon the
+political power in accordance with the advice given by Karl Marx in
+his celebrated "Manifesto."[529]
+
+Most Socialists apparently believe that not by Parliamentary means but
+only by violence will they succeed in making themselves supreme, for
+we are told: "The ballot-box is no doubt a safer weapon than the
+rifle; but even when there will be a sufficient number of people in
+these islands convinced of the necessity and possibility of the
+co-operative commonwealth, the end will not yet be certain. There are
+the classes in possession to be considered. Are they going to allow
+themselves to be voted out? Will they respect a franchise and
+ballot-box which will vote that they shall get off the backs of the
+workers? Franchise 'Reform' Bills--and it is astonishing to what use
+'reform' can now be put--can be rushed through Parliament, like Crimes
+Acts, in twenty-four hours; and there is the 'voluntary' professional
+army, under military law, to overawe the recalcitrants who may resent
+the suffrage and the ballot-box being jerrymandered against the
+popular interest. But none are so likely to be overawed by threatened
+displays of armed force--whether voluntary or conscript--as those who
+have a difficulty in distinguishing the butt end of a rifle from its
+muzzle."[530]
+
+Under the heading "Will it come to barricades?" we read: "The
+barricade is to-day, all will agree, in this country at any rate, an
+impossible weapon. Armed insurrection on the part of the workers in
+this country would to-day be the height of folly, and will continue to
+be so, so long as our standing army of hired mercenaries exists.
+Standing armies are the instruments of capitalist oppression at home
+and aggression abroad. But so long as even one great Power maintains
+the present form of military organisation, so long as war is possible,
+so long will it be necessary that some form of military organisation
+exist in all countries. We dare not preach peace when we know there
+can be no peace. This is why the Socialists of all countries are
+to-day in favour of an educational policy which will make every
+citizen fit for military service within the ranks of a citizen army,
+organised and maintained for purposes of defence only. The advantages
+of such a force, from the Socialist standpoint, are so obvious that
+they need hardly be stated. And it would at least put the working
+class in a position to understand what a barricade means, and how, if
+need be, to act in their own defence. There are, I am well aware, a
+handful of individual Socialists with us who are against universal
+military training, but they are a diminishing quantity, and will in
+due season find their natural vocation within the ranks of the
+Liberty and Property Defence League."[531]
+
+Mr. Quelch, the editor of "Justice," shares the foregoing opinion, for
+he tells us: "Revolutions, it is said, can no longer be accomplished
+by force, but only by peaceful means--the vote, Parliamentary action,
+and legislation. It may be so, but it will be unprecedented if the
+present ruling class surrender without a struggle. And if they had the
+armed force of the nation at their command, they would struggle
+successfully no matter what the Legislature may have done. The ruling
+class will not be made to submit to law and order which is not their
+law and order, except by overwhelmingly superior force. Nobody
+supposes that in such a contest the people could win against the
+ruling class unless they had been able first to win over the army.
+With a professional 'voluntary' army, well paid and well affected to
+its paymasters, such winning over would be practically impossible. But
+with the armed nation there would be no winning over required. An
+armed nation--whatever it may do or submit to--is essentially a free
+nation, and whatever such a nation determines upon, that it can do and
+have, in spite of any ruling class."[532]
+
+Similar opinions have frequently been expressed by leading Continental
+Socialists. Herr Kautsky, for instance, wrote under the heading
+"Expropriation of the Expropriators," as follows: "The arming of the
+people is a political measure. It can, under certain circumstances,
+cost just as much as a standing army, but it is needed for the safety
+of the democracy in order to deprive the Government of its most
+important weapon against the people."[533]
+
+Those who are of opinion that only the extreme section of British
+Socialists, the revolutionary wing, is hostile to the army, are
+mistaken. This may be seen from the following resolution of the Fabian
+Society, which is the most moderate exponent of British Socialism:
+"Armies act as a standing menace not to neighbouring States, but to
+the working populations of their own countries. A study of the
+strategical disposition of many of the great railway stations and
+barracks of the Continent will prove that the most important function
+of the modern army is to suppress the resistance of labour to capital
+in the war of classes."[534]
+
+Among the "immediate reforms" demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation[535] we find a demand for "the abolition
+of standing armies and the establishment of national citizen forces."
+Army and police are to most Socialists very objectionable because it
+is their function to protect the national order and national property
+against predatory, anarchistic, and revolutionary attempts. Therefore
+it is only natural that "No Social Democrat regards the present police
+system as a satisfactory one, or a professional police as other than a
+dubious expedient."[536] According to the opinion held by many
+Socialists, "The soldier's primary function is to come to the rescue
+of the policeman when the latter is overpowered."[537]
+
+Voluntary armies of the British type are quite as objectionable to
+Socialists as are the national armies of the compulsory type raised on
+the Continent of Europe. "We are told that the advantage of our
+present military system is that it is not compulsory, that people are
+free to join the service or not as they please. The freedom of the
+average recruit to join the army is about on a par with the freedom
+of an unemployed workman to work for lower wages than the recognised
+rate of wages, or the freedom of the prostitute."[538] "Your soldier,
+ostensibly a heroic and patriotic defender of his country, is really
+an unfortunate man driven by destitution to offer himself as food for
+powder for the sake of regular rations, shelter, and clothing."[539]
+"A standing army of professional soldiers is the most effective
+instrument in the hands of the dominant class, the greatest menace to
+democracy and popular liberty, and the most effective barrier to
+revolutionary change that could possibly be devised. And surely, too,
+the antithesis to that is the Armed Nation--every citizen a soldier
+and every soldier a citizen."[540]
+
+The ideal army from the Socialist point of view is the armed nation.
+It is, as we shall see in the following, an army composed of Socialist
+workmen and commanded by Socialist leaders. It is not an army for
+national defence, but one for attack on the existing order; it is a
+revolutionary army, an army of plunder. The very natural desire of
+Socialists to create such a force is, as a rule, disguised under the
+demand for a democratic army and universal military training. "We
+Socialists advocate the military training of all citizens and the
+abolition of professional armies, as ensuring the maximum of military
+efficiency and the minimum of menace to democratic principles and
+popular rights. We propose that every man should undergo a thorough
+military training so as to be equal to any other man. A professional
+army is maintained in the main for the defence and maintenance of the
+master class. A professional army is a specialised class or caste,
+divorced from civil life, hostile to the general body of the
+community, and maintained as an instrument to serve the purpose of the
+master class. That purpose is as often the suppression of popular
+movements at home as aggression abroad. If it were possible to abolish
+all military organisations, the remedy would be simple. But we have
+seen that that is, under present conditions, impossible. Therefore we
+urge that all citizens should be armed and trained to the use of arms,
+so that all reasonable military requirements may be met and
+professional soldiering be entirely dispensed with."[541] The fact
+that the abolition of the professional army would involve the loss of
+India and of other possessions to Great Britain is a matter of no
+importance to the Socialists. In fact the Socialists wish Great
+Britain to lose not only India but all her colonies, as will be seen
+by reference to Chapter XI., "Socialism and the Empire."[542]
+
+Every attempt at improving the voluntary army of Great Britain is
+considered a blow at Socialism, and is therefore vigorously resisted
+by the Socialists. Hence the scheme of army reform of Mr. Haldane,
+Secretary of State for War, has been loudly condemned by them as
+reactionary and likely to strengthen the capitalists, and they entreat
+the workers not to oppose universal military training. "The capitalist
+class would be perfectly delighted that all the rest of the people
+outside themselves and their mercenaries should be peaceful unarmed
+non-resisters. Nothing could suit them better. We have Mr. Haldane's
+territorial army--on paper; and a more reactionary, militarist (in the
+worst sense), and anti-democratic system than that to which the
+present War Minister has had the effrontery to apply our term of the
+'Armed Nation' could scarcely be devised."[543]
+
+Whether Mr. Haldane's proposals give Great Britain a better army for
+national and Imperial defence, is apparently immaterial to the
+Socialists, for they criticise it merely from the point of view of
+intending rioters and revolutionaries. They complain: "The position
+of the Volunteers now is this, that they are not under military law,
+and cannot be called out as soldiers to shoot down workmen at the
+bidding of the capitalists. Mr. Haldane's scheme, however, destroys
+the civilian character of the Volunteers, and converts them into
+professional soldiers."[544]
+
+Although most Socialists are in favour of a national militia, a
+considerable number oppose even a national militia of the Swiss type,
+fearing that it would refuse to aid the Socialists in overturning
+society as at present constituted. "We have been told of the readiness
+with which the Swiss militia have donned their uniforms and seized
+their rifles when called upon to act against strikers."[545] The
+Socialist delegates who accompanied the committee of inquiry which the
+National Service League sent to Switzerland in the autumn of 1907 were
+apparently less interested in the efficiency of the Swiss army for
+national defence than in its attitude during conflicts between labour
+and capital.[546]
+
+Fearing that a national militia might not be willing to lend itself to
+revolutionary purposes, that it might become a patriotic force as is
+the Swiss militia, many Socialists condemn every kind of military
+service, and are quite ready to disarm the nation in the name of
+humanity and civil freedom. For instance, at the annual conference of
+the Socialist Independent Labour Party of 1907 the following was moved
+by a well-known revolutionary Socialist, Mr. Bruce Glasier:
+
+"That this Conference believes that the time has come when militarism
+in every form should be denounced and resisted as alien to civil
+freedom and social progress, and expresses itself emphatically against
+compulsory military service, and the attempts which are being made to
+introduce military training in public schools or other public
+institutions, and views with alarm the purposes of Mr. Haldane's Army
+Territorial Bill, which, if passed, will make military service
+practically compulsory under officers drawn wholly from, the upper
+classes, will make industrial employment dependent upon military
+service, and, instead of promoting international unity, will foster
+and increase the spirit of militarism and aggression."[547]
+
+In moving this resolution Mr. Glasier said that "he denounced
+militarism root and branch," and Mr. Keir Hardie, a Communist
+Socialist, in seconding, said: "The resolution was not only a
+declaration against militarism, but a special and specific
+condemnation of the Territorial Army Scheme now before the House of
+Commons. The Socialist party was bound to protest against a system of
+that kind. The particular feature which emphasised the danger was that
+there were to be county associations formed to have charge of the new
+territorial forces, and to have a majority of military men upon them
+with landlords and possibly employers of labour. A citizen army was as
+great a menace to an industrial population as a professional army. The
+new army would be recruited from the people, and officered by the
+enemies of the people, just as the professional army was. Children
+were to be taught that the flag was the great thing to value in life.
+They would find that a citizen army, officered by the rich and
+recruited from their own ranks, would be taught to regard the flag as
+something holy, while they shot down strikers and Socialists just as
+freely as the most exclusive professional army in the world could do.
+Patriotism was one of the weapons used by the enemies of the people to
+blind them to facts."[548]
+
+The Trade Union Congress of 1907, disregarding the security of the
+country and the Empire from foreign aggression, also condemned
+military training of every kind. Commenting hereon, the
+"Social-Democrat," the organ of the Social-Democratic Federation,
+which favours a national democratic army, wrote: "The Trades Union
+Congress declares against conscription and also condemns military
+training, which is a totally different matter. To condemn conscription
+is purely negative. It would be very much more to the point if the
+representatives of the organised working class would formulate an
+expression of opinion on the actual military problem. Conscription, at
+the worst, is in the air; but the present-day military problem is not
+in the air; it is on the earth, practical and urgent. What have the
+trade unionists to say to it? Do they approve of the present system of
+a nominally voluntary professional soldiery, maintained as an
+instrument at the service of the capitalist class for suppression at
+home and aggression abroad?"[549] The trade unionists were urged to
+abolish the voluntary army and to create a national citizen army,
+which will assist the Socialist in overturning society.
+
+A national citizen army, composed of Socialists and commanded by
+Socialists, is the ideal, and until such an army be created it is in
+the interest of Socialists to weaken the existing army and to
+undermine its discipline to such an extent that, in the event of a
+rising or a revolution, it will side with the revolutionaries. With
+this object in view, Socialists are trying to create dissatisfaction
+in the army by means of emissaries and literature. For instance, in a
+leaflet entitled "An Appeal to Soldiers," the Social-Democratic
+Federation says: "If you are to fight for patriotism and country, then
+let it be a national duty for all, wealthy as well as poor, to bear
+arms. Let not those who are called upon to fight remain a pariah class
+apart, bereft of the rights of citizenship--regarded by the upper
+classes as something to be avoided."[550]
+
+In its official programme the Social-Democratic Federation demands,
+under the heading "Immediate Reforms," "the abolition of
+courts-martial: all offences against discipline to be transferred to
+the jurisdiction of civil courts."[551] Why do the Socialists demand
+the abolition of military law? Because, in their own words, "With the
+abolition of military law, upon which we have always laid the greatest
+possible stress, militarism falls to the ground."[552] Therefore the
+"Appeal to Soldiers" admonishes the military: "You are and will remain
+a class apart from the rest of the nation so long as you are compelled
+to serve under a barbarous military code called 'military law.' The
+system of trial by court-martial is a mere farce and a mockery. We of
+the Social-Democratic Federation intend to do our utmost to abolish it
+root and branch. Give us your support. Remember that the late War
+Minister, Mr. St. John Brodrick, compared the soldier to the Chinese
+coolie in South Africa. This is how you are looked upon by the very
+people who use you as food for powder in the interest of their class.
+Now is the time for all who wish you well to demand the abolition of
+military law, the civilising of military service, and the
+establishment of a national citizen force."[553]
+
+In the autumn of 1907 a letter to the editor was published by the
+"Daily Telegraph" which contained the following statement:
+
+"I do not think that many people, least of all the authorities,
+realise what a vigorous campaign is now being waged amongst the rank
+and file by the Social-Democratic Federation. Herewith I forward a
+leaflet which, I believe, is being distributed in thousands to the
+military stations in all the corners of our Empire. The one I enclose
+I found attached to a tree by the roadside during the recent
+manoeuvres near Aylesbury. Copies of the same leaflet have reached me
+from India and Belfast, where they were distributed during the recent
+strike trouble. It is no exaggeration to say that this leaflet is
+dangerous; the men of our army are peculiarly susceptible to the
+tenets of the Social-Democratic Federation. Officers and N.C.O.s will
+tell you what a serious effect such propaganda must have upon
+discipline.
+
+                           "Yours faithfully,
+                                     "H.C. SMART,
+                              Editor, 'Army Graphic'"
+  "_October 7, 1907._"
+
+Socialism is carrying on a vigorous propaganda for destroying
+discipline in the army and also in the navy. Hervéism has been
+imported into Great Britain, and is making rapid progress. "The
+Socialist," the organ of the Socialist Labour party, a party which at
+present is small in number, but which is most violent in attitude, in
+an article entitled "The Socialist Labour Party and the Citizen Army,"
+quotes with approval Hervé's saying: "The present countries are cruel
+step-mothers to the proletariat. There is at present no country so
+superior to any other that its working class should get themselves
+killed in its defence. In case of mobilisation the proletariat should
+respond to the call to arms by an insurrection against their rulers to
+establish the Socialist or Communist _régime_. Rebellion sooner than
+war! In case of an order to mobilise, we would seize the moment to
+attempt the revolution, to place our hands on the social wealth to-day
+usurped by a minority." The foregoing is printed in very large type.
+The article then continues, commenting upon Hervé's advice as follows:
+"The soldier has been fed and clothed by the working class. His
+continued efficiency as a military automaton depends upon regular
+supply of food, clothing, and the necessaries of life from the same
+source. He has been transported to the field of conflict by the labour
+of a whole army of railwaymen. Let us suppose that the day of the
+final struggle has been reached. Suppose the capitalist attempts to
+stifle the revolution in blood; suppose he calls upon the army to
+crush the revolutionary working class by brute force. Let us suppose,
+too, that the revolutionary agitation has not penetrated the Chinese
+walls of military discipline (a most improbable hypothesis) and that
+the soldiers, instead of turning their guns against the capitalist
+murderers, cheerfully and willingly serve their masters in the attempt
+to crush the people--what then? We shall put the army in quarantine.
+We shall isolate it from the rest of the community. We shall cut off
+supplies of food, clothing, and fuel. The railway and telegraph
+service will no longer be at its disposal--and in this respect we are
+in a more advantageous position than our French and German
+fellow-workers, inasmuch as the Government ownership of the railways
+in these countries is used to deny the workers connected with them the
+right of organisation. The army would be in a state of siege,
+surrounded on all sides by implacable foes. That, coupled with
+whatever may be possible and necessary in the way of armed
+insurrection within and outside of the army, is the policy proposed by
+the Socialist Labour party and Industrial Unionism. Circumstances may,
+and probably will, modify it in many important details, but there is
+the main outline. Is it not more logical, more coherent, more likely
+to succeed than any 'citizen army scheme'?"[554]
+
+Love of country has apparently no room in the Socialist's ethics. Its
+defence does not trouble him, since he is taught that his worst
+enemies are those Englishmen who happen to be better off.
+
+        Waste not your ready blows,
+        Strike not at foreign foes,
+    Your bitterest enemies tread your own soil;
+        The preachers who blind ye,
+        The landlords who grind ye,
+    The gluttons who revel whilst ye are at toil.
+
+    Rise in your might, brothers, bear it no longer,
+      Assemble in masses throughout the whole land;
+    Teach the vile bloodsuckers who are the stronger
+      When workers and robbers confronted shall stand.
+        Through Castle, Court, and Hall,
+        Over their acres all,
+    Onward we'll press like the waves of the sea.
+        Seizing the wealth we've made.
+        Ending the spoilers' trade;
+    Till Labour has triumphed, and England is free.[555]
+
+In their desire to abolish the army, some Socialists argue that "The
+whole of your military system is entirely unnecessary."[556] Others
+falsify history and boldly assert that British wars, "in nearly every
+case have been waged for the suppression of liberty abroad, or from
+the irritating desire on the part of British statesmen to interfere
+with the internal affairs of other nations."[557] On the other hand,
+Mr. Quelch very sensibly argues: "Militarism is an evil against which
+we have to fight with all the means in our power, but to talk of
+universal disarmament at the present stage is mere Utopianism, a
+crying of peace where there is no peace, and where existing
+antagonisms make peace impossible. We have at first to eradicate the
+causes of conflict. To-day the unarmed nation offers itself as a
+temptation and a prey to some mighty brigand Power. War is the last
+argument of kings, and all Governments rest on force. So long as that
+is the case, it is only the people which is armed that can maintain
+its freedom, or can indeed lay claim to be a free people. An unarmed
+nation cannot be free. An armed nation, on the contrary, is a
+guarantee of individual liberty, of social freedom, and of national
+independence."[558] Mr. Quelch would have the same ideals as the
+National Service League, did not later utterances of his contradict
+sensible statements such as the above.
+
+It is a curious and most interesting phenomenon that in France and
+Great Britain, two eminently non-aggressive countries, the Socialists
+do all in their power to disarm the nation, whilst in Germany, which
+can hardly be described as non-aggressive, the Socialists are
+patriotic and are ready to go to war, not only for the defence but
+also for the aggrandisement of their country. Numerous declarations to
+that effect made by the leading German Socialists are on record, and
+the following extract is characteristic of their attitude:
+
+"That Germany be armed to the teeth, possessing a strong fleet, is of
+the utmost importance to the working men. What damages our exports
+damages them also, and working men have the most pressing interest in
+securing prosperity for our export trade, be it even by force of arms.
+Owing to her development, Germany may perhaps be obliged to maintain
+her position sword in hand. Only he who is under the protection of his
+guns can dominate the markets, and in the fight for markets German
+working men may come before the alternative either of perishing or of
+forcing their entrance into markets sword in hand."[559]
+
+In the spring of 1907 the leading German Socialist paper wrote in a
+weighty article on the Peace Conference at The Hague: "The conception
+that war is only a product of human unreason is on the same level as
+the idea that revolutions are only mental aberrations of the masses.
+War is rooted in the opposing interests of the nations, as are
+revolutions in the opposing interests of the classes."[560]
+
+A comparison of German Socialism with English Socialism shows that
+English Socialism is more violent and far less patriotic than German
+Socialism. German Socialists love their country. Most British
+Socialists apparently love only themselves.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[529] See p. 107.
+
+[530] H.W. Lee in the _Social-Democrat_, June 1, 1907.
+
+[531] Thomas Kennedy in _Forward_ of May 25, 1907, reprinted in the
+_Social-Democrat_, June 1907.
+
+[532] Quelch in the _Social-Democrat_ for October 1907.
+
+[533] Kautsky, _Social Revolution_, p. 4.
+
+[534] _Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions_, p. 11.
+
+[535] See Appendix.
+
+[536] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 588.
+
+[537] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 25.
+
+[538] _Social-Democrat_, June 1907.
+
+[539] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 25.
+
+[540] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 586.
+
+[541] _Social-Democrat_, April 1907, p. 204.
+
+[542] See p. 170.
+
+[543] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 586.
+
+[544] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 589.
+
+[545] _Ibid._
+
+[546] See _The Nation in Arms_, October 1907, and _Journal de
+Neuchatel_, September 22, 1907.
+
+[547] _Independent Labour Party Report_, 1907, p. 64.
+
+[548] _Ibid._ pp. 64, 65.
+
+[549] _Social-Democrat_, November 1907, p. 516.
+
+[550] _An Appeal to Soldiers._
+
+[551] See Appendix.
+
+[552] H.W. Lee in _Social-Democrat_, June 1907.
+
+[553] _An Appeal to Soldiers._
+
+[554] _Socialist_, October 1907.
+
+[555] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, No. 30.
+
+[556] Kirtlan, _Socialism for Christians_, p. 6.
+
+[557] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, p. 6.
+
+[558] Quelch, _Social Democracy and the Armed Nation_, p. 3 f.
+
+[559] _Sozialistische Monatshefte_, December 1899.
+
+[560] _Vorwärts_, March 10, 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+SOCIALISM AND THE MONARCHY
+
+
+The first of the "Immediate Reforms" demanded in the official
+programme of the Social-Democratic Federation[561] is the "Abolition
+of the Monarchy." That that demand has been made so crudely and that
+it has been given so prominent a position cannot surprise anybody who
+is acquainted with British Socialism. "Socialists are essentially
+thorough-going Republicans. Socialism, which aims at political and
+economic equality, is radically inconsistent with any other political
+form whatever than that of Republicanism, Monarchy and Socialism, or
+Empire and Socialism, are incompatible and inconceivable. Socialism
+involves political and economic equality, while Monarchy or Empire
+essentially imply domination and inequality."[562]
+
+"As in the political history of the race the logical development of
+progress was found in the abolition of the institution of monarchy and
+not in its mere restriction, so in industrial history the culminating
+point to which all efforts must at last converge lies in the abolition
+of the capitalist class, and not in the mere restriction of its
+powers. The Socialist Labour Party, recognising these two phases of
+human development, unites them in its programme, and seeks to give
+them a concrete embodiment by its demand for a Socialist
+Republic."[563]
+
+Most Socialists describe all monarchs as the drones of society, and
+habitually refer to crowned heads either as "loafers" or as "Royal
+paupers, able-bodied and outdoor."[564] "If the people were of my mind
+they would not tolerate for twelve months that the Royal paupers
+should wear robes and have every luxury, and the honest, industrious
+aged poor should wear rags and eat a crust or be imprisoned for being
+hungry."[565] (Has ever anybody in Great Britain, or in any other
+country, been imprisoned "for being hungry"?)
+
+"Is it possible that this degrading monarchical superstition can
+survive in England much longer? Has the schoolmaster now been abroad
+so long in vain? Will the English people never take their destinies
+into their own hands and close the long era of monarchical and
+aristocratic robbery? Are we never to have a Government that can hear
+the bitter cry of the outcast, and, hearing, act? We know the goal.
+The goal is the Democratic Republic."[566]
+
+Many further extracts regarding English and foreign monarchs might be
+given, but they are so indescribably coarse and so offensive--even the
+late Queen is most shamelessly slandered, abused, and calumniated--that
+they are hardly fit for publication, and their authors shall be
+nameless.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[561] See Appendix.
+
+[562] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 37.
+
+[563] _Platform, Constitutions, Rules, and Standing Orders, Socialist
+Labour Party_, pp. 2, 3.
+
+[564] See _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 25.
+
+[565] Glyde, _Britain's Disgrace_, p. 9.
+
+[566] Davidson, _The New Book of Kings_, p. 107.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS ON PARLIAMENT AND THE NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION
+
+
+The opinion of most Socialists with regard to the British Parliament
+is well summed up in the phrase "Parliament a way to the Democracy?
+Why, 'tis not a road at all, but only a barricade across our
+road."[567] It will be seen in this and the following Chapter that
+Socialism means either to capture and hold that barricade or to pull
+it down.
+
+Let us take note of some representative Socialist opinions on the
+British Parliament. "The House of Commons is a machine elaborately
+contrived by the exploiting classes to serve their own ends. In the
+race for Parliamentary seats the wisest and the best are nowhere. They
+are rarely even permitted to start. The prizes are for the richest,
+the most unscrupulous, cunning, and pushing. And without a complete
+revolution in our ideas regarding the objects as well as the methods
+of legislation, it must always remain so."[568] "Parliament is
+appointed, we are told, to fulfil the will of the nation. Then why
+doesn't it do it? If it has a job to do, why does it stand day after
+day, week after week, year after year, cackling, cackling, cackling
+about it? Can the mind of man conceive anything more intensely
+ridiculous than this spectacle solemnly presented for our admiration
+by the champions of the system, of six hundred garrulous old gentlemen
+making a set and formal business of cackling--cackling, cackling,
+cackling, with infinite pride in their own preposterous squeaking and
+nagging, and then filing out one by one at intervals, like a stately
+Lord Mayor's procession in the kingdom of the black and white
+penguins? What is to be done with such a museum?"[569] "Government by
+Parliament is a preposterous pretence--a delusion and a snare to the
+people. It is a gag imposed by the classes on the aspirations of the
+masses. Our Parliamentary representation is a fraud. If we could
+appeal directly to the whole people as to whether willing workers
+should starve, or little children suffer hunger, then something might
+be done. But how can the electors express their desires on this vital
+matter under our present electoral system?"[570]
+
+Socialists complain that Parliament is run by a class. "It is colossal
+impudence for a party paper to talk against 'class representation.'
+Every class is over-represented--except the great working class. The
+mines, the railways, the drink trade, the land, finance, the army
+(officers), the navy (officers), the Church, the law, and most of the
+big industries (employers) are represented largely in the House of
+Commons. And nearly thirty millions of the working classes are
+represented by about a dozen men, most of whom are palsied by their
+allegiance to the Liberal party."[571] "The rich man's club at St.
+Stephen's is merely a committee of plutocrats--rentmongers,
+interestmongers, and profitmongers--assembled for the purpose of
+safeguarding the spoils which the 'classes' have theftuously contrived
+to heap up."[572] "The inequality of representation of classes in
+Parliament at present is somewhat startling. It stands as follows:
+
+               _House of Lords_
+
+  Capitalist members                      614
+  Labour members                            0
+                                          ---
+               Total                      614
+
+               _House of Commons_
+
+  Capitalist members                      640
+  Labour members                           30
+                                          ---
+               Total                      670
+
+"That is, we have 640 members representing the interests of, say,
+6,000,000 of persons, and 30 members representing the interests of
+37,000,000."[573] "As recipients of rents, royalties, interests, and
+dividends, some 600 of the representatives of the people in the House
+of Commons are parasites upon the people's backs. The railway
+shareholders have 78 representatives; the railway workers, nearly
+400,000 strong, have one. One hundred and eighty thousand landed
+proprietors have 155 members; 1,000,000 agricultural labourers have
+one. Coal-mine owners have 21; and 655,000 miners have seven members.
+The shipowners and builders have 22 representatives; the 200,000
+sailors have none."[574]
+
+"The social composition of the House of Commons is as follows: 124
+lawyers, 108 manufacturers (including brewers, colliery-owners, &c.),
+85 landowners, 64 merchants and shopkeepers, 37 army and navy men, 33
+journalists and authors, 28 financiers, 23 professors, teachers, &c.,
+18 Civil servants, 18 newspaper proprietors and publishers, 16 heirs
+to the peerage, 67 of miscellaneous occupations and professions, and
+50 working men. Thus the bulk of the present House of Commons consists
+of rent, profit, and interest mongers and their hirelings and
+hangers-on. The exploited masses of the people are only represented by
+fifty men."[575]
+
+    See your masters, how unceasingly they strive to keep you down,
+    How they manage all your business up in Parliament and town;
+    Well, it is not quite your business, for it really is their own.
+    And that is why the millions of the toilers slave and groan.[576]
+
+"On the top of all this political chicanery and impudent pretence of
+popular representation, there sits an autocratic, irresponsible,
+hereditary legislative body, consisting exclusively of idlers and
+parasites who reserve to themselves the right of rejecting all laws
+which do not clearly further their own exactions and monopolies! Then
+ask yourselves: Of what use is Parliament? Of what use can it ever be
+to the mass of the common people?"[577]
+
+Parliament is not only useless to the worker, but is also, according
+to the Socialists, utterly corrupt and callous to the sufferings of
+the people. "Whenever an American is met abroad with the assertion
+that government in the Republic is corrupt, he can safely say that for
+one ounce of corruption in America there is a full pound avoirdupois
+in Britain."[578] "It is extremely doubtful, indeed, whether either
+slavery or the slave-trade would be abandoned in the British Empire if
+they still existed to-day, and their abrogation and suppression
+depended upon the English House of Commons. The hideous corruption in
+that assembly and the utter indifference of the majority of its
+plutocratic members and their retainers to the welfare of any people,
+at home or abroad, where money is to be made by neglecting the
+commonest rules of ethics, have never been so clearly manifested as
+they are to-day."[579]
+
+"The suffrage in Great Britain is very unsatisfactory, as the
+following table shows:
+
+                             Per cent. of the
+                                population
+                              having a vote.
+  France                            27.9
+  Switzerland                       23.5
+  Greece                            23.0
+  Spain                             22.4
+  Belgium                           21.5
+  Germany                           21.2
+  Bulgaria                          21.2
+  Norway                            19.9
+  Austria                           19.9
+  Portugal                          19.0
+  Great Britain                     16.5
+  Denmark                           16.4
+  Servia                            16.0
+  Holland                           16.0
+
+As to England, she occupies a very low place in the scale. But then
+the people here have not even got universal suffrage! And this is a
+'democratic,' 'self-governing' community."[580]
+
+Furthermore, "The time has come when members of Parliament will have
+to receive payment for their services in the House of Commons, because
+the people have realised that they cannot be adequately represented
+only by men of wealth and position who are able to pay their own
+expenses."[581]
+
+The national Administration is quite as unsatisfactory to Socialists
+as is the national Parliament. "To-day honesty wears rags, and
+rascality and idleness wear robes. Every pint of beer, and every drop
+of wine or spirits the workers drink, every pipe of tobacco or cigar
+they smoke, every cup of tea, coffee, or cocoa they drink, every
+patent medicine they purchase, every dog they keep, every pound of
+sugar they use, even their playing cards and their insurance policies,
+are taxed to help to pay big salaries and pensions to the younger sons
+of the aristocracy, &c. The eldest sons live on the family estate; the
+younger live on the State. One becomes a lawyer, and will lie for
+anyone who will pay him well; another becomes an officer in the army
+or navy, and he will cut the throat of anyone in return for a good
+salary; another becomes a parson, and in return for a good stipend he
+will pray for anyone; the others are quartered on the consular or the
+diplomatic service, or are placed as clerks at _1,000l._ per year in
+the Colonial, Foreign, or Home Office, &c."[582] The official
+Parliamentary Report of the Independent Labour Party for 1907 states:
+"Our short experience has been sufficient to teach us that it is as
+important to democratise our administrative departments as it is to
+democratise our Statute Book. We have found that the doors to the
+higher offices in Whitehall are closed to everyone who has not had a
+middle-class or aristocratic education, and recent changes have placed
+our Civil service more completely in the hands of the wealthy
+classes."[583]
+
+In the foregoing statements we find some of the principal complaints
+of the Socialists regarding the national Parliament and
+Administration. Let us now take note of their wishes and proposals.
+
+Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation we find the following regarding
+Parliament and the Administration:
+
+"Abolition of the Monarchy. Democratisation of the Government
+machinery, viz. Abolition of the House of Lords, Payment of members
+of legislative and administrative bodies, Payment of official expenses
+of elections out of the public funds, Adult suffrage, Proportional
+representation, Triennial parliaments, Second ballot, initiative and
+referendum. Foreigners to be granted rights of citizenship after two
+years' residence in the country, on the recommendation of four
+British-born citizens, without any fees. Canvassing to be made
+illegal. Legislation by the people in such wise that no legislative
+proposal shall become law until ratified by the majority of the
+people. Legislative and administrative independence for all parts of
+the Empire."
+
+As the above demands are somewhat vague, it is worth while to take
+note of another and clearer statement of the political demands made by
+the Social-Democratic Federation. "We of the Democratic Federation
+demand complete adult suffrage for every man and woman in these
+islands, because in this way alone can the whole people give free
+expression to their will; we are in favour of paid delegates and
+annual conventions, because by this means alone can the people control
+their representatives; we stand up for the direct references of all
+grave issues to the country at large and for the punishment as felony
+of every species of corruption, because thus only can tyranny be
+checked and bribery be uprooted; we call for the abolition of all
+hereditary authority, because such authority is necessarily
+independent of the mass of the people. But all these reforms, when
+secured, mean only that the men and women of these islands will at
+length be masters in their own house. Mere political machinery is
+worthless unless used to produce good social conditions."[584]
+
+A widely read Socialist writer formulates the Socialistic demands
+regarding Parliamentary reform as follows: "(1) The suffrage should
+not be given to a man's house or his lodgings, but to the man
+himself. I believe in adult suffrage, male and female. (2)
+Constituencies should be numerically equal, each having three members,
+one retiring annually by rotation. (3) Cabinets should be chosen
+annually by the members of the House of Commons, to whom alone they
+should be responsible. (4) Payment of members and election expenses.
+Members should receive reasonable 'wages' according to the ancient
+practice of the Constitution, while all election expenses (not
+strictly personal to the candidate) should be defrayed out of the
+rates. (5) The Monarchy. If we are to have more kings or queens, their
+cost ought not to exceed that of the President of the United States,
+viz. _10,000l._ a year. 'The office of a king in this nation is
+useless, burdensome, and dangerous, and ought to be abolished'
+(Resolution of the Long Parliament, 1649). (6) The House of Lords. 'A
+House of Peers in Parliament is useless and dangerous and ought to be
+abolished.'"[585]
+
+The Fabian Society proclaims: "To complete the foundation of the
+democratic State, we need manhood suffrage, abolition of all poverty
+disqualifications, abolition of the House of Lords, public payment of
+candidature expenses, public payment of representatives, and annual
+elections."[586]
+
+"The problem how the Lords are to be abolished is of easy solution.
+They cannot present themselves at the Gilded Chamber without writs,
+and these a democratic Ministry could and would peremptorily stop.
+Should they come without writs, Inspector Denning could be instructed
+to take charge of them. Or the House of Commons could simply revive
+its resolution of January 6, 1649, decreeing their abolition."[587]
+
+Many Socialists are opposed not only to the House of Lords but to all
+second chambers. "When the hereditary House is abolished, the demand
+which will be made by reactionaries for a representative second
+chamber must be sternly resisted. True, most nations have second
+chambers in imitation of our pernicious example; but there is not one
+of them, however constituted, whose history is not a conclusive
+argument against such institutions. The second chambers of Europe and
+America are nothing more than standing monuments of the gregarious
+folly of mankind. Nations can no more have two wills than individuals.
+A second chamber at one with the first is superfluous, in opposition
+it is noxious."[588]
+
+A large number of Socialists do not think that the democratisation of
+the House of Commons and the abolition of the House of Lords will
+suffice. They fear that party politics and party intrigues may become
+more pernicious in a Labour Parliament than they have proved to be in
+a middle-class Parliament. They fear that adult suffrage may not
+improve matters, and that impecunious professional politicians may
+prove worse than the class of politicians who up till now have sat in
+Parliament. "We stand in England at the parting of the ways. One leads
+to the payment of members and the creation of a class of professional
+political adventurers; the other leads to the referendum and
+initiative."[589]
+
+"In the Republics of France and the United States the electors are
+virtually endowed with male adult suffrage, and Labour representation
+is facilitated by State payment of members and of their election
+expenses. Yet the French Chamber, with its Panama and Southern Railway
+scandals, in which the patriots have gorged their servile lusts, has
+stood for many years before the nations as a monument of infamy. The
+United States Congress has not a single Labour representative within
+its walls, and the Government of the country is become a vile synonym
+for corruption."[590] "In America the compensation of each Senator and
+each Representative is fixed at five thousand dollars, or one thousand
+pounds per year. In addition to this the members have special fares on
+the railways, and many other perquisites. Yet the American
+'Encyclopedia of Social Reform,' edited by W.D.P. Bliss, says, on page
+325, 'Congressmen, notoriously, do not represent the people, but
+special interests and great moneyed corporations. The Congress is
+almost the only great national legislative body owned wholly by the
+well-to-do. In the British Parliament, even after the Conservative
+victories of the last election, there are thirteen Labour men. In
+Congress there is not one."[591] "Better the stupid British hereditary
+gentleman than the cunning politician-for-a-living. Better a Cabinet
+of Chamberlains and Gladstones than a circus of conflicting
+unscrupulous demagogues on the make."
+
+"The Parliamentary system tends, not to the summoning of thoughtful
+patriots to their country's service, but to the exaltation and
+glorification of plausible windbags."[592] "The panacea of Labour
+representation will not remedy those defects. It is in the eternal
+nature of things that in the electoral competition of rival
+personalities the scum must rise to the top. So long as self-seeking
+is rewarded by the highest honours self-seeking will flourish."[593]
+"A Parliament of Labour members would develop just the same tendency
+as any other to division into parties commanded by rival ambitions,
+between which the democratic vote would, as always, annul
+itself."[594] "If there were five hundred delegates of Labour, if the
+whole of the Cardiff Trade Unions Congress could be suddenly
+translated to Parliament and power, there might still be some envious,
+spiteful braggarts subterraneously scheming and gnawing to undermine
+and engulf a rival, though a people's cause were wrecked in the
+catastrophe. Leaders are always dangerous. The workmen have too many
+leaders. Their first political necessity is to get rid of the
+politicians. Therefore I would like to see abolished all Legislative
+Chambers, Senates, and Councils of State."[595]
+
+Views identical with the foregoing are held by many Socialists, and
+therefore a Socialist writer has asked: "Why cannot the people, even
+of a populous and extensive country, vote upon all laws?"[596]
+"Instead of representation we shall have what is technically called
+the referendum, or submission of all proposed measures to the people,
+who must signify their approval by vote before the measures can pass
+into law. This has been practised already to some extent in
+Switzerland, both in national and cantonal affairs. It was first
+proposed by Robespierre when he advised the king of France to say: 'My
+people, here are the laws I have made for you. Will you accept
+them?'"[597]
+
+Another Socialist says: "It is impossible that any delegate should
+completely represent the desires of ten or twenty thousand electors. No
+two human beings are agreed about everything; and, in every election,
+electors, in order to express approval of one cherished principle, are
+driven to adopt half-a-dozen others which they bitterly
+disapprove."[598] "The way to true democracy will never be found through
+delegacy. The only safe way is through direct legislation--through the
+referendum and initiative. The referendum and initiative does not mean
+more laws, but fewer, shorter, simpler, and more understandable
+ones."[599] "What is wanted is neither aristocracy, plutocracy, nor
+demagoguecracy, but democracy--the one governing system which never has
+been tried. The people must learn that the game of politics is not an
+unfathomable science, but a struggle of rival interests in which no
+delegate can so well represent their needs as themselves."[600] "The
+referendum quite changes the character of the Federal Assembly. It
+ceases to be a Parliament, and becomes merely a drafting committee. In
+other countries the initiative comes from above; the Parliament and the
+King are together the legal sovereign. In Switzerland it comes from
+below, for the legal sovereign is the electorate."[601]
+
+Other Socialists are strongly opposed to the referendum: "Democracy,
+as understood by the Fabian Society, means simply the control of the
+Administration by freely elected representatives of the people. The
+Fabian Society energetically repudiates all conceptions of democracy
+as a system by which the technical work of Government administration,
+and the appointment of public officials, shall be carried on by
+referendum or any other form of direct popular decision. Such
+arrangements may be practical in a village community, but not in the
+complicated industrial civilisations which are ripening for
+Social-Democracy."[602] "The people can only judge political measures
+by their effect when they have come into operation; they cannot plan
+measures themselves, or foresee what their effect will be, or give
+precise instructions to their representatives; nor can any honest
+representative tell, until he has heard a measure thoroughly discussed
+by representatives of all other sections of the working class, what
+form the measure should take so as to keep the interests of his
+constituents in due subordination to those of the community. It is to
+be considered, further, that intelligent reformers, especially
+workmen who have grasped the principles of Socialism, are always in
+the minority; they may address themselves with success to the
+sympathies of the masses and gain their confidence; but the dry
+details of the legislative and administrative steps by which they,
+move towards their goal can never be made interesting or intelligible
+to the ordinary voter. For these reasons the referendum, in theory the
+most democratic of popular institutions, is in practice the most
+reactionary."[603]
+
+Other Socialists are in favour of a reformed Parliament which is to be
+a glorified trade union congress. "Each industry would have adequate
+representation in the Parliament of Industry, and this Parliament
+would connect and harmonise the affairs of the whole. In the future
+society the descendant of the union of to-day will be the centre of
+social life and the administration of things. Let 'workers of all
+trades unite.'"[604] Others, again, call for a Parliament of a frankly
+revolutionary type which is characteristically called a "National
+Convention." "What is the use of the suffrage? It has but one use--to
+enable the workers, as a class, to take peaceful possession of the
+power of the State, so as to use that power for social purposes. But
+to do this you must have paid delegates from your own class, not
+timeserving unpaid representatives from the classes which rob you; you
+must put your servants, not your masters, at Westminster; you must
+have a National Convention of the People, not a House of the
+Confiscating Classes."[605] Readers will no doubt remember the French
+National Convention and its reign of terror and crime which culminated
+in the execution of Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette.
+
+Many Socialists, like most Anarchists, are utterly opposed to
+Parliamentary government and majority rule, preferring rule by
+violence to rule by argument. "What has hitherto been called the will
+of the people, or the will of the majority as manifested in the modern
+constitutional State, does not express any act of will at all, but the
+absence of will. It is not the will but the apathy of the majority
+that is represented."[606] "The preaching of the _cultus_ of the
+majority in the modern State is an absurdity which can only for a
+moment go down with the Parliamentary Radical who is wallowing in the
+superstitions of exploded Whiggery."[607] "The Socialist has a
+distinct aim in view. If he can carry the initial stages towards its
+realisation by means of the count-of-heads majority, by all means let
+him do so. If, on the other hand, he sees the possibility of carrying
+a salient portion of his programme by trampling on this majority, by
+all means let him do this also."[608]
+
+The Women's Suffrage problem has lately come to the front, and it is
+characteristic and noteworthy that it has been taken up with the
+greatest energy, we might almost say with hysterical energy, by
+Socialist women. They tell us, "We desire the stain removed from our
+womanhood. Remove the hateful stigma from your mothers, your wives,
+and your daughters, which places the noblest and the best of them in a
+lower position than the most uncultured and immoral specimen of the
+male sex who pays his rates and taxes."[609] According to a woman
+Socialist, the Votes-for-Women problem is "the greatest moral and
+spiritual problem that has torn asunder the souls of men since the
+fall of Adam and the coming of Christ."[610] "Society has no brighter
+hope, humanity no larger promise than her coming, radiant with health
+and happiness, love and liberty shining from her eyes, the beautiful,
+high-souled, sister-mother of the men that are going to be."[611] "The
+State cannot spare from its high councils the deep wisdom of its
+mothers and the comradeship of its wives."[612]
+
+It is obvious why Socialist women demand the vote with almost frenzied
+fervour, and why the various Socialist societies and parties support
+their agitation. Socialists believe that their wives, and the women
+workers in general, will vote for Socialism, and that most other women
+will be indifferent and abstain from voting. Therefore we learn:
+"Socialism in the only true sense of that term, in the only wise
+conception of that state, can never be brought into the fulness of its
+being until women have been made equal with men as citizens."[613]
+"The benches of the National Chamber may yet be seen accommodating
+three hundred and thirty-five intelligent women."[614] In referring to
+the elections in Finland, Mrs. Snowden writes: "To Socialists, an
+interesting point is the fact that, in spite of the women voters, who
+are supposed to be retrograde in politics, by far the largest number
+of party votes recorded were for the Socialist party."[615]
+
+The claims of women for the franchise have been supported by large
+majorities at important meetings of Socialists. The resolution of the
+Independent Labour Party, "That this Conference declares in favour of
+adult suffrage and the political equality of the sexes, and considers
+that the right of suffrage should immediately be extended to women on
+the same conditions as men," was carried by 236 votes to 24.[616] The
+Social-Democratic Federation resolved: "That this Conference declares
+that the time has arrived when equal rights of citizenship be extended
+to all women and men of full age; urges all members to take advantage
+of the present suffrage agitation to focus public opinion upon the
+only logical solution of the question, viz. the abolition of existing
+franchise qualifications and the establishment of universal adult
+suffrage; and calls upon them actively to work for this practical
+measure of reform." This resolution was carried by 42 votes to 9.[617]
+
+The recent clamour of "Votes for Women" emanated not so much from
+philosophic Radicals who had read John Stuart Mill as from Socialists,
+and many non-Socialist women have become their dupes. Socialist women
+hope that they will have the voting all to themselves. Therefore they,
+and most men Socialists also, would very likely resist to the utmost
+all proposals which would make voting compulsory for _all_ women.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[567] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, p. 3.
+
+[568] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 99.
+
+[569] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, pp. 4, 5.
+
+[570] Thompson, _The Referendum and Initiative in Practice_, p. 4.
+
+[571] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 152.
+
+[572] Davidson, _The Gospel of the Poor_, p. 59.
+
+[573] Washington, _Whose Dog art Thou?_ p. 14.
+
+[574] Thompson, _The Only Way to Democracy_, p. 8.
+
+[575] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 43.
+
+[576] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 21.
+
+[577] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, p. 7.
+
+[578] Davidson, _The New Book of Kings_, p. 118.
+
+[579] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 9.
+
+[580] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 58.
+
+[581] _The Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, p. 121.
+
+[582] Councillor Glyde, _Britain's Disgrace_, p. 30.
+
+[583] _Report Annual Conference of Independent Labour Party_, 1907, p.
+52.
+
+[584] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 7.
+
+[585] Davidson, _A Democrat's Address_, p. 4.
+
+[586] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 187.
+
+[587] Davidson, _The Book of Lords_, p. 78.
+
+[588] Davidson, _The House of Lords, Useless, Dangerous, &c._, p. 13.
+
+[589] Thompson, _The Only Way to Democracy_, p. 11.
+
+[590] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, p. 8.
+
+[591] Thompson, _The Only Way to Democracy_, p. 10.
+
+[592] Thompson, _The Referendum, &c._, p. 3.
+
+[593] _Ibid._ p. 1.
+
+[594] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[595] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, pp. 8, 9.
+
+[596] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 130.
+
+[597] _Ibid._ p. 129.
+
+[598] Thompson, _The Only Way to Democracy_, p. 4.
+
+[599] _Ibid._ p. 15.
+
+[600] Thompson, _The Referendum, &c._, p. 5.
+
+[601] _Ibid._ p. 11.
+
+[602] _Report on Fabian Policy_, p. 5
+
+[603] _Report on Fabian Policy_, p. 13.
+
+[604] Kessack, _The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way Out_, p. 3.
+
+[605] _What Use is a Vote?_ p. 1.
+
+[606] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, p. 120.
+
+[607] _Ibid._ p. 128.
+
+[608] _Ibid._ pp. 127, 128.
+
+[609] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 20.
+
+[610] _Ibid._ p. 19.
+
+[611] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, Introd.
+
+[612] _Ibid._ p. 93.
+
+[613] _Ibid._ p. 97.
+
+[614] _Ibid._ p. 92.
+
+[615] _Ibid._ p. 98.
+
+[616] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference_, 1907, p.
+45.
+
+[617] _Report of 27th Annual Conference, 1907, Social-Democratic
+Federation_, p. 26.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+THE ATTITUDE OF THE SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE TWO PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES
+
+
+From the Socialist point of view there is for all practical purposes
+no difference between the two great parties. Both are representative,
+not of the people, but of capitalism. Both are hostile to labour.
+
+"The difference between Liberalism and Toryism is merely a question of
+phraseology; there is no fundamental clashing of principle. Both stand
+for the private ownership of the means of life. They both support a
+competitive state of society with its inevitable exploitation of the
+wealth-producers."[618] "Both the Conservative and Liberal parties are
+agreed in supporting private ownership in the instruments of
+production for the purposes of profit-making. Their differences are
+merely superficial and their programmes admittedly offer no solution
+of the problems of poverty. The Independent Labour Party regards them
+both as equally the enemies of labour, and in fact merely as two
+sections of the entrenched forces of plutocracy."[619] "There are not
+really two parties in the State. There is but one great party, that of
+privilege, divided into two factions, labelled Whig and Tory, or
+Liberal and Conservative. Both do much the same things in office. The
+mimic warfare which they wage with each other, no shrewd observer
+takes seriously. It is merely a pleasant game of which the stakes are
+the spoils of office and patronage. An 'organised hypocrisy' is but a
+mild description of an English Government, whether Liberal or
+Conservative. The Liberal and the Conservative are the two thieves
+between whom the people are evermore crucified."[620] "Neither of the
+political parties is of any use to the workers, because both the
+political parties are paid, officered, and led by capitalists whose
+interests are opposed to the interests of the workers. The Socialist
+laughs at the pretended friendship of Liberal and Tory leaders for the
+workers."[621] "There's no difference whatever between Bannerman, the
+Scottish landowner, and Balfour, whose uncle made _200,000l._ out of
+army contracts in India in four years. These people are entirely
+antagonistic to the worker."[622]
+
+The assertions of the Liberals that they are the true friends of the
+people, that they have always fought for liberty and democracy, that
+they have given the vote to the people, and that they trust the
+people, are treated with derision and contempt. "Liberalism has
+historically opposed itself alike to Toryism, landed interest, and
+democracy, working-class interest whenever that interest appeared as a
+distinct political party."[623] "Since 1832 the Liberals had eight
+opportunities to give justice to the voteless multitude. In every
+election from 1832 to 1865 solemn pledges were made by the Liberals
+that a Reform Bill should be introduced as soon as they were elected,
+and each time these pledges were ignored after they had secured power
+and position."[624] As regards the giving of the franchise, the
+Conservatives have not been much better than the Liberals. "Neither
+party can claim much credit for its Reform Bills, extorted as they
+have been, not by belief in democracy, but by fear of the opposing
+faction. Even now the citizen is tricked out of his vote by every
+possible legal and administrative technicality; so that more than
+one-third of our adult men are unenfranchised, together with the whole
+of the other sex. Neither the Conservative party nor the self-styled
+'Party of the Masses,' gives proof of any real desire to give the vote
+to this not inconsiderable remnant; but both sides pay lip-homage to
+democracy."[625]
+
+Socialists say that the claims of the Liberals to the gratitude of the
+masses are hypocritical. Their policy has not been based on
+philanthropy, but on a sordid selfishness. They attacked the landed
+interest not in order to benefit the people, but in order to make
+themselves supreme in the State and to fill their own purses.
+Liberalism, with talk of liberty of the individual and of freedom of
+trade on its lips, is in reality the representative of capitalism of
+the most heartless kind. "The political power of the landed classes
+was to be broken; the capitalists were to be allowed to do as they
+liked with their own; a state of individualism was to be established;
+it was to be a fair field for all and devil take the hindmost. So far
+as politics and the law are concerned, this ideal of Liberalism has
+been realised. Land is no longer supreme. Money ranks with it.
+Everyone has a chance of obtaining money. _Ergo_, we are a democratic
+nation."[626] "With the change in economic conditions, with the growth
+of manufacture, the rise of the bourgeoisie meant the downfall of
+feudalism. The plutocrat supplanted the baron, capitalism became king.
+The 'old nobility' of England to-day are successful brewers, bankers,
+and traders, and the Nonconformist Conscience dominates in the place
+of Holy Mother Church."[627] "The representatives of this class in
+Parliament repealed the Corn Laws, securing cheap bread for their
+workers at the expense of the landlords and the farmers. The new
+masters opposed the Factory Acts, championed by Tories such as Lord
+Ashley, Thomas Sadler, and 'King Richard' Oastler, They fostered
+railway development, at the public expense, so that they might have
+quick and cheap transit for their manufactures."[628]
+
+The Liberals have shown their selfishness, heartlessness, and greed by
+opposing the greatest boon to workers, the Factory Acts. "Was it the
+Liberal party which initiated the Factory Acts, which were certainly
+the greatest step towards the elevation of the working class that was
+ever taken in the course of the last century? Oh, no! So far from the
+Liberal party initiating the Factory Acts, we know perfectly well that
+the Liberal party--leading members of the Liberal party, like Mr. John
+Bright and Mr. Richard Cobden--fiercely and bitterly opposed the
+Factory Acts. We know that no one fought more strenuously against the
+ten-hour day than Mr. John Bright. We know that all these canting
+Liberal hypocrites--I can call them nothing else--said with regard to
+the ten-hour day, just what they say now about the proposal for an
+eight-hour day--one of the proposals we put forward in order to get
+rid of this hideous difficulty of the unemployed. The argument was put
+forward then, that the restriction of the hours of labour would ruin
+our industries. Precisely the same argument was put forward when it
+was proposed to put a stop to the terrible over-work of the children
+deep down in the bowels of the earth. Women and children were
+mercilessly driven by brutal overseers at their task, and this was
+maintained by your Liberal party in order that they might obtain large
+profits out of their white slaves. Only let the Liberal party appeal
+to history in its claim for working-class support, and then the
+working class will arrive at the conclusion to which many of us have
+already come--that the Liberal party, so far from being entitled to
+our support, is entitled to our greatest loathing and hatred."[629]
+"As to the Factory Acts, it was not a question of Messrs. Bright and
+Cobden alone, but of the whole organised body of the Liberal party,
+which opposed the Factory Acts, and they were only carried by the
+hostility of the Tory party to the Liberals for having dared to
+interfere with the Corn Laws. The Factory Acts were passed in
+retaliation by the landlord party against the capitalist party."[630]
+
+"Mr. Gladstone was the only member who endeavoured to delay the Bill
+which delivered women and children from mines and pits; and never did
+he say a word on behalf of the factory children until, when defending
+slavery in the West Indies, he taunted Buxton with indifference to the
+slavery in England."[631] "If I were to draw a comparison between the
+Liberal and the Tory parties, I should say that the Tory party has
+done more in that direction than the Liberal party has done."[632] Mr.
+Blatchford wrote in the "Clarion" that "the Liberal party has never
+helped the trade unions," and proved this assertion by giving a
+detailed statement of the trade union legislation, which showed that
+modern trade unionism was constantly opposed by the Liberals and was
+created by the Conservatives.[633]
+
+In consequence of its record, Socialists see in Liberalism not a friend,
+but an enemy. "Liberalism stands for individualism, and the Liberal
+capitalist and trader are bitterly opposed to the trade union and
+co-operative society. They found that these bodies, however, were
+beginning to exercise an important, if indirect, influence upon their
+party. Liberal leaders, alive to the importance of vote-catching, began
+to angle for the support of the working-class organisations."[634] "We
+have no reason for supporting the Liberal party any more than the Tory
+party. Men do not gather grapes from thorns, nor figs from thistles. The
+Liberal party is to-day what it has always been--an organisation of
+capitalists formed to serve the interests of the capitalist class."[635]
+
+Liberalism, with its championship of exaggerated individualism, stands
+not for liberty, but for administrative anarchy. "The trouble with
+nineteenth century Liberalism is that, by instinct, by tradition, and
+by the positive precepts of its past exponents, it 'thinks in
+individuals.' It visualises the world as a world of independent
+Roundheads, with separate ends, and abstract rights to pursue those
+ends. Nineteenth century Liberalism is, in fact, axiomatically hostile
+to the State. It is not 'little Englandism' that is the matter with
+those who still cling to such views; it is, as Huxley and Matthew
+Arnold correctly diagnosed, administrative Nihilism. So far as
+political action is concerned, they tend to be inveterately negative.
+They have hung up temperance reform and educational reform for a
+quarter of a century, because, instead of seeking to enable the
+citizen to refresh himself without being poisoned or inebriated and to
+get the children thoroughly taught, they have wanted primarily to
+revenge their outraged temperance principles on the publican and their
+outraged Nonconformist principles on the Church. Of such Liberals it
+may be said that the destructive revolutionary tradition is in their
+bones; they will reform nothing unless it can be done at the expense
+of their enemies."[636]
+
+"The question is frequently put: 'Why are Socialists so much opposed
+to Liberalism?' But a little serious reflection will explain the
+circumstance. Liberalism is really more conservative than Toryism.
+This is not a paradox, it is a fact. Toryism stands for government,
+and it does not necessarily follow that it stands for bad government.
+Liberalism, on the other hand, admittedly seeks an unrestrained
+operation of the individual will. It is opposed to government. It does
+not consciously subscribe to the recognition of our social being. It
+regards individuals as self-contained units operating in separate
+spheres. The less government we have the better, is the keynote of
+Liberalism. This was Emerson's theory, and Emerson was an
+anarchist."[637] "The modern Conservative candidate is politically a
+man without prejudices. No abstract principle forbids him to listen
+sympathetically to any proposal for reform. Hence he seems on the
+platform less belated than the nineteenth century Liberal with his
+stock of shop-soiled principles at full price."[638] "In many people's
+minds the terms 'Liberalism' and 'insincerity' are held to be
+synonymous. Lacking a central idea of its own, and necessarily failing
+to nourish on borrowed ones, there is nothing before the Liberal party
+but decay. For progress in the future we must look to a party which
+has an ideal and is prepared to stand by it."[639]
+
+Before the general election of 1906 Socialists wrote: "The political
+force of Liberalism is spent. During the last twenty years its
+aspirations and its watchwords, its ideas of daily life, and its
+conceptions of the universe, have become increasingly distasteful to
+the ordinary citizen as he renews his youth from generation to
+generation. Its worship of individual liberty evokes no enthusiasm.
+Its reliance on 'freedom of contract' and 'supply and demand,' with
+its corresponding 'voluntaryism' in religion and philanthropy, now
+seems to work out disastrously for the masses who are too poor to have
+what the economists call an 'effective demand' for even the minimum
+conditions of physical and mental health necessary to national
+well-being."[640] "For the last twenty years the Liberal party has
+been trying to fit itself with a new programme. It took up Home Rule
+for Ireland, but found that split the party; it took up temperance
+reform, quite a deviation from its old policy of individual liberty,
+and again found itself divided; it avowed friendliness to Labour, and
+frightened off still another batch of supporters. The Party of
+Progress finds itself now in the unhappy position that its basic idea
+is old-fashioned, and when it tries to assimilate a new one it becomes
+a case of putting new wine into old bottles. That is the sad plight of
+the Liberal party. The party is merely living from hand to mouth as an
+anti-Tory party, hoping to profit by the mistakes of its rival. The
+party has split up on temperance, on labour, on the war, on
+Imperialism, on education, simply because there is no central
+vivifying ideal to bind together and shape the policy. Can the party
+adopt a new ideal? is the great question. Can it drop its fundamental
+idea of individualism and take up the idea of co-operation? and the
+answer is emphatically 'No.'"[641]
+
+The philosopher of British Socialism thinks that, owing to the
+principles and attitude of the Liberal party, Liberalism and Socialism
+are deadly enemies. "Liberalism, in so far as it aims at maintaining
+the liberty of private property, is reactionary and false to the
+principle which it has always implicitly or explicitly maintained, of
+the right of each and every individual to a full and free development.
+In so far as Liberalism does this, in so far as it assumes as
+axiomatic a state of society based on unrestricted freedom of private
+property, and proceeds to adjust social arrangements solely or
+primarily in the interests of the owners of private property, in so
+far Liberalism and Socialism are death enemies."[642] The leading
+Fabian organ stated: "A party subsisting on illusions, concealments,
+and hypocrisies, could hardly survive in the atmosphere engendered by
+a real fight like that between plutocracy and Socialism. For some time
+it may contrive to subsist by telling the electorate that the only
+true way of resisting Socialism is by means of Liberal reforms, while
+at the same time (with doubtful consistency) asking for Socialist
+support on the ground that it goes 'part of the way.' But its best
+chance is probably to divert public attention from Socialism to other
+matters, and this the Prime Minister evidently feels. The existence of
+the Liberal party is incompatible with the existence of intellectual
+honesty in its leaders. And with all his faults Sir Henry is too
+fundamentally honest a man to lead it effectively at the present
+juncture. The reins had better be handed over to Mr. Winston
+Churchill, against whom no such objection can be urged."[643]
+
+Before the Liberals set to work in 1906, Mr. Philip Snowden wrote: "It
+might be said that in the next Parliament the Liberal party is on its
+last trial."[644] That trial has had, as far as the Socialists and the
+Labour party are concerned, an unsatisfactory result. Before the
+general election Socialists asked themselves: "Will the Liberal party
+come into power with a clear mandate for reform which even the House
+of Lords will not dare entirely to obstruct, or will it shuffle into
+power on the misdoings of its predecessors and carry out a halfhearted
+policy in the hope of not estranging any of its moderate followers? If
+it takes the latter course, it will win the undying contempt of all
+real reformers; it will be the last time that a Liberal Administration
+holds sway, and Labour will be left the only really progressive force
+in the country."[645] Twelve months later, in a review of the activity
+of the Liberal Government, "The Reformers' Year Book" stated: "The
+story of Chinese labour in the Transvaal during the year 1906 has been
+one of continuous perfidy on the part of the Liberal Government at
+home. Returned to power largely on account of the opposition of the
+people of this country to Chinese slavery in any shape or form, they
+have burked the main issue at every point, and only carried out a few
+minor changes which have been totally ineffective, retaining all the
+while a hypocritical devotion to the popular ideal."[646] "The Liberal
+Government has failed entirely to justify the confidence reposed in it
+by the electorate, not only upon the newer questions as they have
+arisen--such as the war in Natal--but on the very matters upon which
+it was returned to power, of which the chief was the continuance of
+Chinese labour in the Transvaal."[647]
+
+Socialists think that the Liberal agitation against the House of Lords
+is insincere and hypocritical. "Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's brave
+talk about fighting the House of Lords sounds very much like blarney
+when we call to mind the fact that he has beaten all records in the
+creation of peers. He has not yet been two years in office, but he has
+managed to make no less than twenty new peers. They include a tobacco
+man, a whisky man, a newspaper man who sold his journal to the Tories,
+several usurers and company promoters."[648]
+
+The assurance of the Liberals that they are the friends of Labour is
+doubted in view of the attitude of the party towards Labour
+candidates. "Liberals are continually saying that there is no quarrel
+between Liberalism and Labour. Why, then, do we have the constantly
+recurring spectacle of a middle-class Liberal being run against a
+popular and capable man who can claim to directly represent the people
+who live by the work of their hands and heads as distinguished from
+those who live upon rent, dividends, or interest? Are there not even
+upon the Liberal side plenty of landlords, railway directors, bankers,
+stockbrokers, and employers of labour, that a seat cannot be spared to
+a workman till he wins it in despite of Liberal and Tory opposition
+alike?"[649]
+
+An amalgamation of the Liberals and the Socialist-Labour members is
+impossible. "Liberal-Labourism" is a delusion. "Labour men and
+capitalist Liberals are beginning to see that individualism and
+co-operation will not mix. If Liberalism to-day swallows Labourism, it
+will have a severe attack of indigestion. Mr. Keir Hardie in the
+Liberal ranks would do more to disrupt and destroy the Liberal party
+than he can possibly do from the outside. Labour, it is true, might
+capture the Liberal party, and this is advocated by some, but if this
+took place the party would wither away. The capitalist element would
+drop out and Labour would be left alone. Labour might just as well
+build up a new party outside. It is no use capturing a weapon which
+crumbles to pieces as soon as you grasp it. Better make a new
+weapon."[650] "The Labour party in the House of Commons is as yet not
+disliked only because as yet it is not feared. Until it has made
+itself both disliked and feared, it will be far short of having
+fulfilled the objects of its very existence. It is not saying too much
+to say that in the very near future the measure of the Labour party's
+effectiveness will be its unpopularity in the House of Commons.
+Acrimonious as are the feelings often evoked by political
+controversies, they are urbanity itself as compared with the passions
+aroused over economic issues. The limits of Liberal concession must
+needs soon be reached. The Liberal-Labour candidate is but a transient
+phenomenon of our time, and with his disappearance the storm will
+break."[651]
+
+The great Liberal majority was created by accident and it is rapidly
+dissolving. "The Liberals succeeded to power through no merit of their
+own, but merely through the errors of their opponents. Liberalism is
+shedding its supporters at both ends, and is rapidly on the way to
+becoming a mere _caput mortuum_."[652] It is true that "at the general
+election many Socialists climbed into Parliament on the backs of the
+Liberals,"[653] but Liberal-Socialist co-operation is not possible.
+
+Many Socialists believe that Liberalism and Socialism are fundamentally
+antagonistic, and that therefore Socialism must fight its battles
+unaided. "In Great Britain, as in France, Belgium, Germany, and Italy,
+the cleavage has now been definitely marked between capitalist
+Liberalism and Socialist Democracy."[654] "Political power, properly
+so-called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing
+another."[655] "All political parties are but the expression of class
+interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically
+opposed to the interests of all sections of the master class, the party
+seeking working class emancipation must be hostile to every other
+party."[656] "We shall see Liberals and Tories working together in
+cordial agreement, as they do in Germany, to prevent the election of
+the only politicians who can really profess to go to the poll on the
+broad ground of citizenship--labour done by hand or brain for the
+community, as apart from idleness and pleasure-seeking supported by
+rents, dividends, and interest taken from the community."[657]
+
+"As the machinery of government, including the armed forces of the
+nation, exists only to conserve the monopoly by the capitalist class
+of the wealth taken from the workers, the working class must organise
+consciously and politically for the conquest of the powers of
+government, national and local, in order that this machinery,
+including these forces, may be converted from an instrument of
+oppression into the agent of emancipation and the overthrow of
+privilege, aristocratic and plutocratic."[658] "The property question
+is the issue which is creating a new political cleavage in the State.
+Somewhat dimly at present, but with growing clearness of vision, the
+worker begins to see that he will remain a menial, outcast and
+forlorn, until he has made himself master of the machine he tends, and
+the soil he tills."[659]
+
+"The only true position for a genuine working-class party is that of
+open hostility to all who support capitalism in any shape or form.
+This is the safe, sure, and scientific position."[660] "Liberals will
+declare and do declare in most pathetic tones that they have done
+more, and will do more, for the workers than the Tories have done or
+will do. And Liberals will assure you that they are really more
+anxious to help the workers than we Socialists believe. But those are
+side issues. The main thing to remember is, that even if the Liberals
+are all they claim to be, they will never do as much for Labour as
+Labour could do for itself."[661]
+
+    Oh heed not the talk of those fat agitators.
+      Who prattle of Gladstone, or Churchill, or worse;
+    Expect not your rights from professional praters,
+      But manfully trust in your courage and force.[662]
+
+    Onward! Sons of Labour! nerve ye for the fray;
+    Soon shall beam the dawning of a brighter day.
+    Keep the red flag flying, herald of the free--
+    On yourselves relying, on to liberty.
+
+    See! the coming glory streams across the plains.
+    Soon the Sons of Labour shall take up the reins.
+    Then in every nation shall our Cause increase
+    Till it reigns triumphant--pledge of joy and peace.[663]
+
+On the other hand, there are Socialists who think that Socialism
+cannot succeed if it cuts itself adrift from the great national
+parties and pursues a purely Socialistic Labour policy. "A member of
+an Imperial Parliament is an Imperialist in spite of himself. A party
+which concerns itself with sectional interests only will soon cease to
+be a party; it will degenerate into a group, and as such it cannot
+hope to receive serious backing in the country."[664]
+
+Many Socialists feel confident that they will conquer power by
+conquering Parliament. "Parliament has always governed the country in
+the interest of the class to which the majority of its members
+belonged. It governed in the interest of the country gentlemen in the
+old days when they were in a majority in the House of Commons; it has
+governed in the interests of the capitalists and employers since they
+won a majority by the Reform Bill of 1832; and it will govern in the
+interest of the people when the majority is selected from the
+wage-earning class."[665] "No sooner shall two hundred Labour members
+be firmly seated upon the cross-benches of the House, than both
+parties will approach them with bended knee, bringing gold and
+frankincense and programmes."[666] "There is a fine impartiality about
+the policeman and the soldier, who are the cutting edge of the State
+power. They take their wages and obey their orders without asking
+questions. If those orders are to demolish the homestead of every
+peasant who refuses to take the bread out of his children's mouths in
+order that his landlord may have money to spend as an idle gentleman
+in London, the soldier obeys. But if his orders were to help the
+police to pitch his lordship into Holloway Gaol until he had paid an
+income-tax of twenty shillings on every pound of his unearned income,
+the soldier would do that with equal devotion to duty, and perhaps
+with a certain private zest that might be lacking in the other case.
+Now these orders come ultimately from the State, meaning in this
+country the House of Commons. A House of Commons consisting of 660
+gentlemen and 10 workmen will order the soldier to take money from the
+people for the landlords. A House of Commons consisting of 660 workmen
+and 10 gentlemen will probably, unless the 660 are fools, order the
+soldier to take money from the landlords for the people."[667]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[618] _John Burns and the Unemployed_, p. 1.
+
+[619] Independent Labour Party, _A Statement of Principles_, p. 3.
+
+[620] Davidson, _The New Book of Kings_, p. 7.
+
+[621] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 151.
+
+[622] Casey, _Who are the Bloodsuckers?_ p. 16.
+
+[623] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 70.
+
+[624] Councillor Glyde, _Liberal and Tory Hypocrisy_, p. 12.
+
+[625] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 39, 40.
+
+[626] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 2.
+
+[627] Quelch, _Economics of Labour_, pp. 9, 10.
+
+[628] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 11.
+
+[629] _Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?_ p. 10.
+
+[630] _Ibid._ p. 19.
+
+[631] Diack, _Socialism and Current Politics_, p. 10.
+
+[632] _Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?_ p. 19.
+
+[633] _Clarion_, February 16, 1906.
+
+[634] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 2.
+
+[635] _Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?_ p. 13.
+
+[636] _Twentieth Century Politics_, p. 4.
+
+[637] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, pp. 3, 4.
+
+[638] _Twentieth Century Politics_, p. 6.
+
+[639] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 4.
+
+[640] _Twentieth Century Politics_, p. 2.
+
+[641] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 3.
+
+[642] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, pp. 69, 70.
+
+[643] _New Age_, October 10, 1907.
+
+[644] _Daily News_, January 20, 1906.
+
+[645] _The Reformers' Year Book_, 1906, Preface p. 6.
+
+[646] _Ibid._ 1907, p. 104.
+
+[647] _Ibid._ Preface.
+
+[648] _Clarion_, November 1, 1907.
+
+[649] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 14.
+
+[650] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 13.
+
+[651] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 14.
+
+[652] _New Age_, November 7, 1907.
+
+[653] _Ibid._
+
+[654] _Clarion_, January 19, 1906.
+
+[655] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 22.
+
+[656] _Declaration of Socialist Party of Great Britain_, see Appendix.
+
+[657] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 16.
+
+[658] _Declaration of Principles of Socialist Party of Great Britain._
+
+[659] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 30.
+
+[660] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, p. 16.
+
+[661] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, pp. 148, 149.
+
+[662] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 30.
+
+[663] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 21.
+
+[664] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 3.
+
+[665] _What Socialism Is_, p. 3.
+
+[666] Leakey, _Co-operators and Labour Platform_, p. 16.
+
+[667] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 26.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+SOCIALISM AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
+
+
+Many Socialists, especially the Fabians, hope to introduce Socialistic
+principles and Socialistic rule into Great Britain rather through the
+local than through the national authorities. They are strenuously
+exerting themselves to bring about that result, and so far their
+exertions have been by no means unsuccessful.
+
+"Socialists to-day are working in the towns with a twofold object. (1)
+To level up their districts. If Glasgow has municipal telephones,
+there is a very good precedent for Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford,
+Leeds, &c., doing likewise. If Liverpool owns a municipal milk-supply,
+London, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds, must be brought into line. Each
+town must adopt the good points from every other town. (2) To urge
+their districts to launch out into something new."[668] "The property
+held and worked and controlled by municipalities already exceeds
+_500,000,000l._ sterling in value, and is being added to yearly. This
+process has but to continue long enough to ensure that every industry
+will pass under public control, and thus State Socialism will become
+an accomplished fact by a gradual process of easy transition."[669]
+
+"The proper sphere of municipal activity includes everything a
+municipality can do better than a private company."[670] "The
+immediate object should be to municipalise all those services which
+are necessary to a healthy life. Food, fuel, clothing, shelter--these
+are required by all--and no man should have the right to deny them to
+any worker. We must not stop at municipal trams. We must not stop at
+municipal gas. We must not stop at municipal electricity. These are
+only stepping-stones. Not until we can say that poverty and disease
+and unemployment are abolished out of the land shall we have the right
+to discuss the limits of municipal trading."[671] "The economic forces
+which replaced the workshop by the factory will replace the private
+shop by the municipal store, and the private factory by the municipal
+one."[672]
+
+According to Socialist teaching the destruction of private enterprise
+by municipal undertakings will be a blessing to all citizens. "Where a
+city supplies its own gas there is no 'middle-man.' The corporation
+stands in the place of the 'middle-man,' and as the corporation is
+elected by the citizens the people are thus in the position of getting
+their own gas made and paying for it in their own way. Some of the
+citizens are makers of gas, or workmen; most of the citizens are users
+of gas, or consumers; and all of the citizens are owners and managers
+of the gasworks and of the gas supply."[673]
+
+The suppression of the "unnecessary middleman" sounds so very
+plausible that it is certain to prove an excellent election cry. But
+has the middleman really disappeared when a city corporation takes his
+place? Does the corporation-middleman supply gas gratis? Are the
+private middleman's profits not distributed to a host of corporation
+officials in the shape of substantial salaries? The transfer of
+gasworks, &c., from private hands to a city corporation is no doubt
+very beneficial to those who draw the corporation salaries. It may be
+very profitable to the local politicians and their hangers-on. Jobs
+may be had as a reward for political support. But the citizens may
+find the gas to be no cheaper and the rates to be considerably higher
+after the suppression of the "unnecessary middleman." And will it then
+console him that he is the "owner and manager of the gasworks and of
+the gas supply"?
+
+Under the heading "The Justice of Abolishing the Private Trader" one
+of the leading champions of municipal Socialism writes: "Is it unfair
+to take away the living of the private trader? Then it is unfair to
+take away the living of the unemployed, the twelve millions on the
+verge of starvation, and the thousands slain annually by poverty and
+preventable disease. I say that the welfare of the nation must be
+considered before the profits of the monopolists and the wasteful
+freedom of the small trader. Under the present system a large
+proportion of the population have so deteriorated in health and
+stamina as to endanger the existence of the nation. Private enterprise
+and competition are responsible for nine-tenths of the misery and
+suffering of our twenty million poor. But we must not attempt to alter
+the conditions because the small private trader would be ruined.
+Nevertheless the system is going to be altered, whether the small
+trader likes it or not."[674]
+
+The foregoing are typical Socialist arguments. In the first place, the
+writer grossly exaggerates existing poverty by speaking of "twenty
+million poor." Then he boldly asserts that all poverty is due to
+private enterprise and that municipal enterprise will abolish it. So
+far municipal enterprise has not even succeeded in diminishing
+poverty. On the contrary, with the phenomenal growth of municipal
+enterprise in Great Britain pauperism, actual and percentual, has also
+grown at an alarming rate. It is significant that poverty and
+distress have increased most rapidly, and have become most acute, in
+those localities in which municipal enterprise has been most active
+and in which Socialist councils have held undisputed sway, as, for
+instance, in East and West Ham and Poplar. Municipal enterprise, by
+increasing the rates--and, with the rates, the rents--has increased
+the general cost of living without at the same time increasing
+production. On the contrary, it has driven factories away through high
+rates. Therefore municipal enterprise has increased the expenditure of
+the general body of workers without increasing their earnings, and
+consequently has directly increased the existing poverty which it has
+promised to abolish. Municipal enterprise has succeeded chiefly in
+giving from the rates high wages to municipal employees at the cost of
+all other workers.
+
+Municipal Socialists rather rely on force than on justice in dealing
+with private business men. "For private traders to fight against
+municipalisation is a short-sighted policy. One thing is certain--they
+have to go. 'What! Compete with us with the ratepayers' money? Our own
+money? What injustice!' says the small trader."[675] This just
+objection of the ratepayers is answered with a contemptible quibble.
+"The small trader is mistaken. The municipality does not use their
+money, and would not use their money, under the supposed
+circumstances. If the London County Council decided to open 1,000
+bread-shops, how would they raise the capital required? Not by taking
+the ratepayers' money, or the private traders' money, but by going
+into the money market and borrowing on the credit of all the citizens.
+Suppose _100,000l._ were required? Not a penny would come out of the
+rates. The credit of all the citizens of London is so good that they
+can borrow all the money they want without any difficulty."[676] In
+other words, the Social-"Democratic" politician claims for himself the
+right of arbitrarily depriving citizens who possess property of that
+property and to ruin them by underselling them. They borrow the money
+they require for these undertakings on the credit of the very
+property-owners whom they wish to ruin, not on the credit of "all the
+citizens," as Mr. Suthers pretends, and then they have the impudence
+to assert that the corporations do not ruin the citizens with their
+own money but only with money borrowed on their credit--as if the one
+were not identical with the other.
+
+The objections to municipal enterprise on a Socialist basis are
+twofold:
+
+(1) That it increases the rates and the municipal debt, and therefore
+the rent of houses and lodgings;
+
+(2) That it is, on the whole, unprofitable, being undertaken without
+due regard to sound finance, efficiency, and economy.
+
+Socialists intend to "tax the rich out of existence." Therefore they
+endeavour to increase as much as possible not only the Imperial
+taxation but also the rates. Owners of house property are used to a
+certain income. If the rates are put up, they put up the rent.
+Therefore every increase in the rates leads, as a rule, automatically
+to an equivalent increase in the rent. The fact that a rise in the
+rates leads to a rise in the rent of houses and lodgings, and that the
+Socialist policy of waste and squander falls therefore most heavily
+not on the capitalist but on the working man, is boldly denied.
+"Generally speaking, the reduction of rates is of no benefit whatever
+to the working class. Rates are levied upon property.--Q. Do not the
+working class pay the rates and taxes? A. No. Rates and taxes are paid
+out of the surplus value taken from the workers by their exploiters.
+As already explained, the return to the workers, their wages, is
+determined by their cost of subsistence, regulated by competition in
+the labour market; consequently they have nothing wherewith to pay
+taxes, and whether these be high or low, or whoever has to pay them
+directly, the position of the worker remains the same. He gets, on the
+average, his subsistence, that is all."[677]
+
+Unfortunately, many working men know to their cost that the arguments
+given above are absolutely untrue. Whilst their wages have remained
+stationary, their expenditure for rent has greatly increased owing to
+municipal enterprise carried on by Socialists regardless of expense,
+which has greatly increased rates. At West Ham "Local government was
+to be carried on in a way regardless of expense, and under the
+compounding system the vast majority of the electors were not to
+realise that there were such things as rates at all. One member of the
+Socialist party publicly declared that it did not matter to the
+working men of the borough how high the rates were. But the 'people'
+got to see in course of time that there were drawbacks, even for them,
+in unrestricted Socialism. They found that, because of the increased
+rates, house rents were going up twelve and a half to twenty per
+cent., notwithstanding the threats of the Socialists that every
+landlord who raised his rents should have his assessments
+increased."[678]
+
+Owing to municipal enterprise directed by Socialists, "The sum-total
+of the rates, which stood at _6s._ in the pound in 1890 and at _8s._
+_1d._ in 1896, rose to _8s. 10-1/2d._ in the pound in 1900 and _9s._
+_5-1/2d._ in the pound in 1901. From that figure it advanced to _9s._
+_8d._ in the pound,"[679] and to _10s. 8d._ a little later. It is an
+impudent misstatement of fact when Socialist leaders tell the workers,
+"We are not killed by rates, we are killed by rent."[680] "The whole
+of our municipal expenditure is only a paltry 110 millions a year.
+What do we pay in rent? Two hundred and seventy-five millions!"[681]
+After all, people in other countries, where the blessings of Socialist
+local government are unknown, and where poverty is much rarer than in
+Great Britain, also pay rent. On an average the rates are 150 per
+cent. higher in Great Britain than in Germany.[682]
+
+Whilst the national Government endeavours to diminish the dead weight
+and the heavy yearly charge of national indebtedness, Socialist local
+authorities vie with each other in piling up local indebtedness as
+fast as possible with a reckless disregard of the future. The increase
+of the municipal debt, the increase of local taxation, like the
+increase of national taxation, has no terrors for Socialists. On the
+contrary, "Municipal debt is not a burden. It is a splendid
+investment. We 'owe' 370 millions. Do we 'own' nothing? The
+municipalities own all the roads, drains, sewers, public buildings,
+parks, libraries, a thousand waterworks, two hundred and sixty
+gasworks, three hundred and thirty-four electricity undertakings, one
+hundred and sixty-two tramways, two or three hundred markets, a
+hundred and fifty cemeteries, forty-three harbours, piers, and docks,
+numerous baths, washhouses, and working-class dwellings, thousands of
+schools, and thousands of acres of land."[683] Since these words were
+written local indebtedness has increased. "We owe" now 470 millions.
+
+Unfortunately, many of the splendid assets enumerated possess no
+realisable value whatever, and many municipal enterprises are run
+without an adequate profit or with a loss.
+
+The Socialist views and aims regarding local indebtedness are well
+summed up as follows by Suthers: "The 'municipal debt' argument is a
+bogey. The greater the municipal debt, the less private enterprise
+there will be. The greater the municipal debt, the cheaper and better
+the public services will be. The less private capital, the less
+profits going into a few pockets, the richer the general public will
+be. Up, then, with municipal debt."[684] These are principles which
+threaten to make Great Britain bankrupt. "The annual report of the
+work of the Local Government Board for 1907 shows that the local debt
+of England and Wales, from being 17 per cent. of the National Debt in
+1879-80, has grown to 58.5 per cent. of the National Debt in 1904-5.
+The National and Local debts have grown as follows:
+
+                      1879-80         1904-5      _Increase_
+  National Debt    Ł770,604,774    Ł796,736,491   Ł26,131,717
+  Local Debt        136,934,070     466,459,269   329,525,199"[685]
+
+Unless the Imperial Government interferes, the local debt will soon be
+larger than the National Debt.
+
+We have seen in the beginning of this Chapter that, as regards local
+government, the Socialists pursue a twofold aim: (1) To level up their
+districts; (2) To urge their districts to launch out into something
+new. Therefore we find, as Mr. John A. Fairlie says in his book on
+"Municipal Administration," that "the danger of excessive debt is most
+serious in the smallest cities. The largest cities, while they have
+the largest debts, have also the largest resources, and also the
+best-developed financial administration. The cities of modest size,
+however, which attempt to equal the works of the metropolis without
+its available sources of revenue, are very likely to find themselves
+in serious difficulties."
+
+The time may come, and it may come soon, when British local
+indebtedness will become greatly reduced by local bankruptcy and
+repudiation. That process would have no terrors for Socialists. They
+ought rather to look forward to it. As they demand the repudiation of
+the National Debt (see Chapter IX.), they should logically also strive
+to repudiate the local debt. A general repudiation of local debt would
+be the fitting and logical aim and end of municipal enterprise.
+Municipal enterprise aims at expropriating private property-owners,
+who, rightly considered, are paid not in cash but in debt
+certificates. The repudiation of all local debts would convey gratis
+to the municipality the municipally managed undertakings which,
+rightly considered, belong to the stockholders, and would at the same
+time ruin the capitalists who have advanced the money for acquiring
+those undertakings. The Socialist policy would triumph. This would be
+the fitting end of a rule by irresponsible and penniless demagogues.
+
+To the Socialist there is no limit to municipal enterprise. Not some
+branches of private trade and production, but all private trade and
+production are to be taken over by the municipalities. Private
+enterprise is to be extinguished altogether. The municipalities are to
+be universal owners, manufacturers, and providers. Among the first
+things which Socialist municipalities wish to control are the supply
+of bread, milk, coal; hospitals and public-houses, banks, fire
+insurances, and pawnshops.[686]
+
+All workers are to be municipal officials. Stretching out beyond their
+borders, the municipalities are ultimately to absorb the country, and
+to bring it under Socialist management and government.[687]
+
+Some of the more immediate aims of Socialism as regards London are
+expressed by Sydney Webb, the brilliant, but unfortunately somewhat
+over-imaginative, leader of British scientific Socialism, as follows:
+
+"We see in imagination the County Council's aqueducts supplying London
+with pure soft water from a Welsh lake; the County Council's mains
+furnishing, without special charge, a constant supply up to the top of
+every house: the County Council's hydrants and standpipes yielding
+abundant cleansing fluid from the Thames to every street. When every
+parish has its public baths and washhouses open without fees, every
+Board school its swimming-bath and teacher of swimming, every railway
+station and public building its drinking-fountain and basin for
+washing the hands, every park its bathing and skating ponds--then we
+shall begin to show the world that we do not, after all, fall behind
+Imperial Rome in this one item of its splendid magnificence. By that
+time the landlord will be required, as a mere condition of sanitary
+fitness, to lay on water to every floor, if not to every tenement, and
+the bath will be as common an adjunct of the workman's home as it now
+is of the modern villa residence. And just as in some American cities
+hot water and superheated steam are supplied in pipes for warming
+purposes over large areas, we may even see the County Council laying
+on a separate service of hot water to be drawn at will from a tap in
+each tenement. Why should London's million families waste their
+million fires every time hot water is needed?
+
+"The economy of fuel leads, indeed, to the municipalised gas-supply,
+then laid on, as a matter of course, to every tenement, and used, not
+only for lighting, but still more largely for cooking in the stoves
+supplied at a nominal charge.
+
+"In order to relieve the pressure of population in the centre, and
+reduce the rents of the metropolitan "Connaughts," the County Council
+tramways will doubtless be made as free as its roads and bridges.
+Taxes on locomotion are universally condemned, and the economic
+effects of a penny tram-fare are precisely the same as those of a tax
+on the trip. The County Council will, however, free its trams on the
+empirical grounds of economy and the development of its suburban
+estates of artisans' dwellings, built on land bought to retain the
+unearned increment for the public benefit. Free trams may well imply
+free trains in the metropolitan and suburban area. Does not the
+Council already run a free service of steamboats on the Thames at
+North Woolwich--eventually, no doubt, to be extended all along the
+stream?
+
+"Public libraries and reading-rooms in every ward are nearly here
+already, but we may expect that the library and the public hall will
+go far to cut out the tavern (at present our only 'public' house) as
+the poor man's club. As for bands of music in the parks, municipal
+fętes, and fireworks on 'Labour Day,' and other instances of the
+communalisation of the means of 'enjoyment,' all this is already
+common form in France. The parks, indeed, will be tremendous affairs.
+But when London's gas and water and markets are owned and controlled
+by its public authorities; when its tramways, and perhaps its local
+railways, are managed like its roads and parks, not for private
+profit, but for public use; when the metropolis at length possesses
+its own river, and its own docks; when its site is secure from
+individual tyranny, and its artisans' dwellings from the whims of
+philanthropy; when, in short, London collectively really takes its own
+life into its own hands, a vast army of London's citizens will be
+directly enrolled in London's service."[688]
+
+The foregoing political and economic programme would be more
+creditable to an imaginative schoolgirl ten years old than to a man of
+science and a politician. How are all these wonderful and almost
+miraculous changes to be financed? Quite simply and very easily--by
+plunder. Mr. Sidney Webb, like most "scientific" Socialists, is a
+loose and shallow thinker. He forgets in his calculations that
+stubborn little item--human nature. He forgets that nobody can become
+richer by transferring money from the right pocket to the left. If you
+plunder all capitalists and all middlemen, the workers will certainly
+not be better off. Owing to the absence of direct self-interest, the
+management by salaried officials will be inefficient. All experience
+of management by public bodies through officials shows that public
+enterprise is far more wasteful and far less efficient than private
+enterprise; that in official management routine, sloth, waste,
+irresponsibility, nepotism, favouritism, and often peculation too,
+become supreme. Besides, far more money than is wasted now by
+capitalists on themselves will be wasted by politicians hankering
+after popularity, and after jobs for themselves and their followers
+and dependents. The greatest wasters in the poorest districts are the
+irresponsible Socialist authorities. In palatial town halls
+sumptuously furnished, in magnificent public libraries, in marble
+baths, and other outlets of civic magnificence, money wrung from the
+hard-worked wage-earners is wasted in far greater sums than could
+possibly be spent by the most reckless capitalist on his private
+amusement. The most magnificent town halls, &c., are to be found in
+the poorest districts. Besides, "salaries must be liberal enough to
+attract the best men to the public service."[689] It is a matter of
+course that the rule of irresponsible Socialist agitators, that a
+system of local government whereby those who have no money are enabled
+to spend lavishly by drawing upon those who have money, will not make
+for efficiency and economy, and the end will be the Poplar-ising of
+Great Britain. There is a generally accepted principle, "No taxation
+without representation." That principle requires as a supplement, "No
+representation without taxation." Otherwise Great Britain will be
+ruled by a mob headed by imaginative and dishonest demagogues.
+
+No enterprise is too large or too costly for the Socialists. Quite
+recently the Fabians recommended in a leaflet that Glasgow should
+acquire the whole built-over ground of the city at a cost of
+_24,000,000l._, issuing against that sum Corporation Bonds bearing
+3-1/4 per cent. interest. Provided that everything should be settled
+according to expectations, and supposing that Glasgow should be able
+to borrow _24,000,000l._ at 3-1/4 per cent., which seems extremely
+unlikely, there would accrue, on the most favourable showing, a net
+profit of _200,000l._ per annum to Glasgow, if nothing be allowed for
+the cost of management.[690] The possibility that that gigantic
+speculation might prove a failure is not even considered. On the
+contrary, it is assumed as certain that Glasgow will greatly profit by
+the growing value of land. Now if through natural economic
+development, or through the rule of a Socialist national or local
+administration, Glasgow should decline and land in Glasgow should fall
+in value, the town might be ruined. Of course that would not hurt the
+penniless Socialist agitators. Besides, there would always be the
+sovereign remedy of repudiation.
+
+According to the fundamental Socialist doctrines which condemn
+profit,[691] "Municipal trading does not seek profit. To the private
+trader the making of profits or losses is a vital matter. He makes the
+mistake of thinking the same motives induce a municipality to provide
+a public service."[692] To the Socialist administrators it is quite
+immaterial whether their enterprises are run at a profit or at a loss,
+so long as they can draw freely on the rich and well-to-do to pay for
+their extravagance. "The Socialist view of the fair way of dealing
+with profits on trading concerns is to have none--if one may be
+excused so paradoxical a statement. Fair wages and good conditions
+generally for the employees, and selling at cost so that all may use
+freely the commodity or service, is the nearest approach to justice in
+respect to such municipal concerns as are incapable of being used with
+equal freedom by all."[693] "The only sound principle of municipal
+management is to run all these things primarily for use, with no idea
+of making profit at all, and as far as possible at a price to the user
+covering the cost of the production only. Such profits as are made
+should be used either to extend municipal enterprise or be utilised
+for what in Scotland is known as "the common good," that is, in the
+provision of instruction, amusements, parks and open spaces, helpful
+and beneficial to all."[694]
+
+"Municipalisation or nationalisation must proceed on the right lines
+and for a practical object. What should be the object of
+municipalisation and nationalisation? The primary object should be the
+most economical provision of the best possible public services. The
+general well-being should be the first consideration to be served,
+having due regard to the welfare of each and all engaged in these
+services. The idea of profit either in the shape of interest on loans,
+or of reduced rates and taxes, should be eliminated altogether."[695]
+"The private trader always pursues profits. That is why he is such a
+dreadful failure. The motive of municipal trading, on the contrary, is
+public welfare--the benefit of all the citizens. That is why it is
+such a tremendous success. No one ever thinks of criticising a town
+council because they make no profits on these services. Now when we
+consider the question of municipal trading in gas, tramways, and
+electricity, is the principle involved any different? Not at all. The
+provision of gas, trams, and electricity is inspired by just the same
+motives as inspired the provision of roads, parks, libraries,
+sewerages, police, and education. That is to say, the benefit of all
+the citizens."[696] "The day may come when municipal trams and
+municipal light will be just as free as municipal streets and
+municipal libraries. That is to say, a rate will be levied on the
+citizens for their upkeep, and everyone will be free to use them as
+required."[697]
+
+Such an ideal state of affairs, as pictured by scientific Mr. Webb and
+his rapacious followers, would be most desirable from the point of
+view of the town loafer. He would no longer monopolise the free
+library, the lodging-house, and the public-house corners, as he does
+at present. He would vary the monotony of the reading-room and the
+street corner by free rides up and down the town and into the country.
+In the evening he would take a hot bath in the free public baths
+recommended by Sidney Webb, sit for a while in the free clubs
+recommended by the same gentleman, and then stroll out to the free
+public park to view the free fireworks and listen to the free music.
+Free meals and lodgings will no doubt follow in due course. Great
+Britain will be ruled for the benefit of the tramp. Why should anybody
+work in such a "free" country? Who would not be a loafer or a tramp
+under these conditions--especially as the "vice" of work, to use a
+Socialistic expression, would speedily be visited by punishment in the
+shape of confiscatory taxation, if not of direct confiscation? The
+populace of decaying Athens and Rome lived under those conditions
+which are the ideals of British Socialists. The citizens lived by
+their votes for a time in idleness. They were fed and clothed by
+slaves and subject nations. But the end was starvation.
+
+To provide all these free benefits for those unwilling to work, the
+owners of property would of course have to be taxed out of existence.
+"There is no limit to the present rating powers of the local
+authority, nor to the taxing powers of the State. The recognised
+limits to local and national taxation are the needs of the respective
+authorities. Though not perhaps clearly or generally understood, the
+taxing powers of the community are based upon the principle that
+private property is only permitted to be held or enjoyed by
+individuals so long as that private possession is not opposed to the
+general welfare, and so long as the community does not require the
+property or the income for public purposes. The Socialist accepts the
+principle of taxation--taxation 'according to ability derived from the
+profits of stock-in-trade and other property'--but desires
+deliberately to incorporate another idea and purpose in taxation,
+namely, the taxation of the rich to secure such socially created
+wealth as is now taken in rent, interest, and profit, and to use this
+revenue for social reform purposes. In other words, we would by that
+means compel 'the rendering unto Cćsar the things that are
+Cćsar's.'"[698] Municipal funds would be provided, not only by local
+rates, but also by a local income and land taxes.[699] In other words,
+Socialism would eat the goose that lays the golden eggs.
+
+According to leading Socialists, municipal enterprise is preferable to
+private enterprise, not only for economic but also for moral reasons.
+"The system of private enterprise and competition reeks with
+corruption. Honesty under it is impossible. Municipal Socialism, on
+the contrary, would provide an environment which would encourage and
+promote the growth of moral activities. Instead of leading to
+corruption it would lead away from it."[700] "Private enterprise must
+lead to fraud, deceit, bribery, corruption, and even murder, in the
+struggle for existence. Municipal Socialism would entirely remove any
+temptation to commit these immoral actions. Why? Because, under
+municipal Socialism, every person who worked would be sure of a
+living."[701] We have seen some samples of the moral and purifying
+influence of municipal Socialism in the investigations recently made
+by the Board of Trade. Unfortunately these have revealed the fact
+that, in many of the most advanced Socialist corporations, fraud,
+bribery, intimidation, favouritism, and common theft are of daily
+occurrence. What else can be expected when men of predatory instincts,
+who preach the gospel of idleness and confiscation, who live not by
+work but by talk, who have been accustomed to handle pence, and who
+have to be taught by the town clerk how to sign a cheque, are suddenly
+enabled to dispose of thousands of pounds and to negotiate loans?
+
+The general public takes little interest in local elections. Most
+citizens abstain from voting. Therefore the numerous corporation
+employees often have the decisive vote in local elections, and they
+will support only a candidate who promises shorter hours or higher
+pay. Municipal employees sitting in the public galleries will even
+dominate the council chamber, intimidate councillors, and shout down
+those of whom they disapprove. Besides, they may strike and
+disorganise the public services, and make the Socialistic authorities
+look ridiculous. Therefore it is better to humour and to obey them
+than to oppose them. The Fabian Society demands for municipal servants
+"full liberty of combination," because "the servants of the public
+may often need protection against the public, as in the Post
+Office."[702] The results of Socialist teachings are to be seen in
+many municipalities. "The servants of the public" are already, and
+will in an increasing degree become, the masters of the public.
+
+Under municipal Socialism the wages of tramway-men have increased as
+follows: "In Sheffield, where the private company paid _100l._ for
+labour, the Corporation pay _165l._ for the same amount of work. In
+Bolton, where the private company paid _100l._, the Corporation pay
+_137l._ In Wallasey, where the private company paid _100l._, the
+District Council pay _185l._ In Northampton, where the private company
+paid _100l._, the Corporation pay _120l._ In Birkenhead, where the
+private company paid _100l._, the Corporation pay _315l._ In
+Portsmouth, where the private company paid _100l._, the Corporation
+pay _130l._ In Sunderland, where the private company paid _100l._, the
+Corporation pay _145l._ When the Manchester Corporation took over the
+trams they paid increased wages amounting to _60,000l._ a year."[703]
+
+The foregoing information is given by a Socialist. Some of the
+advances may be justified, but others, and probably the majority, have
+been made with that fine disregard of economy which is commonly found
+among men who can afford to be generous at other people's expense.
+Municipal Socialism is an ever-growing cancer which is rapidly
+exhausting the country.
+
+"Half the municipal debt is of a nature which can never yield a
+profit."[704] The other half is invested in enterprises many of which
+are run regardless of economy and of expense, regardless of profit and
+loss, in accordance with the Socialistic principles stated in this
+Chapter. The policy of deliberate waste and of constant increase of
+debt, the principles of "launching out into something new" and
+"levelling up their districts," perhaps also the fear of eventual
+bankruptcy and repudiation, have at last frightened the investor.
+Corporation stocks can no longer be considered as safe first-class
+securities. Besides, the banks have begun to refuse to accommodate
+Socialistic municipalities with the necessary funds by overdrafts,
+short loans, &c. Socialists have therefore begun to complain when they
+saw that the unlimited supply of other peoples' money was diminishing.
+They consider it a grievance that they can no longer arbitrarily
+squander on fantastic undertakings what is not their own. "The
+hostility of the banking interest to municipal borrowing, and the
+threat to 'cut off supplies' has at length taken practical form.
+Disappointed in their attempt to secure sufficiently favourable
+treatment from their bankers (Parr's), the Chester Corporation applied
+to four other banks in the city, viz. Lloyds, North and South Wales,
+National Provincial, and Liverpool Banks. All refused to tender for
+the account. The banks are not run for the public, the public are run
+for the bankers."[705] Also, the banks, instead of lending their funds
+gratis to Socialist corporations, are heartless enough to demand
+interest "usury" on their loans. "Unfortunately at present public
+bodies must pay heavy tribute as interest on borrowed money."[706]
+"Our embryo Socialistic enterprises are even now suffering from the
+toll of interest which a restricted credit and currency permit the
+money lords to exact."[707]
+
+Has the attitude of the investing public and the banks caused the
+Socialist municipalities to restrain their insane expenditure, and to
+keep it within legitimate bounds? No, they have tried to obtain money
+by borrowing it in small sums directly from the public. "The
+Corporation of Bolton, the Boroughs of Heywood, Middleton, and others,
+invite the investment of small sums of money in municipal enterprise,
+offering a higher rate of interest on deposits than the banks can
+supply."[708]
+
+Many Socialists advocate that the municipalities should raise money by
+issuing paper-money in unlimited quantities or that they should become
+bankers, pay interest on deposits, and invest the savings of the poor
+in highly speculative enterprises carried on without regard to economy
+and expense, or to profit and loss. "Why pay in usury at all? Abolish
+the gold monopoly by demonetising metals, and the sole remaining
+argument against municipal trading disappears along with the most
+crippling restriction under which public enterprise labours."[709]
+"Credit notes would be of little use were the city's credit gone,
+because the people would be afraid to take them. However valuable the
+assets of a municipal authority might be--and municipal concerns are
+usually far more substantial and sound than banking companies are--it
+is public confidence that constitutes the first requisite, and this it
+is the duty of all reformers to establish and maintain against the
+assaults of those whose interest it is to break it down. The
+institution of municipal savings banks under the protection of, and
+subject to inspection by, the State would assist public authorities
+and render them less dependent on the bankers; then when people had
+become accustomed to thinking their city's credit at least equal to
+that of the leading banks, a limited issue of notes might be
+allowed."[710] Further proposals for "demonetising" gold and issuing
+unlimited amounts of unconvertible notes, on the model of the
+assignats of the French Revolution, will be found in Chapter XX.
+"Some Socialist Views on Money, Banks, and Banking."[711]
+
+These and many other dangerous experiments could easily be undertaken
+by needy demagogues with fantastic ideas, if the supervision of
+municipalities by the national Government were abolished. Therefore
+the Independent Labour Party passed at the last Annual Conference the
+following resolution: "That this Conference urges the Labour party in
+Parliament to secure the extension of power to municipalities,
+enabling them to undertake trading and the development of existing
+municipal concerns, without the sanction of the Local Government
+Board, and to use any profits accruing from same in such manner as may
+be decided by the municipality, without the necessity of promoting
+Parliamentary Bills."[712]
+
+No administration can continue for long a financial and general policy
+of waste and pillage, such as that followed by the Socialist
+municipalities of Great Britain, without diminishing not merely
+private wealth but also the national wealth. The British Socialists
+seem determined to do all they can to destroy as fast as possible the
+accumulated wealth of the country and its productive power.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[668] _The Advance of Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[669] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, pp. 27, 28.
+
+[670] Snowden, _Straight Talk to Ratepayers_, p. 8.
+
+[671] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 148.
+
+[672] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 157.
+
+[673] Blatchford, _Competition_, p. 4.
+
+[674] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, pp. 93, 94.
+
+[675] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, pp. 87, 88.
+
+[676] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 88.
+
+[677] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 42.
+
+[678] _The Times, Municipal Socialism_, p. 43.
+
+[679] _Ibid._
+
+[680] Suthers, _Killed by High Rates_, p. 12.
+
+[681] _Ibid._ p. 11.
+
+[682] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 552.
+
+[683] Suthers, _Killed by High Rates_, p. 9.
+
+[684] Suthers, _Municipal Debt_, p. 4.
+
+[685] _Daily Mail_, November 26, 1907.
+
+[686] See _A Municipal Bread Supply_; _Municipal Bakeries_; _Municipal
+Drink Traffic_; _Municipal Fire Insurance_; Washington, _Milk and
+Postage Stamps, &c._
+
+[687] _Municipalisation by Provinces._
+
+[688] Sidney Webb, _The London Programme_, 1892, pp. 208-213.
+
+[689] Jowett, _Socialism and the City_, p. 17.
+
+[690] _Forward_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[691] See Chapter IV.
+
+[692] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 14.
+
+[693] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 40.
+
+[694] Irving, _The Municipality_, p. 6.
+
+[695] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 42.
+
+[696] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 9.
+
+[697] _Ibid._ p. 8.
+
+[698] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, pp. 3, 4, 6.
+
+[699] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 38; Snowden, _The
+Socialist's Budget_, p. 83.
+
+[700] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 119.
+
+[701] _Ibid._ p. 122.
+
+[702] _A Labour Policy for Public Authorities_, p. 19.
+
+[703] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 103.
+
+[704] Snowden, _A Straight Talk to Ratepayers_, p. 8.
+
+[705] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 15.
+
+[706] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 42.
+
+[707] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 11.
+
+[708] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 13.
+
+[709] _Ibid._ pp. 13, 14.
+
+[710] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, pp. 45, 46.
+
+[711] See p. 281 ff.
+
+[712] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference_, 1907, p.
+50.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+SOCIALISM AND AGRICULTURE
+
+
+In one of his books Mr. Blatchford gives prominence to the following
+statement contained in Prince Kropotkin's book, "Fields, Factories,
+and Workshops": "If the soil of the United Kingdom were cultivated
+only as it was thirty-five years ago, 24,000,000 people could live on
+home-grown food. If the cultivable soil of the United Kingdom were
+cultivated as the soil is cultivated on the average in Belgium, the
+United Kingdom would have food for at least 37,000,000 inhabitants. If
+the population of this country came to be doubled, all that would be
+required for producing food for 80,000,000 inhabitants would be to
+cultivate the soil as it is now cultivated in the best farms of this
+country, in Lombardy, and in Flanders."
+
+Commenting on this statement Mr. Blatchford says: "Why, indeed, should
+we not be able to raise 29,000,000 quarters of wheat? We have plenty
+of land. Other European countries can produce, and do produce, their
+own food. Take the example of Belgium. In Belgium the people produce
+their own food. Yet their soil is no better than ours, and their
+country is more densely populated, the figures being: Great Britain
+per square mile, 378 persons; Belgium per square mile, 544 persons.
+Suppose wheat will cost us _2s._ a quarter more to grow it than to buy
+it. On the 23,000,000 quarters we now import we should be saving
+_2,000,000l._ a year. Is that a very high price to pay for security
+against defeat by starvation in time of war?"[713]
+
+Many Socialists very wisely demand that everything possible should be
+done to bring about a revival of our agriculture. They point to the
+agricultural prosperity of Belgium, France, and Germany, and they
+would be quite ready to sanction the re-introduction of Protection, as
+will be seen in Chapter XXI. Nevertheless they absolutely and
+unconditionally oppose the creation of a class of peasant proprietors,
+although the intensive agriculture of France, Belgium, and Germany is
+founded upon the system of peasant proprietorship, and although
+general experience, both in Europe and on other continents, has proved
+the great superiority of peasant proprietors over large farmers in
+intensive culture. "No Socialist desires to see the land of the
+country divided among small peasant freeholders, though this is still
+the ideal professed by many statesmen of 'advanced' views."[714]
+"Socialism is hostile to small properties."[715]
+
+Socialists pretend to be opposed to the creation of peasant
+proprietors either on scientific grounds or for ethical reasons. "As a
+matter of economic evolution, small properties will have to go. But
+viewed from an ethical standpoint, surely nothing has been more
+conducive to the development of the worst side of human nature--of
+'hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness' than the system of small
+properties."[716] "If England were cut up into small allotments, the
+general state would be harder and leaner than before."[717] "Would
+Socialists take away the land from the landlords and let it out in
+little plots? No. Because that would make a lot of little proprietors
+as selfish as the landlords."[718] "Divide the land into small
+allotments and very soon the cunning and rapacious would 'acquire' the
+estates of other men, and so we should come back to the present state
+of chaos. In fact, the parcelling out of the land means putting back
+the clock of civilisation about one thousand years."[719]
+
+The real reason which prompts Socialists to oppose by all means the
+creation of peasant proprietors is to be found neither in the realm of
+political economy nor in that of abstract ethics, but in that of party
+politics. The peasant proprietor, like every sensible owner of
+property, is hostile to Socialism. "The peasant has nothing else in
+the world but his farm, and that is one of the reasons why it is so
+very difficult to win him over to our cause. He is, indeed, one of the
+last bulwarks of private property."[720] The philosopher of British
+Socialism frankly confesses: "On the Continent the peasant proprietor,
+who may now be reckoned as part of the _petite bourgeoisie_, just as
+the large landlord with us may be reckoned as part of the big
+capitalist class, is a potent factor in retarding the process of
+Socialisation."[721]
+
+The experience of Socialists in Germany, Austria-Hungary, France,
+Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and Switzerland shows that Socialism finds
+practically no adherents among the land-owning peasants. At the German
+Reichstag elections of 1903, for instance, the Social-Democrats
+received almost 60 per cent. of the votes in the large towns as
+compared with less than 20 per cent. of the votes in the country. Of
+the latter, the vast majority was given by artisans and landless rural
+labourers. The peasant, like every property-owner, is an enemy of
+fantastic schemes of confiscation and of general plunder lavishly
+embellished with promises of Utopia. Therefore Social-Democrats will
+rather see the countryside of Great Britain turned into a wilderness
+than see it peopled by peasants.
+
+Desperately anxious lest the Government of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman
+should create a British peasantry, the Socialist press opposed the
+creation of a British peasantry as unscientific and certain to lead to
+disaster. The people were told in countless articles that peasant
+proprietorship had proved a failure everywhere. Under the heading "The
+Small-Holding Fraud" the "Social-Democrat" showed the true motive of
+the Socialist agitation by expressing the hope that "The Government
+will assuredly fail in their attempt to erect a peasant proprietary
+barrier against the rising proletariat"[722]--Has the Socialist outcry
+against creating peasant proprietors influenced Sir Henry
+Campbell-Bannerman's Government in its land-settlement policy? Did Sir
+Henry Campbell-Bannerman wish to satisfy the Socialists by rather
+creating small leaseholders than small freehold farmers?
+
+The positive proposals of Socialists for bringing about a revival of
+agriculture are frankly Utopian. Their proposals can of course not be
+practical, because they object to the present agricultural
+arrangements of Great Britain and to those prevailing on the continent
+of Europe. Many Socialists desire the towns to control and resettle
+the country. "The towns should claim the right of dictating to England
+the way in which the land should be put to profit. The great majority
+of the classes nearest the land, squires and farmers and parsons, are
+disqualified respectively by self-interest, by religious prejudice
+that scruples at anything that may lead to the mental enfranchisement
+of the poor, and by sheer sluggishness of intellect joined to a blind
+selfishness without parallel in any class of English society. The
+land and the labourer have hitherto been left to them. And we want a
+change of management."[723]
+
+Socialists want a "change of management" in agriculture, replacing the
+expert by the amateur in accordance with their general policy of
+turning everything upside down. Their ideal would seem to be that the
+owners of land should be dispossessed and driven into the towns, and
+be replaced by Socialistic town officials who would exploit the
+country in the interest of the town.
+
+The tenants whom the Socialists would like to create would, rightly
+considered, be merely wage-earners in the pay of the Socialistic
+administration, who, living from hand to mouth, would not be able to
+put anything by. With that object in view, rents would apparently be
+adjusted by Socialist administrations. "Tenancies would be granted for
+seven years or for twenty-one years revisable at periods of seven
+years, so that the tenant might not be able to appropriate the
+unearned increment of the land; but it should also be clearly
+understood that a satisfactory tenant would not be arbitrarily
+disturbed in his holding. At the same time no mercy would be extended
+to a bad cultivator; and when a tenant left his holding, either by the
+efflux of time or for any other reason, he would have no tenant-right
+to dispose of, but would only be entitled to compensation for
+unexhausted improvements and to a fair settlement of accounts as
+between himself and the committee. Rents would be fixed and disputes
+settled by the independent agricultural court, which would also
+continue the regulation of agricultural wages. Exploitation of the
+economically weak must not be permitted, even to a communal authority.
+It would be within the power of the committee to rent farms to
+co-operative associations of labourers if satisfied as to their
+industrial and financial capacity. Arrangements might also be made
+whereby a town could run its own dairy-farm or farms, since this is
+probably the only way in which a municipality can be sure of an
+uncontaminated supply of milk."[724]
+
+Many Socialists would like to resettle the country with colonies of town
+unemployed, but these proposals are opposed by some as impractical. "To
+imagine that any such colony could be self-supporting, that the land
+which no capitalist will now till with expert farm labourers at ten
+shillings a week would yield trade-union rates of wages to a mixed crowd
+of unemployed townsmen, that such a heterogeneous collection of waifs
+and strays, without a common acquaintanceship, a common faith, or a
+common tradition, could be safely trusted for a single day to manage the
+nation's land and capital; finally, to suppose that such a fortuitous
+agglomeration of undisciplined human atoms offers 'the most suitable and
+hopeful way of ushering in a Socialist State'--all this argues such a
+complete misconception of the actual facts of industrial and social
+life, such an entire misunderstanding of the process by which a
+democratic society passes from one stage of its development to another,
+that I feel warranted in quoting it as an extreme instance of
+Utopia-founding."[725]
+
+Whilst the various Socialist schools propound different Utopian
+schemes for the resettlement of the land in the future, their
+immediate aim is of course not so much to benefit agriculture, as they
+profess, but to gain adherents among the rural labourers. With this
+object in view they are urged to agitate for, and are promised to be
+given by the Socialists, better wages, safe and healthy homes, more
+powers for the parish councils, which are to be used for the
+restoration of common lands, real free schools and better ones, cheap
+and good allotments, pensions for the old people, reform of taxation,
+&c. The rural labourers are urged to form trade unions, and they are
+told, "All these things you can get for yourself by your trade union
+and your vote if you and all the other labourers in the district will
+join the union and will agree to vote only for those who will promise
+to help to get them for you."[726]
+
+In other pamphlets specially addressed to the rural labourers they are
+told how to get allotments, how to force the district councils to
+build good cottages for them, &c.[727]
+
+Many Socialists propound the doctrine that the first and the principal
+object in re-creating the rural industries must be the bettering of
+the wages of rural labourers, and that the State should secure them
+better wages by arbitrarily reducing rents. The object, it need hardly
+be mentioned, is rather to destroy private capital in accordance with
+the Socialists' tenets than to benefit the labourers. The Fabian
+Society, for instance, claims, "It is necessary for the State to
+interfere, partly to secure the better utilisation of our national
+resources, partly to increase our agricultural population. The class
+most needing protection, the labourers, must be dealt with first in
+order to raise them to a decent level of comfort. A living wage must
+be secured to them, and, as a consequence, the farmers' rents must be
+fixed at a fair level. An agricultural court must be set up in each
+county to regulate wages and fix rents. Continental success in
+agriculture depends on co-operation, and that in turn is associated
+with the peasant-proprietor system. That system for sundry reasons
+cannot be adopted here, but its advantages can be obtained through
+security of tenure. The small farm system should, therefore, form the
+basis of our reconstruction, free play being left for a graded system
+of farms where possible. In each county an agricultural committee
+should have compulsory power to acquire land and let it out to
+tenants, chiefly smallholders. It should have power to advance capital
+to individuals on the collective guarantee of its tenants, and it
+should be its duty to organise the collection of farm produce and its
+disposal in the market."[728]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[713] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, pp. 111, 112.
+
+[714] _Socialism True and False_, p. 18.
+
+[715] _Some Objections to Socialism Considered._
+
+[716] _Ibid._
+
+[717] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[718] Hazell, _The Red Catechism_, p. 11.
+
+[719] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[720] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 30.
+
+[721] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, p. 41.
+
+[722] _Social-Democrat_, November 1907.
+
+[723] Pedder, _The Secret of Rural Depopulation_, p. 18.
+
+[724] _The Revival of Agriculture_, p. 17.
+
+[725] Sidney Webb, _Socialism True and False_, p. 12.
+
+[726] _What the Farm Labourer Wants_, p. 4.
+
+[727] _Allotments and How to get Them_; _Parish Council Cottages and
+How to get Them._
+
+[728] _The Revival of Agriculture_, p. 22.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS ON BRITISH RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING
+
+
+Many Socialists complain, and they complain with good cause, about the
+railways of Great Britain. All the British railways are in private
+hands, and they are very inefficient. They are in many respects very
+backward, badly equipped, and badly managed. They have wasted their
+capital, watered their stock, and have paid dividends out of capital;
+their freight charges are exorbitant; besides, they give habitually
+and by various means, with which it would lead too far to deal in this
+book, preferential treatment of a very substantial kind to the
+foreigner.
+
+Many Socialists have extracted from British Government publications
+instances of such preferential treatment. One of the most widely read
+Socialist writers, for example, gives among others the following
+freight charges favouring the foreigner:
+
+"Carriage of a ton of British meat, Liverpool to London, _2l._:
+Carriage of a ton of foreign meat, Liverpool to London, _1l. 5s._:
+Carriage of a ton of eggs Galway to London, _4l. 14s._: Carriage of a
+ton of eggs Denmark to London, _1l. 4s._: Carriage of a ton of plums,
+apples, and pears, Queenborough (Kent) to London, _1l. 5s._: Carriage
+of same from Flushing (Holland), _12s. 6d._: Carriage per ton of
+English pianos Liverpool to London _3l. 10s._: Carriage as above of
+foreign, _1l. 5s._: British timber per ton Cardiff to Birmingham,
+_16s. 8d._: foreign as above _8s. 10d._ In the carriage of iron ore
+and steel rails the American railways charge _6s. 3d._ where the
+British charge _29s. 3d._"[729]
+
+"The real enemy are the monopolists of land and locomotion--the
+landlord and the raillord who are uprooting the British people from
+their native soil. It is in fact by no means easy to say which is the
+greater malefactor of the two."[730] Such differential charges are
+bound to cripple the British industries, and in view of the harm which
+is thus being done to British farmers, manufacturers, and traders, it
+is only natural that British Socialists are unanimous in condemning
+the anti-British freight policy of the railways and in recommending
+that they should be taken over and managed by the State.
+
+"There are nearly 24,000 miles of railway in the kingdom, the greater
+part of which is owned or controlled by a dozen great companies, who,
+moreover, have standing conferences through which they exercise a
+virtual monopoly against the public, although they have all the
+expenses of competing concerns. The public bears the costs and
+inconveniences of competition without many of its benefits. The total
+capital of the companies is _1,300,000,000l._ of which _200,000,000l._
+is nominal or 'watered' stock. A very large part of the rest was for
+extravagant sums paid to great landowners for their land and another
+large part for legal expenses. On this huge capital a sum of
+_44,000,000l._ has to be earned in dividends. If the State bought out
+the railways, it could borrow this necessary sum for at least
+_5,000,000l._ to _8,000,000l._ a year less than this, and at once
+effect enormous savings resulting from the present competitive and
+chaotic methods of the companies. Despite the virtual monopoly, there
+are over 3,000 railway directors drawing fees or salaries amounting to
+nearly _1,500,000l._ Of the principal of these there are eighty in the
+Lords and twenty-five in the Commons. Mr. Gladstone predicted that if
+the State did not control the railway companies, they would control
+the State, and this has come to pass. Their servants are overworked
+and underpaid, extortionate freights are charged on the carriage of
+goods, unfair preferences are given, but Parliament is powerless to
+check this."[731]
+
+"The railway system to-day is the greatest protection ever heard of in
+favour of the foreigner, and neither Mr. Chamberlain nor Mr. Balfour,
+nor any other man makes a single proposal to touch the railway
+question. Why? Because the House of Commons is dominated by the
+railway interest."[732] "Our railway experience proves that it is not
+enough to make preferential rates illegal. They reappear too easily in
+the form of rebates and even of allowances which belong to the more
+private chapters of capitalist history. The attempt of the Railway
+Commission to abolish preference in railway rates has left us with a
+system which could not be much worse from the national industrial
+point of view."[733]
+
+"Imperial trade suffers no more serious handicap than that imposed
+upon it by shipping rings and railway companies, which exploit the
+Imperial needs of transport for their own purposes, which hamper the
+ready flow of Imperial trade, and, for an insignificant percentage,
+turn the British seamen off the water in favour of the Lascar."[734]
+
+"The railways of India, which yield a great portion of our Indian
+revenue, are owned by the Indian Government. The well-managed and
+prosperous systems of Australasia, with the best conditions of labour
+and the lowest freights of any railways in the world, are State owned.
+Why, then, should not the British Government own and control in the
+public interest the systems which are so wastefully and inefficiently
+managed by the present companies?"[735]
+
+The last Annual Conference of the Independent Labour Party resolved:
+"That in the opinion of this Conference the time is ripe for the
+nationalisation of the railways of the country, and that our
+representatives be asked to urge forward a measure to that effect in
+Parliament."[736] The Fabians think that "An equitable basis of
+purchase may be found in Mr. Gladstone's Act of 1844, which enables
+the Treasury to buy out the shareholders of lines built since that
+date at twenty-five years' purchase, calculated on the earnings of the
+previous three years. The price of the railways need not be an
+insuperable, or even a serious, difficulty in the way of national
+possession of the means of transit."[737]
+
+The demand of the Socialists that the Government should acquire the
+railways would perhaps be reasonable if that demand was not coupled
+with extravagant and fantastic ideas regarding their future
+management. The different Socialistic views as to the proper
+management of State railways are summed up as follows by Mr.
+Blatchford: "The railways belong to railway companies, who carry goods
+and passengers and charge fares and rates to make profit. Socialists
+all say that the railways should be bought by the people. Some say
+that fares should be charged, some that the railways should be
+free--just as the roads, rivers, and bridges now are; but all agree
+that any profit made by the railways should belong to the whole
+nation, just as do the profits now made by the Post Office and the
+telegraphs."[738]
+
+One Socialist writer modestly proposes that the fare anywhere in
+Great Britain should be a shilling. "Look at our railroads--might they
+not be the property of the community at large as well as the high
+roads, instead of being a monopoly in the hands of private persons
+whose sole object is to enrich themselves at the cost of their fellow
+citizens? If so, it has been proved that you could go to any part of
+these islands with a shilling ticket."[739]
+
+Other Socialists advocate that railway travelling should be made
+absolutely free to all, and that the costs of running the railways
+free of charge should be borne exclusively by the rich. "The blessings
+of free travel are too many by far for enumeration, but one stands
+out. It is the only effective means yet suggested for the extirpation
+of our vile city slums. At present the sweated must live near their
+work."[740] "Overcrowding can only be cured outright by one sovereign
+remedy--by giving the toiler a home in the country; and free travel
+alone makes this possible. There is no reason why a 'docker' should
+not grow his own vegetables and be his own dairyman at the same time.
+Free travel would in a few years change the whole face of
+society."[741] "A nation that can afford to spend _140,000,000l._ a
+year on strong liquors might not unreasonably be asked to strike even
+the forty odd millions off its drink-bill--about half that amount
+would suffice for the purpose--and take them out in free ozone."[742]
+"Then would rise the question how to make up for the abolition of
+passenger fares. The answer, it seems to me, is not far to seek. The
+substitute tax must be levied on the 'unearned increment' of land,
+urban and rural. The people must therefore unfalteringly press for the
+reassessment of the 'land-tax' by gradual increase up to _20s._ in the
+pound, and in the meantime procure any further funds necessary from
+our surplus capital by a graduated income-tax. Personally I abhor
+usury, whether in the shape of railway dividends or Government
+Consols, as alike _contra naturam_ and _contra Christum_."[743]
+
+In order to further the policy of free travelling by railway,
+Socialists appear to have founded a "Free Railway Travel League,"
+domiciled at 359 Strand, London, W.C. I am not aware whether the Free
+Railway Travel League--every tramp should join it--exists still.
+
+It is only logical that, if the railways should be made free for the
+carriage of people, they should likewise be made free for the
+transport of goods. "It is obvious that if railways can be worked free
+for passengers they may be made free for goods as well. Free goods
+traffic would everywhere equalise the price of commodities, be they
+the produce of sea or land, mine or manufacture, and equal wages in
+town and country would speedily follow equal prices with beneficial
+results to the people altogether incalculable. Granted free passes,
+free freights will doubtless in time follow almost as a matter of
+course."[744]
+
+When free travel by railway has been established, free travel by
+tramway, which has already been demanded by municipal reformers (see
+Chapter XVII.), will necessarily also be introduced. A publication
+issued by the most scientific body of British Socialists, the Fabian
+Society, urges: "There is only one safe principle to guide the
+reformer. The tramways, the light railways, and the railways must be
+regarded as the modern form of the king's highway. Our fathers spent
+time and trouble ridding the roads of tolls; and railway rates and
+passenger fares are merely modern tolls. Their abolition must come
+sooner or later."[745] "We have abolished the turnpike gate and the
+toll-collector, and our highways are free in the sense that they are
+maintained by general assessment. And if the turnpike gate was an
+odious obstruction to the traveller, how much more obnoxious to him,
+or her, is the railway ticket-box?"[746]
+
+Railways may be made free before the ideal Socialist State of the
+future has been created, but they will certainly be free as soon as
+the Socialist commonwealth has been established. "Railways will play a
+very great part indeed in the Socialist State, They will be absolutely
+'free' for every purpose. The cost of actual working is comparatively
+inconsiderable, while the benefits of free transit are incalculable.
+To decentralise the population so as to efface the distinction between
+dwellers in town and country is to renovate humanity physically and
+morally."[747]
+
+After travel and transport has been made absolutely free on land
+throughout the length and breadth of Great Britain, the free travel
+and transport principle will of course be extended to travel and
+transport by sea, and free travel and transport by sea will better
+bind the Empire together than a Pan-Britannic Customs Union. The most
+scientific body of British Socialists, the Fabian Society, says: "A
+logical consequence of the national management of internal means of
+communication will be the completion of the State control of our
+oversea transit. It is impossible here to go into details. Let it
+suffice to remark that already the nation has a direct financial
+interest in the great steamship lines, through its mail subsidies and
+Admiralty loans with corresponding claims for service in war; that
+intellectually the nation, by its pride in its magnificent mercantile
+fleet, regards it as a national possession, and declines to consider
+our shipping as the mere private property of the shareholders of the
+steamship companies; and finally, that our navy is maintained at
+enormous public expense expressly to protect the mercantile fleet,
+which at present is mainly private property."[748] "The notion that
+the forces making for disintegration can be neutralised by 10 per
+cent. preferential duties is not worth discussing; indeed, the raising
+of the fiscal question seems at least as likely to reveal our
+commercial antagonisms as our community of interests. And the huge
+distances will be mighty forces on the side of disintegration unless
+we abolish them. Well, why not abolish them? Distances are now counted
+in days, not in miles. The Atlantic Ocean is as wide as it was in
+1870; but the United States are four days nearer than they were then.
+Commercially, however, distance is mainly a matter of freightage. Now
+it is as possible to abolish ocean freightage as it was to make
+Waterloo Bridge toll-free, or establish the Woolwich free ferry. It is
+already worth our while to give Canada the use of the British Navy for
+nothing. Why not give her the use of the mercantile marine for nothing
+instead of taxing bread to give her a preference? Or, if that is too
+much, why not offer her special rates? It is really only a question of
+ocean road making. A national mercantile fleet plying between the
+provinces of the Empire, and carrying Empire goods and passengers
+either free or at charges far enough below cost to bring Australasia
+and Canada commercially nearer to England than to the Continent, would
+form a link with the mother-country which once brought fully into use
+could never be snapped without causing a commercial crisis in every
+province."[749]
+
+The purchase of the whole British mercantile marine by the Government
+would incidentally have the effect of abolishing the British shipping
+rings, which, like the British railways, frequently penalise with
+discriminating rates the British producer and shipper. "Of the real
+conditions of ocean traffic, at present, the public has no suspicion.
+All our lines of communication are controlled by shipping rings which
+carry preferential rating (an illegal practice in our inland transit)
+to an extent that would shock Mr. Chamberlain back again to Free
+Trade if he realised it; for their preferences are by no means
+patriotic; they have helped Belgium into our Indian market, and
+Germany and America into South Africa and New Zealand. The cotton
+conference of Liverpool directly assisted the American exporters of
+cotton to China by the heavy charges they made against the Lancashire
+manufacturer--charges which were modified only after repeated
+protests. These rings and rates constitute the most dangerous
+disintegrating force we have to face."[750]
+
+There is much justification in the complaints of the Socialists with
+regard to British railways and shipping, but their proposals are, as
+usual, quite Utopian. For all ills of the body politic and economic,
+the Socialists have only one remedy, and that an infallible
+one--nationalisation, or rather Socialisation.
+
+The policy of the British railway and shipping rings is no doubt a
+national scandal, but their defects and delinquencies may no doubt be
+counteracted by appropriate Government action and legislation. It is
+probably now too late for the State to acquire the railways. The State
+cannot afford to risk a large capital loss. Railway purchase would
+apparently be too speculative an undertaking.
+
+If the State should acquire the railways, they would certainly be run
+at a profit. The sooner the Socialists abandon their fixed idea that
+profit on private and national undertakings is immoral, the better
+will it be for them. So long as they decry profit and propose to work
+State undertakings without a profit, so long can they not be taken
+seriously. Profit consists in part of the salary of direction, in part
+of the earnings set aside for effecting the necessary alterations,
+improvements, and extensions, and for forming a reserve fund for
+making losses good, &c. Therefore abandonment of profit would mean the
+decline and decay of the national capital.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[729] Davidson, _Free Trade_ v. _Fettered Transport_, p. 9.
+
+[730] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[731] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, pp. 119, 120.
+
+[732] Hyndman, _Real Reform_, p. 14.
+
+[733] _Fabianism and the Fiscal Question_, p. 17.
+
+[734] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 96.
+
+[735] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, p. 120.
+
+[736] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference_, 1907, p.
+50.
+
+[737] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 14.
+
+[738] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 86.
+
+[739] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 13.
+
+[740] Davidson, _Free Trade and Fettered Transport_, p. 17.
+
+[741] Davidson, _Free Rails and Trams_, p. 9.
+
+[742] _Ibid._ p. 13.
+
+[743] Davidson, _Free Rails and Free Trams_, p. 7.
+
+[744] _Ibid._ p. 14.
+
+[745] _Public Control of Electric Power and Transit_, p. 10.
+
+[746] Davidson, _Free Rails and Trams_, p. 5.
+
+[747] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 158.
+
+[748] _Public Control of Electric Power and Transit_, p. 14.
+
+[749] _Fabianism and the Fiscal Question_, p. 16.
+
+[750] _Fabianism and the Fiscal Question_, p. 16.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON MONEY, BANKS, AND BANKING
+
+
+All Socialists wish to abolish private capital. Money embodies private
+capital in its most portable form. It can easily be hidden, and as the
+Socialists wish to prevent the re-accumulation of new private capital,
+the abolition of money, and especially of gold and silver, has
+prominently figured in all Socialistic programmes since the time of
+Protagoras and of Plato. Socialists wish to effect the exchange of
+commodities, the payment of labour, and the settlement of accounts
+mainly by book-keeping.
+
+"As there are no wares in the new community neither will there be any
+money."[751] "In the Social-Democratic State the citizen will be
+granted an income, which will be indicated by labour checks or credit
+cards, as advocated by Gronlund, Bellamy, and John Carruthers."[752]
+"Under ideal Socialism there would be no money at all and no wages.
+The industry of the country would be organised and managed by the
+State, much as the Post Office now is; goods of all kinds would be
+produced and distributed for use and not for sale, in such quantities
+as were needed. Hours of labour would be fixed, and every citizen
+would take what he or she liked from the common stock. Food, clothing,
+lodging, fuel, transit, amusement, and all other things would be
+absolutely free, and the only difference between a Prime Minister and
+a collier would be the difference of rank and occupation."[753]
+
+"How will exchange then be carried on? By account facilitated by some
+such contrivance as labour checks. When in the Co-operative
+Commonwealth money becomes superannuated we shall have nothing but
+checks, notes, tickets--whatever you will call them--issued by
+authority."[754] And how will international exchange be carried on?
+Very simply and easily. By barter. "So much tea is wanted from China.
+The Chinese Government is advised of the quantity and asked what
+British goods will be acceptable by the Celestials in exchange. There
+will be international barter on a grand and equitable scale."[755] It
+is quite logical that the Socialists who wish to introduce the
+primitive Communism of the prehistoric ages (see Chapter XXIX.), wish
+also to reintroduce the aboriginal system of barter.
+
+However, the contemplated form of "international barter on a grand and
+equitable scale" will have its difficulties. China, for instance, may
+sell much silk and tea to England and take in exchange mostly foreign
+manufactured goods from America, Germany, Belgium, and Japan, as she
+does at present. It is to be feared that the "grand and equitable
+system of international barter" will prove impracticable even if, as
+most Socialists somewhat rashly assume, all States should become
+Socialistic commonwealths, or if the grand Socialist Republic of the
+world should actually be created. We have at present an international
+currency, Gold. The contemplated creation of unlimited paper issues in
+lieu of gold, the fulfilment of the ideal of many Socialists, would
+have a very simple, a very certain, and a very unpleasant consequence.
+Foreign merchants, doubting the value of the new paper currency and
+the stability of the new Socialist Government, would of course refuse
+to part with their goods. Not a pound of cotton, not a bushel of wheat
+would reach England from abroad. The nation would be starving, and
+Socialist deputations would hasten to search out Lord Rothschild in
+the workhouse, where no doubt he would reside, and implore him to
+reintroduce capitalism and food into Great Britain.
+
+Some Socialists of the saner kind fear that it will not be possible to
+abolish money. Kautsky, for instance, writes: "To abolish money I
+consider impossible. Money is the simplest means as yet known which
+renders it possible in a mechanism so complicated as the modern system
+of production, with its enormously minute subdivision of labour, to
+arrange for the smooth circulation of products and their distribution
+among the individual members of society; it is the means which enables
+everyone to satisfy his needs according to his individual taste
+(naturally within the limits of his economic power). As a medium of
+circulation, money will remain indispensable so long as nothing better
+is found."[756]
+
+Socialists declaim against the immorality of charging
+interest--"usury" as they call it (see Chapters IV., IX., and XVII.),
+and they are indignant that the banks are unwilling to advance gratis
+unlimited funds to Socialist town councils to be wasted as fancy may
+direct (see page 258). Therefore they wish to abolish "that most
+costly of all modern parasites, the banker."[757] Some very
+irreligious, if not atheistic, Anarchist-Socialists, such as Mr.
+Morrison Davidson, pretend to object to interest on religious grounds
+because, "the Way, the Truth, and the Life said, 'Lend hoping for
+nothing again.'"[758] Other Socialists wish to abolish the banks and
+the charging of interest for the benefit of the people and of the
+Socialist municipal and other councils. "Usury--in that offensive
+pregnant little word is contained the secret of Society's worries and
+Man's woes. Abolish usury: that is the true Fiscal Reform
+Policy."[759]
+
+"Usury can be arrested at present by nationalisation of exchange. The
+nationalisation of exchange must be undertaken. Metal must be
+demonetised and reduced to the ranks. Banking must be undertaken by
+the municipalities and county councils, and by these elective bodies
+only, while a durable paper currency issued on the basis of the
+ascertained wealth of the nation, and maintained in true relation to
+it, shall supersede gold. Then we arrive at a scientific solution of
+the question of exchange and put in operation the currency and credit
+system of Socialism."[760]
+
+When the banks and the gold currency have been abolished and when
+"exchange has been nationalised" the Socialist local authorities will
+no longer have any difficulty in procuring the unlimited funds they
+need for the execution of their boundless plans. They will raise the
+money by the printing of practically unlimited quantities of paper
+money issued against the security of "the ascertained wealth of the
+nation." If they wish to spend money, they simply "make it" by means
+of an ordinary printing press. Could a simpler and more ingenious
+system for making money be devised?
+
+"Recently notice has been given by leading bankers of their intention
+to discriminate against municipal loans. And as things now stand, it
+is certain that, if an organised effort is made generally by the
+bankers throughout the country by advising clients against such
+investments and by refusing to accept municipal bonds as collateral
+security for overdrafts, &c.--a serious check will be put upon public
+enterprise. Those who imagine bankers either impotent or incapable of
+such treason against the public interest should remember what took
+place in the United States in 1893.
+
+"The natural suggestion to be offered as a counter-move to the threat
+of the bankers and their Industrial Freedom League is to add to those
+enterprises now under municipal control that of banking. And surely
+there is nothing which lends itself more easily to municipalisation!
+If the credit of a banking house can be employed for promoting
+enterprise and earning dividends, why cannot municipalities employ
+their own credit directly? In others words, why cannot the credit of a
+city be utilised to carry on its municipal works instead of it having
+to borrow the credit of a bank and pay interest charges? Consider how
+public works are now financed. The London County Council decides to
+build decent and respectable houses in some locality for the working
+classes. It requires, we will say, _500,000l._ with which to build
+dwellings for 2,000 families. Bankers are invited to tender for the
+loan, and finally the Council gets this advance on a guarantee of 3
+per cent. per annum, the principal being repayable at the end of
+thirty-three and a third years. At the end of this period the Council
+will have paid the bank _500,000l._ in interest as well as the
+_500,000l._ original loan. The charge for the loan is equal to the
+entire cost of the whole undertaking; the result is that each family
+must pay about twice the amount of rent that it would otherwise have
+to pay if the Council had not incurred interest charges through
+borrowing other people's credit. Was there ever greater lunacy in
+public affairs?
+
+"Suppose that instead of issuing credit in the shape of bonds of large
+denomination, the Council issued it in notes of small denominations of
+pounds and shillings. Does anyone mean to assert that that credit
+which is eagerly purchased by a banker would be refused by a
+bricklayer or stonemason? Supposing the London County Council was
+empowered to issue its credit in one-pound notes, as well as large
+amounts, and supposing it was compulsory that these notes were good
+in payment of rates. Is there any question as to their being
+acceptable? The plan is so simple and so safe that at first it seems
+amazing it should have been so long out of employment."[761]
+
+"Of course gold will drain off abroad--if the foreigners don't follow
+in our footsteps at once. If the demonetised gold is withdrawn--well,
+we can have a new currency by nationalising the railways and paying
+the shareholders 'in current coin'" (which means in unconvertible
+notes), "not in redeemable, interest-bearing bonds. So long as solid
+wealth rests behind our issue, our financial policy is sound. Of
+course, the railway and other shareholders will want fresh
+investments; they won't find them, because no man will pay interest to
+usurers when he can monetise his credit at the mere cost of banking
+and exchange. They must therefore spend it, and the currency will
+never be restricted henceforward. And this national ownership of
+exchange can be operated to compel every monopolist to sell his
+monopoly to the nation."[762]
+
+This insane project is called by the writer, "A scientific way to
+Socialism."[763]
+
+Surely science is the most abused word in modern language. The
+creation of money by unlimited issues of paper secured by the national
+possessions was tried on the grandest scale at the French Revolution.
+The "assignats" were secured on the national domains, and their
+security seemed absolute to the revolutionaries. The great Mirabeau
+had stated on September 27, 1790: "Our assignats are not ordinary
+paper money. They are a new creation for which there is no precedent.
+What constitutes the value of metal money? Its intrinsic value. Now I
+ask you: Does paper which represents the foremost of the possessions
+of a nation such as France not possess all the characteristics of
+intrinsic and generally accepted value which metal money
+possesses?"[764] The "assignats" speedily fell to a discount, although
+dealing in them at a discount was made punishable with twenty years'
+imprisonment with hard labour,[765] and they fell ultimately to
+waste-paper value. A pair of boots worth thirty francs in gold cost
+10,000 francs in paper. On paper all were immensely rich. Yet the
+masses were starving. Unfortunately people cannot live by consuming
+unlimited quantities of credit notes. They can become prosperous
+neither by robbing the rich nor by calling a shilling a sovereign, but
+only by producing more. Greater wealth means simply increased
+consumption, and increased consumption, unless based on increased
+production, can only be effected by intrenching upon and diminishing
+the national capital, the national reserve store of food, clothing,
+tools, &c., and thus causing widespread misery and starvation.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[751] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future_, p. 192.
+
+[752] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 90.
+
+[753] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[754] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 103.
+
+[755] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 157.
+
+[756] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 14.
+
+[757] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 44.
+
+[758] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 57.
+
+[759] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 1.
+
+[760] _Ibid._ pp. 10, 17.
+
+[761] _How to Finance Municipal Enterprises_, pp. 3-5.
+
+[762] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 20.
+
+[763] _Ibid._
+
+[764] _Nouvelle Biographie Générale_, vol. xxxv. p. 39.
+
+[765] Roscher, _System_, p. 227.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXI
+
+SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON FREE TRADE AND PROTECTION
+
+
+In his thoughtful book on Socialism, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., the
+Socialist leader, attributes the rise of the Socialist movement in
+great Britain to various causes, one of which is "the reaction against
+Manchesterism."[766]
+
+Socialists, generally speaking, are opposed to Free Trade. Neither the
+moderate nor the revolutionary sections of British Socialism have a
+good word to say for it. The Socialist leaders, looking at the
+question of Free Trade and Protection from the worker's point of view,
+have arrived with Lecky at the conclusion that the whole Liberal Free
+Trade agitation is one of the greatest political impostures which the
+world has witnessed,[767] a view which, by the by, was also expressed
+by Bismarck.[768]
+
+Socialists are not under any illusion as to the causes which led to
+the introduction of Free Trade into Great Britain, and they sneer at
+the humanitarian cant with which its promoters successfully surrounded
+it. One of the leading Socialist books states with regard to this
+point: "Protection was no longer needed by the manufacturers, who had
+supremacy in the world-market, unlimited access to raw material, and a
+long start of the rest of the world in the development of machinery
+and in industrial organisation. The landlord class, on the other
+hand, was absolutely dependent on Protection. The triumph of Free
+Trade therefore signifies economically the decay of the old landlord
+class pure and simple, and the victory of capitalism. The capitalist
+class was originally no fonder of Free Trade than the landlords. It
+destroyed in its own interest the woollen manufacture in Ireland, and
+it would have throttled the trade of the colonies had it not been for
+the successful resistance of Massachusetts and Virginia. It was
+Protectionist so long as it suited its purpose to be so. But when
+cheap raw material was needed for its looms, and cheap bread for its
+workers; when it feared no foreign competitor, and had established
+itself securely in India, in North America, in the Pacific; then it
+demanded Free Trade."[769] "Protection at home was needless to
+manufacturers who beat all their foreign rivals, and whose very
+existence was staked on the expansion of their exports. Protection at
+home was of advantage to none but to the producers of articles of food
+and other raw materials, to the agricultural interest, which, under
+the then existing circumstances in England, meant the receivers of
+rent, the landed aristocracy."[770]
+
+The Free Trade manufacturers, who were chiefly interested in cheapness
+of production, cared little what became of the workers. "The
+individualist devotees of _laisser faire_ used to teach us that when
+restrictions were removed, free competition would settle everything.
+Prices would go down, and fill the 'consumer' with joy unspeakable;
+the fittest would survive, and as for the rest--it was not very clear
+what would become of them, and it really didn't matter."[771]
+
+The doctrines and the boasts of the Free Traders are usually treated
+by the Socialists with contempt. "Cobdenites ascribe every known or
+imagined improvement in commerce, and the condition of the masses, to
+Free Trade. Things are better than they were fifty years ago: Free
+Trade was adopted fifty years ago. _Ergo_--there you are. There is not
+a word about the development of railways and steamships, about
+improved machinery, about telegraphs, the cheap post and telephones,
+about education and better facilities of travel."[772]
+
+The unsoundness of the fundamental doctrine of Free Trade, "Buy in the
+cheapest and sell in the dearest market," has frequently been exposed
+by Socialists. Mr. Blatchford, for instance, in a book of his of which
+more than a million copies have been sold gives prominence to Cobden's
+pronouncement in the House of Commons in which he expounded the
+celebrated maxim: Buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market:
+"To buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest, what is the
+meaning of the maxim? It means that you take the article which you
+have in the greatest abundance and with it obtain from others that of
+which they have the most to spare; so giving to mankind the means of
+enjoying the fullest abundance of earth's goods."[773] Mr. Blatchford
+then comments upon Cobden's doctrine as follows: "Let us reduce these
+fine phrases to figures. Suppose America can sell us wheat at _30s._ a
+quarter, and suppose ours costs _32s. 6d._ a quarter. That is a gain
+of 1/15th in the cost of wheat. We get a loaf for _3d._ instead of
+having to pay _3-1/4d._ That is all the fine phrases mean. What do we
+lose? We lose the beauty and health of our factory towns; we lose
+annually some twenty thousand lives in Lancashire alone; we are in
+constant danger of great strikes; we are reduced to the meanest shifts
+and the most violent acts of piracy and slaughter to 'open up
+markets' for our goods; we lose the stamina of our people, and we lose
+our agriculture."[774]
+
+Most Socialists recognise that under the Free Trade _régime_ Great
+Britain has sacrificed her safety and her strength to profit. "Did you
+ever consider what it involved, this ruin of British agriculture?
+Don't you see that if we lose our power to feed ourselves we destroy
+the advantages of our insular position?"[775] "Don't you see that the
+people who depend on foreigners for their food are at the mercy of any
+ambitious statesman who chooses to make war upon them? And don't you
+think that is rather a stiff price to pay to get a farthing off the
+loaf? No nation can be secure unless it is independent; no nation can
+be independent unless it is based upon agriculture."[776] "We must buy
+wheat from America with cotton goods; but first of all we must buy raw
+cotton with which to make those goods. We are therefore entirely
+dependent upon foreigners for our existence."[777]
+
+"The present national ideal is to become 'The workshop of the world.'
+That is to say, the British people are to manufacture goods for sale
+to foreign countries, and in return for those goods are to get more
+money than they could obtain by developing the resources of their own
+country for their own use. My ideal is that each individual should
+seek his advantage in co-operation with his fellows, and that the
+people should make the best of their own country before attempting to
+trade with other people's."[778] "The Free Traders tell me that under
+their glorious system of free exchange nations naturally occupy
+themselves in those industries which produce the most wealth. Thus, if
+Great Britain, by employing a million men in growing corn, can produce
+_50,000,000l._ a year, while she can produce _51,000,000l._ by
+employing the men in getting coal. Great Britain will 'naturally'
+employ those men in getting coal! Sending her coal abroad, Great
+Britain can get _1,000,000l._ a year more wealth. What a beautiful
+doctrine! Enormous increase in wealth. Foreigners can send us
+_51,000,000l._ of corn for our coal, while Great Britain could only
+grow _50,000,000l._ Free Trade for ever! It never occurs to the Free
+Traders to ask: 'Is it better to have a million men working in the
+bowels of the earth, or a million men tilling the surface?"[779]
+
+"The idea is, that if by making cloth, cutlery, and other goods we can
+buy more food than we can produce at home with the same amount of
+labour, it pays us to let the land go out of cultivation and make
+Britain the 'workshop of the world.' Now, assuming that we can keep
+our foreign trade, and assuming that we can get more food by foreign
+trade than we could produce by the same amount of work, is it quite
+certain that we are making a good bargain when we desert our fields
+for our factories? Suppose men can earn more in the big towns than
+they could earn in the fields, is the difference all gain? Rents and
+prices are higher in the towns; the life is less healthy, less
+pleasant. It is a fact that the death-rates in the towns are higher,
+that the duration of life is shorter, and that the stamina and
+physique of the workers are lowered by town life and by employment in
+the factories. And there is another very serious evil attached to the
+commercial policy of allowing our British agriculture to decay, and
+that is the evil of our dependence upon foreign countries for our
+food. The plain and terrible truth is that even if we have a perfect
+fleet and keep entire control of the seas, we shall still be exposed
+to the risk of almost certain starvation during a European war. As I
+have repeatedly pointed out before, we have by sacrificing our
+agriculture destroyed our insular position. As an island we may be,
+or should be, free from serious danger of invasion. But of what avail
+is our vaunted silver shield of the sea if we depend upon other
+nations for our food? We are helpless in case of a great war. It is
+not necessary to invade England in order to conquer her. Once our
+food-supply is stopped, we are shut up like a beleaguered city, to
+starve or to surrender. Stop the import of food into England for three
+months and we shall be obliged to surrender at discretion. And our
+agriculture is to be ruined and the safety and honour of the Empire
+are to be endangered that a few landlords, coal-owners, and
+moneylenders may wax fat upon the vitals of the nation."[780] "For
+over half a century we have been committing industrial suicide. By
+laying waste our own land and throwing ourselves upon the mercy of the
+foreign food-producers, we have been deliberately sacrificing the
+millions and the future to the millionaires and the moment."[781]
+
+The celebrated cheapness argument of the Free Traders has little
+attraction for Socialists. "'Ah,' says the Free Trader, 'but think of
+the cheaper grocery and the cheaper boots!' Yes, let us think of them.
+What good does it do me, my countrymen, one of the unemployed, to
+think of the wealth of the Rothschilds, or the cheap boots and the
+cheap bread and the cheap clothes of those who benefit by these
+things? I am one of the nation. Are these things that are so good for
+the nation good for me? How can these cheap wares do me any good, who
+have no money at all? The fact is that Free Trade and cheap goods are
+only good for certain individuals. They are good for those who benefit
+by them."[782]
+
+Cheapness means low wages. Cheapness may benefit that strange and
+mythical figure the abstract "consumer" of the text-books, but need
+not benefit the working man. Very likely it will harm him, because
+"Cheap goods mean cheap labour, and cheap labour means low wages. You
+have nothing but your labour to sell, and you are told that it will
+pay you to sell that cheaply."[783] "All commodities are produced by
+labour, therefore to drive commodities down to their cheapest rate
+must result in cheap labour."[784] Cheapness may fill those with joy
+who have money in their pocket and who do not care how cheap goods are
+produced. But incidentally the policy of Free Trade and of _laisser
+faire_, the policy of cheapness which benefits the consumer and takes
+no notice of the producer, encourages and causes sweating and untold
+misery to the workers. "Do you ever consider the lives of the people
+who make these marvellously cheap things? And do you ever think what
+kind of homes they have; in what kind of districts the homes are
+situated; and what becomes of those people when they are too ill, or
+too old, or too infirm to earn even four shillings as the price of a
+hundred and twelve hours' work?"[785]
+
+Free Trade may have been beneficial in Cobden's time, when Great
+Britain was the chief manufacturing country in the world. But what is
+its effect under the changed conditions of the present time, and how
+will these changes affect her industries and her workers? "In the
+early days of our great trade the commercial school wished Britain to
+be the 'workshop of the world,' and for a good while she was the
+workshop of the world. But now a change is coming. Other nations have
+opened world-workshops, and we have to face competition. France,
+Germany, Holland, Belgium, and America are all eager to take our
+coveted place as general factory, and China and Japan are changing
+swiftly from customers into rival dealers. Is it likely, then, that
+we can keep all our foreign trade, or that what we keep will be as
+profitable as it is at present?"[786] "Suppose we lost a lump of our
+export trade. Suppose the Japanese, Chinese, or Americans capture some
+of our markets. Where should we get our food? If we could not sell our
+exports, we could not buy imports of food. We are walking on thin ice,
+my countrymen. And if competition became keener, what would the
+champions of Free Trade do to meet it? They would say: 'We must sell
+our manufactures, or you will get no food. To sell our manufactures we
+must reduce the price. To reduce the price we must reduce the cost of
+production. To reduce the cost of production we must cut down
+wages.'"[787] "Free Trade means _laisser faire_ all round, not only in
+regard to inanimate commodities, but in respect to that most important
+commodity of all--human labour power. Chinese, Japanese, Indians,
+negroes are all permitted under complete Free Trade to compete freely
+on their lower standard of life against the white man."[788] "A demand
+for a general reduction of wages is the end of the fine talk about big
+profits, national prosperity, and the 'workshop of the world.' The
+British workers are to emulate the thrift of the Japanese, the
+Hindoos, and the Chinese, and learn to live on boiled rice and water.
+Why? So that they can accept low wages and retain our precious foreign
+trade. Yes, that is the latest idea. With brutal frankness the workers
+of Britain have been told again and again that, 'If we are to keep our
+foreign trade, the British workers must accept the conditions of their
+foreign rivals,' and that is the result of our commercial glory! For
+that we have sacrificed our agriculture and endangered the safety of
+our Empire."[789]
+
+The assertion of the Free Traders that Free Trade has made Great
+Britain prosperous is treated with scorn. "The Free Traders say we,
+the nation, are richer under this system than we should be under
+Protection. By employing ourselves in those occupations in which we
+can produce the cheapest article, we earn the most wealth in money
+value.--In money value.--They do not consider the twelve million
+underfed, the hundreds of thousands of unemployed. The nation, _we_,
+are richer. That is the test. Well, my countrymen, I think it is a
+damnable doctrine, and its results are damnable. The Free Traders
+boast of our wealth. Are twelve million underfed, a million starving
+children, a million paupers, an infantile death-rate of 150 per
+1,000--are these signs of wealth? The question is not 'Is the nation
+wealthy?' but 'Are the people wealthy?' Judged by this standard, how
+poor a nation is this, my countrymen! The Free Traders tell us that we
+earn more wealth under Free Trade than we should under Protection.
+Again I ask: Who are _we_?"[790] A Socialist weekly lately said:
+"Great Britain, I understand, has recovered its prosperity; our
+exports are going strong, and our imports have nothing much to
+complain about. Prosperity? Why, Great Britain is simply rolling
+in--statistics."[791]
+
+Socialists rightly demand that the effect of British fiscal policy
+should be judged not by its effect upon the wealth of the few, but
+upon the employment of the many, and they clearly recognise the
+destructive effect which Free Trade has upon the national industries.
+"Under Free Trade it is possible for a foreign trader to take trade
+away from a British trader. If for any reason we lost an important
+trade, or several small trades, our unemployed would naturally grow.
+The Free Trade theory that the capital and the labour in the lost
+trades will find other employment is simply theory. Suppose they
+didn't. The Free Trader has no answer except: Look at our enormous
+wealth. My countrymen, looking at another man's wealth does not feed
+me, clothe me, and house me."[792] "When men are thrown out of work,
+by competition, or depression, or any cause, they do not so easily
+'transfer their services to some other new employment.' It is easy to
+make them do so--on paper. And when they do get a fresh job, is it
+always as good as the one lost? Do they not often lose all their
+belongings, and get into debt, while looking for that new employment
+which the Free Traders talk about so glibly? and do not capitalists
+often lose a good deal of capital before they give up the fight for
+the trade? Nevertheless, say the Free Traders, we, the nation, are
+richer under this system than we should be under Protection. By
+employing ourselves in those occupations in which we can produce the
+cheapest article, we earn the most wealth in money value."[793] To
+this argument the Socialists reply: "Does your moral law say it is
+right that men should be thrown on the streets to starve because other
+men in other countries produce goods 2-1/2 per cent. cheaper?"[794]
+
+The statistics of an enormous foreign trade, which Free Traders
+triumphantly display for the edification of the masses, give,
+according to the Socialists, little consolation to the unemployed and
+ill-employed workers. "Figures, be they never so dazzling, and
+numbers, be they never so round, will not feed the hungry, house the
+homeless, or bring light and warmth into the drear, precarious lives
+of the mass of our people. The increase of trade means only an
+increase of production, and not necessarily of persons employed or
+wages gained. With the rapid concentration of industries and the
+perfection of labour-saving devices, production has been enormously
+increased without any corresponding increase of employment; in some
+cases, with an actual decrease of employment. What the workers are
+interested in is not the mere growth of profitable trade, but the
+extent to which the industries of their country afford them and their
+families a security of livelihood, and the reasonable comforts and
+recreations which their labour has more than earned."[795]
+
+Most Socialists frankly own that Free Trade has been a failure. "In
+the House of Commons on March 12th, 1906, Mr. P. Snowden, M.P., said:
+'Sixty years of Free Trade had failed to mitigate or palliate to any
+considerable extent the grave industrial and social evils which Free
+Traders and Protectionists alike were compelled to admit. Sir H.
+Campbell-Bannerman had admitted them when he said that 30 per cent. of
+our population were on the verge of hunger. He contended that whatever
+improvement had been effected in the condition of the people during
+the last sixty years was due to other causes than Free Trade."[796]
+
+During 1907 the complaints among the Socialists about the effect of
+Free Trade upon employment have become louder. The fact that British
+unemployed workmen furnished an apparently inexhaustible supply of
+strike-breakers to Continental employers, that men fought like wild
+beasts at the registry offices in order to be allowed to act as
+strike-breakers in Hamburg and Antwerp, has shown the great prevalence
+of unemployment. Commenting hereon a Socialist monthly said in bitter
+irony, under the heading "British Blacklegs": "The intervention in the
+Antwerp dock-workers' strike of British workmen as blacklegs is a
+striking commentary on the prosperity of the people of this country.
+Under Free Trade we have been told--_ad nauseam_--by Liberal
+politicians that the British working-man is the most prosperous and
+well-fed human being on the face of the earth. He, with wages nearly
+double those of the best-paid Continental workman, with all kinds of
+provisions infinitely cheaper--thanks to Free Trade--than they can be
+procured elsewhere, is indeed 'God's Englishman.' It would be as
+unkind as rude to suggest that these honourable politicians had been
+lying. The only alternative conclusion to be arrived at is that the
+British workman is a most disinterested being, willing to sacrifice
+his prosperity and comfort in order to compel the miserably paid
+dockers of Antwerp and Hamburg to submit to the conditions against
+which they have revolted."[797] The action of Mr. Haldane, the present
+Secretary of State for War, in dismissing a large number of workmen
+from Woolwich Arsenal and giving a contract for 100,000 horseshoes for
+the British Army to an American firm on account of greater cheapness,
+prompted the following verses:
+
+    Mr. Haldane was smiling and suave
+    As his views upon horseshoes he gave;
+      He will buy from the Yanks
+      (Who take orders with thanks).
+    And believes that much money he'll save.
+
+    How thankful we all ought to be
+    That this most kind and careful M.P.
+      Thus shows Woolwich men
+      They will be employed when
+    They're off to the States--Q.E.D.[798]
+
+Some Socialists take a very pessimistic view of the economic position
+of Great Britain. Mr. Hyndman said that "Great Britain had lost her
+commercial and industrial supremacy. The United States now stood
+first, Germany second, and Great Britain was forced into third
+place."[799] Many years ago some far-seeing Socialists had prophesied
+the coming industrial decline of Great Britain. "The notion that
+Britain can hold a monopoly of engineering, or of any other trade,
+must be given up. Britain cannot; countries that have been almost
+wholly agricultural are rapidly becoming manufacturers too."[800] Of
+late these pessimistic forecasts have become louder and more frequent.
+The progress of industrial countries can be measured, to some extent,
+by their output of coal, and "at no distant date Germany will probably
+also surpass our output and we will be relegated to third place."[801]
+This event will very likely take place about 1910. The statistics
+published by the British Board of Trade are deceptive. They leave out
+Germany's very large and constantly growing output of lignite, which
+amounts to about 60,000,000 tons per annum, and which increases
+Germany's coal output, as stated by the Board of Trade, by about 50
+per cent.
+
+British Socialists have found out that the Free Trade doctrine with
+its hypothetical "consumer" for a centre is opposed to science, to
+experience, and to common-sense. "The present system of trade is, in
+my opinion, opposed entirely to reason and justice. Nearly all our
+practical economists of to-day put the consumer first and the producer
+last. This is wrong. There can be no just or sane system which does
+not first consider the producer and then widely and equitably
+regulates the distribution of the things produced."[802] They
+recognise that Free Trade has caused ill-balanced production, and
+that, through the stagnation and decay of industries, men who ought to
+be engaged in production have been forced into more or less
+unprofitable and more or less useless employments. "What this country
+is rotting for is the want of more and better producers of
+necessaries--more and better market-gardeners, fruit-growers,
+foresters, general farmers, wool-workers, builders, and useful makers
+generally. Instead of which, the present system is giving us more and
+more non-producers--more and more shopkeepers, middlemen, commercial
+travellers, advertising agents, dealers, and wasters generally.
+According to the last census returns, we find that whilst the
+agricultural class shows a terrible decline, and the industrial class
+has barely kept pace with the population as a whole, on the other hand
+the commercial, or selling class, shows an increase of over 42 per
+cent. inside ten years."[803]
+
+Free Trade has been tried and has been found wanting, and a return to
+Protection, which is in accordance with the needs of the times and the
+spirit of the workers, especially of the trade unionists, is
+inevitable. "Capitalist Free Trade is a manifest failure. Trade
+unionism is, in its essence, a very sturdy form of Protection, as we
+can see, if not here in Great Britain, certainly in America and in
+Australia."[804] "Society is constantly changing its form of living:
+every day some supposed old truth goes into the limbo of forgotten
+things, and, looking around us, those who have eyes to see and ears to
+hear may see and hear on all hands the death-knell of the old
+Manchester school of political economy."[805]
+
+The claims of Free Trade and the cheap-food cry are disregarded and
+treated with contempt. "Free Traders talk about the folly of
+Protection. But Free Trade itself is a form of Protection. It protects
+the strong and the cunning against the weaker and the more honest. It
+protects the cheap and nasty against the good."[806] The founder of
+modern Socialism had stated already in 1847: "What is Free Trade under
+the present conditions of society? Freedom of capital."[807] Free
+Trade undoubtedly directly protects capital and leaves labour
+unprotected. "Your food will cost you more! I am to bow down to the
+idol of cheapness. I, one of the unemployed. What is cheapness to me,
+who have no money at all?"[808] "Your Manchester school treat all
+social and industrial problems from the standpoint of mere animal
+subsistence."[809] Declarations such as "The Social-Democratic
+Federation stands for universal free trade or free exchange and for
+the abolition of all indirect taxation,"[810] and "The only form of
+Protection advocated by the Social-Democratic Federation is the
+protection of the proletariat against the robbery and exploitation of
+the master-class"[811] have not the ring of seriousness about them.
+
+Only very rarely are utterances in favour of Free Trade to be found in
+Socialist writings. However, frequently the demand is made that Tariff
+Reform and Socialism must go hand in hand, and doubt is expressed
+whether the Tariff Reform agitation is carried on for the benefit of
+the manufacturer or for that of the workers. "Mr. Chamberlain is not a
+Socialist. His Government will not be a Socialist Government. His plan
+would protect only the rich. This fiscal fight is a fight between
+capitalists as to who shall make the profits. It is not a fight for
+the benefit of the 'nation.' That is what they tell you. The
+capitalist who loses his trade through foreign competition is a Tariff
+Reformer. He wants Protection. The capitalist who depends on cheap
+foreign imports for raw material is a Free Trader. He does not want
+his prices raised."[812] "Preferential trade is the proposal of
+individual capitalists who desire to make profits out of our Imperial
+connections."[813]
+
+The Fabian organ looks at Free Trade and Protection merely as a
+business proposition. "We care nothing for abstract Cobdenite
+economics, and are quite willing to welcome Tariff Reform if its
+advocates show us that it can be used as a lever for raising the
+standards of life and labour. The Labour party is therefore eminently
+wise in seeing how far it can be used for their advantage.
+Protectionism of the Australian Labour party is the right kind of
+Protectionism--Labour-Protectionism: a very different thing from the
+Capital-Protectionism which is (with a few exceptions) the
+characteristic mark of Tariff Reformers in this country."[814]
+
+Some revolutionary Socialists are in favour of Free Trade because they
+hope that it will bring on a revolution in Great Britain. Their great
+leader, Karl Marx, taught sixty years ago, when Free Trade was being
+introduced: "The Protective system is nothing but a means of
+establishing manufacture upon a large scale in any given country.
+Besides this, the Protective system helps to develop free competition
+within a nation. Generally speaking, the Protective system in these
+days is conservative, while the Free Trade system works destructively.
+It breaks up old nationalities and carries the antagonism of
+proletariat and bourgeoisie to the uttermost point. In a word, the
+Free Trade system hastens the social revolution. In this revolutionary
+sense alone I am in favour of Free Trade."[815] Those Socialist
+revolutionaries who wish to increase the misery of the people, hoping
+that unbearable poverty, owing to increasing unemployment and
+consequent want, will at least madden the people and cause a
+revolution--they remember that the great French revolutions were also
+brought about by unemployment and consequent widespread misery--are
+the most determined champions of Free Trade.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[766] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[767] Lecky, _History of the Eighteenth Century_, quoted in _Fabian
+Essays in Socialism_, p. 81.
+
+[768] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 531.
+
+[769] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 80, 81.
+
+[770] F. Engels in Marx, _Discourse on Free Trade_, p. 5.
+
+[771] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 90.
+
+[772] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 154.
+
+[773] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 33.
+
+[774] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 33.
+
+[775] _Ibid._ pp. 33, 34.
+
+[776] _Ibid._ p. 35.
+
+[777] _Ibid._ p. 34.
+
+[778] _Ibid._ p. 12.
+
+[779] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 100.
+
+[780] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, pp. 97, 98, and 118.
+
+[781] Hall, _Land, Labour, and Liberty_, p. 11.
+
+[782] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 82.
+
+[783] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 92.
+
+[784] _Ibid._ p. 97.
+
+[785] _Ibid._ p. 97.
+
+[786] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 100.
+
+[787] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 103.
+
+[788] _Justice_, November 23, 1907.
+
+[789] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 100.
+
+[790] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, pp. 102, 103.
+
+[791] _Clarion_, October 25, 1907.
+
+[792] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, pp. 96, 97.
+
+[793] _Ibid._ p. 101.
+
+[794] _Ibid._ p. 104.
+
+[795] _Labour Leader_, January 12, 1906.
+
+[796] _National Union Gleanings_, vol. xxvi. January-June 1906, p.
+220.
+
+[797] _Social-Democrat_, September 1907, pp. 519, 520.
+
+[798] _Battersea Vanguard_, November 1907, p. 5.
+
+[799] _Report, 27th Annual Conference Social-Democratic Federation_
+1907, p. 29.
+
+[800] Mann, _The International Labour Movement_, p. 8.
+
+[801] Jones, _Mining Royalties_, p. 14.
+
+[802] Blatchford, _Competition_, p. 9.
+
+[803] Hall, _Land, Labour, and Liberty_, pp. 9, 10.
+
+[804] _Justice_, November 23, 1907.
+
+[805] George Lansbury, _The Principles of the English Poor Law_, p.
+16.
+
+[806] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 104.
+
+[807] Karl Marx, _A Discourse on Free Trade_, p. 39.
+
+[808] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 100.
+
+[809] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 15.
+
+[810] H. Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 11.
+
+[811] _Ibid._
+
+[812] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 119.
+
+[813] J. Ramsay Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 97.
+
+[814] _New Age_, October 10, 1907, p. 369.
+
+[815] Karl Marx, _A Discourse on Free Trade_, p. 42.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXII
+
+SOCIALISM AND EDUCATION
+
+
+The attitude of Socialists towards education is a peculiar one. They
+see in it apparently less an agency for distributing knowledge and
+discovering ability than an instrument for the propagation of
+Socialism and an institution for relieving parents of all cost and
+responsibility for the maintenance and the bringing up of their
+children. Hence most Socialists, in discussing education, consider it
+rather from the point of view of those who are desirous of State
+relief than from the point of view of those who wish for good
+education.
+
+Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded by the Social-Democratic
+Federation, the following embody its education programme: "Elementary
+education to be free, secular, industrial, and compulsory for all
+classes. The age of obligatory school attendance to be raised to
+sixteen. Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher
+education, both general and technical, and all such education to be
+free. Free maintenance for all attending State schools. Abolition of
+school rates; the cost of education in all State schools to be borne
+by the national Exchequer."[816] An influential Socialist writer
+demands: "Education should be fee-less from top to bottom of the
+ladder, the universities included."[817] In accordance with the
+Socialist views regarding the relation of the sexes, which are
+described in Chapter XXV. "Socialism and Woman, the Family and the
+Home,"[818] most Socialists demand co-education and identical
+education for both sexes. "Under Socialism boys and girls will receive
+exactly the same training and exercise in the fundamentals of a
+liberal education. Success in examinations of whatever character shall
+bring equal reward and distinction. There will be no separation into
+boys' classes and girls' classes. The instruction being the same, they
+shall receive it at the same time."[819] "Education will be the same
+for all and for both sexes. The sexes will be separated only in cases
+in which functional differences make it absolutely necessary."[820]
+
+Socialists see in the schools chiefly a means whereby to abolish
+parental responsibilities and to secure "free State maintenance" for
+all children. In claiming free State maintenance, Socialists grossly
+exaggerate with regard to the number of underfed children. "It is
+doubtful if half the children at present attending school are
+physically fit to be educated, and medical men of eminence have
+unhesitatingly expressed the opinion that the alarming increase of
+insanity, which is one of the most terrible characteristics of modern
+social life, is largely, if not entirely, due to the attempt to
+educate those who are too ill-nourished to stand the mental strain
+that even the most elementary school-training involves. As a remedy
+for this, the Social-Democratic Federation advocates a complete system
+of free State maintenance for all children attending school. This is
+an essential corollary of compulsory education. Only complete free
+maintenance will meet the requirements of the case."[821] "All
+children, destitute or not, should be fed, and fed without charge, at
+the expense of the State or municipality. We propose that the regular
+school course should include at least one meal a day. Thus only can
+we make sure that all the children who need feeding will be fed."[822]
+"To cram dates into the poor little skulls of innocent children when
+you ought to be cramming dates down their throats is not a right thing
+to do, especially when you remember that the most precious thing in
+this world is a human life, and when you realise that you are
+murdering systematically thousands of children every year because they
+cannot get proper food--they cannot even get pure milk in the great
+cities of our land. One of our first duties in this nation is to see
+that every child has a right to the best and most ample provision for
+its physical needs. That should be the primary charge upon the nation.
+I am not here to-night to discuss the great question of the State
+maintenance of children. Personally I am absolutely in favour of
+it."[823] Experience of other nations has taught that the institution
+of free meals for necessitous school-children is immediately and very
+grossly abused by unscrupulous parents easily able to feed their
+children. From Milan, for instance, we learn that "When in 1900 this
+service began, meals were given on only 133 days out of a possible 174
+days of school attendance. The outlay was then set down at 98,300
+francs. During the second year, however, free meals were served on 153
+days and cost 149,337 francs. In 1903 the free meals cost the
+municipality 247,766 francs and 277,603 in 1904. The outlay will now
+exceed 300,000 francs, and the number of pupils who manage to
+establish their claim to be fed gratuitously is ever increasing."[824]
+British experiments of free feeding on a smaller scale have shown that
+"In the large majority of cases the children who are sent to school
+hungry are so sent, not by honest and poor parents, but by those who
+have an imperfectly developed sense of parental responsibility and are
+willing to shuffle out of the duty of providing for their children if
+they think anybody else will undertake it for them. These parents are
+not in need of assistance--they are perfectly well able to feed their
+own children; but if free meals can be had for the asking, they are
+not too proud to tell the child to ask. It relieves the mother of the
+trouble of preparing a meal for the child, and the money saved can be
+used for some more attractive form of personal expenditure."[825] At
+Birmingham, for example, numerous applications were made by the
+teachers to the relieving officers on behalf of children under their
+care, but when inquiries were made into the circumstances of the
+parents it was found that many of them were earning over thirty
+shillings a week, and in one case the parent was in constant
+employment with an average wage of _3l. 17s. 6d._ a week.[826] In
+Bolton, where during the winter of 1904-5 a charitable society
+provided free meals for children in certain centres of the town, it
+was found that the parents of some of the children who were partaking
+of the free meals so provided, and even reported as being underfed,
+were in receipt of as much as from _2l._ to _3l._ a week.[827] In
+Fulham (London) "More than one hundred names were sent to the Boards
+of Guardians of children who were adjudged to be underfed and were
+receiving meals from public charity. In hardly one of these cases did
+the relieving officer consider the complaint well founded. One family
+was found by him to be earning an income of _4l. 4s._ a week, and yet
+the children were sent to share in the charitable meals."[828] "Some
+of the parents who sent their children to the Johanna Street school in
+Lambeth said that they did not give their children food before going
+to school as they knew that if they did not do so they would receive
+it at the school, as the children of other people got food there and
+they did not see why theirs should not too."[829] The fact that
+Socialists grossly exaggerate in giving the proportion of underfed
+school children, and in ascribing the cause of underfeeding solely to
+the poverty of parents, is clear to all who have studied the problem
+of poverty. Mr. Cyril Jackson, the chief inspector of public
+elementary schools, for instance, in summarising the evidence of the
+women inspectors appointed to inquire into the age of admission of
+infants into elementary schools, says: "The question of underfed
+children cannot fail to be touched in the course of such an inquiry.
+It is interesting to find a general agreement that it is unsuitable
+rather than insufficient feeding that is responsible for sickly
+children. Want of sufficient sleep, neglect of personal cleanliness,
+badly ventilated homes, are contributory causes of the low physical
+standard reached."[830]
+
+Some Socialists, though only a few, have been honest enough to express
+similar views. A Fabian tract, for instance, says: "We have said that
+universal free feeding appears to be the only way in which the evil of
+improper (as distinct from insufficient) feeding can be removed. At
+present many children whose parents get fairly good wages cannot feed
+their children properly, either because they do not know what is the
+best food to give, or because they have not the time or the skill to
+prepare it. Manifestly the case of these will not be met by any system
+which feeds only the patently starved and destitute child. But it will
+be met both directly and indirectly by a universal system; directly,
+because the children, whatever they get at home, will at least get
+proper food at school; indirectly, because it will serve to educate
+the next generation of mothers in the knowledge of what is the best
+and most economical way of providing for their families. This is not
+the place to go into the very large question of what is the ideal diet
+for a child. All that need be insisted on here is that the provision
+should be bought and prepared under expert advice, and that
+consideration of cheapness should never be allowed to count as against
+the needs of nourishment. Every child should receive at least one
+solid meal in the middle of the day, and perhaps a glass of hot milk
+on arrival in the morning."[831]
+
+The "hungry children" argument is a valuable one for purposes of
+agitation, and it is used by the Socialists to the fullest extent. The
+workers are told: "The children are too ill provided for to be
+educated. This is not because the worker is idle or thriftless, but
+actually because he is too industrious and produces so much that his
+labour as a producer is at a discount. It is objected that to provide
+free State maintenance for all the children would be to destroy
+parental responsibility. But it is too late in the day to urge this
+objection, seeing that the State has taken upon itself the education
+of the children and is prepared to undertake, and does undertake,
+their maintenance and bringing-up when the parents are so careless of
+their responsibilities as to neglect them entirely."[832] "The
+old-fashioned prejudice fostered by the capitalists and their
+hangers-on that it is degrading to accept anything from the State is
+fast dying out"[833]--That workmen who are daily told by their leaders
+that it is unreasonable to expect that they should bring up their
+children frequently desert their family is natural. Every year many
+thousands of wives and children are deserted. At every police station
+the names of such men may be seen posted up, and those desertions are
+undoubtedly largely due to Socialistic teaching.
+
+The real object of the Socialists in demanding free maintenance for
+the children is not humanity. In making that demand they do not even
+think of the welfare of the children, as the following extracts will
+prove, which clearly reveal the real object of their demands. "Free
+maintenance for children should be accepted by trade unionists as
+tending to raise the standard of comfort. All should demand it with
+the object of personally benefiting themselves."[834] "In nine cases
+out of ten it is the hungry child who breaks the back of the strike.
+Let them feel assured that their children's dinner is secure, and they
+will continue the struggle to a victorious end."[835] "Free
+maintenance for children would be a tax on that surplus wealth which
+the capitalists and the aristocracy share between them. To the worker
+free maintenance for his children would be equivalent to an additional
+income. His standard of living would rise. No doubt the capitalist
+would reduce his wages as much as possible, but the worker would then
+be able to fight him on more equal terms. His children being well
+cared for, he would be able to hold out against the capitalist for an
+indefinite period."[836] "We counsel the workers to accept the offer
+as a small payment on account of a huge debt, but to accept it with no
+more gratitude than is shown by the class which is maintained in
+luxury, parents and children alike, by the collective industry of the
+workers. By dint of organisation they may be able very soon to exact
+payment of a more substantial sum--State maintenance, to wit."[837]
+
+The doctrines above given have unfortunately been accepted by many
+organised workers. A resolution of the Trades Union Congress at
+Leeds, in September 1904, asserted:
+
+"That having regard to the facts (_a_) that twelve millions of the
+population are living in actual poverty, or close to the poverty line;
+(_b_) that physical deterioration of the people is the inevitable
+result of this; (_c_) that it is impossible to teach starving and
+underfed children, this Congress urges the Government to introduce,
+without further delay, legislation instructing education authorities
+to provide at least one free meal a day for children attending
+State-supported schools."
+
+A resolution passed at the Scottish Miners' Conference on December 30,
+1904, stated:
+
+"That this Conference is in favour of State maintenance of children,
+but that in the meantime we identify ourselves with the movement in
+favour of free meals for school children."
+
+Resolutions passed by the National Labour Conference on the State
+maintenance of children, at the Guildhall, City of London, Friday,
+January 20, 1905, declared:
+
+"That this Conference of delegates from British Labour Organisations,
+Socialist and other bodies, declares in favour of State maintenance of
+children as a necessary corollary of universal compulsory education
+and as a means of partially arresting that physical deterioration of
+the industrial population of this country which is now generally
+recognised as a grave national danger. As a step towards such State
+maintenance this Conference, supporting the decision of the last
+Trades Union Congress upon this question, calls upon the Government to
+introduce without further delay such legislative measures as will
+enable the local authorities to provide meals for children attending
+the common schools, to be paid for out of the National Exchequer; and
+in support of this demand calls attention to the evidence given by Dr.
+Eichholz, the official witness of the Board of Education on the
+Committee on Physical Deterioration, in which he stated that the
+question of food is at the base of all the evils of child degeneracy,
+and that if steps were taken to ensure the proper adequate feeding of
+the children the evil will rapidly cease."
+
+A Socialist has worked out in a widely read book the cost of free
+education and State maintenance, which will require a yearly
+expenditure of _458,750,000l._, a sum four times as large as the
+entire national Budget. This outlay does not deter him. Combining the
+State schools with State workshops, he promises that they will yield a
+profit of exactly _105,850,000l._ a year.[838] This scheme should
+recommend itself to Chancellors of the Exchequer in search of a few
+millions.
+
+Another imaginative Socialist would make the abolition of all existing
+languages part of his educational scheme: "Socialism will steadfastly
+aim at the adoption of a universal language, be it English or volapuk.
+All the modern languages--and for the matter of that, the ancient
+also--are but jungles of verbiage which retard, rather than
+facilitate, human thought and progress. They have grown up anyhow; but
+what we now want is a made language, constructed on scientific
+principles, and so easy of comprehension that any intelligent person
+can acquire it in a few months."[839]
+
+Across the educational, as most other, proposals of British Socialists
+should be written in large letters, Utopia!
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[816] See Appendix.
+
+[817] Davidson, _Democrat's Address_, p. 5.
+
+[818] See p. 330.
+
+[819] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, pp. 39, 40.
+
+[820] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 218.
+
+[821] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 8.
+
+[822] Fabian Tract, _After Bread, Education_, No. 120, p. 9.
+
+[823] Kirtlan, _Socialism for Christians_, p. 8.
+
+[824] _Free Feeding of School Children_, p. 23.
+
+[825] Cox, _Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[826] _Local Government Board Report_, Cd. 3105, p. 495.
+
+[827] _Ibid._ p. 506.
+
+[828] _Times_, March 17, 1906.
+
+[829] Cox, _Socialism_, pp. 16, 17.
+
+[830] _Cd._ 2726, p. iii.
+
+[831] Fabian Tract, _After Bread, Education_, No. 120, p. 14.
+
+[832] Quelch, _Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 9.
+
+[833] _Socialism and Trade Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[834] _Socialism and Trade Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[835] Fabian Tract, _After Bread, Education_, No. 120, p. 11.
+
+[836] _Socialism and Trade Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[837] Watts, _State Maintenance for Children_, p. 4.
+
+[838] Richardson, _How It Can Be Done_, pp. 50-61.
+
+[839] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 166.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXIII
+
+THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS PROVIDENCE, THRIFT, AND TEMPERANCE
+
+
+Socialism thrives upon the poverty, unhappiness, and misery of the
+workers. Starving and desperate men may easily be aroused to
+rebellion. Contented men will not become Socialists. Therefore it lies
+in the interest of the professional Socialist agitators to maintain
+poverty and misery among the masses, and if possible to increase it.
+With this object in view, many Socialist agitators oppose all measures
+which are likely to turn the propertyless wage-earner--the "wage
+slave" as the Socialists like to call him, in order to exasperate
+him--into an owner of property, a small capitalist. That might make
+him a contented man. Therefore, as we have seen in Chapter XVIII., the
+Socialist leaders strenuously oppose "for scientific reasons" the
+creation of peasant proprietors. They distinctly encourage
+improvidence and oppose, also "for scientific reasons," providence,
+thrift, and abstinence among the workers. The philosopher of British
+Socialism informs us: "Thrift, the hoarding up of the products of
+labour, it is obvious, must be without rhyme or reason, except on a
+capitalist basis,"[840] and the Socialists do not wish the workers to
+become capitalists.
+
+Some Socialists were indiscreet enough to confess that they opposed
+providence, thrift, and temperance among the workers, as practised
+especially by the members of trade unions, co-operative societies, and
+friendly societies, because these are likely to elevate the masses
+and rob the Socialist leaders of supporters. We read, for instance:
+"The so-called thrift and temperance movements are essentially
+antagonistic to Socialism."[841] "The trade co-operator canonises the
+bourgeois virtues, but Socialist vices, of 'over-work' and
+'thrift.'"[842] "Co-operation, though regarded by the individual
+trader as an enemy, does not necessarily enter into conflict with the
+capitalist at all. Indeed, so far as it transforms workmen into
+shareholders, it forms a bulwark for capitalism, the same as the
+creation of small landholders or any other class of small proprietors
+would do."[843] "Co-operation, as carried on in England, is an
+obstacle and a danger to the Socialist cause. Being capitalist
+concerns pure and simple, co-operative societies are subjected to the
+same influences as all other capitalistic ventures."[844] "The
+friendly societies are the least promising of any of the democratic
+movements from the political point of view. The doctrine of 'thrift'
+also has been preached very vigorously to them. There is at present
+little prospect of the friendly societies identifying themselves with
+the general political labour movement of the country."[845] The
+Anarchist Congress of 1869 at Marseilles stated very truly: "La
+coopération démoralise les ouvriers en faisant des bourgeois."[846]
+
+Now let us take note of the "scientific" arguments with which British
+Socialists oppose providence, thrift, and sobriety among the workers.
+
+"Under present circumstances, the more frugal, thrifty, and abstemious
+working people as a class become, the more cheaply they have to live,
+the more cheaply they have to sell their labour power to the
+capitalist class, wages being determined by the cost of
+subsistence."[847] "Temperance, thrift, industry only serve to make
+labour an easier or more valuable prey to capital. If they reduce the
+cost of living in any particular, they but reduce the cost of labour
+to the capitalist."[848] "If _all_ the workers were very thrifty,
+sober, industrious, and abstemious they would be worse off in the
+matter of wages than they are now."[849] "The mere cheapening of the
+cost of living only tends to reduce wages, and thus cannot advantage
+the worker."[850] "If _all_ workers were to become teetotalers and
+vegetarians, wages would inevitably fall to the wretched level,
+perchance, of Oriental countries like India and China, where thrift in
+every form is carried to incredible lengths."[851] "Is it not proved
+that the Hindoos and the Chinese, who are the most temperate and the
+most thrifty people in the world, are always the worst paid? And don't
+you see that if the Lancashire workers would live upon rice and water,
+the masters would soon have their wages down to rice and water
+point?"[852]
+
+The foregoing arguments, which are based on the "Iron Law of Wages,"
+of which a refutation has been given in Chapter IV.,[853] may sound
+plausible to the unthinking workman. They may infuriate him and
+therefore serve the ends of the Socialist agitator, but they are
+utterly false and dishonest, as all Socialist leaders know. Wages
+depend partly on the supply and demand for labour, partly on the
+productiveness of labour. In machineless countries, such as China and
+India, the average worker produces very little, and the supply of
+workers is unlimited. Hence their wages are low. If the Socialistic
+arguments were right, Chinese and Hindoos could double or treble
+their wages by becoming drunkards, and English navvies could earn
+_5l._ a week by agreeing among themselves to drink champagne instead
+of beer. If the cost of subsistence determined the rate of wages, the
+wages for all workers in London ought to be approximately the same. In
+reality, however, we find that wages range in London from _3l. 10s._
+to _18s._ per week. The most skilled workers receive the highest, the
+least skilled the lowest, wages. It is therefore evident that wages
+are determined by the cost of subsistence only in the case of the
+least skilled workers, provided an unlimited supply of such workers
+and unrestricted competition among them for work drive down their
+wages to the bare existence level.
+
+Providence, thrift, and temperance are habitually attacked by
+Socialists not only on "scientific" but also on moral and philosophical
+grounds. For instance, Mr. Keir Hardie tells us: "As for thrift, much
+which passes for such at present is little different from
+soul-destroying parsimony. Men and women starve their years of healthy
+activity that they may have enough to keep alive an attenuated old age
+scarcely worth preserving."[854] In other words, he advises the workers
+to spend all they earn and to become paupers in their old age. A very
+influential Socialist writer says: "A man by starving his mind and his
+body is able to save money. He borrows books instead of buying them. He
+starves his emotional nature by neglecting to go to the theatre,
+because to go to the theatre costs money. He doesn't go to concerts
+because concerts cost money. He is a teetotaler, not so much because he
+wishes to keep his stomach clean and his head clear, but because his
+ideal men are teetotalers, grad-grinds, who mortify the flesh in order
+to save. And the money is saved with a bad intention. The aim is either
+to start independently in business, or else to secure shares in the
+undertaking paying the highest dividends compatible with security. The
+object of this man is to leave his class behind him, and to live _upon_
+labour rather than _by_ it"[855]--According to this authority it would
+be immoral for the rural labourer to save in order to be able to till
+his own field and to live in his own cottage; it would be immoral for
+the artisan to endeavour to have a workshop and a house of his own; it
+would be immoral for the worker to put his savings into a savings-bank
+or a friendly society, or some limited company, and to live upon his
+savings during his old age. It would almost seem as if from the
+Socialist point of view the only moral way of obtaining property was by
+plundering the rich. "Waste all you earn and die in the workhouse" is
+at present their advice to the worker, and the worker who follows that
+advice and who lives from hand to mouth easily becomes a pauper. For
+him a short spell of unemployment means starvation and despair. This is
+evidently a state of affairs which Socialist agitators favour because
+it will increase their following.--Another prominent Socialist writer
+says: "Among the many quack remedies for poverty, the most venerable
+and the most illusive is thrift or saving. The habit of saving is
+always represented by the rich as the highest of social virtues; but it
+is one they are careful rarely to practise themselves"[856]--If the
+rich are so wasteful, how is it then that the national capital, held by
+the rich, as the Socialists tell us, has increased from
+_4,000,000,000l._ to _12,000,000,000l._ during the last sixty years,
+notwithstanding huge capital losses caused by suffering industries? The
+decay of agriculture alone has caused a capital loss which approximates
+_2,000,000,000l._
+
+The great co-operative movement in England was created by the
+celebrated Rochdale Pioneers, the name given to the weavers of
+Rochdale who started it. On a rainy night in November 1843, twelve men
+met in the back room of a mean inn and commenced the co-operative
+movement by organising themselves as "The Rochdale Society of
+Equitable Pioneers." They agreed to pay twenty pence a week into a
+common fund, but only a few of these twelve men were able to pay their
+pence that evening. They began by buying a little tea and sugar at
+wholesale prices, which they sold to their members at little more than
+cost. In a year their number had grown to twenty-eight, and they had
+collected _28l._, with which they rented a little store and stocked it
+with _15l._ worth of flour. During the first year they made no profit.
+In its second year the society had seventy-four members, _181l._ in
+funds, _710l._ of business, and made _22l._ profit, 2-1/2 per cent. of
+which was used as a fund for education.[857]
+
+Gradually but constantly growing, this movement has branched out in
+every direction, and the result is that there are now in Great Britain
+1,685 co-operative societies with 2,263,562 members. These
+co-operative societies are manufacturers, ship owners, bankers,
+brokers, factors, merchants, millers, printers, bookbinders, and
+shopkeepers of every kind on the largest scale. The rapidly growing
+assets of the various undertakings represent a value of about
+_50,000,000l._, the combined nominal capital comes to _42,813,348l._,
+and the yearly net profits amount to about _11,000,000l._, or to more
+than 35 per cent. per annum on the subscribed capital. In 1905 the net
+profits amounted to 37.4 per cent., in 1906 to 36.4 per cent. on the
+share capital.
+
+Capitalised at 4 per cent, the co-operative societies represent an
+investment value of about _300,000,000l._, or about _100l._ per
+co-operator. The societies maintain an army of 107,727 employees.
+Their progress during the last decade may be seen at a glance from
+the following figures:
+
+_Total Trade of British Co-operative Societies._
+
+    1896                    Ł58,729,643
+    1901                     88,394,304
+    1906                    110,085,826[858]
+
+Already the income of the co-operative societies is twice as large as
+the interest paid on the whole of the deposits in the British
+savings-banks. There is no reason why the co-operative movement should
+not further grow and increase, and it is to be hoped that it will
+further extend in every direction to the benefit of the industrious
+and thrifty workers. There ought to be no propertyless workers in
+Great Britain.
+
+The British co-operative societies have proved to the dismay of the
+Socialists that working men may improve their position unaided and may
+become capitalists. They have proved that thrift and ability create
+prosperity, and they have therefore incurred the hatred of the
+Socialist agitators. The philosopher of British Socialism complains:
+"Co-operation so far from being Socialism is the very antithesis of
+Socialism. Trade co-operation is simply a form of industrial
+partnership, in which the society of co-operators is in the relation
+of capitalist to the outer world. The units of the society may be
+equal amongst themselves, but their very existence in this form
+presupposes exploitation going on above, below, and around them."[859]
+The editor of "Justice" seems to regret that co-operation encourages
+and rewards ability and thrift, for he says: "Co-operation is most
+valuable to those among the workers who are best off. The artisan
+earning a regular weekly wage has not only a better opportunity of
+becoming a member of the co-operative society than the more
+precariously employed and more poorly paid labourer, but the advantage
+to him is greater by reason of his having more money to spend at the
+store. In many cases the poorer members have to sell out, and then the
+affair becomes simply a joint-stock company of the more fortunate, the
+race being once more to the swift, the battle to the strong."[860]
+"The ordinary workman can if he likes become a shareholder in the
+"co-op." So he may become a shareholder in a railway if he likes; but
+this does not make the capitalist domination of our railways less a
+fact. In a co-operative store, as elsewhere, the man with _2l._ a week
+is worth just twice as much as the man with _1l._ Co-operation as a
+factor in social progress has effected nothing, and is absolutely
+valueless except to a certain extent as an educational influence."[861]
+
+Some Socialist writers show their hatred of the co-operative societies
+and the co-operators by bitter and almost vicious attacks upon them.
+One of them complains: "Instances of successful co-operation _in
+production_ have, as yet, been very few, and their moral results
+disappointing. Their general tendency has been, not to raise the
+workers as a class, but to raise a certain number of prudent--I had
+almost said selfish--workmen _out_ of their class, and so to
+constitute a _Labour Caste_. Such co-operators employ and exploit
+other workmen even more mercilessly than the capitalist employers, and
+in struggles between Labour and Capital their sympathies have nearly
+always been on the side of the capitalists."[862] Another says: "The
+Rochdale Pioneers hire and fleece labourers in the usual manner.
+Experience teaches, indeed, that such associations are the hardest
+taskmasters. Their interest becomes identified with Capital; and if
+ever circumstances should make it easier for the smarter labourers to
+start companies of the kind successfully, the creation of a _Labour
+Caste_ would be the result. In a general dispute between Labour and
+Capital these associations, instead of being a vanguard of Labour,
+will go over to the side of Capital. The sons of Rochdale Pioneers,
+living in luxury, and imitating the airs and fashions of the wealthy
+of all times, point the moral. Where, then, is the gain to the
+labouring class? No, instead of advising workmen to save and to invest
+their savings in such risky enterprises, it would be much better to
+advise them to put their savings into their own flesh and bone."[863]
+
+The foregoing extracts, and many similar ones which might be given,
+display a regrettable hatred of ability, providence, and
+thrift--qualities which, it is true, are not easily reconcilable with
+the tenets of Socialism.
+
+The British nation spends on intoxicating drink about _160,000,000l._
+per annum. Out of this enormous sum--a sum much larger than the
+national Budget--between _100,000,000l._ and _120,000,000l._ is spent
+by the working class alone. Drink is a fearful evil in Great Britain.
+The average working man spends every year two months' earnings in
+drink, and as there are many moderate drinkers and abstainers, there
+must be many who spend three months' earnings and more--that is,
+one-quarter of their wages, sometimes one-half, and sometimes more
+than one-half, on intoxicants. According to some of the foremost
+authorities on social science, and according to some of the most
+prominent medical men, drink is chiefly responsible for poverty,
+underfeeding, ill-health, and racial degeneration. Nevertheless, the
+British Socialists, instead of condemning drunkenness, rather
+encourage, or at least excuse, this terrible vice; and again, the
+universally discredited Iron Law of Wages is solemnly brought forth to
+prove "scientifically" that sobriety and abstinence on the part of
+the workers would not benefit the workers but the capitalists. "We are
+not prepared to admit that, if all workers were to become teetotalers,
+as I am, the _140,000,000l._ now spent on intoxicants would benefit
+the workers to any appreciable extent. On the contrary, all economists
+tell us that wages always tend towards the minimum subsistence
+point--the level at which the wage-slave is willing to subsist and to
+reproduce his kind."[864]
+
+The Iron Law of Wages has been abandoned by all scientists because of
+its manifest absurdity. However, supposing the Iron Law of Wages were
+true, it would not by any means follow that general abstinence would
+lead to a lower rate of wages. Non-abstemious wage-earners live
+frequently in the most wretched homes, and are dressed in rags because
+they spend all they can spend in drink. If they should become sober,
+they would find better houses, better clothing, better furniture as
+indispensable as drink is now to them. In reality abstinence, instead
+of lowering wages, would probably increase them very considerably in
+accordance with the increased productive power of the worker. It is a
+general experience that the steady and abstemious worker commands a
+higher wage than his more or less drunken, unreliable, and untidy
+colleague.
+
+Socialists are fond of excusing drunkenness by arguing that the worker
+gets drunk "because he is physically and mentally exhausted, used up
+with the day's work";[865] "because the wretched social condition of
+the mass of workers of this country--the long hours, the uncertainty
+of work, the insufficient food and clothing, and degrading home-life,
+which are their daily portion--makes drunkards."[866] Another
+well-known writer states: "If thousands of the workers drink to drown
+the cares and sorrows of their dreary, degraded, wretched existence,
+they do so at the expense of going without some of the merest
+necessaries."[867] This is, unfortunately, only too true. But it is
+not true that "Our damnable, infernal, profit-mongering system
+manufactures and produces drunkards because huge profits can be made
+out of the business for the brewer and the publican."[868]
+
+The above statements, which excuse drunkenness as something natural
+and unavoidable in Great Britain, are untrue. All civilised countries
+are based upon the private possession of capital, and in all large
+profits can be made by brewers and publicans. Now, if it were true, as
+has been stated in the foregoing, that hard work and long hours cause
+drunkenness, drunkenness should be greater in the United States,
+Germany, and France than in Great Britain, for in these countries and
+most others workers work much harder and work much longer hours than
+in Great Britain. The British nation should therefore be the most
+sober nation, but it is in reality the most drunken nation, a fact
+which is known to all who have studied this question.
+
+The majority of British Socialist leaders apparently desire to keep
+the workers drunken, for every suggestion that the worker might
+improve his position by greater moderation in drinking is passionately
+denounced by them. In a speech Andrew Carnegie mentioned that "he had
+employed forty-five thousand men at one time, and his experience was
+that the man who drank was good for drinking and for nothing else. He
+had nothing to do with the man who drank. He did not believe in the
+Submerged Tenth, but what he wanted to do, remembering he was a
+working man himself, was to take an honest, sober, well-doing,
+hard-working man by the hand and help him if he could. He only wanted
+to help those who could help themselves." Commenting on this speech,
+one of the Socialist weeklies said: "According to the foregoing, no
+drunkard, no matter how chronic, could display a greater specimen of
+human demoralisation than does that reported speech of Dr. Andrew
+Carnegie depict himself; soulless beyond imagination almost, in spite
+of his self-advertised respect and sympathy for the honest, sober
+working man." In the same article we read: "Total abstainers are
+capable of viler actions than those of certain drunkards, while the
+profoundest depth of ignorance and incapacity to think are attributes
+of millions of total abstainers."[869] When Mr. John Burns advised the
+workmen to help themselves by abstaining from drink and gambling, the
+whole Socialist press raged, and he was called a traitor to the cause
+and an agent of capitalism.
+
+Only rarely does a Socialist rebuke drunkenness. In "Socialism for
+Christians" we find a passage: "As long as you have a democracy sodden
+in drink you will have a democracy under the hoofs of capitalists.
+There is no hope for the democracy as long as it is content to grovel
+before the great pewter pot which it has made into a god."[870]
+However, that passage was not penned by a professional Socialist, but
+by a clergyman, an outsider, and an amateur in Socialism.
+
+While British Socialist leaders try to degrade the masses and to
+increase their misery by encouraging them to waste a very large part
+of their wages in drink, instead of spending the money on necessary
+food and clothing, on sufficient living room and furniture, foreign
+Socialists try to elevate their followers and to combat the drinking
+evil among them. The foremost Belgian Socialist, who constantly
+agitates against drunkenness, wrote:
+
+"How often have we not found in Socialist pamphlets, or in our
+newspapers, statements such as the following: 'Misery produces
+alcoholism,' or 'Drink is a consequence of capitalism, and will only
+disappear with the capitalistic system itself.' These are comfortable
+theories indeed, but they unfortunately come in conflict with the
+facts. The labourer must not only regard alcohol as one of the causes
+of poverty, demoralisation, and degeneration, but as a canker which
+destroys his strength and powers of resistance. We therefore address
+to all our comrades this warning: The more earnest you are and the
+stricter towards yourself, the greater will be the authority you bring
+to bear upon the branding of this evil. Everything which decreases the
+consumption of alcohol increases the helping powers of labour
+movements, raises the moral tone of the working class, and gives it
+fresh strength in its struggle for emancipation. Therefore all
+Socialistic societies should break away from out-of-date ideas with
+regard to alcoholism, and leave off expecting results from a social
+revolution which they themselves can attain to-day. It is our bounden
+duty to declare war against alcohol. War to the knife, for it is all
+the more dangerous as it dwells in our midst in the guise of
+friendship. When addicted to drink, the working class cannot do what
+must be done. Alcohol, by its paralysing qualities, naturally leads to
+fatigue, negligence, weakness, and impotence. Only those who can rule
+themselves are able and worthy to rule the world."[871]
+
+The German Socialist leaders also endeavour to elevate their followers
+by fighting drunkenness. At the Congress at Essen in 1907, a
+resolution was unanimously passed by the German Social-Democratic
+party in which various recommendations were made to the Government
+regarding the diminution of drunkenness, and which concluded with the
+words: "The working-class organisations are invited to suppress in
+their meeting all compulsion to consume alcoholic liquors, to put a
+stop to its sale in schools, in registry offices, and in places where
+collections are made for strikers, and to inform children and young
+men by word of mouth and by the Press of the danger of alcohol, and to
+watch over drinking habits which lead to the abuse of alcohol."[872] A
+German Socialist periodical recently wrote: "Workers who drink neglect
+their duties towards their family, drink away their wages, bring
+disorder into their unions, lose the sympathy of the quiet and
+industrious citizens, become the slaves of the public-house, and
+damage Socialism. Therefore Socialists should abstain absolutely from
+drinking intoxicating drinks. Ordinary capitalism exploits the
+proletariat, but does not poison them too in their own persons and in
+their posterity. But alcohol does both; it lames the power of a whole
+nation and leads to the degeneration of the race, as does opium in
+China. The drinker loses his self-respect, his higher aims as a human
+being. It must be made a fundamental principle of the German
+Social-Democratic party that the proletariat can vanquish capital only
+after it has first vanquished drink. The sooner that victory is won,
+the sooner the fate of society will be decided."[873]
+
+Continental Socialist leaders recommend to their followers thrift,
+sobriety, and co-operation. British Socialist leaders, who have taken
+the whole of their doctrines from the Continent, condemn "on
+scientific and moral grounds," thrift, sobriety, and co-operation.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[840] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 95.
+
+[841] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 40.
+
+[842] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 94.
+
+[843] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 16.
+
+[844] _Social-Democrat_, April 1907, p. 212.
+
+[845] Penny, _Political Labour Movement_, p. 11.
+
+[846] Roscher, _Politik_, p. 575.
+
+[847] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 41.
+
+[848] Quelch, _Economics of Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[849] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 127.
+
+[850] Quelch, _Economics of Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[851] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 107.
+
+[852] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 129.
+
+[853] See p. 53 ff, _ante._
+
+[854] Keir Hardie, _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_ p.
+13.
+
+[855] Leatham, _The Class War_, p. 8.
+
+[856] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 105.
+
+[857] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, pp. 358 and 1195.
+
+[858] _Labour Gazette_, December 1907.
+
+[859] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 94.
+
+[860] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 10.
+
+[861] _Ibid._ p. 13
+
+[862] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 109.
+
+[863] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 51.
+
+[864] Muse, _Poverty and Drunkenness_, p. 3.
+
+[865] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 11.
+
+[866] Muse, _Poverty and Drunkenness_, p. 12.
+
+[867] Glyde, _Britain's Disgrace_, p. 20.
+
+[868] _Ibid._ p. 20.
+
+[869] _Forward_, November 16, 1907.
+
+[870] Kirtlan, _Socialism for Christians_, p. 15.
+
+[871] Vandervelde, _Drink and Socialism_, pp. 3, 8.
+
+[872] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 620.
+
+[873] _Die Neue Gesellschaft_, November 1907, pp. 332, 337.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXIV
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS ON LAW AND JUSTICE
+
+
+Most Socialists have a very strong objection to the existing laws.
+"Law is only a masked form of brute force."[874] "The laws to-day are
+defences of the foolish rich against the ignorant and hungry poor. The
+laws to-day, like the laws of the past, make more criminals than they
+punish. The laws keep the people ignorant and poor, and the rich idle
+and vicious."[875] "The laws were made by ignorant and dishonest men;
+they are administered by men ignorant and selfish; they are dishonest
+laws, good for neither rich nor poor; evil in their conception, evil
+in their enforcement, evil in their results."[876]
+
+Most Englishmen are proud of the English judges because of their
+learning, high character, and integrity. To many Socialists the judges
+are the most contemptible and mercenary of men. The philosopher of
+British Socialism informs us: "It is an undoubted truth that no judge
+can be strictly an honest man. The judge must necessarily be a man of
+inferior moral calibre. A judge, by the fact of his being a judge,
+proclaims himself a creature on a lower moral level than us ordinary
+mortals, and this without any assumption of moral superiority above
+the average on our part. He deliberately pledges himself, that is, to
+be false to himself. He may any day have to pass sentence on one whom
+he believes to be innocent. He lays himself under the obligation of
+administering a law which he may know to be bad on any occasion when
+called upon, merely because it is a law. He makes this surrender of
+humanity and honour for what? For filthy lucre and tawdry notoriety.
+Now, I ask, can we conceive a more abjectly contemptible character
+than that which acts thus?"[877]
+
+The cause of the hatred with which the British Socialists contemplate
+the law and the judges is obvious:
+
+    They're blocking up the highway; yes, they think to keep us back
+    By piling barriers of law and falsehood on the track;
+    We'll break the barriers down, and burn them into cinders black,
+                As we go marching to liberty.[878]
+
+    Come every honest lad and lass!
+      Too long we've been kept under
+    By rusty chains of fraud and fear--
+      We'll snap them all asunder!
+
+    That robbers' paction styled the Law
+      To frighten honest folk, sirs,
+    We'll set ablaze and fumigate
+      The country with the smoke, sirs.[879]
+
+When Jack Cade, whom the Socialists praise as a social reformer,
+marched at the head of the insurrectionists into London, one of his
+first acts was to burn the stored-up documents of the law, an act
+which Shakespeare immortalised in his "Henry VI." in the following
+words:
+
+"Cade: Is not this a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent
+lamb should be made parchment? that parchment, being scribbled o'er,
+should undo a man?... Away, burn all the records of the realm: my
+mouth shall be the parliament of England.
+
+"John (_aside_): Then we are like to have biting statutes, unless his
+teeth be pulled out.
+
+"Cade: And henceforward all things shall be in common."[880]
+
+Socialism will abolish the law: "The great act of confiscation will be
+the seal of the new era; then, and not till then, will the knell of
+Civilisation, with its rights of property and its class-society, be
+sounded; then, and not till then, will justice--the justice not of
+Civilisation but of Socialism--become the corner-stone of the social
+arch."[881] Therefore one of the first acts of Socialist government
+will be "the abrogation of 'civil law,' especially that largest
+department of it which is concerned with the enforcement of contract
+and me recovery of debt."[882]
+
+Socialists never tire of denouncing the barbarity of the existing law.
+According to their religious views given in Chapter XXVI. (see p.
+360), man is an irresponsible being. He does not know the difference
+between right and wrong, between good and evil. Therefore it is
+according to their opinion unjust and cruel to punish criminals. "The
+Christian regards the hooligan, the thief, the wanton, and the
+drunkard as men and women who have done wrong. But the humanist
+regards them as men and women who have been wronged."[883] "Human law,
+like divine law, is based upon the false idea that men know what is
+right and what is wrong, and have power to choose the right."[884]
+"Man becomes that which he is by the action of forces outside
+himself."[885] "All human actions are ruled by heredity and
+environment. Man is not responsible for his heredity and environment.
+Therefore all blame and all punishment are unjust. Blame and
+punishment, besides being unjust, are ineffectual."[886]
+
+"To the Socialist, for every crime committed the State, or the society
+in which it is committed, is as much or more responsible than the
+individual."[887] "A society that employs the gallows and the 'cat'
+pretty much deserves all it gets at the hands of criminals. If the
+criminal, when he gets the chance of doing so with impunity, commits
+the crime for which the gallows or the lash is reserved, society has
+only itself to thank."[888]
+
+From the foregoing considerations it logically follows that "a
+Socialist administration would treat delinquents with the utmost
+leniency consistent with the existence of society."[889] "A man of
+average sense ought to be able to protect himself against fraud. Theft
+only requires the restitution of the stolen property plus an addition,
+such as the Roman law provided. The ideal condition of a community is
+that the remorse following the commission of a crime should be an
+adequate preventive of its commission"[890]--By its attitude towards
+crime, Socialism should secure for itself the enthusiastic support of
+the criminal classes. By abrogating the enforcement of contract and
+the recovery of debt, it should secure for itself the equally
+enthusiastic support of all fraudulent debtors. Conspirators and
+revolutionaries since the time of Catiline have opened the gaols and
+have relied on criminal desperadoes for the realisation of their
+ambitions. It is worth noting that most Anarchists also recommend the
+abolition of law and the law courts.[891]
+
+Until the ideal Socialist commonwealth has been firmly established,
+and "until the economic change has worked itself out in ethical
+change, it is clear that a criminal law must exist. The only question
+is whether its basis shall be a mass of anomalous statutes and
+precedents or a logical system."[892] Bax decides that the logical
+system and the Code Napoléon is to be introduced after the Socialist
+revolution.[893] The fact that the people do not know the French laws
+apparently does not matter.
+
+Many Socialists complain that British laws, and American laws too, are
+not collected and codified. Hence the citizen does not, and cannot,
+know the law. "What is called 'the law' is something that no lawyer
+can learn in a lifetime, both on account of the bulk of the Reports,
+and because he never can be absolutely certain what is good and what
+is bad law. The profession chooses rather than ascertains the
+law."[894] Owing to lack of a code of laws, the law is uncertain and
+exceedingly costly. Hence the poor man can obtain justice only with
+difficulty, if at all. Besides, "The fear of litigation is a weapon
+society places in the hands of the rich man to coerce the poor man,
+irrespective of the merits of the case, by dangling ruin before
+him."[895] There is much justification for these complaints.
+
+We have seen in former Chapters that Socialism teaches that property
+is theft and that rich men are criminals. In the present Chapter we
+have learned that criminals are men wronged by society. The Socialist
+conception of law and justice should recommend itself to all
+criminals, and all criminals should be Socialists.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[874] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 107.
+
+[875] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, p. 258.
+
+[876] _Ibid._ p. 259.
+
+[877] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 108.
+
+[878] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 17.
+
+[879] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 19.
+
+[880] _King Henry VI._, Part II. Act IV. Scenes 2 and 7.
+
+[881] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, pp. 82, 83.
+
+[882] _Ibid._ pp. 85, 86.
+
+[883] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 100.
+
+[884] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, p. 19.
+
+[885] _Ibid._ p. 23.
+
+[886] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, p. 251.
+
+[887] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 146.
+
+[888] _Ibid._ p. 105.
+
+[889] Bax, _Ethics of Socialism_, p. 59.
+
+[890] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 104.
+
+[891] See Stirner, _Der Einzige und sein Eigentum_; Bakounine, _Dieu
+et l'État_; Kropotkine, _Paroles d'un Révolté_, &c.
+
+[892] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, p. 88.
+
+[893] _Ibid._ p. 89.
+
+[894] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 138.
+
+[895] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 147.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXV
+
+SOCIALISM AND WOMAN, THE FAMILY AND THE HOME
+
+
+Men in all classes of society save and endeavour to become owners of
+some property, not so much for their own sake as for the sake of their
+wives and of their children, whom they wish to leave "provided for."
+Married men are notoriously more provident and thrifty than unmarried
+ones. Property is the defence of the family. The fundamental aim of
+Socialism is the abolition of that private property which is the prop
+of the family. Consequently every prudent head of a family is likely
+to resist Socialism, and thus there exists a natural and innate
+hostility between Socialism and the family.
+
+Besides, the idea of the family is not easily reconcilable with the
+idea of the Socialistic State. The maintenance of the family requires
+private capital, and the present capitalistic and individualistic
+system of society, the modern State and modern civilisation, are based
+upon the family and have sprung from it. The citizen of the modern
+civilised State places the interest of his family above the interest
+of the community. Socialism wishes to reverse the situation and to
+subordinate the interest of the family to the interest of the
+community.
+
+Socialism strives after equality among the citizens. Therefore many
+British Socialists are avowed communists, as will be shown in Chapter
+XXIX. Now it is clear that a perfect equality among the citizens
+cannot be created by abolishing merely the institution of private
+property. The man who envied his neighbour for the exclusive
+possession of his property may, after the abolition of private
+property, envy him for the exclusive possession of a particularly
+attractive wife. Therefore most of the great thinkers since Plato who
+have mapped out systems for the equalisation of fortunes, have
+logically insisted on the community of wives.
+
+Lastly, the subordination of the private family under the State, the
+control of work and food for all by the State, must logically lead
+also to State control of the increase of the population. Two thousand
+two hundred years ago, when in Athens the idea of the equalisation of
+fortunes had come to the front, Aristotle wrote: "Whoever would
+regulate the extent of private fortunes must also regulate the
+increase of families. If children multiply beyond the means of
+supporting them, the intention of the law will be frustrated and
+families will be suddenly reduced from opulence to beggary, a
+revolution always dangerous to public tranquillity."[896] At the same
+time Aristophanes showed in his comedy "Ecclesiazusae" that the
+community of goods would necessarily lead to the community of wives.
+
+The assertion of the opponents of Socialism that Socialism means the
+dissolution of the marriage tie and the abolition of the family has
+been met with an indignant denial by many Socialists: "Socialism does
+not 'threaten the sanctity of the home.' Socialism has no more to do
+with the marriage laws than Toryism has."[897] "No party--neither
+Socialist nor non-Socialist--has openly identified itself with the
+views of its prominent members on this question. The idea that
+marriage, as an institution, ought to be abolished has never received
+the sanction of any political organisation in Great Britain."[898] "No
+Socialist entertains the remotest idea of 'abolishing' the family,
+whether by law or otherwise. Only the grossest misrepresentation can
+fasten upon them such a purpose; moreover, it takes a fool to imagine
+that any form of family can either be created or abolished by
+decree."[899]
+
+The above is confirmed by an official declaration of recent date. At a
+meeting of the National Council of the Independent Labour Party, which
+took place in London on October 4 and 5, 1907, the following
+resolution was adopted:
+
+"The National Council of the Independent Labour Party repudiates the
+attack upon Socialism on the ground that Socialism is opposed to
+religion, and declares that the Socialist movement embraces men and
+women of all religions and forms of belief, and offers the most
+complete freedom in this respect within its ranks. It further
+repudiates the charge that Socialism is antagonistic to the family
+organisation, and reminds the public that the disintegration of the
+family, which has been in progress for some generations, has been
+owing to the creation of slums, the employment of children in
+factories, the dragging of mothers into workshops and factories, owing
+to the economic pressure created by low wages, sweating, and other
+operations of capitalism which the anti-Socialist campaign is designed
+to support, and which it is the purpose of Socialism to supplant."
+
+Now let us compare with these emphatic denials addressed to the
+general public the deliberate statements of the intellectual leaders
+of British and foreign Socialism regarding marriage and the family,
+addressed to their followers.
+
+The celebrated "Manifesto" issued by the founder of modern
+international Socialism declares: "On what foundation is the present
+family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. The
+bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its
+complement vanishes. Bourgeois marriage is in reality a system of
+wives in common, and thus, at the most, what the Communists might
+possibly be reproached with is that they desire to introduce, in
+substitution for a hypocritically concealed, an openly legalised,
+community of women."[900] The founders of British Socialism state:
+"Even now it is necessary that a certain code of morality should be
+supposed to exist, and to have some relation to that religion which,
+being the creation of another age, has now become a sham. With this
+sham, moreover, its accompanying morality is also stupid, and this is
+clung to with a determination, or even ferocity, natural enough, since
+its aim is the perpetuation of individual property in wealth, in
+workman, in wife, in child."[901]
+
+"Like every other institution of existing society, marriage, as we
+know it, is a consequence of private property. The primitive
+swag-monger could think of no better method of keeping his swag
+together after his death than by making the child of a particular
+slave-wife his heir. The chief pre-eminence of the Sultana of the
+harem lay in the fact that she acted, so to speak, as the conveyancer
+of the estate."[902] The spokesmen of the Social-Democratic Federation
+say: "What is the position of Socialism towards the question of
+marriage as at present constituted? The existing monogamic relation is
+simply the outcome of the institution of private or individual
+property. It has developed, in proportion to the accentuation of the
+institution of private, as against communal, property. When private
+property ceases to be the fulcrum around which the relations between
+the sexes turn, any attempt at coercion, moral or material, in these
+relations must necessarily become repugnant to the moral sense of the
+community."[903]
+
+The foregoing statements lead to the inevitable conclusion that "The
+transformation of the current family form into a freer, more real, and
+therefore a higher form, must inevitably follow the economic
+revolution which will place the means of production and distribution
+under the control of all for the good of all."[904]
+
+Another authority informs us "Socialism, Communism, or whatever one
+chooses to call it, by converting private property into public wealth
+and substituting co-operation for competition, will restore society to
+its proper condition of a thoroughly healthy organism, and ensure the
+material well-being of each member of the community. It will, in fact,
+give life its proper basis and its proper environment. Socialism
+annihilates family life, for instance. With the abolition of private
+property, marriage in its present form must disappear. This is part of
+the programme."[905] A distinguished Fabian proclaims: "The Socialist
+no more regards the institution of marriage as a permanent thing than
+he regards a state of competitive industrialism as a permanent
+thing."[906] The leading book of the Fabian Society states: "The
+economic independence of women and the supplanting of the head of the
+household by the individual as the recognised unit of the State will
+materially alter the status of children and the utility of the
+institution of the family."[907] The leading periodical of the Fabians
+says: "Of all the stupid theories regarding the family, the most
+stupid is the belief that it is natural. On the contrary, the
+trinitarian family organisation is plainly a work of art, a
+deliberate device of man's. Nothing is more plain than the fact that
+the hierarchy of the family has been employed, and is still employed,
+as a model for the hierarchy of the State and of human society
+generally; in other words, as a prop of aristocracy."[908] A leading
+member of the Independent Labour Party tells us: "I do not believe it
+is desirable to cultivate the family idea as at present understood,
+which in the main is designed to teach the children to think more of
+their own family than any other; I want to see the broader family life
+of society taught in the spirit of the West Country motto, 'One for
+all and all for each.'"[909]
+
+Marriage is, according to many Socialists, not only incompatible with
+Socialistic progress, but is also immoral. The philosopher of British
+Socialism, going a step further than did Marx in his Manifesto,
+endeavours to prove that marriage and prostitution are equally immoral.
+"Both legalised monogamic marriage and prostitution are based
+essentially on commercial considerations. The one is purchase, the
+other hire. The higher and only really moral form of the marriage
+relation which transcends both is based neither on sale nor hire.
+Prostitution is immoral as implying the taking advantage by the woman
+of a monopoly which costs her no labour for the sake of extorting money
+from the man. But the condition of legal marriage--maintenance--does
+the same."[910] This opinion is shared by the leading American
+Socialist writer, who says: "The one has sold her person for money
+under cover of marriage, the other has done the same thing outside
+marriage."[911] Other Socialists express similar opinions: "The present
+marriage system cannot be claimed by anyone as a success. Complete
+economic independence of women will, however, solve the question. Under
+Communism will and affection will be supreme. Marriage will be
+infinitely holier and more permanent than it is to-day."[912] "Mere
+legal matrimony and familism could not survive the communalisation of
+property, and it may be well so. Marriage as we know it is merely one
+of the many unwholesome fungi that grow out of the reeking, rotting
+corpus of private property, and it would not be difficult to conceive
+of a sexual order infinitely more angelic."[913]
+
+There is no reason why an "infinitely more angelic sexual order"
+should not replace marriage as at present conceived and constituted,
+for "Marriage is no more a Christian ethic than it is a Mohammedan
+ethic, or a Japanese custom. We have already 'considered' the marriage
+laws and altered them. Where, then, is the immorality in demanding a
+further consideration? Our notions concerning the relations of men and
+women have changed with the changing times, and at each stage we have
+reached a more exalted plane of understanding. What right have we to
+assume, therefore, that the future does not hold a nobler ideal than
+our present one?"[914]
+
+The direction in which inter-sexual relations should be changed in
+order to attain a nobler ideal than the present one is obvious: "What
+we need is freedom from the restraints of an artificial existence;
+liberty to make the most of our inherent capacity, and human longing
+for a higher life will do all the rest."[915] "Socialism will strike
+at the root at once of compulsory monogamy and of prostitution by
+inaugurating an era of marriage based on free choice and intention,
+and characterised by the absence of external coercion. For where the
+wish for the maintenance of the marriage relation remains, there
+external compulsion is unnecessary; where it is necessary, because the
+wish has disappeared, there it is undesirable."[916] "The present
+marriage system was based on the general supposition of the economic
+dependence of the woman on the man, and the consequent necessity for
+his making provision for her which she can legally enforce. This basis
+would disappear with the advent of social economic freedom, and no
+binding contract would be necessary between the parties as regards
+livelihood; while property in children would cease to exist, and every
+infant that came into the world would be born into full citizenship
+and would enjoy all its advantages, whatever the conduct of its
+parents might be. Thus a new development of the family would take
+place, on the basis not of a predetermined life-long business
+arrangement to be formally and nominally held to, irrespective of
+circumstances, but on mutual inclination and affection, an association
+terminable at the will of either party. There would be no vestige of
+reprobation weighing on the dissolution of one tie and the forming of
+another."[917]
+
+Many Socialists, led by Bax, the philosopher of Socialism in Great
+Britain, and by Bebel, the head of the Social-Democratic party in
+Germany, take a very broad and a very primitive view with regard to
+marital relations and to the greater freedom in these relations in the
+Socialistic State of the future: "The whole of our sexual morality (as
+such), in so far as it has a rational, as opposed to a mystical,
+basis, is nothing but a 'plant' to save the ratepayers' pockets by
+fixing the responsibility for the maintenance of children on the
+individuals responsible for the procreation of them. To the consistent
+Socialist, the sexual relation is, _per se_, morally indifferent
+(neither moral nor immoral) like any other bodily function, but it
+may easily become immoral _per accidentem_, i.e., from the special
+circumstances under which it takes place, and whereby it acquires the
+character of an act of injustice or treachery, such as seduction of a
+friend's wife or daughter."[918] A very influential Socialist writer
+asks: "Is chastity a virtue, and is there such a vice as unchastity?"
+and he answers his question by quoting the above statement of
+Bax.[919] "If it be asked, Is marriage a failure? the answer of any
+impartial person must be--monogamic marriage is a failure--the rest is
+silence. We know not what new form of the family the society of the
+future, in which men and women will be alike economically free, may
+evolve and which may be generally adopted therein. Meanwhile, we ought
+to combat by every means within our power the metaphysical dogma of
+the inherent sanctity of the monogamic principle. Economic development
+on the one side and the free initiative of individuals on the other
+will do the rest."[920]
+
+Bebel thinks, "The satisfying of amatory desires is a law which every
+individual must fulfil as a sacred duty towards himself, if his
+development is to be healthy and normal, and he must refuse
+gratification to no natural impulse. The so-called animal passions
+occupy no lower rank than the so-called mental passions. A healthy
+manner of life, healthy employment, and a healthy education in the
+broadest sense of the word, combined with the natural gratification of
+natural and healthy instincts, must be brought within the reach of
+all."[921] Freedom of love is to be equal to men and women: "In the
+choice of love woman is free just as man is free. She woos and is wooed
+and has no other inducement to bind herself than her own free will.
+The contract between the two lovers is of a private nature as in
+primitive times. The gratification of the sexual impulse is as strictly
+the personal affair of the individual as the gratification of every
+other natural instinct. No one has to give an account of him or herself
+and no third person has the slightest right of intervention."[922]
+
+A prominent British Socialist shares Bebel's views: "For the
+non-childbearing woman the sex-relationship, both as to form and
+substance, ought to be a pure question of taste, a simple matter of
+agreement between the man and her, in which neither the society nor
+the State would have any need to interfere, a free sexual union, a
+relation solely of mutual sympathy and affection, its form and
+direction varying according to the feelings and wants of the
+individuals."[923] The founders of British Socialism agree with the
+foregoing opinion. "Under a Socialistic system contracts between
+individuals would be free and unenforced by the community. This would
+apply to the marriage contract as well as others, and it would become
+a matter of simple inclination. Nor would a truly enlightened public
+opinion, freed from mere theological views as to chastity, insist on
+its permanently binding Nature in the face of any discomfort or
+suffering that might come of it."[924]
+
+"Socialists expect that, under Socialism, the terrible evil of
+prostitution will disappear. If it does not, it will be either because
+women are still denied political power, or because their votes have
+decided that the prostitute must remain. But if, as at present, the
+'unfortunate woman' be regarded as a necessity in those days of
+advanced thought and increased opportunities, then her status must be
+raised. She must not be an acknowledged necessity and a scorned
+outcast at the same time, as is the case now. Her position in the
+State will be clearly defined. She will be held to be performing a
+necessary social service. Whether this idea meets with favour or not,
+it is the only fair, the only possible, solution, if the prostitute is
+to remain."[925]
+
+"In a Socialistic State, no woman will be economically dependent upon
+any one man, father, brother, or husband. Her living will be assured
+to her by the community. Marriage will not make her the more
+dependent. If she should have children, she will be salaried, or
+otherwise supported, according to the number and the healthiness of
+her offspring. If no children are born to her, she will be at liberty
+to occupy herself with some other profitable work--not necessarily
+household labour, certainly not household labour all the time--for
+that will be reduced to a minimum. But she will engage in such useful
+work as her special tastes will direct. A free woman, she will thus be
+able to give her love freely."[926] "The 'subjection of woman' being
+at an end in consequence of her economic emancipation, actions for
+breach of promise or seduction, as well as prostitution itself, will
+be rendered meaningless. When a woman sues for breach of promise she
+is really suing for loss of a lucrative situation. When she plies for
+hire on the public street, she does so because the scourge of
+starvation is laid on her shoulders. Remove that scourge, and instead
+of the hideous commerce between lust and lucre we shall, in all cases,
+have the fair exchange of genuine human love for love."[927] "Free as
+the wind, the Socialist wife will be bound only by her natural love
+for husband and children."[928]
+
+Men and women being sexually free in the Socialist State of the
+future, the law will take cognisance neither of breach of promise,
+seduction, prostitution, and desertion of the family, nor of even
+graver offences against the present code of morality. The philosopher
+of British Socialism informs us: "Society is directly concerned--(1)
+with the production of offspring, (2) with the care that things
+sexually offensive to the majority shall not be obtruded on public
+notice, or obscenity on 'young persons.' Beyond this, all sexual
+actions (of course excluding criminal violence or fraud) are matters
+of purely individual concern."
+
+"Offences connected with sexual matters, from rape downwards, may be
+viewed from two or three different sides, and are complicated in ways
+which render the subject difficult of discussion in a work intended
+for promiscuous circulation. Here, as in the last case--viz. of theft
+or robbery--we must be careful in considering such offences to
+eliminate the element of brutality or personal injury, which may
+sometimes accompany the crime referred to, from the offence itself.
+For the rest I confine myself to remarking that this class also,
+though not so obviously as the last, springs from an instinct
+legitimate in itself but which has been suppressed or distorted. The
+opinions of most, even enlightened, people on such matters are,
+however, so largely coloured by the unconscious survival in their
+minds of sentiment derived from old theological and theosophical views
+of the universe, that they are not of much value. This is partly the
+reason why the ordinary good-natured bourgeois, who can complacently
+pass on by the other side after casting a careless look on the most
+fiendish and organised cruelty in satisfaction of the economic
+craving--gain--is galvanised into a frenzy of indignation at some
+sporadic case of real or supposed ill-usage perpetrated in
+satisfaction of some bizarre form of the animal craving--lust. Until
+people can be got to discuss this subject in the white light of
+physiological and pathological investigation rather than the dim
+religious gloom of semi-mystical emotion, but little progress will be
+effected towards a due appreciation of the character of the offences
+referred to. It is a curious circumstance, as illustrating the change
+of men's view of offences, that an ordinary indecent assault, which in
+the Middle Ages--in Chaucer's time, for instance--would evidently have
+been regarded as a species of rude joke, should now be deemed one of
+the most serious of crimes."[929]
+
+"When a sexual act, from whatever cause, is not, and cannot be,
+productive of offspring, the feeling of the majority has no _locus
+standi_ in the matter. Not only is it properly outside the sphere of
+coercion, but it does not concern morality at all. It is a question
+simply of individual taste. The latter may be good or bad, but this is
+an ćsthetic, and not directly a moral or social question."[930] "No
+social and secular argument readily presents itself against the act
+for which the brilliant and wretched Wilde is to-day the associate of
+felons. In view of the exclamations of bated horror over this offence,
+and the tacit assumption that it stands second only to murder in its
+enormity, it may be worth while to point out that, tested by a
+non-theological ethic, it is not quite certain that such practices are
+immoral at all."[931] "It has been well said that there are few laws
+so futile as those that profess to seek out and punish acts--normal or
+abnormal--done in secret and by mutual consent between adult persons.
+There are also few laws more unjust when the acts thus branded by law
+are the natural outcome of inborn disposition and not directly
+injurious to the community at large. The Moltke-Harden case brings
+these considerations clearly before us afresh, and compels us to ask
+ourselves whether it would not be possible to amend our laws in the
+direction not only of social purity and sincerity but of reason and
+humanity."[932]
+
+The "social purity" of Socialism would be the purity of Sodom and
+Gomorrah. It would be unrestricted bestiality.
+
+The majority of Socialists who have seriously considered the marriage
+problem in the Socialist State of the future--Marx, Lassalle,
+Rodbertus, and others, consider only the economic problems--have
+pronounced themselves in favour of free love in some form or the
+other. In this the conclusions of the Socialists agree with those of
+the Anarchists.[933] Indeed, "collective" marriage and other
+abominations have been freely practised during a long time in the
+Socialist colonies of North America, such as Oneida and
+Wallingsford.[934] Some Socialist thinkers, such as Saint-Simon and
+Enfantin, following the footstep of Plato, condemn marriage for life
+and recommend the organisation of procreation by the State. Others,
+such as Fourier, favour polygamy and polyandry. Others, such as
+Bellamy[935] and Kautsky,[936] believe that the people will remain
+attached to marriage as at present constituted. Others again find
+consolation in the fact that "despite the marital customs of the East,
+there is in the average human animal a strong monogamous
+instinct."[937] Anton Menger compares free love with free competition,
+and therefore objects to it[938] for the same reason for which
+Aristophanes objected to it in his "Ecclesiazusae" 2200 years ago. He
+thinks that free love would benefit the young, strong and
+good-looking, and believes that the doctrine of free love owes its
+rise to hatred of Christianity among Socialists,[939] monogamous
+marriage being a Christian institution.
+
+Socialists propose to break all the bonds which at present connect
+woman with her husband and her children, and to put her into an
+artificial and unnatural position calculated to unsex her. "For the
+first time since the world began, woman will in every respect be the
+equal of man. She will be the guardian of her own honour, and marriage
+will assume an entirely novel character. All unions will be unions of
+affection and esteem, and children, as of old, will primarily be the
+children of the mother. Her right to select the father of her own
+children is absolute. In such a society all children will be equally
+'legitimate,' and the Seventh Commandment will become practically
+obsolete, because the economic circumstances in which it was
+formulated will have passed away. She will be the complete arbiter of
+her own destiny. Her unsullied conscience will be the foundation of a
+purer morality than is at present even conceivable."[940] The
+principles expressed in the foregoing recall to one's mind the decree
+of the French Convention, dated June 28, 1793, which runs as follows:
+"La nation se charge de l'éducation physique et morale des enfants
+abandonnés. Désormais ils seront désignés sous le seul nom
+d'orphelins. Aucune autre qualification ne sera permise"; and the
+principle of the French Code, "La récherche de la paternité est
+interdite," will become a principle of British law. The State will
+have to become the protector of the husbandless mothers and the
+fatherless children.
+
+"Woman stands to gain much from the growth of a Socialist State. Among
+the free communistic services the right of the wife to maintenance
+during the period of maternity will quickly find a place."[941] "For
+every child born, the State will make provision. Either the mother
+will be paid so much per child so long as it lives and thrives, as her
+wages for important work done for society in bearing and rearing it"
+(it should be noted that children will belong no more to their parents
+but to "society," that childbearing will be "work" paid for by
+"wages," and that the breeding of children will become as much a
+business on the part of independent women as is now the breeding of
+cats and dogs for profit), "or her absolute independence of her
+husband will be secured in some other way. The State doctor (a woman
+for this office) will prescribe and care for the child from the moment
+of its birth, and State nurses will be in attendance to see that the
+mother is in need of nothing for her own and the child's
+well-being."[942] "Socialism will simply be the scientific development
+of those natural tendencies which augment the happiness or improve the
+comfort of the people. It is conceivable that every child shall come
+under the care of the administrative assembly. The right of the child
+is not interwoven with parental responsibility. They are separate
+considerations. Only a madman will hold that in the event of its
+parents being unmindful of their duties a helpless little one should
+be allowed to suffer. The fact of its being is the child's title to
+whatever provision society is able to make for it."[943] "Socialism
+therefore teaches men to expect a communal watchfulness over infant
+life. If parents refuse, or are unable, to meet the requirements of
+the case, the State will supply the deficiency."[944] "A State that
+truly represents its members will legislate generously for those who
+announce frankly and without cant that they have no desire for the
+care of children."[945]
+
+In the Socialist State of the future, people could therefore get rid
+of new-born babes far more easily than they now can of puppies and
+kittens. The institution round the corner would be the general
+foster-mother. Hordes of fatherless and motherless children would
+throng the State nurseries. The words "father" and "mother" would lose
+their meaning. However, we are told that "Socialism would begin by
+making sure that there should not be a single untaught, unloved,
+hungry child in the kingdom."[946] Love would evidently also be
+"organised" by the authorities.
+
+Some Socialists fear that, under a _régime_ of free love and free
+State maintenance for mothers and children, life will become a riot,
+that husbands will constantly change wives and wives husbands, and
+that, owing to the absence of all responsibility on the part of the
+parents for their offspring, over-population and consequent
+pauperisation will take place. Therefore some Socialists think that "A
+time will come when the patriot will consider it to be his duty, not
+to kill as many enemies as possible in time of war, but to restrict
+his family as far as possible in time of peace."[947] Socialist
+daydreamers seem to be unaware that the best preventive against
+over-population lies in the duty of parents to bring up and educate
+their children, a duty which they wish to abolish.
+
+As Aristotle pointed out 2200 years ago, the all-regulating State
+would also have to regulate the increase of population. "If the State
+is to guarantee wages, it is bound in self-protection to provide that
+no person shall be born without its consent. The State is to sanction
+the number of births; all others are immoral, because anti-social. As
+national wealth increased, a larger number of births would be allowed,
+or a larger sum would be expended on such as were allowed. An
+unsanctioned birth would receive no recognition from the State, and in
+times of over-population it might be needful to punish, positively or
+negatively, both father and mother. As such births may be due to
+ignorance or inefficiency of some check system, it would be the duty
+of the State to scientifically investigate the whole system of checks,
+and to spread among its citizens a thorough knowledge of such as were
+harmless and efficient in practice."[948]
+
+The State would control procreation. Intending couples would
+apparently have to take out a procreation licence, which would be
+granted only to those able to pass a searching examination. "Marriage
+between the mentally weak will not be allowed. Imbeciles, lunatics,
+and those with dangerous and ineradicable criminal tendencies will not
+be permitted to reproduce their species at all."[949]
+
+Unfortunately the writer fails to specify how unauthorised
+reproduction of the species would be prevented, and how contravention
+of the procreation laws would be punished. These details are furnished
+by another writer. "All those actually certified as degenerates must
+be prevented from procreating. Society has not only a right but a duty
+to protect itself against such by-products, and it can only do this by
+State control of marriage."[950] "Marriage without a satisfactory
+medical certificate should be subjected to a penalty which would be in
+effect prohibitive. In certain cases asexualisation and sterilisation
+should be applicable under special safeguards and conditions."[951]
+
+Free love has apparently its limitations and its dangers. The
+procreation inspector might make an irreparable mistake.
+
+There are, of course, Socialists who think that the family ought to be
+preserved, and who oppose State nurseries. One of them writes: "The
+State, in its own interests, will do everything it can to develop
+individuality in its children. The barrack school and State
+nursery--never much more than the Utopian dreams of amiable
+people--are condemned by up-to-date psychologists. The personal touch
+and affection of the mother, the surroundings and ethics of a small
+community, the sense of continuity which comes to the maturing child's
+mind from a personal organisation like the family, are all invaluable
+to a State which must take as much care of its citizens of to-morrow
+as it does of its citizens of to-day."[952] Mr. Macdonald's views on
+Socialism are hardly orthodox, and he has been denounced by
+thorough-going Socialists as an agent of the bourgeoisie.
+
+As women may be the strongest opponents to the dissolution of the
+family, Socialists addressing themselves to women try to persuade them
+that they are forced into matrimony by necessity, that marriage is a
+degradation to them and to their children, and that Socialism will
+elevate them and make them free and happy. "The average young woman of
+the working class, who is not herself employed in some well-paid
+occupation, has nothing but marriage to which to look forward. She
+gives herself and all she has or is in exchange for such board as her
+husband's means permit."[953] "For the sake of bread and shelter she
+marries and becomes the unpaid cook and housekeeper of a husband and
+the mother of his children."[954] "Woman has been degraded, the mother
+has been kept down; so the children have been born with slavish
+instincts, ready to creep for any favour, and only just awakening to
+the need for self-assertion and independence of action."[955]
+Socialism will change all that, for "Socialism means freedom for
+women, just as it does for men."[956]
+
+What is the Socialistic conception of "freedom for women"? What are
+its privileges and its advantages? "In considering the position of the
+woman Socialist, one great central fact must be borne constantly in
+mind. What she will be, what she will do, how she will live--all will
+depend upon one great fact, the greatest fact in Socialism--a fact
+which constitutes Socialism--namely, that she will be economically
+free."[957] "The new order will make husband and wife equals simply by
+enabling the wife to earn her living by fitting employment."[958] "A
+living will be assured to every woman."[959] "In the new community
+woman is entirely independent, a free being, the equal of man. Her
+education is the same as that of man except where the difference of
+sex makes a deviation from this rule and special treatment absolutely
+unavoidable. She works under exactly the same conditions as a
+man."[960] "Under a Socialist _régime_ every profession will be open
+to women as to men."[961] "Socialism means enfranchising them, giving
+them the vote, so that they can lift their voice alongside with men's
+voice and fight with the same weapon for a better, happier
+life."[962] "It is only by removing the disabilities and restraints
+imposed upon woman, and permitting her to enter freely into
+competition with men in every sphere of human activity, that her true
+position and function in the economy of life will ultimately be
+ascertained."[963] "Socialism alone offers woman complete economic
+emancipation, with all that that implies. It provides her with
+suitable work, and it pays her exactly as men are paid. It educates
+her as men are educated, and protects her in pregnancy with tender
+regard; and, in so doing, Socialism will raise the whole level of
+society to a height of moral grandeur never yet attained and hardly
+ever dreamed of by the most optimist of poets and philosophers."[964]
+
+Apparently Socialists will elevate downtrodden woman by compelling her
+to work for a living, and it is doubtful, as will be seen in Chapter
+XXXVI., whether she will be allowed to select her task or whether she
+will have to work under a system of forced labour. She will be given
+that freedom and liberty which is now called licence by the abolition
+of all the laws of morality. In the words of an exceedingly
+straightforward Socialist, "Independence for women will mean a heavy
+sacrifice for them, for it will mean for them compulsory work."[965]
+In return for such work they will be given full sexual license and the
+vote.
+
+There is another aspect to be taken note of with regard to the
+emancipation of woman. Many Socialists, in giving to woman equality
+with man as a wage-earner and voter, wish to unsex her completely.
+They wish to deprive her of those privileges which she possesses at
+present owing to her sex. The philosopher of British Socialism informs
+us: "The law nowadays makes no distinction of persons between men.
+True; but it makes distinctions between men and women, and where law
+draws no distinction, practice does. 'Benefit of clergy' is superseded
+by 'benefit of sex.'"[966] "The tendency of the bourgeoisie world, as
+expressed in its legislation and sentiment, has been towards a
+factitious exaltation of the woman at the expense of the man--in other
+words, the cry for 'equality between the sexes' has in the course of
+its realisation become a sham, masking a _de facto_ inequality. The
+inequality in question presses, as usual, heaviest upon the working
+man, whose wife, to all intents and purposes, now has him completely
+in her power. If dissolute or drunken, she can sell up his goods or
+break up his home at pleasure and still compel him to keep her and
+live with her to her life's end. There is no law to protect him. On
+the other hand, let him but raise a finger in a moment of exasperation
+against this precious representative of the sacred principle of
+'womanhood,' and straightway he is consigned to the treadmill for his
+six months amid the jubilation of the 'Daily Telegraph' and its
+kindred, who pronounce him a brute and sing pćans over the power of
+the 'law' to protect the innocent and helpless female. Thus does
+bourgeois society offer sacrifice to the idol 'equality between the
+sexes.' For the law jealously guards the earnings or property of the
+wife from possible spoliation. She on any colourable pretext can
+obtain magisterial separation and protection."[967] Bax concludes that
+if the law is right in flogging men it should flog women too, for "the
+brutality and cowardice of the proceeding is no greater in the one
+case than in the other."[968]
+
+The abolition of the marriage tie may mean that general barracks will
+take the place of private houses. Is the home worth preserving? Most
+Socialists think it is not. "It may be doubted after all whether it
+is necessary to regard 'the home' in the sense in which the phrase is
+here used as the final and immutable form of social organisation.
+Humanity does not stand or fall by the arrangement whereby families
+take their food in segregated cubicles."[969] "The entire preparation
+of food will be undertaken by society in the future. The private
+kitchen will disappear."[970] "Instead of a hundred kitchens and fires
+and cooks, we shall have one. Instead of a hundred meals to prepare,
+we shall have one. Instead of a hundred homes being made to reek of
+unsavoury dishes, or the detestable odour of bad cooking, the
+offensive effluvia will be confined to one building. Under Socialism
+domestic duties will be reduced to a minimum."[971] "We set up one
+great kitchen, one general dining-hall, and one pleasant
+tea-garden."[972] Only a few Socialists are in favour of individual
+houses, believing that "Each house should be self-contained."[973]
+
+The proposals of British Socialists regarding woman, the family, the
+home, and marriage are not new. They were tried in the French
+Revolution, and the consequences of the experiments recommended by the
+philosophers of the Revolution were as follows:
+
+"The legislation of the Revolution diminished the paternal authority
+and converted the family into a republic. Marriage became a contract
+which could be broken at will by either party, a contract which
+allowed of short notice and which could be concluded for any space of
+time. People married for a year, sometimes only for a month. They
+married for fun or for profit, and marriages were dissolved and others
+contracted if it paid to do so."[974] The French police reports tell
+us: "The depravity of morals is extremely great, and the new
+generation is growing up in a state of disorder which promises to have
+the most unfortunate and most far-reaching consequences to future
+generations. Sodomy and Sapphic love flourish with the same
+shamelessness as prostitution, and the progress of all these vices is
+terrifying."[975] From another source we learn: "Society has become
+terribly depraved; fornication, adultery, incest, and murder by poison
+or violence are the fruits of philosophism. Things are as bad in the
+villages as in Paris. Justices of the peace report that immorality has
+spread to such an extent that many communes will soon no longer be
+inhabitable by decent people."[976] This is the new and the better
+world towards which Socialism is steering.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[896] Aristotle, _Politics_, Book ii. Chapter v.
+
+[897] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[898] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 13.
+
+[899] Kautsky, _The Socialist Republic_, p. 23.
+
+[900] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, pp. 19, 20.
+
+[901] Morris and Bax, _Socialism: Its Growth and Outcome_, p. 9.
+
+[902] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 164.
+
+[903] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 39.
+
+[904] Bax, _The Religion of Socialism_, p. 145.
+
+[905] Oscar Wilde, "The Soul of Man under Socialism," _Fortnightly
+Review_, February 1891.
+
+[906] Wells, "Socialism and the Middle Classes," _Fortnightly Review_,
+November 1906.
+
+[907] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 200.
+
+[908] A.R. Orage in the _New Age_, November 21, 1907.
+
+[909] Lansbury, _The Principles of the English Poor Law_, p. 10.
+
+[910] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 160.
+
+[911] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 151.
+
+[912] Benson, _Woman, the Communist_, p. 16.
+
+[913] Davidson, _Gospel of the Poor_, p. 149.
+
+[914] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, pp. 14, 15.
+
+[915] _Ibid._ p. 15.
+
+[916] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, pp. 159, 160.
+
+[917] Morris and Bax, _Socialism; Its Growth and Outcome_, p. 199.
+
+[918] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, pp. 114, 115.
+
+[919] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 30.
+
+[920] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 160.
+
+[921] Bebel, _Woman_, pp. 44, 86.
+
+[922] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future_, pp. 229, 230.
+
+[923] Karl Pearson, _The Ethic of Free Thought_, p. 108.
+
+[924] Morris and Bax, _Manifesto of the Socialistic League_, p. 100.
+
+[925] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 56.
+
+[926] _Ibid._ pp. 59, 60.
+
+[927] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 165.
+
+[928] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 61,
+
+[929] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, p. 62.
+
+[930] _Ibid._ p. 126.
+
+[931] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 24.
+
+[932] "The Moltke-Harden Case" in the _New Age_, November 14, 1907.
+
+[933] For details on this subject see Bebel, _Woman_; Meslier, _Le
+Testament_, 1864, ii. 226; Dezamy, _Code de la Communauté_, 1842, p.
+266; Godwin, _Enquiry concerning Political Justice_, ii. 507; Owen,
+_The Marriage System_, 1838, p. 66; Owen, _Manifesto_, 1840, p. 56;
+Owen, _What is Socialism?_ 1841, p. 40; Morris, _News from Nowhere_,
+1899, p. 90; Tucker, _Instead of a Book_, 1897, p. 15; Grave, _Société
+Future_, ch. xii.; Charles Albert, _L'Amour Libre_, 1899, p. 191, &c.
+
+[934] See Nordhoff, _Communistic Societies_, 1875, p. 275; Noyes,
+_History of American Socialism_, 1870, p. 623; Hinds, _American
+Communities_, 1902, p. 196.
+
+[935] _Looking Backward_, ch. xxiv.
+
+[936] _Erfurter Programm_, 1892, p. 145.
+
+[937] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 32
+
+[938] Menger, _L'État Socialists_, 1904, p. 187.
+
+[939] _Ibid._ p. 188.
+
+[940] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, pp. 164, 166.
+
+[941] Benson, _Woman the Communist_, p. 15.
+
+[942] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, pp. 48, 49.
+
+[943] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[944] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 10.
+
+[945] _New Age_, Letter to Editor, November 14, 1907.
+
+[946] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 7.
+
+[947] A. Menger, _Volkspolitik_, p. 51.
+
+[948] Karl Pearson, _Socialism and Sex_, pp. 12, 108.
+
+[949] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 49.
+
+[950] Victor Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 14.
+
+[951] Victor Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 15.
+
+[952] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 98.
+
+[953] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 64.
+
+[954] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 13.
+
+[955] _Ibid._ p. 42.
+
+[956] _Independent Labour Party Leaflet_, No. 5.
+
+[957] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 37.
+
+[958] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 148.
+
+[959] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 57.
+
+[960] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 229.
+
+[961] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 86.
+
+[962] _What Socialism means for Women_, p. 1.
+
+[963] Keir Hardie, _Citizenship of Women_, p. 6.
+
+[964] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 113.
+
+[965] Menger, _L'État Socialiste_, p. 191.
+
+[966] Bax, _Ethics of Socialism_, p. 66.
+
+[967] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 116.
+
+[968] _Ibid._ p. 117.
+
+[969] _After Bread, Education_, p. 10.
+
+[970] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 227.
+
+[971] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 70.
+
+[972] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 49.
+
+[973] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 60.
+
+[974] Vandal, _L'Avénement de Bonaparte_.
+
+[975] _Rapports de police publiés par Schmidt_, iii. p. 389.
+
+[976] Roussel, _Un Evéque assermenté_, p. 298.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXVI
+
+THE SOCIALIST ATTITUDE TOWARDS CHRISTIANITY AND RELIGION
+
+
+What is the attitude of Socialism towards Christianity and religion?
+
+A clerical apologist of Socialism informs us that "Socialism is
+founded on the doctrine of the Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of
+man."[977] Another reverend gentleman states: "Socialism in the first
+place means combination, bringing together men for the building up of
+a sacred, holy life on this earth. It means the building up together
+of the different elements of human life. It is, in the grand words of
+the New Testament, which we were told Socialists did not believe in,
+'No man liveth unto himself, and no man dieth unto himself.'"[978] A
+third clergyman tells us that "The ethics of Socialism are identical
+with the ethics of Christianity."[979]
+
+Some British Socialist leaders explain that Socialists are good
+Christians, and that Socialism attacks only the Church and professed
+Christians, but not religion. "Much of what is regarded as
+anti-Christian Socialist doctrine is only an attack upon the Churches
+and professed Christians, and, so far from being anti-Christian, is,
+as a matter of fact, inspired by the ethics of Christ's
+teaching."[980] Other British Socialist leaders say that Socialism,
+not being a religious doctrine, has no concern with religion and does
+not meddle with it. "A charge against Socialists is that they are
+Atheists whose aim is to destroy all religion and all morality. This
+is not true. It is true that many Socialists are Agnostics, and some
+are Atheists. But Atheism is no more a part of Socialism than it is a
+part of Toryism, or of Radicalism, or of Liberalism."[981] "Socialism
+has no more to do with a man's religion than it has with the colour of
+his hair. Socialism deals with secular things, not with ultimate
+beliefs."[982]
+
+It is quite true that "there is at present no consensus of Socialist
+opinion on religious questions,"[983] but it is hardly honest on the
+part of Socialist leaders to assert that Socialism has nothing to do
+with religion. The leading journal of the Fabian Society frankly
+confesses: "There is the argument that Socialism has nothing whatever
+to do with subjects such as religion and marriage. But if Socialism is
+a theory of the State, nothing human is alien to it. It may be true
+that no one of the specific theories of religion or marriage so far
+put forward by Socialists has any claim to be regarded as the
+Socialist view; but there is all the difference in the world between
+such an admission and the denial that Socialism has any concern with
+the questions at all."[984]
+
+Some Socialists proclaim that Socialism will carry out the will of
+Christ upon earth. Mr. Keir Hardie, for instance, says: "Christ laid
+down no elaborate system of either economics or theology. No great
+teacher ever did. His heart beat in sympathy with the great human
+heart of the race. His words are simple and not to be misunderstood
+when taken to mean what they say. His prayer--Thy kingdom come, Thy
+will be done on earth as it is in Heaven--was surely meant to be taken
+literally Are our opponents prepared to assert that in Heaven there
+will be factories working women and children for starvation wages;
+coal-mines and private property in land, dividing the population of
+Heaven into two classes, one revelling in riches and luxury,
+destructive of soul and body, the other grovelling in poverty, also
+destructive of all that is best in life? If not, how can they
+consistently support the system which inevitably produces that state
+of things upon earth?"[985]
+
+Other Socialists frankly confess that Socialism is absolutely
+incompatible with Christianity and all other religions; that Socialism
+can succeed only if religion be abolished, and that therefore religion
+must be abolished. The philosopher of British Socialism states:
+"Socialism utterly despises the 'other world' with all its stage
+properties--that is, the present objects of religion. It brings
+back religion from heaven to earth."[986] "As to the ethical
+teaching of Christ, with its one-sided, introspective, and
+individualistic character, we venture to assert that no one
+acquainted with the theory of modern scientific Socialism can for one
+moment call it Socialistic. Socialism has no sympathy with the morbid,
+eternally-revolving-in-upon-itself transcendent morality of the Gospel
+discourses. This morality sets up a forced, to the vast majority
+impossible, standard of 'personal holiness' which, when realised,
+has seldom resulted in anything but (1) an apotheosised priggism,
+_e.g._ the Puritan type, or (2) in an epileptic hysteria, _e.g._
+the Catholic saint type."[987] Mr. Blatchford states: "I have
+been asked why I have 'gone out of my way to attack religion.'
+In reply I beg to say that I am working for Socialism when I
+attack a religion which is hindering Socialism, that we must pull down
+before we can build up, and that I hope to do a little building, if only
+on the foundation. I oppose the Christian religion because I do not
+think the Christian religion is beneficial to mankind, and because I
+think it an obstacle in the way of humanism."[988] Another very
+influential writer says: "Personally I feel called upon to attack
+Christianity as I would any other harmful delusion. I do not believe in
+the theology of Jesus any more than I do in his sociology. It is no use
+pretending that Socialism will not profoundly revolutionise religion.
+The change in the economic basis of society is the more important thing
+to strive for; but if the triumph of the Socialist ideal does not crush
+supernatural religion, then we shall still have a gigantic fabric of
+falsity and convention upon which to wage war. Happily Christianity
+becomes less and less of a power every day. So far, indeed, from
+Christianity being able to support Socialism, it goes hard with
+Christianity to stand by itself. As a support to Socialism it would
+surely prove a broken reed."[989]
+
+A Socialist poet proclaims:
+
+    The name of Christ has been the sovereign curse,
+    The opium drug that kept us slaves to wrong,
+    Fooled with a dream, we bowed to worse and worse.
+    "In heaven," we said, "He will confound the strong."
+    O hateful treason that has tricked too long!
+
+    Had we poor down-trod millions never dreamed
+    Your dream of that hereafter for our woe,
+    Had the great powers that rule, no Father seemed,
+    But Law relentless, long and long ago
+    Had we risen and said, "We will not suffer so!"
+
+    "O Christ, O You who found the drug of heaven,
+    To keep consoled an earth that grew to hell,
+    That else to cleanse and cure its sores had striven,
+    We curse That name!"[990]
+
+There is an eminently practical reason for the hostility of Socialists
+to Christianity. Religious people are not likely to become Socialists.
+"Christianity is like a set of manacles fastened upon the minds of
+those who believe in it. It is vain for us to look for aid from the
+Church and Christianity. It might be supposed that a hungry Christian
+would rebel against his hunger as readily as a hungry Atheist. But it
+is not the case."[991]
+
+The belief in a life after death also is incompatible with Socialism,
+and must therefore be combated: "We are compelled to abandon the
+belief in immortality. He who is given to meditating on his latter end
+and for whom the question of a post-physical future life for himself
+as an individual is of primary importance, is, generally speaking,
+indifferent where not positively hostile to social ideals."[992] "The
+moment this belief in an after-death existence is erected into a
+dogma, the moment it comes to be looked upon as an article of faith,
+which it is a duty to hold, or at least which it is the evidence of an
+ignoble disposition of mind not to hold, then it becomes an enemy to
+be combated."[993]
+
+The practical teachings of Christ are directly opposed to the
+practical teachings of Socialism: "Jesus said, 'Blessed are the poor.'
+Socialism recognises that wealth is a good thing, and it exists for
+the purpose of securing a better share of it for the 'blessed' poor.
+Socialism declares that all ought to work; but Jesus did no manual
+work after he was thirty years of age, and he encouraged his disciples
+to leave their occupations, to wander about and to beg, and this last
+feature of discipleship has in all ages been well maintained.
+Socialism incites the workers of all countries to unite for the
+prosecution of the class war; but Jesus approved of obedience,
+contentment, and humility of spirit."[994]
+
+Socialism has no use for Christianity. "To-day we have to settle down
+to our primers and our programmes, our Blue-books and our social
+experiments, just as if Jesus had never lived, or perhaps all the more
+because he lived. We get no assistance from Him. His followers are our
+enemies in every country which owns His influence--and the worst
+enemies of all because ever professing friendship."[995]
+
+Christianity is, according to Socialists, an outworn creed. "As Marx
+says, 'The religious world is but the reflex of the real world.
+Christianity, like all religions, is but an expression of material
+conditions, a direct outcome of social relations, the unsubstantial
+image of a world reflected in the muddy pool of human intellect. Jesus
+varies with the ages. Redeemer of Roman slave; War-God of Crusader;
+General Overseer of Manufacturing Capitalist."[996] Besides,
+Socialists resent "the continual reference of ideal perfection to a
+semi-mythical Syrian of the first century when they see higher types
+even in some now walking this upper earth, but in vulgar flesh and
+blood and without the atmosphere of nineteen centuries to lend
+enchantment to them."[997]
+
+Lastly, Christianity has been a failure: "The success of Christianity
+as a moral force has been solely upon isolated individuals. In its
+effects on societies at large it has signally and necessarily
+failed."[998] "Holiness! Your religion does not make it. Its ethics
+are too weak, its theories too unsound, its transcendentalism is too
+thin. There ought to be no such thing as poverty in the world. The
+earth is bounteous: the ingenuity of man is great. He who defends the
+claims of the individual, or of a class, against the rights of the
+human race is a criminal. A hungry man, an idle man, an ignorant man,
+a destitute or degraded woman, a beggar or pauper child, is a
+reproach to society and a witness against existing religion and
+civilisation. In such a world as this, friend Christian, a man has no
+business reading the Bible, singing hymns, and attending divine
+worship. He has not time. All the strength and pluck and wit he
+possesses are needed in the work of real religion, of real salvation.
+The rest is all 'dreams out of the ivory gate and visions before
+midnight.'"[999] "In a really humane and civilised nation there should
+be and need be no such thing as poverty, ignorance, crime, idleness,
+war, slavery, hate, envy, pride, greed, gluttony, vice. But this is
+not a humane and civilised nation, and never will be while it accepts
+Christianity as its religion."[1000]
+
+Our belief in God also must be abandoned, but if we continue believing
+in God it follows that man is not responsible for his actions, that he
+cannot do wrong: "Man is what God made him; could only act as God
+enabled him or constructed him to act. If God is responsible for man's
+existence, God is responsible for man's act. Therefore man cannot sin
+against God."[1001] "If God is all-knowing, He knew before He made man
+what man would do. If God is all-powerful, He need not have made man
+at all, or He could have made a man who would be strong enough to
+resist temptation. Or He could have made a man who was incapable of
+evil. If God had never made man, then man could never have succumbed
+to temptation. God made man of His own divine choice and made him to
+His own divine desire. How then could God blame man for anything man
+did? Man might justly say to God: 'I did not ask to be created. You
+knew when You made me how I should act. If You wish me to act
+otherwise, why did You not make me different? I was fore-ordained by
+You to be and to do what I am and have done. Is it my fault that You
+fore-ordained me to be and to do thus?' The actions of a man's will
+are as mathematically fixed at his birth as are the motions of a
+planet in its orbit. God, who made the man and the planet, is
+responsible for the actions of both."[1002]
+
+"Divine law says that certain acts are good and that certain acts are
+evil; and that God will reward those who do well and will punish those
+who do ill. And we are told that God will so act because God is just.
+But I claim that God cannot justly punish those who disobey, nor
+reward those who obey His laws. If God created all things, He must
+have created the evil as well as the good. Who, then, is responsible
+for good and evil? Only God, for he made them. He who creates all is
+responsible for all. God created all: God is responsible for all. He
+who creates nothing is responsible for nothing. Man created nothing:
+man is responsible for nothing. Therefore man is not responsible for
+his nature, nor for the acts prompted by that nature. Therefore God
+cannot justly punish man for his acts. Therefore the Divine law, with
+its code of rewards and punishments, is not a just law and cannot have
+emanated from a just God."[1003]
+
+"I do not pretend to say whether there is, or is not, _a_ God, but I
+deny that there is a loving Heavenly Father who answers prayer. I deny
+the existence of Free Will and possibility of man's sinning against
+God. I deny that Christ is necessary to man's salvation from Hell or
+from Sin. I do not assert or deny the immortality of the soul. I know
+nothing about the soul, and no man is, or ever was, able to tell me
+more than I know."[1004] "I do seriously mean that no man can, under
+any circumstances, be justly blamed for anything he may say or do.
+That is one of my deepest convictions."[1005]
+
+Mr. Blatchford's philosophy excuses, and therefore encourages, every
+action based upon a bad impulse, every vice and every crime, and his
+creed should find the unqualified approval of habitual criminals and
+loafers.
+
+Views similar to those of Mr. Blatchford are expressed by many other
+Socialists. We read, for instance: "It was pleasant to believe that a
+benevolent hand was guiding the steps of society; overruling all evil
+appearances for good; and making poverty here the earnest of a great
+blessedness and reward hereafter. It was pleasant to lose the sense of
+worldly inequality in the contemplation of our equality before God.
+But utilitarian questioning and scientific answering turned all this
+tranquil optimism into the blackest pessimism. Nature was shown to us
+as 'red in tooth and claw': if the guiding hand were indeed
+benevolent, then it could not be omnipotent, so that our trust in it
+was broken: if it were omnipotent, it could not be benevolent; so that
+our love in it turned to fear and hatred."[1006]
+
+    As long as childhood pines in City slum;
+      As long as Landlords steal their racking rent;
+    As long as Love and Faith to gold succumb;
+      As long as human life in war is spent;
+    While false religion teaches men to pray
+      To a false Tyrant, whom they misname God;
+    Whose "Holy Will" is--so they glibly say--
+      The poor should suffer 'neath His chast'ning rod;
+    As long as men do buy and sell the soil,
+      And thereby make their fellow men their slaves;
+    While selfishness exacts its cruel spoil;
+      While yet the poor are ground into their graves;
+    Until these crying wrongs are made to cease
+    Nowhere upon this earth can there be peace.[1007]
+
+Although the Socialists have declared war against the Christian
+religion and the Christian Churches, they freely quote the Scriptures
+and the Fathers if it suits their purpose, and shamelessly misuse the
+name of Christ. In support of their maxim "Property is theft," they
+quote St. Jerome's saying: "Opulence is always the result of theft:
+if not by the actual possessor, then by his predecessors."[1008] They
+quote Christ in support of their demand for the abolition of private
+property, marriage and the family. "Christ abolished all private
+property, and with it the State. He abolished all distinctions of
+race, rank, sex, and intellect. He made the first last and the last
+first, acknowledging only devoted _service_ as true greatness; the
+only law, the Law of Love. In His sweeping condemnation of egoism in
+every form it seems doubtful if He did not even lay iconoclastic hands
+on marriage and the family, as they existed and exist. In the
+resurrection they neither marry nor give in marriage, but are as the
+angels in heaven. Woman (to His mother), what have I to do with thee?
+Whosoever shall do the will of My Father which is in heaven the same
+is My brother, and sister, and mother."[1009] They use the name of
+Christ for electioneering purposes. At a West Ham election, for
+instance, the electors received leaflets which stated "If you vote for
+the Municipal Alliance you vote against God. If Christ were in
+Plaistow Ward, Christ would vote for Coe."[1010]
+
+Professor Schäffle, perhaps the most fair-minded and moderate
+scientist who ever criticised Socialism, was perfectly right in
+stating: "Socialism of the present day is out-and-out irreligious, and
+hostile to the Church. It says that the Church is only a police
+institution for upholding capital, and that it deceives the common
+people with a 'cheque payable in heaven,' that the Church deserves to
+perish."[1011] The above words were written with regard to German
+Socialism, and British Socialism is far more irreligious, violent, and
+revolutionary than is the German variety.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[977] Rev. E.T. Russell in _Forward_, November 23, 1907.
+
+[978] Rev. L. Jenkyns Jones in _Forward_, November 16, 1907.
+
+[979] Rev. Frank Ballard in _Socialism: A Cancerous Growth_, p. 19.
+
+[980] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 99.
+
+[981] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 4.
+
+[982] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 101.
+
+[983] _New Age_, October 10, 1907.
+
+[984] _Ibid._ p. 10.
+
+[985] Keir Hardie, _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_ p.
+18.
+
+[986] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 52.
+
+[987] _Ibid._ p. 97.
+
+[988] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 189.
+
+[989] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 14.
+
+[990] Francis Adams, _The Mass of Christ_, p. 12.
+
+[991] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 14.
+
+[992] Bax, _Ethics of Socialism_, pp. 192, 193.
+
+[993] _Ibid._ pp. 196, 197.
+
+[994] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 6.
+
+[995] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 16.
+
+[996] _Socialist Standard_, December 1, 1907.
+
+[997] Bax, _The Religion of Socialism_, p. 90.
+
+[998] _Ibid._ p. 98.
+
+[999] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 194.
+
+[1000] _Ibid._ p. 197.
+
+[1001] _Ibid._ p. 124.
+
+[1002] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, pp. 135, 136.
+
+[1003] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, pp. 11, 12.
+
+[1004] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 122.
+
+[1005] _Ibid._ p. 137.
+
+[1006] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 27.
+
+[1007] _The Deadly Parallel_, October 1907.
+
+[1008] Wheatley, _How the Miners are Robbed_, p. 13.
+
+[1009] Davidson, _Gospel of the Poor_, p. 149.
+
+[1010] _Times, Municipal Socialism_, p. 42.
+
+[1011] Schäffle, _Quintessence of Socialism_, p. 116.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXVII
+
+THE RELIGION OF SOCIALISM
+
+
+We have seen in Chapter XXVI. that Socialism makes war upon
+Christianity and upon religion, that it strives to eradicate religion
+out of the people's hearts. Now the question arises: How do Socialists
+propose to fill the void? What do they intend to put into the place of
+that religion which they wish to destroy?
+
+"Socialism involves a change which would be almost a revolution in the
+moral and religious attitude of the majority of mankind."[1012]
+"Religion will share the fate of the State. It will not be
+'abolished,' God will not be dethroned, religion will not be 'torn out
+of the people's hearts.' Religion will disappear by itself without any
+violent attack."[1013] "The establishment of society on a Socialistic
+basis would imply the definitive abandonment of all theological cults,
+since the notion of a transcendent god or semi-divine prophet is but
+the counterpart and analogue of the transcendent governing class. So
+soon as we are rid of the desire of one section of society to enslave
+another, the dogmas of an effete creed will lose their interest. As
+the religion of slave industry was Paganism; as the religion of
+serfage was Catholic Christianity, or Sacerdotalism; as the religion
+of Capitalism is Protestant Christianity or Biblical dogma, so the
+religion of collective and co-operative industry is Humanism, which is
+only another name for Socialism."[1014] "The religion of the future
+is to be the religion of the common life. It will have for its ideal
+the complete organic unity of the whole human race. And this religion
+will be a political religion. It will be a religion which will seek to
+realise its ideal in our industrial and social affairs by the
+application and use of political methods. The popular conception of
+politics as something apart from religion is a cunning device of the
+devil to serve his own ends; just in the same way as the popular
+impression that politics is something apart from bread and butter, and
+shorter hours, and better homes, and better industrial conditions.
+There can be no separation between politics and religion. The religion
+of the future will be an application of the moral truths of religion
+through politics to our industrial and social conditions."[1015]
+
+To root out the very memory of Christianity, Socialists would abolish
+the Sunday. "We would surrender once and for all this chimerical
+notion of one day of universal rest and institute three days a week,
+or, if necessary, more, as days of partial rest, _i.e._ on which
+different sections of the community would be freed from labour in
+turn."[1016]
+
+This proposal, like so many Socialist proposals, reminds us of the
+French Revolution, which also simultaneously abolished the Christian
+religion and changed the calendar. The month was divided into three
+periods of ten days. The tenth day, the "_decadi_," replaced
+Sunday.[1017] The people were compelled to rest on _decadi_ and to
+work on Sunday. Peasants who on Sundays did not bring their vegetables
+to market were prosecuted.[1018] Policemen who on _decadi_ heard
+suspicious noises broke by force into houses to find out whether
+people were "desecrating" _decadi_ by work, and the people
+complained, "Where is the liberty you promised us when we may not even
+dance on any day we like?"[1019]
+
+The French Revolutionaries destroyed the statues and pictures in the
+churches. British Socialists at present only propose to replace the
+effigies of Christ and the saints by Socialist heroes: "Let the
+painters, sculptors, poets, and musicians do honour to the heroes of
+humanity, the apostles of science and progress, as they have
+heretofore lavished their taste and skill and imagination on a
+conventional Jesus, an ideal Madonna and imaginary saints, and Gospel
+scenes; let statues arise to Bruno, Vanini, Servetus; let the
+historian and the biographer recount with loving wealth of detail
+their struggles, controversies, flights, imprisonments, and
+martyrdoms; let poets and painters cast the halo of romantic art
+around Caxton, Galileo, William the Silent, Milton, Harry Vane, and
+great masterful Cromwell; let hymns be sung to Copernicus, Newton,
+Harvey, to Massaniello, Danton, Garibaldi, Delescluze, to Grace
+Darling, Sister Dora and Father Damien."[1020]
+
+"To the Socialist, Marx has said the last word that need be said on
+the subject of the relation of Socialism and religion. 'The religious
+reflex of the real world can only finally vanish when the practical
+relations of everyday life offer to man none but perfectly
+intelligible and reasonable relations with regard to his fellow men.'
+Material conditions rule. 'The English Established Church will more
+readily pardon an attack on thirty-eight of its thirty-nine articles
+than on one-thirty-ninth of its income.' This is as true to-day as
+when written in 1867."[1021] Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded by
+the Social-Democratic Federation is, of course, "the disestablishment
+and disendowment of all State churches."[1022]
+
+British Socialists, like the French Revolutionaries, have issued
+numerous travesties of the Christian church service. The following are
+extracts from a widely read "Socialist Ritual."
+
+
+"A CATECHISM FOR THE MOB
+
+"Q. What is thy name? A. Wageworker.--Q. Who are thy parents? A. My
+father was called Wageworker--my mother's name is Poverty.--Q. Where
+wast thou born? A. In a garret under the roof of a tenement house
+which my father and his comrades built.--Q. What is thy religion? A.
+The Religion of Capital.--Q. What duties does thy religion lay upon
+thee with regard to society? A. To increase the national wealth--first
+through my toil, and next through my savings, as soon as I can make
+any.--Q. What does thy religion order thee to do with thy savings? A.
+To entrust them to the banks and such other institutions that have
+been established by philanthropic financiers, to the end that they may
+loan them out to themselves. We are commanded to place our earnings at
+all times at the disposal of our masters."
+
+
+"A LITANY
+
+for the use of the respectable classes. Edited by Edward Carpenter.
+
+"O God, the Father of Heaven, have mercy upon us, miserable
+sinners.--Remember not, Lord, our offences, nor the offences of our
+forefathers, neither take thou vengeance of our sins. Spare us, good
+Lord; spare us whom thou hast brought into honour and good position
+through the precious blood of the toiling masses, and be not angry
+with us for ever: Spare us, good Lord.--From all evil and mischief,
+from the crafts and assaults of the thief and the burglar, from
+poverty and the everlasting damnation of the workhouse: Good Lord,
+deliver us.--From bad trade and bogus dividends, from shady and
+unprofitable investments, from all unsuccessful speculation and
+losses, whether on the turf or in the City: Good Lord, deliver us."
+
+
+"THE CAPITALIST'S TEN COMMANDMENTS
+
+"I am Capital, thy Master, that brought thee out of the Land of
+Liberty into a State of Slavery. Thou shalt not become thine own
+Master, nor have any other Masters but me. Thou shalt commit murder
+for my sake only. Thou shalt give thy daughters in prostitution and
+thy wife in adultery to me."
+
+
+THE LATEST DECALOGUE
+
+    Thou shalt have one God only, who
+    Would be at the expense of two?
+    No graven images may be
+    Worshipped, except the currency.
+    Swear not at all, as for thy curse
+    Thine enemy is none the worse.
+    At Church on Sunday to attend
+    Will serve to keep the world thy friend.[1023]
+
+The foregoing representative statements and extracts clearly prove
+that the teachings of Socialism, far from being in harmony with
+Christianity, are incompatible and directly hostile not only to
+Christianity but to all religion. The philosopher of British Socialism
+has very truly said, "Socialism has been well described as a new
+conception of the world, presenting itself in industry as co-operative
+Communism, in politics as international Republicanism, in religion as
+atheistic Humanism, by which is meant the recognition of social
+progress as our being's highest end and aim."[1024] As there is very
+little difference between "atheistic Humanism" and Atheism pure and
+simple, Socialists have really no right to complain if their
+opponents, relying on Bax's high authority, reproach them with being
+Atheists. The excerpts given above show that the religion of Socialism
+is a political and economic one. Its character and principles may be
+found in the publications of the Labour Church Union and of the
+Socialist Sunday School Union. The prospectus of the Labour Church
+Union contains the following declaration of principles:
+
+"(1) That the Labour Church exists to give expression to the religion
+of the Labour movement. (2) That the religion of the Labour movement
+is not theological, but respects each individual's personal
+convictions upon this question. (3) That the religion of the Labour
+movement seeks the realisation of universal well-being by the
+establishment of Socialism--a Commonwealth founded upon justice and
+love. (4) The religion of the Labour movement declares that
+improvement of social conditions and the development of personal
+character are both essential to emancipation from social and moral
+bondage, and to that end insists upon the duty of studying the
+economic and moral forces of society."
+
+It will be noticed that the words Christianity, God, morality, virtue,
+&c., do not occur in the foregoing statement.
+
+Now let us study the details of the Socialist religion. These details
+are taken from a statement of the aims, methods, &c. of the Socialist
+Sunday Schools, published for the enlightenment of the public by the
+Glasgow and District Socialist Sunday School Union, the principal
+Socialist Sunday School Union of Great Britain. In that official
+publication we read: "Socialism, which the children are taught, is an
+idealism. It has been described as 'the highest flight of the ideal
+into the realm of the practical.' It is a faith--a faith based on the
+divine brotherhood and sisterhood of humanity--irrespective of class,
+colour, or creed. It is a religion--a religion greater than creeds or
+dogmas. It is a religion of love! Its followers and disciples are
+lovers of mankind! Its worship is service to humanity! Socialism has
+absorbed not only all the essential spiritual elements contained in
+the Christ teaching, but it has also, as Christianity itself has done
+before it, absorbed all the highest altruistic teaching of the ages.
+But Socialism has done something more--it has struck a new note,
+deep-sounding, far-reaching, and its vibrations are stirring in the
+hearts of the nations! Socialism has proclaimed its tenets, declaring
+the only possible ways and means whereby the sacred rites of the
+religion of love can be observed, and without which there can be no
+realisation of the divine sentiment--'the brotherhood of man.'
+
+"The Church, the State, and the people alike, in so far as they
+sanction and sanctify unrighteous social conditions, are equally guilty
+of breaking the very first laws of brotherhood, and thereby of
+violating the pure and holy religion of love. When the Sun of Social
+Justice--Socialism--has arisen in its full glory, all the artificial
+and unnatural causes of evil and error will have been rooted out from
+the pathway of human progress. The sons and daughters of men may then,
+without mockery, stand before the great throne of love and worship the
+beauty and the wonder and the glory of the earth, sky, and sea, as
+brothers and sisters in one holy unity, and be more worthy to fathom
+the deeper mystery. Thus Socialism, or the law of the religion of love,
+unfalteringly maintains: That private property in land is public
+robbery. It is public robbery because, the land being the source of all
+the necessaries of life, it should belong equally to all, by birthright
+of our common inheritance in the brotherhood of the world. 'Let them
+know that the earth from which they were created is the common
+property of all men, and that therefore the fruits of the earth belong
+indiscriminately to all. Those who make private property of the gift of
+God, pretend in vain to be innocent, for they are the murderers of
+those who die daily for want of it.' Such is the terrible and
+unassailable dictum of one of the great founders of the early Christian
+Church, Saint Gregory I. Private property in capital--whether in money,
+railways, mines, factories, machinery, tools, &c.--is public robbery.
+It is public robbery because it creates and divides the human family
+into classes. Classes of rich and idle people who claim and hold all
+these things as by right--and classes of hirelings who are thus forced
+to pay for the use of them--as rent in land, interest in capital,
+profit on labour. This means that the hireling classes require to give
+all the work of their hands and brains in order to secure a small share
+of the things which they need to live, and which they themselves have
+produced out of Nature's ample store. And this at once hinders the
+possibility of any unity of brotherhood or sisterhood and breaks the
+law of love."[1025]
+
+It will be noticed that in this lengthy statement God is mentioned
+only for party purposes, and that the chief aim of the "religion of
+love" is to sow hatred and to incite to plunder.
+
+The Labour Church Union and the Socialist Sunday Schools use the same
+form of the Socialist Ten Commandments, which are as follows:
+
+"Love your schoolfellows, who will be your fellow-workers in life.
+Love learning, which is the food of the mind, and be grateful to your
+teacher as to your parents. Make every day holy by good and useful
+deeds and kindly actions. Honour good men, be courteous to all, bow
+down to none. Do not hate or speak evil of anyone, do not be
+revengeful, but stand up for your rights and resist oppression. Do not
+be cowardly, be a friend to the weak and love justice. Remember that
+all the good things of the earth are produced by labour. Whoever
+enjoys them without working for them is stealing the bread of the
+workers. Observe and think in order to discover the truth. Do not
+believe what is contrary to reason, and never deceive yourself or
+others. Do not think that he who loves his own country must hate and
+despise other nations, or wish for war, which is a remnant of
+barbarism. Look forward to the day when all men will be free citizens
+of one fatherland and live together as brothers, in peace and
+righteousness. Socialism is the hope of the world."
+
+Here also the words Christianity and God do not occur.
+
+We are officially told that "Socialist Sunday Schools are intended to
+serve as a means of teaching economic causes of present-day social
+evils and of implanting a love of goodness in the child mind."[1026]
+
+The following extracts from the "Red Catechism" serve to show how
+"love of goodness" is inculcated in the Socialist Sunday Schools:
+
+"Q. Is there any difference in the teachings at Socialist Sunday
+schools and other Sunday schools? A. Yes.--Q. What is taught in
+Christian schools? A. Christian morals and capitalist teachings.--Q.
+What is meant by the term 'employing men for profit'? A. Capitalists,
+when they pay wages, make the workers produce three or four times the
+amount they pay them. The extra which the men produce over their wages
+is called profit.--Q. What evidence is there that the workers earn a
+great amount and get very little? A. The national amount of wealth
+produced every year is two thousand millions and the amount paid out
+in wages is only five hundred millions, showing that the poor are poor
+because they are robbed.--Q. Who creates all wealth? A. The working
+class.--Q. Who creates all poverty? A. Our capitalist society.--Q. Who
+are the workers? A. Men who work for wages.--Q. What class of men get
+into Parliament? A. The capitalist and aristocratic class?--Q. How is
+that? A. Because the workers are opposed by men interested in keeping
+them poor.--Q. How many children are there in London who go to school
+insufficiently fed and clothed? A. It is stated as many as 100,000; a
+number equal to the population of a small county.--Q. To what class do
+these poor starving children belong? A. The working class.--Q. Is it
+not the working class which creates all wealth? A. Yes.--Q. Do the
+rich trouble about the poor children of London who are ill-fed and
+clothed? A. No.--Q. What is a pauper? A. One who lives upon others,
+while being able to work?--Q. Are the rich class able to work? A. Yes;
+because they are well cared for when young and grow up strong?--Q. Do
+they work? A. No; they consider it menial and beneath them.--Q. Then
+they are paupers? A. Yes.--Q. Do the rich and their children live at
+the expense of those who work? A. Yes.--Q. What does machinery enable
+the workers to do? A. To produce wealth quicker.--Q. Do the workers
+benefit by machinery? A. No. On the contrary. It generally reduces
+their wages and throws them out of work.--Q. Why is that? A. Because
+the machinery is controlled by the capitalist class.--Q. What is a
+wage-slave? A. A person who works for a wage and gives all he earns to
+a capitalist.--Q. What proportion does a wage-slave receive of what he
+earns? A. On the average about a fourth. The slave and serf always had
+food, clothing, and shelter. The wage-slave, when he is out of work,
+must now starve or go into the workhouse and be made miserable, or
+commit suicide.--Q. What is the remedy for wage-slavery? A.
+Socialism.--Q. Who pays the rent? A. Father and mother.--Q. Who
+demands the rent? A. The landlord.--Q. Can you say how much the
+landlord takes from the wages of father, generally for rent? A. Yes; a
+fourth.--Q. That is sheer robbery, is it not? A. Yes; but working men
+cannot help it.--Q. Why is that? A. Because the landlord class have a
+monopoly of land and houses, and workmen have no land and are too poor
+to build for themselves."[1027]
+
+With this mendacious stuff the "Religion of Love" systematically
+poisons the innocent minds of little children. The religion of
+Socialism is indeed a political religion, as Mr. Snowden, M.P., has
+stated.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1012] Ball, _The Moral Aspects of Socialism_, p. 23.
+
+[1013] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 213.
+
+[1014] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 81.
+
+[1015] Snowden, _The Christ that Is to be_, pp. 6, 7.
+
+[1016] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, pp. 58, 59.
+
+[1017] Mignet, _Revolution Française_, ch. viii.
+
+[1018] Sciout, iii. 176.
+
+[1019] Sciout, iv. 386.
+
+[1020] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 16.
+
+[1021] _Socialist Standard_, December 1, 1907.
+
+[1022] See Appendix.
+
+[1023] _A Socialists' Ritual_, pp. 7-16.
+
+[1024] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 81.
+
+[1025] Glasier, _Socialist Sunday Schools_, p. 9.
+
+[1026] Glasier, _Socialist Sunday Schools_, p. 10.
+
+[1027] Hazell, _The Red Catechism_, pp. 3-10.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXVIII
+
+CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM
+
+
+The position of the Christian Churches and of Christian ministers
+towards Socialism is one of considerable difficulty. Socialism and
+Christianity are two words which are not easily reconcilable. Chapters
+XXVI. and XXVII. show that the attitude of British Socialists, not
+only towards Christianity but towards all religion, is in the main a
+hostile one. Their attitude is only logical. Socialists see in
+religious men and in religious corporations obstacles to their
+revolutionary and predatory progress. However, as many Socialists have
+declared that the teachings of Christ and of Socialism are identical,
+some large-hearted Christian ministers have tried to reconcile
+Christianity and Socialism. Working under the banner of Christian
+Socialism, these are rather trying to exercise practical Christianity
+than to assist the Socialist agitation, as may be seen from their
+programmes given in the Appendix.
+
+Many Christian Socialist ministers are pious and worthy men whose
+actions are wise and moderate. Others have adopted an attitude of
+hysterical enthusiasm and admiration towards Socialism. Whilst the
+former have only a few adherents, some of the latter have rapidly
+secured for themselves a considerable Socialist following, and if one
+takes note of their views, one cannot help doubting whether their
+motives are entirely disinterested. The following utterances, for
+instance, one would expect from the mouth of a Soudanese dervish or
+an Indian fakir, but not from the pen of a Christian minister:
+
+"Socialism is the Greatest Movement for Justice and Brotherhood that
+this old Planet has ever known. Socialism is the Greatest Passion for
+the Release and Freedom of the Human Soul that this world has ever
+felt. Socialism is the Greatest Urge of the Average Man to stand
+erect, independent, and free, without a Master and without a slave,
+that the human race has ever experienced.
+
+"The Spirit of the Lord of Life within me, burning as a fierce flame
+in my bones, saith 'Speak unto the people these words': There is only
+one Sacred Thing beneath the stars--Human Life. Human Life is the
+Incarnation of the Desire of the Lord of Life. Behold! He awaits the
+Full Expression, the Complete Emancipation, the Perfect Freedom of
+that Human Life, as Life, in all its undisclosed majestic meanings.
+And it doth not yet appear what it shall be! The Average Man at your
+side in the street, next door--the average woman, any woman, the
+child, any child--Behold here is the Sacred One. Love, Worship, and
+Bless in the name of the Lord of Life. 'Inasmuch as ye have done it
+unto one of the least of these, ye have done it unto Me.' No
+artificial, conventional, social, or financial dignity can make that
+Human One worthy; no present degradation or humiliation can finally
+obscure that Radiant One. 'I see through your sham tinsel and title; I
+see through the dirt and despair to the Human One shining there,'
+saith the Living Truth. 'The worship that passeth these Darlings of My
+Heart and leaveth them--that worship I am against,' saith the Lord of
+Life. O stand erect now, just where you are, just as you read these
+words. Thou hast no Superior! Thou art very Beautiful! Thou art the
+Freedom Incarnate, whose Heart-beat shall dissolve all slaveries and
+Injustice. I Love thee, O Thou Human One. There is only one Sacred
+Thing beneath the stars--Human Life. Whatever hurts, harms, makes
+cheap, blights, hinders, enslaves, subordinates, or profits off Human
+Life is Wrong tho' demanded by ten thousand priests, tho' framed in a
+thousand laws, tho' hoary with ten thousand years. Whatever hurts the
+Son of man--that--that is the Blasphemy. Whatever helps, releases,
+emancipates, makes free, glorifies, makes sacred, enlarges, enricheth
+Human Life, that is the Right and Good, tho' persecuted by private
+interests; that is the Truth, tho' withstood by dead men's creeds.
+Whatever emancipates the average man--that--that is the coming of the
+Lord. The Fundamental fact of Life is Bread. Man doth not--cannot live
+by Bread alone. But man cannot live without Bread. In the eating of
+Bread, behold the Divine Democracy of Human Life. The necessity of
+eating Bread--there is the Universal Sacrament--all are present--all
+partake. Behold, the Supper of the Lord is--just Bread--our common
+Daily Bread. Why is this Bread Sacred? Not in itself. No! Why, then?
+It is the food of the Sacred Ones--the Human Ones. It is the Food of
+the Incarnation of the Lord of Life. And the first Basic Sacred
+Ceremony of Man is--Labour in securing that Bread--the Fact of
+Bread-Getting. If that is not Just, True, Right, Good, a
+Blessing--then nothing is. All else is measured here. You cannot build
+a Sacred Ceremony in the superstructure of Human Life if the Basis in
+Bread-getting is a Lie, a Fraud, a Cheat, a Theft, a Slavery, a
+Service to the Gain-god--Mammon, a Gamble with Human Flesh. Nay,
+verily! 'I will not hear your prayers, your chants, your liturgies,
+your praises; My soul hateth even your solemn meeting,' said the Lord
+of Life, if thou wilt not see Me in these Human Ones as they struggle
+for Bread, if thou wilt not make thy Bread-getting Just, and Holy, and
+Good, and True.
+
+"And now, O Capitalism, Thou art doomed! I am against thee, saith the
+Spirit. O Capitalism, I have weighed thee in My balances--thou art
+found wanting. O Capitalism, thou hast gambled with the Land that I
+gave to all for Bread. O Capitalism, thou hast gambled with the great
+machines that are for the bread-getting of the people. O Capitalism,
+thou hast made Human need an asset of thy gains. Thy Purse is filled
+with Bloody Coin. Thy Store-Houses burst where the many Hunger. The
+Little Ones cry in the streets whilst thou hidest thy Plunder. I am
+against thee, O Capitalism, I am against thee! Thou hast gambled with
+the very Bodies and Souls of men in thy Mad Mammonism. Thy fierce
+Profit-Hunger Hath rejoiced in the Hunger of Man. I am against thee, O
+Capitalism!
+
+"Behold! the Day Dawns! I see Justice arise. I see the Land redeemed!
+I see the Titans of Iron, the machinery of shops, used for man! I see
+the Toilers go forth to their labours and return with the product of
+their toil! I see Capitalism lie prone! I see Mammonism fallen! I see
+the Profit of the Many Arise! I see Freedom! I see Brotherhood! I see
+the Socialist Age! I see the Commonwealth of Man! 'Tis the coming of
+the Lord of Life."[1028]
+
+Much of the foregoing is printed in half-inch letters. At the end of
+these wild utterances we read in letters an inch tall: "Rally, Rally,
+Rally! Great Social Crusade! Rally, Rally, Rally!"--which unpleasantly
+reminds one of the shouting butcher's insistent cry, "Buy, Buy, Buy!"
+to be heard in crowded thoroughfares on Saturday nights.
+
+The moderate Christian Socialists cannot help opposing the most
+important item in the Socialist programme. For example, "The Christian
+Social Union asserts that it has not the slightest sympathy with
+confiscation." In fact, "the whole question of expropriation is
+tacitly ignored in the literature of Christian Socialism."[1029] "The
+Christian who believes in the words: 'Take heed, and keep yourselves
+from all covetousness, for a man's life consisteth not in the
+abundance of the things which he possesseth,' cannot easily be a
+Socialist, and a Christian minister cannot easily approve of the
+spoliation of the Church."[1030] Professor Flint stated quite
+correctly: "What is called Christian Socialism will always be found to
+be unchristian in so far as it is socialistic, or unsocialistic in so
+far as it is truly and fully Christian."[1031]
+
+Christian Socialist leaders urge Socialists to join the Christian
+Socialist movement. "Every Socialist who understands how deeply
+religion has been concerned in every movement that has ever won the
+enthusiasm of men, every Socialist who realises how enormous is the
+work before him, must welcome the assistance of this ancient and
+imperishable organ of love and justice. And every Christian who
+rejoices in the singular growth of religious zeal in recent years must
+long to see all that huge force given to the service of the Humanity
+which Jesus Christ has taken up into the Godhead. For the man that
+loves much is a Socialist, and the man that loves most is a saint, and
+every man that truly loves the brotherhood is in a state of
+salvation."[1032] These words seem rather perfunctory and laboured.
+
+By far the largest number of Socialists regard the Christian Socialist
+movement with suspicion and dislike. The philosopher of British
+Socialism, Mr. Bax, for instance, wrote contemptuously: "The leaders
+of the Guild of St. Matthew wish to accomplish vast changes through 'a
+clarified Christianity'?--a Christianity which shall consist
+apparently of the skins of dead dogmas stuffed with adulterated
+Socialist ethics." A leading Socialist weekly wrote of the early
+Christian Socialists: "Whether their labours were largely beneficial
+depends on the way one looks at these things. We have no doubt that
+for the capitalist class these labours were eminently beneficial, and
+that is why Maurice and his friends are held in such great esteem by
+them. For the working class, however, their labours spelt slavery, and
+ought always to be remembered when similar attempts to 'Christianise'
+Socialism are made by the 'servants' of the Church. Here, as in many
+other things, the motto of the worker must be 'I fear the Greeks, even
+when they come with gifts.'"[1033]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1028] _The Social Crusade to Herald the Message of Truth and Freedom
+to this Age, conducted by Rev. J. Stitt Wilson, M.A._, November 1907.
+
+[1029] Woodworth, _Christian Socialism in England_, p. 161.
+
+[1030] _Church and Socialism_, p. 39.
+
+[1031] Flint, _Socialism_, p. 441.
+
+[1032] Dearmer, _Socialism and Christianity_, pp. 22, 23.
+
+[1033] _Justice_, October 19, 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXIX
+
+SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM
+
+
+Socialism is not a simple but a complex movement. It contains a
+powerful strain both of Communism and of Anarchism. In fact one might
+almost divide all Socialists into two classes: Communist Socialists
+and Anarchist Socialists. A study of the history of Socialism,
+Communism, and Anarchism shows that all three movements have much in
+common. It shows instances of Socialistic parties branching out and
+having Communist and Anarchist offshoots, and shows instances of
+Anarchist and Communist groups combining under the red banner of
+Socialism.
+
+Owing to its intimate historical and sentimental connection with
+Communism and Anarchism, Socialism is hostile to the State, and many
+Socialists desire its downfall: "The expropriation of all the private
+proprietors of the means of production being effected, society starts
+on a new basis. The conditions of existence and of human life are
+changed. The State Organisation gradually loses its foundation. The
+State expires with the expiration of a ruling class, just as religion
+expires when the belief in supernatural beings or supernatural
+reasoning powers ceases to exist."[1034] "The first act wherein the
+State appears as the real representative of the whole body social--the
+seizure of the means of production in the name of society--is also its
+last independent act as State. The interference of the State in social
+relations becomes superfluous in one domain after another and falls of
+itself into desuetude. The place of a government over persons is taken
+by the administration of things and the conduct of the processes of
+production. The State is not 'abolished,' it dies out."[1035] "The
+representatives of the State will have disappeared along with the State
+itself--ministers, parliaments, standing armies, police and
+_gens-d'armes_, law courts, lawyers and public prosecutors, prisons,
+rates, taxes and excises--the entire political apparatus. The great and
+yet so petty parliamentary struggles have given place to administrative
+colleges and administrative delegations, whose function it is to settle
+the best methods of production and distribution."[1036] "The
+Co-operative Commonwealth will incorporate the whole people into
+society. The whole people does not want, or need, any government at
+all. It simply wants administration--good administration,"[1037]
+
+The arguments contained in the foregoing extracts are exceedingly
+shallow. The various authorities quoted tell us in more or less
+involved language that the State disappears because "governments" will
+be replaced by "administrations." Unconvincing verbiage apart, the
+only change which would take place would be a change of name.
+Countries would be ruled by Socialist governments instead of by
+non-Socialist ones. The State could disappear only with the
+disappearance of nations and of frontiers, with the advent of the
+"Brotherhood of Man." The first Socialist State might of course
+proclaim the Brotherhood of Man in accordance with the precedent set
+by the French Revolution, but other nations might feel as little
+inclined to join it as during the time when bloodthirsty demagogues
+ruled France in the name of Liberty, Fraternity, and Equality, with
+the liberal assistance of the rifle and the guillotine.
+
+What is Communism? John Stuart Mill tells us: "The assailants of the
+principle of individual property may be divided into two
+classes--those whose scheme implies absolute equality in the
+distribution of the physical means of life and enjoyment, and those
+who admit inequality, but grounded on some principle, or supposed
+principle, of justice or general expediency, and not, like so many of
+the existing social inequalities, dependent on accident alone. The
+characteristic name for the former economical system is
+Communism."[1038] "Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy" says:
+"Communism is the theory which teaches that the labour and the income
+of society should be distributed equally among all its members by some
+constituted authority."[1039]
+
+Let us now take note of some Socialist views on Communism. "Laurence
+Gronlund, whose 'Co-operative Commonwealth' has been styled the New
+Testament of Socialism (as the 'Capital' is its Old Testament), has
+tried to distinguish between Socialism and Communism by describing
+Communism as meaning 'each according to his needs,' and Socialism 'each
+according to his deeds.'"[1040] "As soon as the principle of equality
+is applied to Socialism, Socialism becomes 'Communism.'"[1041]
+"Socialism and Communism are very generally confounded, but they are
+quite distinct economic systems. Socialists seek only to control the
+instruments of production--Land and Capital; Communists leave nothing
+to the individual which he can call his own. St. Paul was a Socialist,
+Christ a Communist."[1042]
+
+Many so-called Socialists are in reality avowed Communists who look
+forward to the introduction of Communism more than to the advent of
+Socialism. They see in Socialism merely an intermediate stage towards
+their final goal. "If the millennial haven of Communism is to be
+reached by mankind generally, it must be through the disciplinary
+portal of Socialism."[1043] "Communism, the final goal of Socialism,
+is a form of Social Economy very closely akin to the principles set
+forth in the Sermon on the Mount."[1044] "Socialism and freedom 'gang
+thegither.' Socialism implies the inherent equality of all human
+beings. It does not assume that all are alike, but only that all are
+equal."[1045] "Between complete Socialism and Communism there is no
+difference whatever in my mind. Communism is, in fact, the completion
+of Socialism; when that ceases to be militant and becomes triumphant
+it will be Communism."[1046] "The vision of freedom is an
+ever-expanding conception of life and its possibilities. The slave
+dreams of emancipation, the emancipated workman of citizenship; the
+enfranchised citizen of Socialism; the Socialist of Communism."[1047]
+
+Some Socialists champion Communism because Communism, the equality of
+all, is "natural," whilst individualism is "unnatural": "Capitalistic
+individualism has no prototype in Nature and is therefore unnatural.
+But some opponent will say, 'It is here, and therefore it must be a
+natural product.' The answer is simple. It is here, but it is one of
+Nature's failures. We have seen how, low down in the organic scale,
+Nature makes many failures in order to achieve one success. Sometimes
+even millions perish in order that one of high type may survive.
+Nature always accomplishes her purposes in the end. We know that her
+aim is Communism, for some of the higher species have already reached
+it, and all are tending towards it."[1048] The assertion, "We know"
+(who are we?) "that Nature's aim is Communism," can hardly be called a
+sufficient scientific proof of the foregoing proposition. Other
+Socialists assert that Communism is in accordance with the Bible:
+"Christ's teaching is often said to be Socialistic. It is not
+Socialistic, but it is Communistic, and Communism is the most advanced
+form of the policy generally known as Socialism."[1049]
+
+A Socialist Bible student and very prolific writer says: "Can anything
+be conceived more diametrically opposed to the principle laid down by
+Christ than the present system, based as it is on the principle of
+competition? 'You are all brothers,' says Christ, and if all are
+brothers, then it needs no philosopher to tell us that all should work
+together for the common good."[1050] In support of this doctrine that
+Communism is in accordance with the Bible, the said writer quotes Acts
+iv. 32-35, "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart
+and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things
+which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
+Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were
+possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the
+things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and
+distribution was made unto every man according as he had need."[1051]
+The Socialist can quote Scripture for his purpose--and misquote it
+too. Therefore the pious Socialist writer leaves out the lines which
+follow: "But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold
+a possession, and kept back part of the price."[1052] Will there be no
+Ananiases in the Socialist Commonwealth? Besides, the early Christian
+Communism was voluntary and dictated only by charity. It certainly was
+not enjoined as a religious duty.[1053] Lastly, the first Christian
+experiment in Communism proved immediately a failure, probably because
+there were many Ananiases, and because Communism is opposed to human
+nature and leads to poverty and strife, not to prosperity and peace.
+Hence, St. Paul founded no more Communist settlements, but collected
+everywhere for the "poor saints at Jerusalem" in order to relieve them
+in their "deep poverty," as may be seen in Romans xv. 26-27, 1
+Corinthians xvi. 1-3, 2 Corinthians viii. and ix. To misquote
+Scripture in support of Socialist Communism with an attitude of deep
+piety is not only in bad taste, but also dishonest. It is cant and
+hypocrisy.
+
+Another prolific Socialist writer, under the title "Was Jesus a
+Socialist?" tells us that Socialism "claims complete equality of
+rewards for all members of society, not on any theologico-metaphysical
+ground, such as the Christian abstract principle of brotherhood, but
+because it sees men to have on the whole the same natural endowments,
+and the same natural needs."[1054] Have they? Considered merely as
+two-legged animals requiring only food, warmth, and shelter, men have
+not even the same physical needs.
+
+It is very difficult to make out a good case in favour of Communism,
+an equal reward for all, a doctrine which will be attractive only to
+the lowest rank of workers, the lazy, and the inefficient. Therefore
+Socialist Communists endeavour to make Communism appear more palatable
+to the active and the efficient by the lavish use of poetry and
+hyperbole. For instance, we learn: "He who makes the canvas is as
+useful as he that paints the picture. He who cleanses the sewer and
+prevents disease is as useful as the physician who cures the malady
+after it has been contracted."[1055] To learn painting or medicine
+requires at least ten years' study; sewer-cleaning requires no study.
+The offer of equal rewards for an hour's work at painting, at
+amputating in a hospital, and at cleaning sewers must be very
+attractive to sewermen. Will it prove equally attractive to surgeons
+and painters? Socialism is to be world-wide. Will the highly skilled
+British trade unionist agree to work side by side with unskilled
+Chinamen and for equal wages?
+
+    In youth, as I lay dreaming,
+      I saw a country fair.
+    Where Plenty sheds its blessing down,
+      And all have equal share.
+    There Poverty's sad features
+      Are never, never, seen;
+    And each soul in the Brotherhood
+      Scorns cunning arts or mean.[1056]
+
+I think skilled workers will hardly hail with enthusiasm the day of
+liberty and equality and of sewermen's wages all round, poetry
+notwithstanding.
+
+Other Socialists try to recommend Communism by a ridiculous and
+dishonest play upon words: "He who declares himself an enemy of
+Communism declares himself an enemy of common interest, an enemy of
+society and mankind. Whoever wishes to annihilate Communism will have
+to destroy the common roads, the schools, he will have to destroy the
+public gardens and parks, he will have to abolish the public baths,
+the theatres, the waterworks, all the public buildings; he will have
+to destroy the railroads, the telegraphs, the post-office. For all
+these belong to Communism."[1057] It would be as logical to say, "He
+who opposes Socialism will have to destroy the Royal Society, and all
+clubs, for all these are social institutions." The Social-Democratic
+Federation says about Communism: "Has there not always been the
+aggregation of wealth in the hands of a few in all stages of human
+society?--Certainly there has been a tendency to such concentration
+throughout history. In what did tribal society differ from civilised
+society?--Briefly, it differed in that its underlying principle was
+that of social solidarity and Communism. We may instance such examples
+as survived in the village communities of India before the
+establishment of British institutions; in the Russian Mir, in its
+older form; in the Arab tribal organisation and the Javan village
+communities."[1058] That "primitive Communism" of "tribal society,"
+the organisation of savages and semi-savages, of the decadent and of
+the unfit, Socialists wish to foist upon a highly cultured nation. The
+above arguments, penned by the philosopher of British Socialism and
+the editor of "Justice" in recommendation of Communism, suffice to
+condemn it.
+
+We have a survival of ancient Communism in the Russian Mir, and to the
+Mir is the great backwardness of Russian agriculture chiefly to be
+attributed.[1059] The Russian peasants, recognising the disadvantages
+of the Communist Mir, are gradually abandoning it and converting
+common into individual properties. Nevertheless some Socialists have
+the hardihood to ascribe the universal disappearance of ancient
+Communism to the tyranny of man, not to the logic of facts and the
+action of Nature which replaces inefficient by efficient
+organisations. "There have been attempts in all ages to introduce some
+system of holding things in common in order to alleviate and soften
+the hard struggle with Nature for food, clothing, and shelter. This
+voluntary Communism rendered the workers too independent for the
+governing classes, and the jealousy of Church and State invariably
+destroyed it as the Russian village communes are now being destroyed
+by the Government."[1060]
+
+Another Socialist quotes with approval the pronouncement of Gregory
+the Great "Let them know that the earth from which they spring, and of
+which they are formed, belongs to all men in common, and that
+therefore the fruits which the earth brings forth must belong, without
+distinction, to all."[1061] China suffers from over-population and is
+very poor. Would the writer give to the Chinese a share of Great
+Britain's wealth since "the earth and its fruits belong without
+distinction to all?"
+
+Mr. Keir Hardie, M.P., who has apparently a somewhat elementary
+knowledge of ancient history, and who seems to rely for information on
+a primer such as "Little Willie's First History Book," recommends
+Communism because "In Sparta there were not only common lands, but
+also a common table, whilst dogs and horses were practically common
+property also. Sparta, which kept its Communism almost to the end, was
+also the Republic from which came the immortal heroes who made the
+pass of Thermopylae one of the great inspirations of the world."[1062]
+The Spartans were barbarians among the Greeks. Spartan Communism was
+founded on slavery and on the virtual community of women.
+Slave-murder, child-murder, rape, and theft were legally enjoined, and
+that is the community which Mr. Keir Hardie bids us consider as our
+model. Mr. Keir Hardie concludes: "We have seen how mankind when left
+free has always, and in all parts of the world, naturally turned to
+Communism. [Has it? When, and where?] That it will do so again is the
+most likely forecast of the future which can be made, and the great
+industrial organisations, the Trade Unions, the Co-operative Movement,
+the Friendly Orders, the Socialist organisations and the Labour party
+are each and all developing the feeling of solidarity and of mutual
+aid which will make the inauguration of Communism a comparatively easy
+task as the natural successor to State Socialism."[1063]
+
+The ideas of Socialists with regard to Communism are incredibly
+confused. For instance, we find in the same book the following
+contradictory statements describing Socialism: "Socialism is the
+common holding of the means of production and exchange, and _the
+holding of them for the equal benefit of all_"[1064] (the italics are
+in the original), and "To distribute the gifts of Nature justly
+according to the labour done by each in the collective search for
+them. This desire is Socialism."[1065] These absolutely contradictory
+statements, telling us that Socialism is both individualistic and that
+it is also Communistic, are taken from the fundamental book of the
+Fabian Society, the most scientific body of Socialists, and they have
+been reprinted again and again down to the edition bearing the imprint
+"43rd Thousand."
+
+Socialism is eternally between the horns of a dilemma. It promises to
+make all men happy. If it rewards men by results, the inefficient and
+the lazy will be dissatisfied. If it rewards all men alike
+(Communism), the efficient, able, and energetic will be dissatisfied.
+Reward by result will, in the absence of self-regulating commercial
+demand and supply, require an autocratic and absolute authority which
+arbitrarily apportions the unequal rewards of labour. It would be the
+tyranny of the few over the many, and would mean the abolition of
+democracy. Communism, equal rewards for all, would lead to the tyranny
+of the many over the few, and would stifle all motives to excel. Well
+might the Fabians ask: "Since we are too dishonest for Communism
+without taxation or compulsory labour, and too insubordinate to
+tolerate task work under personal compulsion, how can we order the
+transition so as to introduce just distribution without Communism and
+maintain the incentive to labour without mastership?"[1066]
+Unfortunately for the Socialists, that question is unanswerable. It is
+likely always to remain so, and the impossibility of answering it
+makes Socialism impossible. However, since Socialists wish to array
+the masses against the classes, the poor against the rich, they
+naturally incline, for tactical reasons rather than from honest
+conviction, to Communism, the worst of all tyrannies, and the most
+retrograde and inefficient of economic organisations.
+
+"Communism in proposing the appropriation of the results of the
+unequally productive labour for a uniformly equal distribution
+according to needs, seeks to establish a universal and monstrous
+appropriation by one set of persons of the surplus value belonging to
+others. Socialism would, in short, do to a far greater degree the very
+thing with which to-day it so indignantly and bitterly reproaches
+capitalism."[1067] Whilst Mr. Keir Hardie and his numerous followers
+enthusiastically support a free Communism in which "the rule of life
+will be--From each according to his ability, to each according to his
+needs,"[1068] "the Fabian Society resolutely opposes all pretensions
+to hamper the Socialisation of industry with equal wages, equal hours
+of labour, equal official status, or equal authority for everyone.
+Such conditions are not only impracticable, but incompatible with the
+equality of subordination to the common interest which is fundamental
+in modern Socialism."[1069]
+
+The Communistic idea is not yet dead. The short-sightedness and folly
+of mankind is such that Communism, in spite of a record of more than
+2,000 years of universal failure, is still a power to be reckoned
+with. Visionaries like Saint-Simon and Owen, and madmen like Fourier,
+are still able to lead the people astray.
+
+Fourier taught that Communism would alter not only man but the
+physical world as well. The duration of the human race on earth would
+be 80,000 years, divided into two periods of ascending and two of
+descending vibrations. Lions would be taught to draw waggons, as a
+symbol of the victory of man over Nature. Human life would on an
+average last 144 years. The aurora borealis, which now rarely appears
+in northern regions, would become permanently visible and be fixed at
+the Pole. It would give out, not only light, as at present, but also
+heat. It would decompose the sea water by the creation of citric
+boreal acid and convert it into a kind of lemonade which would
+dispense with the necessity of provisioning ships with fresh water.
+Oranges would grow in Siberia and tame whales would pull becalmed
+sailing-ships. The full indulgence of human nature in all its passions
+would produce happiness and virtue. Society would harmoniously be
+organised in groups (phalanxes) of 1,600 persons to inhabit a large
+palace called a phalanstery. If England would introduce these
+phalanxes, her labour would become so productive that she could pay
+off her national debt in six months by the sale of hens' eggs. Labour
+would be organised and occupation be changed every two hours. Workers
+would be taken in carriages to and from their work, and agricultural
+labourers would work under tents so as to be protected against the
+rain. The relations between the sexes would be of the freest. All
+should freely satisfy all their passions, and all passions would
+naturally combine in one grand harmony. The world would become a huge
+Republic which would be governed from Constantinople, and French would
+be the universal language.[1070]
+
+Notwithstanding the evident insanity of Fourier's proposals, and the
+almost equally extravagant proposals of Owen, more than a hundred
+phalansteries and other Communistic settlements were founded in Great
+Britain and elsewhere, especially in the United States. Their failure
+was universal and their immorality was very great.[1071] "The trouble
+with all the Fourierite communities was that they were fanciful and
+theoretical schemes, not simple and natural growths. They had little
+definite religious spirit to hold them together. They had little
+business headship. At the least discouragement and misfortune they
+melted away. Only religious communism, the facts seem to prove, can be
+successful."[1072] Only the communism of the convent and of the
+monastery, the equality of all based on a fervent religious belief, on
+a firm discipline, on an equal and absolute poverty, and on the almost
+insurmountable difficulty of re-entering the world, has hitherto
+proved practicable from the time of the Essenes to the present day.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1034] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 178.
+
+[1035] Engels, _Socialism: Utopian and Scientific_, pp. 76, 77.
+
+[1036] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 212.
+
+[1037] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 123
+
+[1038] Mill, _Political Economy_, Book iii. ch. i. par. 2.
+
+[1039] _Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy_, vol. i. p. 297.
+
+[1040] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 89.
+
+[1041] Menger, _L'État Socialiste_, p. 35.
+
+[1042] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 93.
+
+[1043] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 94.
+
+[1044] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 36.
+
+[1045] _Ibid._ p. 9.
+
+[1046] Morris, _Communism_, pp. 11, 12.
+
+[1047] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 77.
+
+[1048] Connell, _Socialism and the Survival of the Fittest_, p. 19.
+
+[1049] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 5.
+
+[1050] Ward, _Are All Men Brothers?_ p. 19.
+
+[1051] Ward, _All Things in Common_, p. 5.
+
+[1052] Acts v. 1, 2.
+
+[1053] Acts v. 4.
+
+[1054] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 5.
+
+[1055] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 159.
+
+[1056] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 27.
+
+[1057] Sorge, _Socialism and the Workers_, p. 8
+
+[1058] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, pp. 20, 21.
+
+[1059] See Simkhowitsch, _Die Feldgemeinschaft_, 1898; Haxthausen,
+_Studien_, &c.
+
+[1060] Benson, _Socialism_, p. 4.
+
+[1061] Ward, _All Things in Common_, p. 1.
+
+[1062] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 17.
+
+[1063] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, pp. 96, 97.
+
+[1064] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 212.
+
+[1065] _Ibid._ p. 4.
+
+[1066] B. Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 17.
+
+[1067] Schäffle, _The Impossibility of Social Democracy_, p. 60.
+
+[1068] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 89.
+
+[1069] _Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions_, p. 7.
+
+[1070] See Fourier, _Oeuvres_; Pellarin, _Fourier_; Sargant, _Social
+Innovators_.
+
+[1071] See Noyes, _History of American Socialism_; Nordhoff,
+_Communistic Societies of the United States_.
+
+[1072] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 319.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXX
+
+SOCIALISM AND ANARCHISM
+
+
+Socialism is, on the whole, hostile to the State. All Socialists hate
+the State as at present constituted, because it protects the property
+which they wish to seize. However, many Socialists hate not only the
+State in its present form. They have become doubtful whether private
+capital or the State is the greater evil. They long for liberty, and
+would not welcome the restraint of any State, and least of all that of
+the absolute, all-regulating, and constantly interfering Socialistic
+State. Hence many Socialists have become Anarchists. Socialists may be
+divided into two classes--Communists and Anarchists--and Prince
+Kropotkin, the foremost Anarchist leader living, described the two
+Socialistic sections as follows: "A section of Socialists believes
+that it is impossible to attain Socialism without sacrificing personal
+liberty on the altar of the State. Another section, to which we
+belong, believes, on the contrary, that it is only by the abolition of
+the State, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by
+free agreement, association, and absolute free federation, that we can
+reach Communism."[1073] Many Socialists, seeing the enemy rather in
+the State than in private capital, express their passionate hatred of
+the State: "The State at present is simply a huge machine for robbing
+and slave-driving the poor by brute force."[1074] "The Parliament ever
+cries for more money, more money for the service of the State. Just
+heavens! Of what service is the State? Of very little service to
+honest, industrious men,"[1075] The philosopher of British Socialism
+frankly confesses himself a revolutionary Anarchist: "As an
+international revolutionist I have always been strongly sympathetic
+with all movements for local autonomy as most directly tending to
+destroy the modern 'nation' or centralised bureaucratic State."[1076]
+"It is quite true that Socialism will have to take over the accursed
+legacy of existing national frontiers from the bourgeois world-order;
+but Socialism will take it over merely with the view of killing it off
+and burying it at the earliest possible moment. The modern nation or
+centralised State is a hideous monstrosity, the offspring of
+capitalism in its various phases; in its present shape the outcome of
+the developed capitalism of the great industry. We quite admit that in
+form it may, and probably will, survive the earlier stage of
+Socialism, but its ultimate disappearance is none the less certain.
+The sentiment of the national patriotism will then, let us hope, be
+reduced to its last expression--the holding of annual dinners, or some
+harmless festivity of this sort, such as is affected by the natives of
+certain English counties resident in the metropolis. The Nationalist
+movement, therefore, is an old Radical 'plank' which clearly no longer
+belongs to us as Socialists."[1077]
+
+The Socialist-Anarchist hates State government in every form. To him a
+Social-Democratic State is quite as hateful as any other form of
+government: "The State is the evil, the inveterate foe of labour--be
+the Government Autocratic, Bureaucratic, or Social-Democratic. For
+what, after all, is our vaunted nose-counting, majority-ridden
+Democracy but an expansion of the old-time tyranny of monarch and
+oligarch, inasmuch as the Governmentalist, whatever his stripe, is
+doomed to act on the two root principles of statecraft--force and
+fraud? And, obviously, so long as that is so, his particular profession
+of political faith is almost a matter of indifference."[1078] "What
+was, what is the State, wherever it exists, but a community of human
+beings barbarically held together by a well-drilled gang of
+magistrates, soldiers, policemen, gaolers, and hangmen?"[1079] Mr.
+Blatchford, who is apparently never quite sure in his mind whether he
+is a Socialist, a Communist, or an Anarchist, gives voice to his
+Anarchist sentiments in the words: "Rightly or wrongly, I am opposed to
+godship, kingship, lordship, priestship. Rightly or wrongly, I am
+opposed to imperialism, militarism, and conquest. Rightly or wrongly, I
+am for universal brotherhood and universal freedom."[1080]
+
+Another influential Socialist writer exclaims: "What is freedom but
+the unfettered use of all the powers which God for use has
+given?"[1081]--a sentiment which is heartily endorsed by all
+Anarchists. However, the unfettered use of all powers means that the
+will of the individual, not the will of society, is the supreme law.
+It means the denial of the supremacy of society, the State,
+government. Similar sentiments are expressed with greater energy and
+greater fulness by many Socialist writers. Mr. Davidson, for instance,
+says: "In the new order every man (woman, of course, included) will be
+his own legislator. In the state of ultimate and universal freedom to
+which we aspire, when the greatest of all tyrants, poverty, is slain
+and plenty sits on the throne which the lean monster has so long
+usurped--it may well be that there shall be no necessity for any law
+except that which the purified conscience of every individual man and
+woman will readily supply. Then will have come the true Golden Age,
+the millennium of Christian Anarchism."[1082]
+
+The claims, programme, and aims of Socialism and Anarchism are
+curiously alike. Prince Kropotkin, the leading exponent of Anarchism,
+writes: "Anarchy appears as a constituent part of the new philosophy,
+and that is why Anarchists come in contact on so many points with the
+greatest thinkers and poets of the present day. In fact, it is certain
+that in proportion as the human mind frees itself from ideas
+inculcated by minorities of priests, military chiefs, and judges, all
+striving to establish their domination, and of scientists paid to
+perpetuate it, a conception of society arises, in Which conception
+there is no longer room for those dominating minorities. A society
+entering into possession of the social capital accumulated by the
+labour of preceding generations, organises itself so as to make use of
+this capital in the interests of all, and constitutes itself without
+reconstituting the power of the ruling minorities. Acknowledging as a
+fact the equal rights of all its members to the treasures accumulated
+in the past, it no longer recognises a division between exploited and
+exploiters, governed and governors, dominated and dominators, and it
+seeks to establish a certain harmonious compatibility in its midst not
+by subjecting all its members to an authority that is fictitiously
+supposed to represent society, not by trying to establish uniformity,
+but by urging all men to develop free initiative, free action, free
+association."[1083]
+
+There is little difference between the Anarchism of Proudhon,
+Bakounin, and Kropotkin, and the Socialism of many British Socialists.
+The economic doctrines of Socialism and Anarchism are practically
+identical. Socialism has taken the most important doctrines from
+Proudhon,[1084] and, owing to the similarity of their views and aims,
+Socialists and Anarchists are commingling and fraternising. Anarchists
+see in Socialists a wing of the great Anarchist army of destruction,
+and Socialists see in Anarchists associates and friends and partners
+in the revolution and general pillage which both movements equally
+strongly desire to bring about. Therefore a leading Fabian Socialist
+tells us: "Kropotkin is really an advocate of free Democracy, and I
+venture to suggest that he describes himself as an Anarchist rather
+from the point of view of the Russian recoiling from a despotism
+compared to which Democracy seems to be no government at all, than
+from the point of view of the American or Englishman who is free
+enough already to begin grumbling over Democracy as 'the tyranny of
+the majority' and 'the coming slavery.'"[1085] If Kropotkin is a
+"Democrat," then Ravachol, Vaillant, Henry, Pallas, and Bresci were
+also merely Democrats.
+
+British Anarchists are closely watching the British Socialist Labour
+movement, which they wish to lead into Anarchist channels. Thus we
+learn from an Anarchist monthly: "The question of the position to be
+taken in relation to the labour movement is certainly one of the
+greatest importance to Anarchists. It does not suffice for us to form
+groups for propaganda and for revolutionary action. We must convert as
+far as possible the mass of the workers, because without them we can
+neither overthrow the existing society nor reconstitute a new one. And
+since to rise from the submissive state in which the great majority of
+the proletarians now vegetate to a conception of Anarchism and a desire
+for its realisation, is required an evolution which generally is not
+passed through under the sole influence of the propaganda; since the
+lessons derived from the facts of daily life are more efficacious than
+all doctrinaire preaching, it is for us to take an active part in the
+life of the masses and to use all the means which circumstances permit
+to gradually awaken the spirit of revolt, and to show by these facts
+the path which leads to emancipation. Amongst these means the Labour
+movement stands first, and we should be wrong to neglect it. In this
+movement we find numbers of workers who struggle for the amelioration
+of their conditions. They may be mistaken as to the aim they have in
+view and as to the means of attaining it, and in our view they
+generally are. But at least they no longer resign themselves to
+oppression nor regard it as just--they hope and they struggle. We can
+more easily arouse in them that feeling of solidarity towards their
+exploited fellow-workers and of hatred against exploitation, which must
+lead to a definitive struggle for the abolition of all domination of
+man over man."[1086] Anarchists therefore constantly try to influence
+the British Socialist Labour movement. When, for instance, in the
+autumn of 1907 the possibility of a railway strike was being discussed,
+Anarchists did their best to bring about a revolutionary struggle: "The
+railway crisis must have shown very clearly that if the men had but the
+will, they have the power to bring about at any time a revolutionary
+situation in the struggle of labour against capital. Some day they will
+have to do this, for the conditions of the conflict will leave them no
+choice. They will perhaps learn also that the glorification of a man
+like Bell--whose fooling of their cause is his method of
+advertisement--means putting powers into one man's hands that no man
+ought to possess. Nothing could be more absurd than the prolongation of
+this 'crisis' which has been done so that one man might have the centre
+of the stage, while hundreds of thousands of men toil on in suspense.
+Bell is everything: the workers are mere cyphers. Yet this man is
+mistrusted by many; and everyone knows how on occasion he can join the
+feast of the directors and be one of them. And if generalship were
+needed, what an ass this would be to attempt to lead the men to
+victory! Successful strikes are never made by the farcical tactics of a
+Bell. Recognition, forsooth! They'll recognise you when you strike.
+Workers, watch your leaders!"[1087]
+
+In view of the connection existing between British Socialism and
+Anarchism, it is but natural that Socialists have become the
+apologists of Anarchism. "The vulgar notion that Anarchism is a
+synonym for disorder is as nearly as possible the reverse of the
+truth. It is Governments and Laws that do all the mischief. They
+produce the very evils they pretend to remedy."[1088] "Verily the
+State is the evil. Back to the land. Back to the simple life. Away
+with Governments, palavers, Dumas, and Courts of Law. Long live the
+Commune."[1089]
+
+Anarchists contend that the "Social Revolution" for which most
+Socialists strive will become an Anarchist revolution: "If the workers
+succeed by revolt in destroying the mutual insurance society of
+landlords, bankers, priests, judges, and soldiers; if the people
+become masters of their destiny for a few months, and lay hands on the
+riches they have created and which belong to them by right--will they
+really begin to reconstitute that blood-sucker, the State[1090]?" "On
+the day when ancient institutions splinter into fragments before the
+axe of the proletariat, voices will be heard shouting: Bread for all!
+Lodging for all! Right for all to the comforts of life! And these
+voices will be heeded. The people will say to themselves: Let us
+begin by satisfying our thirst for the life, the joy, the liberty we
+have never known. And when all have tasted happiness we will set to
+work; the work of demolishing the last vestiges of middle-class rule,
+with its account-book morality, its philosophy of debit and credit,
+its institutions of mine and thine. 'While we throw down we shall be
+building' as Proudhon said, 'we shall build in the name of Communism
+and of Anarchy."[1091] Anarchists are authorities on revolutions. Very
+likely Prince Kropotkin's view is right.
+
+There are two kinds of Anarchists: Philosophic Anarchists who
+propagate their views by speech and pen, and Anarchists of action who
+propagate their views by dynamite and dagger, and the former are
+responsible for the crimes of the latter. Many British Socialists
+defend not only philosophic Anarchism, but also that form of Anarchism
+which finds its expression in murder.
+
+Leading British Socialists refer, for instance, to the four
+Anarchists, Spies, Fischer, Engel, and Parsons, the heroes of the
+Chicago bomb outrage, who were responsible for the death of six
+policemen and for the wounding of about sixty, and who were hanged in
+November 1886 in Chicago, as "martyrs,"[1092] and British Socialists
+are urged to follow the glorious footsteps of the Chicago Anarchists:
+
+    Then on to revolution, boys! Keep Freedom's highway broad.
+    The path where Spies and Parsons fell--as fearlessly they trod;
+    And though we fall as they fell--millions follow on the road,
+              To carry the Red Flag to victory.[1093]
+
+The sympathy which British Socialists feel for the Chicago Anarchists
+arises from the similarity of their aims. The programme of the
+American Anarchists was, according to the Pittsburg proclamation, as
+follows:
+
+(1) Destruction of the existing class rule, by all means, _i.e._ by
+energetic, relentless, revolutionary, and international action. (2)
+Establishment of a free Society based upon co-operative organisation
+of production. (3) Free exchange of equivalent products by and between
+the productive organisations without commerce and profit-mongery. (4)
+Organisation of education on a secular, scientific, and equal basis
+for both sexes. (5) Equal rights for all without distinction of sex or
+race. (6) Regulation of all public affairs by free contracts between
+the autonomous (independent) communes and associations resting on a
+federalists basis.[1094]
+
+The attitude of many leading British Socialists towards the murdering
+of monarchs and statesmen may be gauged from the following extracts:
+"On the occasion of the assassination of any potentate or statesman,
+the public opinion of the possessing class and its organs is lashed up
+to a white heat of artificial fury and indignation against the
+perpetrator, while they have nothing but approbation for the
+functionary--military or civil--who puts to death a fellow-creature in
+the course of what they are pleased to call his duty. Evidently force
+and bloodshed, when contrary to the interests of the possessing class,
+is a monstrous crime, but when it is in their favour it becomes a duty
+and a necessity."[1095] "We believe the 'potting' of the 'heads' of
+States to be a foolish and reprehensible policy, but the matter does
+not concern us as Socialists. We have our own quarrel with the
+Anarchists, both as to principles and tactics, but that is no reason
+why, as certain persons seem to think, we should put on sackcloth and
+ashes, and dissolve ourselves in tears because, say, M. Carnot or the
+head of any other State has been assassinated by Anarchists. What is
+Carnot to us or we to Carnot, that we should weep for him? We do not
+specially desire the death of political personages, while we often
+regret their slaying on grounds of expediency, if on no others. But at
+the same time Socialists have no sentimental tears to waste over the
+heads of States and their misfortunes. To the Socialist the head of a
+State, as such, is simply a figure-head to whose fate he is
+indifferent--a ninepin representing the current political and social
+order."[1096]
+
+    We're low, we're low, we're very very low.
+      And yet when the trumpets ring.
+    The thrust of a poor man's arm will go
+      Through the heart of the proudest king.[1097]
+
+The "Socialist Annual" contains in its calendar pages numerous items
+under the heading "For the Working Class to Remember," which is
+filled with Socialist dates such as "birth of Mr. Blatchford," and
+with the records of the most conspicuous Anarchist, Nihilist, and
+Revolutionary crimes. Details regarding the deeds of Orsini and
+Louise Michel, Jack Cade and Wat Tyler, the execution of Louis XVI.
+and Marie Antoinette, the assassination of Presidents Lincoln,
+McKinley, and Carnot, the attempt on King Alfonso, and other facts
+are there recorded--"for the working class to remember." Earlier or
+later the Socialist-Communist-Anarchist agitation in Great Britain
+may, and very likely will, lead to Anarchist outrages.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1073] Prince Kropotkin, _Anarchism_, p. 16.
+
+[1074] B. Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 24.
+
+[1075] Davidson, _The Democrat's Address_, p. 15.
+
+[1076] Bax, _Paris Commune_, p. 35.
+
+[1077] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, pp. 98, 99.
+
+[1078] Davidson, _Christ, State, and Commune_, pp. 16, 17.
+
+[1079] _Ibid._ p. 6.
+
+[1080] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 195.
+
+[1081] Thompson, _That Blessed Word Liberty_, p. 13.
+
+[1082] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 172.
+
+[1083] Kropotkin, _Anarchism_, p. 8.
+
+[1084] Brockhaus, _Konversations Lexikon_, vol. i. p. 578.
+
+[1085] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 26.
+
+[1086] _Freedom_, November 1907.
+
+[1087] _Freedom_, November 1907.
+
+[1088] Davidson, _Christ, State, and Commune_, p. 22.
+
+[1089] _Ibid._ p. 31.
+
+[1090] Kropotkin, _Anarchism_, p. 19.
+
+[1091] Kropotkin, _The Wage System_, p. 15.
+
+[1092] See Leatham, _Lives of the Chicago Martyrs_.
+
+[1093] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 35.
+
+[1094] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 63.
+
+[1095] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 31.
+
+[1096] Bax, _A Short History of the Paris Commune_, p. 78.
+
+[1097] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 33.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXI
+
+SOCIALISM AND REVOLUTION
+
+
+The "Socialist Catechism" contains the following passage: "Q. How are
+forms of government changed so as to readjust them to the economical
+changes in the forms of production which have been silently evolving
+in the body of society? A. By means of revolution.--Q. Give an
+instance of this? A. The French Revolution of 1789."[1098]
+
+Many British Socialists are revolutionaries. They hope to introduce
+Socialism into Great Britain by revolutionary means. They have studied
+the French revolutions, and have become pupils of the French
+revolutionary leaders. "Socialism is essentially revolutionary,
+politically and economically, as it aims at the complete overthrow of
+existing economic and political conditions. We should organise and be
+prepared for what might be described as a revolutionary outbreak. The
+economic changes which are taking place, and the corresponding changes
+in other conditions, are bringing about a revolutionary transformation
+in human society, and what we have to do is to help on this
+development, and to prepare the way for it."[1099] "We Socialists are
+not reformers; we are revolutionists. We Socialists do not propose to
+change forms. We care nothing for forms. We want a change of the
+inside of the mechanism of society; let the form take care of
+itself."[1100] British Socialism was founded by revolutionary
+Communists. Marx was a revolutionary. "For a number of years the late
+William Morris, the greatest man whom the Socialist movement has yet
+claimed in this country, held and openly preached this doctrine of
+cataclysmic upheaval and sudden overthrow of the ruling
+classes."[1101] That idea has been revived by modern British
+Socialists, many of whom believe that "The only effective way to
+induce the ruling class to attempt to palliate the evils of their
+system is to organise the workers for the overthrow of that
+system."[1102] "In the International Socialist movement we are at last
+in the presence of a force which is gathering unto itself the rebel
+spirits of all lands and uniting them into a mighty host to do battle,
+not for the triumph of a sect, or of a race, but for the overthrow of
+a system which has filled the world with want and woe. 'Workers of the
+world, unite!' wrote Karl Marx; 'you have a world to win and nothing
+to lose but your chains.' And they are uniting under the crimson
+banner of a world-embracing principle which knows nor sect, nor creed,
+nor race, and which offers new life and hope to all created
+beings--the glorious gospel of Socialism."[1103]
+
+In many respects the French Revolution has served as a model to
+British Socialists of the Anarchist-Revolutionary type. They have
+adopted its outward emblems, its songs, and its most effective
+catch-phrases: "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity was the brave and
+splendid legend inscribed on the blood-red banners of the French
+Revolutionists. And in strange ways the oppressed and hunger-maddened
+people sought to realise their ideal. It is still the battle-cry of
+the English Socialists--indeed, of the world-wide Socialist
+movement."[1104] In the Socialist song-books a translation of the
+"Marseillaise" is to be found, which is sung at Socialist gatherings:
+
+    Shall hateful tyrants, mischief-breeding,
+      With hireling hosts, a ruffian band,
+      Affright and desolate the land,
+    While Peace and Liberty lie bleeding?
+    To arms! to arms, ye brave!
+      The avenging sword unsheathe!
+    March on! March on! all hearts resolved
+      On Liberty or death.[1105]
+
+In the eyes of many British Socialists the French Revolution was not
+sufficiently democratic, not sufficiently radical, not sufficiently
+violent. We are told that the French revolutionaries were soft-hearted
+men, and that our sympathy with their innocent victims, such as Queen
+Marie Antoinette, is quite uncalled for. "The Revolution was in its
+conception, its inception, and its results a middle-class revolution.
+The revolution was inaugurated by the Parliament of Paris--a
+pettifogging legal assembly. Marie Antoinette was but one fine useless
+woman among the millions, and she personified the heedless prodigal
+selfishness of autocracy. We of the Socialist movement, who are full
+of the idea of social service, of making a full return to society for
+the bread we eat, the clothes we wear out, and the house-room we
+occupy, how can we be expected to think so much of the suffering of
+one idle extravagant woman and so little of the age-long privation and
+torture of the hard-working useful mothers and sisters of France? The
+crimes of ignorant, passionate democracy, of which Burke and Carlyle
+have made so much, are as a drop in the ocean by comparison with the
+deliberate enormities perpetrated by enlightened cold-blooded
+autocracy, from Herod to Nicholas. The democracy has always been
+pitiful, extremely pitiful. Even the September massacres, carried out
+by the lowest of the low in an enraged and degraded and
+terror-stricken populace, are brightened by golden patches of clemency
+and love such as the annals of class punishment nowhere reveal."[1106]
+
+The outbreak of the Paris Commune of 1871, having been less a
+"middle-class" revolution, is considered by Socialists with greater
+approval than the French Revolution of 1789. The philosopher of
+British Socialism writes: "The Commune of Paris is the one event which
+Socialists throughout the world have agreed with single accord to
+celebrate. Every 18th of March witnesses thousands of gatherings
+throughout the civilised world to commemorate the (alas! only
+temporary) victory of organised Socialist aspiration over the forces
+of property and privilege in 1871."[1107] Another leading Socialist
+writer says: "Year by year as the 18th of March comes round, it is the
+custom with Socialists to commemorate the proclamation of the Commune
+of Paris. As a Socialist I am a friend of the Commune."[1108]
+
+What was the Paris Commune, and what did it do? In the words of an
+impartial publication, "The Communard chiefs were revolutionaries of
+every sect, who, disagreeing on governmental and economic principles,
+were united in their vague but perpetual hostility to the existing
+order of things. History has rarely known a more unpatriotic crime
+than that of the insurrection of the Commune."[1109] "The Commune was
+an insurrection which initiated a series of terrible outrages by the
+murder of the two generals Lecomte and Thomas.... The incapacity and
+mutual hatred of their chiefs rendered all organisation and durable
+resistance impossible.... The Communists were committing the most
+horrible excesses: the Archbishop of Paris, President Bonjean,
+priests, magistrates, journalists, and private individuals, whom they
+had seized as hostages, were shot in batches in prisons, and a scheme
+of destruction was ruthlessly carried into effect by men and women
+with cases of petroleum. The Hôtel de Ville, the Palais de Justice,
+the Tuileries, the Ministry of Finance, the Palace of the Legion of
+Honour, that of the Council of State, part of the Rue de Rivoli, &c.,
+were ravaged by the flames; barrels of gunpowder were placed in Notre
+Dame and the Pantheon ready to blow up the buildings, and the whole
+city would have been involved in ruin if the national troops had not
+gained a last and crowning victory."[1110]
+
+Socialists have nothing but praise for the Communards, who killed and
+burned, desecrated the churches and devastated the town. They speak
+with enthusiasm of the leaders of that outbreak as of heroes who
+fought for the "Brotherhood of Man," and they exalt them above the
+saints of early Christianity. The philosopher of British Socialism
+exclaims: "Limitless courage and contempt of death was displayed in
+defence of an ideal, the colossal proportions of which dwarf
+everything in history, and which alone suffices to redeem the
+sordidness of the nineteenth century. Here was a heroism in the face
+of which the much-belauded Christian martyrs cut a very poor
+figure."[1111] "It was in the Commune that we saw manifested as never
+before the strong compelling force of a secular altruism. Without hope
+of heaven and without fear of hell, men lived and died for the idea of
+a brotherhood of self-governing and self-respecting men and
+women."[1112]
+
+Even the murderous Paris Commune was too moderate for the taste of
+many British Socialists, who favour sterner measures. The philosopher
+of British Socialism informs us; "The Commune had one special fault,
+that of a fatuous moderation in all its doings. Probably never since
+history began have any body of men allowed themselves and theirs to be
+treated as lambs in the slaughterhouse with more lamb-like forbearance
+and absence of retaliation than the Commune and its adherents; we have
+seen this illustrated by the incredible fact that up to the last, amid
+all the slaughterings of Communists, the vast majority of the hostages
+and prisoners in its hands remained unscathed."[1113] "One of the most
+unfortunate characteristics of the leaders of the Commune was their
+sensitiveness to bourgeois public opinion. The first thing for the
+leader of a revolutionary movement to learn is a healthy contempt for
+the official public opinion of the 'civilised world.' He must
+resolutely harden his heart against its 'thrills of horror,' its
+'indignation,' its 'abomination,' and its 'detestation,' and he must
+learn to smile at all the names it will liberally shower upon him and
+his cause."[1114]
+
+Whilst the revolutionary criminals who ruled by murder and arson were
+heroes and martyrs, the defenders of law and order were criminals
+according to British Socialists: "The thirst of the well-to-do classes
+for the blood of the Communards was insatiable. The latter were tried
+and shot in batches."[1115] "The Communards, desperate as they were,
+only faintly imitated the wholesale savagery of the regular
+troops."[1116] Peaceful M. Thiers, being at the head of the
+government, was "probably the cleverest, most hypocritical, and most
+unscrupulous villain that ever denied the pages of history."[1117]
+
+Although Socialists pose as democrats, they do not believe in majority
+government.[1118] Being aware that they will hardly be able to gain
+over the majority of the people to their revolutionary and visionary
+plans, they may, like the Paris Commune, try to force Socialism upon
+an unwilling majority. Therefore the attempt of the Parisian
+Socialists to overrule France is not condemned but regretted by the
+British Socialists: "The revolt was open to the objection that may be
+urged against most insurrections. It was an attempt to impose the will
+of a minority on a large majority of the people. The Socialists in the
+Commune must have realised at times that the people of France were not
+prepared for even the small instalments of Socialism which they sought
+to introduce. The revolutionists may have thought to impose their
+policy upon France by a mere _coup de main_."[1119]
+
+The attitude of Socialists makes it appear possible that the
+revolutionary outbreak of 1871 will not be the last. The next
+revolutionary attempt may conceivably take place in Great Britain.
+"One man with an idea in his head is in danger of being considered a
+madman; two men with the same idea in common may be foolish, but can
+hardly be mad; ten men sharing an idea begin to act; a hundred draw
+attention as fanatics, a thousand and society begins to tremble, a
+hundred thousand and there is war abroad."[1120] "Whilst our backers
+at the polls are counted by tens, we must continue to crawl and drudge
+and lecture as best we can. When they are counted by hundreds, we can
+permeate and trim and compromise. When they rise to tens of thousands,
+we shall take the field as an independent party. Give us hundreds of
+thousands, as you can if you try hard enough, and we will ride the
+whirlwind and direct the storm."[1121]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1098] Joynes, _A Socialist Catechism_, p. 13.
+
+[1099] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 37.
+
+[1100] De Leon, _Reform or Revolution_, p. 3.
+
+[1101] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 23.
+
+[1102] _Socialist Standard_, October 1, 1907.
+
+[1103] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 86.
+
+[1104] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 10.
+
+[1105] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 20.
+
+[1106] Leatham, _French Revolution_, pp. 13, 14.
+
+[1107] Bax, _Paris Commune_, Preface.
+
+[1108] Leatham, _The Commune of Paris_, p. 3.
+
+[1109] _Encyclopćdia Britannica_, vol. xxviii. p. 480.
+
+[1110] _Encyclopćdia Britannica_, vol. xviii. p. 294.
+
+[1111] Bax, _Paris Commune_, p. 59.
+
+[1112] Leatham, _The Commune of Paris_, p. 18.
+
+[1113] Bax, _Paris Commune_, p. 74.
+
+[1114] _Ibid._ p. 88.
+
+[1115] Leatham, _The Commune of Paris_, p. 13.
+
+[1116] _Ibid._ p. 19.
+
+[1117] Bax, _Paris Commune_, p. 86.
+
+[1118] See Chapters XV. and XXX. _ante._
+
+[1119] Leatham, _The Commune of Paris_, p. 15.
+
+[1120] Morris, _Art, Labour, and Socialism_, p. 24.
+
+[1121] Shaw, _The Fabian Society and its Early History_, p. 28.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXII
+
+STATE SOCIALISM
+
+
+Most Socialist agitators in Great Britain oppose and condemn State
+Socialism for two reasons: firstly, because, owing to their Communist
+and Anarchist leanings, they oppose and hate the State as such, as has
+been shown in the Chapters on "Socialism and Communism," "Socialism
+and Anarchism," "Socialism and Revolution"; secondly, because with the
+introduction of State Socialism their occupation would be gone.
+Socialist agitators do not wish others to govern the State. They wish
+to govern it themselves. The welfare of the masses is to them
+apparently only a secondary consideration. Hence most British
+Socialist agitators condemn the State Socialism of Germany, though it
+has greatly benefited the masses, and perhaps because it has greatly
+benefited the masses. They also condemn the British Post Office,
+although, being not overburdened with scruples, they praise it to the
+skies as a Socialistic model institution when it happens to suit them.
+In fact, most Socialist leaders condemn all existing Government
+institutions, ostensibly because they are capitalistic enterprises
+which are run at a "profit," and because they "exploit" their workers.
+It would of course be fatal to the Socialist agitators had they to
+preach the gospel of envy and hatred, of destruction and pillage, to
+the contented.
+
+"The State of to-day, nationally and locally, is only the agent of the
+possessing class."[1122] "Mere nationalisation or mere municipalisation
+of any industry is not Socialism or Collectivism; it may be only the
+substitution of corporate for private administration; the social idea
+and purpose with which Collectivism is concerned may be completely
+absent."[1123] "Mere Statification, as we may term it, does not mean
+Socialism. The State of to-day is mainly an agent of the possessing
+classes, and industrial or commercial undertakings run to-day by
+Governmental bodies are largely run in the interests of these classes.
+Their aim in all cases is to show a profit, in the same way as ordinary
+capitalistic enterprises. This profit accrues to the possessing classes
+in the form of relief of imperial or local taxation, mainly paid by
+them, interests on loans, &c. In other words, these industrial
+undertakings are run for profit and not for use, and their employees
+are little, if at all, better off than those of private
+employers."[1124] "The modern State is but the organisation which
+capitalist society gives itself in order to maintain the external
+conditions of capitalist production against the attacks both of the
+workmen and of individual capitalists. The modern State, whatever its
+form, is essentially a capitalist machine."[1125] "State administration
+is very far from being the same as a Socialistic administration, as is
+sometimes erroneously supposed. The State administration is just as
+much a system of capitalistic exploitation as if the institutions in
+question were in the hands of private undertakers."[1126] "A
+bureaucracy--that is, a body of permanent officials, entrenched in
+Government departments, according to whose piping ministers themselves
+have willingly or unwillingly to dance--is totally incompatible with
+the very elementary conditions of Socialistic administration."[1127]
+"Bismarckian State control is brusque and baneful, and is certainly
+not the desire of the true Socialist."[1128]
+
+"State ownership, State tyranny, State interference exist to-day. We
+have to bear them now; we have to submit to them now; we have to pay
+for them now. The people, as such, own nothing. And the Socialists
+demand that the people shall own everything. Not the 'State,' the
+'People.' So great is the difference between the word 'State' and the
+word 'people.'"[1129] "Do you propose that all these means of
+production which are now owned by individuals, by this class, as you
+say, should be made the property of the Government, like the Post
+Office and the telegraph system are in this country, and the railways
+as well in some others, or that they should be owned by municipal
+bodies, as waterworks, tramways, gasworks, and so on, are in many
+cases already?--No. Socialism does not mean mere Governmental
+ownership or management. The State of to-day, nationally or locally,
+is only the agent of the possessing class; the Post Office and the
+other State-owned businesses are run for profit just as other
+businesses are; and the Government, as the agent of the possessing
+class, has, in the interests of its employers, to treat the employees
+just as other employees are treated. The organised democratic society
+contemplated by Socialists is a very different thing from the class
+State of to-day. When society is organised for the control of its own
+business, and has acquired the possession of its own means of
+production, its officers will not be the agents of a class, and
+production will be carried on for the use of all and not for the
+profit of a few."[1130] "The Post Office to-day is an organised
+sweating-den. The Government get the largest possible amount of work
+for the lowest possible wages. That is capitalist wage-slavery under
+Government control."[1131] "The country postman has to walk excessive
+distances for miserable wages in order that the profit on the Post
+Office may be filched from the employees and from the public by the
+Chancellor of the Exchequer."[1132]
+
+The Fabians, on the other hand, advocate State Socialism, but they are
+a small minority. "The Socialism advocated by the Fabian Society is
+State Socialism exclusively."[1133] Some Socialists would welcome
+State Socialism in the hope that it would prepare the way for free
+Communism. Mr. Keir Hardie, for instance, says: "State Socialism with
+all its drawbacks, and these I frankly admit, will prepare the way for
+free Communism, in which the rule, not merely the law of the State,
+but the rule of life will be--From each according to his ability, to
+each according to his needs."[1134]
+
+"Socialists only believe in the fraternal State. Paternal State
+Socialism all Socialists unanimously oppose."[1135]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1122] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[1123] Ball, _The Moral Aspects of Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[1124] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[1125] Engels, _Development of Socialism from Utopia to Science_, p.
+71.
+
+[1126] Bebel, _Woman_, pp. 198, 199.
+
+[1127] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[1128] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[1129] _Clarion_, October 18, 1907.
+
+[1130] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, pp. 8, 9.
+
+[1131] Hyndman, _Social-Democracy_, p. 22.
+
+[1132] _Fabian Election Manifesto_, 1892, p. 3.
+
+[1133] _Report on Fabian Policy_, 1896, p. 5.
+
+[1134] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 89.
+
+[1135] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 1262.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXIII
+
+THE SOCIALIST ORGANISATIONS: THEIR MUTUAL RELATIONS AND THEIR POLICY
+
+
+The Social-Democratic Federation is the most honest and
+straightforward of the various Socialist organisations. Its aims are
+revolutionary, as the following statement proves:
+
+"The Social-Democratic Federation is a militant Socialist organisation
+whose members--men and women--belong almost entirely to the working
+classes. Its object is the realisation of Socialism--the emancipation
+of the working class from its present subjection to the capitalist
+class. The means by which it seeks to attain that end are: agitation,
+education, and the organisation of the working class into a
+class-conscious political party--that is, a party clearly conscious of
+the present position of the workers as a subject class, in consequence
+of all the means of production being owned and controlled by another
+class, and clearly conscious of its duty and mission to free them from
+that position by the conquest of all the powers of the State, and by
+making all the means of production collective common property, to be
+used for the benefit of all instead of for the profit of a class. To
+this end the Social-Democratic Federation proclaims and preaches the
+class war."[1136]
+
+"According to the report for the year ending March 1907 it has 186
+branches and affiliated societies. One of its members sits in
+Parliament as a member of the Labour party, and about 120 are members
+of various local bodies. Its gross income and expenditure through, out
+the country is estimated at _15,500l._ It has a weekly paper,
+'Justice,' and a monthly magazine, 'The Social-Democrat.'[1137] "In
+its own estimation "Justice" is "the most respected of Socialist
+newspapers."[1138]
+
+The various Socialist organisations do not love each other. The Fabian
+Society caustically remarks: "The Federation runs a newspaper called
+'Justice' which has not hitherto been worth a penny to any man whose
+pence are so scarce as a labourer's, and which has made repeated
+attacks on the ordinary working-class organisations without whose
+co-operation Socialists can at present do nothing except cry in the
+wilderness. The branches are expected to sell this paper at their
+meetings."[1139] "The Social-Democratic Federation is virtually the
+oldest Socialist society and is certainly the most conservative. It
+was founded as the Democratic Federation about 1880, and adopted its
+present name in 1884. Mr. H.M. Hyndman, its most prominent member,
+imported its doctrines--which were of German origin--and the S.D.F.
+(as it is familiarly called) has ever since endeavoured to maintain an
+unshaken faith in all the teachings of Karl Marx. In fact, the S.D.F.
+changes its doctrines not with the times, but a dozen years or so
+after; so that it is always rather out of touch with the actualities
+of politics and attracts the type of mind that prefers clear-cut
+principles to practical political progress."[1140]
+
+Other Socialist organisations which are less straightforward than the
+Social-Democratic Federation hide their identity and object under
+misleading titles. The Independent Labour Party, for instance, is a
+purely Socialist party notwithstanding its name. "Its object is, an
+Industrial Commonwealth founded upon the Socialisation of land and
+capital. Its methods are the education of the community in the
+principles of Socialism; the industrial and political organisation of
+the workers; the independent representation of Socialist principles on
+all elective bodies."[1141] "No one will find much difference in the
+programmes of the Social-Democratic Federation and the Independent
+Labour Party."[1142] "The Independent Labour Party, commonly called
+the I.L.P., which must be carefully distinguished from the Labour
+party, is much the largest, and politically the most important,
+Socialist organisation. It was founded at Bradford in 1892, by Mr.
+Keir Hardie, M.P., and others, and it has from the first advocated
+Socialism of the English type and endeavoured to work in harmony with
+trade unionists. The Labour party is mainly due to its initiative, and
+through its members in trade unions it largely controls the policy of
+the party. In August 1907 it had over 700 branches, of which 155 had
+been formed in the preceding six months. Its operations have recently
+expanded with extraordinary rapidity, its central office expenditure
+for the years ending February 28 having been _955l._ in 1905,
+_1,817l._ in 1906, and _3,552l._ in 1907. It does a very large
+business in the publication and sale of pamphlets and books, and has a
+weekly paper, "The Labour Leader." At the general election of 1906,
+eighteen of its members were returned to Parliament, all belonging to
+the Labour party, and two more have since been elected, one for the
+Labour party, and one, Mr. Victor Grayson, as an independent
+Socialist. Over five hundred of its members sit on town councils and
+other local bodies. The total membership is estimated at 40,000, and
+its income and expenditure at perhaps _100,000l._"[1143] "The
+Independent Labour Party was formed in January 1893. As years have
+passed the Independent Labour Party has steadily strengthened its
+programme, until it is to-day entirely Socialist, but it has not quite
+got rid of the strain of opportunism, at elections its independence
+being more in evidence in its name than in its conduct."[1144]
+
+Wishing to secure Socialist and non-Socialist adherents, and
+masquerading as a Liberal Labour party, the attitude of the
+Independent Labour Party is not a straightforward one. One of its
+competitors states: "The Independent Labour Party has continued its
+policy of bargain-making with capitalist politicians. The leaders at
+times call themselves Socialists, and at other times protest against
+frightening their supporters by introducing the word into resolutions.
+At the general election, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald at Leicester, and Mr.
+James Parker at Halifax, were amongst the candidates who entered into
+compacts with the Liberals. At the Amsterdam International Congress
+they voted for a resolution extolling the 'tried and victorious policy
+based on the class war,' and on their return to England referred to
+the class war as a 'shibboleth' and as a 'reactionary and Whiggish
+precept, certain to lead the movement away from the real aims of
+Socialism.'"[1145]
+
+The Fabian Society is the least open and the least straightforward
+Socialist organisation. Ostensibly it adopted its curious name because
+"for the right moment you must wait, as Fabius did most patiently when
+warring against Hannibal, though many censured his delays; but when
+the time comes you must strike hard as Fabius did, or your waiting
+will be in vain, and fruitless."[1146] In reality the misleading title
+was probably adopted because the Fabian Society habitually and on
+principle sails under a false flag, wishing not to arouse suspicion as
+to its objects.
+
+The object of the small but powerful Fabian Society is a peculiar one:
+"Founded on a small scale in 1884 and actually the oldest of the three
+great Socialist organisations, the Fabian Society has never aimed at a
+large membership or endeavoured to become a political party. Its work
+has been mainly educational, its endeavour to translate the principles
+of Socialism into practical politics suited to English conditions.
+From the first it refused to accept Marxian teaching. The Fabian
+Society is not a political body, in that it allows its members
+complete freedom to adopt any method of carrying out the principles
+they profess. Hence its members in Parliament belong to the Liberal or
+the Labour party, and they sit as Progressives on London local bodies.
+The Society is mainly middle-class, and the majority of its members
+belong to London, where fortnightly meetings are held for the
+discussion of Socialism. Its great force lies in the ability of many
+of its members, some of whom, Mr. Bernard Shaw, the dramatist; Mr.
+Sidney Webb, the political writer; Sir Sydney Olivier, now Governor of
+Jamaica, have belonged to it from the start; whilst others, such as
+Mr. H.G. Wells and the Rev. R.J. Campbell, are more recent recruits.
+Recently it has greatly increased its membership, now nearly 2,000,
+and has formed substantial branches in the Universities and in many
+large towns. Eleven of its members sit in Parliament."[1147]
+
+"The chief object to which the Society devotes its resources is the
+education of the people in political, economic, and social subjects.
+To effect this purpose it must in the first place educate itself by
+the discussion of those problems which from time to time appear ripe
+for solution. Its members therefore undertake the study of such
+problems, and lay the results before the Society, where they are
+considered from various points of view. Finally the conclusions
+adopted and generally approved by the members are published, usually
+in penny tracts, and by this means made available for the information
+of all. The Society further endeavours to promote social amelioration
+by the dissemination of information about existing institutions, in
+order that better use may be made of the powers already possessed by
+local administrative authorities, now too often neglectful of their
+obligations. The same ends are sought to be attained by means of
+circulating libraries supplied to Working-men's Clubs, Co-operative
+Societies, Trade Unions, and similar bodies, and by the publication of
+lists of best books on social and political subjects. The Society also
+at times engages trained lecturers to give courses of lectures during
+the winter months on social politics to working-class and other
+organisations. The members of the Society who control its policy are
+Socialists; that is to say, are committed to the theory of the
+probable direction of economic evolution which is now often called
+Collectivism."[1148]
+
+"The object of the Fabian Society is to persuade the English people to
+make their political constitution thoroughly democratic, and so to
+socialise their industries as to make the livelihood of the people
+entirely independent of private Capitalism. The Fabian Society
+endeavours to pursue its Socialist and Democratic objects with complete
+singleness of aim. For example: It has no distinctive opinions on the
+Marriage Question, Religion, Art, abstract Economics, historic
+Evolution, Currency, or any other subject than its own special business
+of practical Democracy and Socialism. It brings all the pressure and
+persuasion in its power to bear on existing forces, caring nothing by
+what name any party calls itself, or what principles, Socialist or
+other, it professes, but having regard solely to the tendency of its
+actions supporting those which make for Socialism and Democracy and
+opposing those which are reactionary. It does not propose that the
+practical steps towards Social Democracy should be carried out by
+itself, or by any other specially organised society or party. It does
+not ask the English people to join the Fabian Society. The Fabian
+Society does not claim to be the people of England, or even the
+Socialist party, and therefore does not seek direct political
+representation by putting forward Fabian candidates at elections. But
+it loses no opportunity of influencing elections and inducing
+constituencies to select Socialists as their candidates."[1149]
+
+"The Fabian Society, far from holding aloof from other bodies, urges
+its members to lose no opportunity of joining them and permeating them
+with Fabian ideas as far as possible."[1150] "The typical Fabian is an
+uncompromising Socialist and Democrat; but he holds aloof from no
+association that can possibly be induced to push in his direction.
+Instead of wasting time in forming new sects, he tries to inoculate
+with his Socialism the existing organisations--the political clubs,
+the caucuses, the trade unions, the Press, the co-operative societies,
+and the rival party leaders."[1151]
+
+Whilst the other Socialist organisations rely chiefly on direct
+driving force, the Fabian Society relies chiefly on subtle, indirect
+action and on intrigue. One of its most prominent men boasted: "In
+1888 it only cost us twenty-eight postcards, written by twenty-eight
+members, to convince the newly-born 'Star' newspaper that London was
+aflame with Fabian Socialism."[1152] "Our policy has been to try to
+induce some of these regular papers to give a column or two to
+Socialism, calling it by what name they please. And I have no
+hesitation in saying that the effect of this policy as shown in the
+'Manchester Sunday Chronicle,' the 'Star,' the London 'Daily
+Chronicle,' and other more exclusively working-class papers, notably
+the 'Clarion,' has done more for the cause than all the time and money
+that has been wasted on 'Justice' since the 'Star' was founded. Our
+mission is to Socialise the Press as we hope to Socialise Parliament
+and the other estates of the realm, not to run the Press
+ourselves."[1153]
+
+Owing to these peculiar methods, by which they secured the support of
+many people who did not know they were Socialists, the Fabians have
+been very successful in their policy: "In 1888 we had not been found
+out even by the 'Star.' The Liberal party was too much preoccupied
+over Mr. O'Brien's breeches and the Parnell Commission, with its
+dramatic climax in the suicide of the forger Pigott, to suspect that
+the liveliness of the extreme left of the Radical wing in London meant
+anything but the usual humbug about working-class interests. We urged
+our members to join the Liberal and Radical Associations of their
+districts, or if they preferred it, the Conservative Associations. We
+told them to become members of the nearest Radical club and
+co-operative store and to get delegated to the Metropolitan Radical
+Federation and the Liberal and Radical Union if possible. On these
+bodies we made speeches and moved resolutions, or better still, got
+the Parliamentary candidate for the constituency to move them, and
+secured reports and encouraging little articles for him in the 'Star.'
+We permeated the party organisations and pulled all the wires we
+could lay our hands on with our utmost adroitness and energy; and we
+succeeded so far that in 1888 we gained the solid advantage of a
+Progressive majority, full of ideas that would never have come into
+their heads had not the Fabian put them there, on the first London
+County Council. The generalship of this movement was undertaken
+chiefly by Sidney Webb, who played such bewildering conjuring tricks
+with the Liberal thimbles and the Fabian peas that to this day both
+the Liberals and the sectarian Socialists stand aghast at him."[1154]
+Fabians rely for their success chiefly on their artfulness. "Always
+remember that, even if you cannot convert a man to Socialism, you may
+get his vote all the same."[1155]
+
+Fabian middle-class Socialism differs from the democratic Socialism of
+the larger Socialist organisations which appeal to the working class:
+"The Socialism advocated by the Fabian Society is State Socialism
+exclusively."[1156] "We have never advanced the smallest pretensions
+to represent the working classes of this country."[1157] Therefore the
+Fabians are very cordially hated by the Democratic Socialists. The
+Social-Democratic Federation blames them for their "cynical
+opportunism."[1158] Another organisation declares: "The Fabian Society
+poses as a Socialist organisation, for we are told that this Society
+'consists of Socialists.' It is indeed composed of middle-class men
+who naturally deny the class struggle, profess to believe in
+permeating the capitalist class with Socialism, and hold that the
+tendency of society is towards government by the expert-Fabianism
+therefore tends towards the rule of the bureaucrats or that section
+of the educated middle-class. The Fabians are the cult of the civil
+service and are Socialists neither in name nor in fact."[1159]
+
+Let us now consider the genesis and character of the great Labour
+party.
+
+Formerly Socialists and trade unionists marched and fought apart.
+However, "On the 27th February, 1900, a joint Socialist and Trade
+Union Conference met in the Memorial Hall, London. One hundred and
+seventeen delegates were present representing sixty-seven Trade
+Unions, seven representing the Independent Labour Party, four the
+Social-Democratic Federation, one the Fabian Society. The result was
+the formation of the Labour Representation Committee,"[1160]
+simultaneously representing trade unions and Socialists. "At the
+General Election of 1906, the Labour Representation Committee ran
+fifty candidates for Parliament and returned thirty. That year its
+name was changed to the Labour Party."[1161] The Labour party
+therefore unites trade unionists and Socialists. The Fabian Society
+and the Independent Labour party have joined it. Only the
+Social-Democratic Federation has so far kept aloof from it.
+
+The Labour party, being chiefly composed of trade unionists, is fond
+of posing as a non-Socialist party. It is true that "Mr. Keir Hardie,
+the Labour leader, said they did not want Toryism, Liberalism, or
+Socialism, only Labourism, but the same Keir Hardie sits as a delegate
+on the International Socialist Bureau."[1162] "Many of the Labour
+members in Parliament are avowed Socialists. The working-class
+movement already is largely a Socialist movement, and is in continual
+process of becoming more so. With the speculative side of Socialism
+the average man with us has but small concern; it is its common-sense
+which appeals to him. By inherited instinct we are all Communists at
+heart."[1163]
+
+"The Labour party, which now has thirty-one members in the House of
+Commons, is not purely Socialist, but twenty-three or twenty-four of
+its M.P.s, and nearly all its elected executive, are Socialists. It
+has no official programme; but in view of its membership its policy is
+and must be Socialist. This is not because the majority rules. It is
+because the Socialist section has a policy and the non-Socialist
+section approves of that policy so far as it can be translated into
+Bills or resolutions to be laid before Parliament. There is no
+anti-Socialism in the Labour party. There is far more difference
+between sections of Liberals or Conservatives than there is between
+Socialist and non-Socialist Labour men. All these bodies are working
+more or less together for the same great ends."[1164] The connection
+between organised Labour and organised Socialism is further
+illustrated by the important letters printed on pages 141-143 of this
+book.
+
+The demands and semi-official programme of the Labour party are
+practically identical with those of avowed Socialists, as may be seen
+from the following statement of its Secretary:
+
+"We are in favour of the special taxation of land values, of a minimum
+income-tax on earned incomes, and a super-tax on a graded scale on all
+incomes over, say, _1,000l._ This is described as robbing the rich.
+That does not express either the purpose or the spirit of the Labour
+party however. We call it--securing for the public values created by
+the public. Our critics, if they are to have any effect on intelligent
+public opinion, must understand this cardinal point in our creed, this
+axiom in our programme-making. We do not regard taxation as a taking
+by the State of property which belongs to other people, but the
+appropriation of property which ought to belong to itself. This theory
+of taxation goes very far, and its full application involves the
+complete destruction of parasitic classes. It can only be applied
+slowly, but as people get clearly to understand that socially-created
+values should be socially-owned values, many of our most recondite
+problems, like overcrowding, waste-lands, high rating, will be in a
+fair way to settlement."[1165]
+
+The foregoing shows that the Labour party, like the most predatory
+Socialist, wishes to tax all private capital out of existence. "The
+Labour party is not as yet a purely Socialist organisation, because
+any attempt to make it such would disrupt it."[1166] However, its rank
+and file are rapidly being permeated with Socialism.
+
+The following table shows the composition of the Labour party and its
+numerical strength and growth:
+
+"GROWTH OF THE LABOUR PARTY
+
+             Trades Union    Socialist
+              Membership     Membership      Total
+  1900-1        353,070       22,861       375,931
+  1901-2        455,450       13,861       169,311
+  1902-3        847,315       13,835       861,150
+  1903-4        956,025       13,775       969,800
+  1904-5        885,270       14,730       900,000
+  1905-6        904,496       16,784       921,280
+  1906-7        975,182       20,885      *998,338
+
+*This total includes 2,271 co-operators"[1167]
+
+Apparently only one-fiftieth of the members of the Labour party are
+Socialists, but in reality their proportion is very much larger,
+because only a few working men with Socialistic leanings have actually
+joined a Socialist party. "When the daily Press states that out of a
+million affiliated members of the Labour party there are only 17,000
+Socialists, its readers naturally inquire, 'How then is it that there
+are at least twenty Socialists among its thirty M.P.s?' The reply is
+that as the trade union candidates were elected by the ballot of the
+members of their respective societies, it must be supposed that those
+candidates with Socialist views were the most acceptable to the
+majority of members. This situation was strikingly reflected in the
+results of the election of 1906. The votes cast for declared
+Socialists account for 232,378, or 70 per cent. of the total Labour
+Representation Committee poll of 331,280, whilst of the whole Labour
+poll, comprising that of the L.R.C., Scottish workers, miners, trades
+union group, and Socialists, the votes for declared Socialists
+accounted for 274,631 out of 530,643, or nearly 52 per cent."[1168]
+"The Labour party is not a Socialist party yet, but those who possess
+an ear for the great changes now taking place in the depths of the
+nation will understand that the Labour party is going to be a
+Socialist party one day."[1169]
+
+It seems likely that the more or less Socialist Labour party in
+Parliament will soon absorb practically the whole trade union group.
+"Of the eighteen miners' representatives in the House of Commons
+fifteen are in the trade union group. In October 1907, at the
+Conference of the Federated Miners' Associations, a resolution was
+adopted declaring that the time had come for joining the Labour party
+and ordering a ballot of the whole Federation area to be taken. It is
+practically a foregone conclusion that the proposal will be carried,
+in which case the fifteen miners' representatives now sitting on the
+Ministerial benches will cross the House and practically double the
+effective power of the Labour party as against the Government. The
+trade union group will then practically cease to exist. The railway
+servants have decided that all their candidates at the next election
+must join the Labour party. Therefore Richard Bell must sign the
+constitution of the Labour party or retire in favour of someone who
+will. Of the remaining seven members of the group W.C. Steadman is the
+only recognised leader of trade unionism."[1170]
+
+Apart from the larger Socialist parties described in the foregoing,
+there are two smaller organisations composed of revolutionary
+Socialists of the most violent type, whose Socialism is a misnomer for
+Anarchism. They are "The Socialist Party of Great Britain" domiciled
+in London, and "The Socialist Labour Party" (an American importation),
+domiciled in Edinburgh. Their programmes, as those of the other
+Socialist organisations, will be found in the Appendix.
+
+The numerous Socialistic organisations mentioned in this Chapter
+oppose and fight one another. Many Socialists recommend that a united
+Socialist party should be formed, but it is clear to all who are
+acquainted with the inner history of British Socialism that "the vital
+differences that exist among Socialist parties as to tactics--as to
+the way to attain Socialism--cannot be glossed over by a few
+expressions of brotherly love."[1171] The Socialists are divided among
+themselves, and the rivalry and enmity between some of the sections is
+deep-seated and bitter. Nominally they differ with regard to the
+policy to be pursued, but in reality their differences seem to be
+rather of a personal nature. Socialist leaders, though they have the
+words "democracy," "freedom," "liberty," and "love" constantly on
+their lips, are apt to be very autocratic as soon as their sphere of
+political influence is threatened by competition, and as soon as their
+private property, their political capital which they have created, is
+threatened with "socialisation." The men who so glibly recommend the
+world-wide brotherhood of man, and the socialisation and co-operation
+of the world, cannot even co-operate among themselves although they
+pursue the identical immediate aim: the plunder of the well-to-do. It
+is an old experience that revolutionaries always end in cutting one
+another's throats.
+
+Some Socialist groups have been formed owing to very peculiar and very
+unsavoury circumstances. A comparatively innocent though
+psychologically highly interesting and characteristic Socialist new
+formation has recently occurred in that ally of the Socialists, the
+Women's Social and Political Union. "In September 1907 a bombshell was
+thrown into the camp of the Women's Social and Political Union by the
+extraordinary action of Mrs. Pankhurst, who, as 'the founder,'
+announced that she had discharged the Executive Committee of the
+Union."[1172] In the words of an opponent: "Mrs. Pankhurst tore up the
+constitution, robbed the branches and members of all control over the
+National Committee, abolished the annual conference, and elected
+herself and a few personal friends as an autocratic permanent
+committee answerable to no one in the world and to sit at her
+pleasure."[1173] The consequence of this personal squabble among
+leaders for supremacy was of course the splitting up of the party, and
+the aggrieved ladies formed a new party, the "Women's Freedom League."
+
+Socialists never tire of declaiming against competition, and of
+praising co-operation. At present there are two "competitive" Women's
+Freedom societies. If they continue pushing the identical article of
+agitation, all custom will go to the larger party. Therefore we may
+expect that, unless the breach is healed, the two parties will agree
+to differ "on the basic principles of women's freedom" and will
+recommend slightly different political mixtures.
+
+The example of France, Germany, and other countries shows that the
+jealousy and envy of leaders and party tyranny is nowhere greater than
+among Socialists. It will not be easy for British Socialists to found
+a united party, especially as it is more difficult to create unity
+among individualistic Englishmen, who are by their nature impatient of
+restraint, than among Frenchmen and Germans, who are more used to
+co-operation and who through their military training have learned the
+necessity of discipline and the duty of obedience.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1136] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 3.
+
+[1137] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1908, pp. 74, 75.
+
+[1138] _Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation Conference 1906_,
+p. 2.
+
+[1139] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, p. 23.
+
+[1140] The Secretary of the Fabian Society in _Daily Mail Year Book_,
+1908, p. 72.
+
+[1141] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1906, p. 73.
+
+[1142] _Report of the Twenty-sixth Annual Conference,
+Social-Democratic Federation, 1906_, p. 1.
+
+[1143] _Reformers' Year Book, 1908_, p. 73; _Daily Mail Year Book,
+1908_, p. 72.
+
+[1144] _Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation Conference, 1906_,
+p. 3.
+
+[1145] _Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 2.
+
+[1146] _Capital and Land_, Motto.
+
+[1147] Secretary of Fabian Society in _Daily Mail Year Book, 1908_, p.
+72.
+
+[1148] Official Circular: _The Fabian Society_.
+
+[1149] _Report on Fabian Policy_, 1896, p. 3.
+
+[1150] _Ibid._ p. 4.
+
+[1151] _Scottish Leader_, September 4, 1890, reprinted by Fabian
+Society and issued in form of a leaflet.
+
+[1152] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, p. 26.
+
+[1153] _Ibid._ p. 24.
+
+[1154] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, pp. 18, 19.
+
+[1155] _How to Lose and How to Win an Election_, p. 1.
+
+[1156] _Report on Fabian Policy_, 1896, p. 5.
+
+[1157] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, p. 23.
+
+[1158] _Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation Conference, 1906_,
+p. 2.
+
+[1159] _Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 11.
+
+[1160] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 52.
+
+[1161] _Ibid._ p. 53.
+
+[1162] _Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 13.
+
+[1163] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, pp. 33, 34.
+
+[1164] Secretary, Fabian Society, in _Daily Mail Year Book_, 1908, p.
+73.
+
+[1165] R. Macdonald, M.P., in _Daily Mail Year Book_, 1908, p. 109.
+
+[1166] _Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 3.
+
+[1167] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1908, p. 8.
+
+[1168] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, p. 51.
+
+[1169] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 607.
+
+[1170] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1908, p. 23.
+
+[1171] _Socialist_, December 1907.
+
+[1172] _Independent Labour Party Year Book_, 1908, p. 28.
+
+[1173] _Forward_, November 23, 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXIV
+
+THE GROWTH AND DANGER OF BRITISH SOCIALISM
+
+
+Up to a recent date the Socialists in Great Britain had neither power
+nor influence. Whilst Germany, France, and other countries had large
+Socialist parties, British Socialism was practically unrepresented in
+Parliament. Many Englishmen thought that the free British democracies
+did not offer a soil favourable to the growth of Socialism, whilst
+many Socialist leaders believed that England possessed ideal
+conditions for effecting a social revolution because no other country
+contains, proportionally, so large a propertyless proletariat as
+England.[1174] In view of the large number of propertyless people in
+Great Britain and the nervous restlessness of the race since it has
+become a race of town-dwellers we cannot wonder at the rapid growth of
+British Socialism, and we must look forward to its further increase.
+
+The following most interesting table gives a picture of the growth of
+the Socialist vote in the three most Socialistic countries on the
+Continent of Europe, and in Great Britain. It shows that Socialism has
+apparently passed the zenith on the Continent of Europe, but that it
+has not yet reached maturity in Great Britain.
+
+          "GERMANY
+                      Members of
+             Votes    Parliament
+  1867       30,000        8
+  1878      437,158        9
+  1887      763,123       11
+  1890    1,427,298       35
+  1893    1,876,738       44
+  1896    2,107,076       57
+  1903    3,010,472       81
+  1907    3,258,968       43
+
+          GREAT BRITAIN
+                      Members of
+             Votes    Parliament
+
+  1895       46,000        0
+  1900*      65,000        2
+  1906*     335,000       30
+
+          FRANCE
+                      Members of
+             Votes    Parliament
+
+  1887       47,000       19
+  1889      120,000        9
+  1893      440,000       49
+  1898      790,000       50
+  1902      805,000       48
+  1906      896,000       52
+
+          BELGIUM
+                      Members of
+             Votes    Parliament
+
+  1894      320,000       32
+  1900      344,000       33
+  1902      467,000       34
+  1904      463,967       28
+  1906      469,094       30
+
+    *This is the vote of the Labour party candidates,
+     not all of whom were Socialists."[1175]
+
+A glance at the above table shows that the Socialist vote in Great
+Britain is as yet insignificant by comparison with other countries,
+and it seems likely to increase very greatly. More than a third of the
+Australian House of Representatives and Senate consists of Socialists.
+May not proportionately as large a Socialist party arise in Great
+Britain, especially as no political party can outbid the Socialists?
+The Socialist danger is probably greater in Great Britain than it is
+in France, Germany, or Belgium. In those countries a vast body of
+freehold peasants exists who are absolutely opposed to revolutionary
+schemes. Besides, owing to the fact that the majority of Continental
+workers have a substantial stake in the country, either in the form of
+land, houses, or other property, Continental Socialism is
+comparatively moderate, whilst it is violent, Anarchistic, and
+revolutionary in Great Britain, where the majority of workers possess
+far less property than the majority of French, German, and Belgian
+workers. The German Socialists, since Germany's unity, have gone the
+way of Lassalle, the patriot Socialist. "They have ceased to denounce
+the churches. From a necessary evil or a mere stop-gap, the present
+State has become to them gradually, and perhaps unconsciously, their
+own State."[1176] It is true that the Socialist vote is ten times
+larger in Germany than in Great Britain. Nevertheless the danger of
+Socialist troubles of the very gravest kind is perhaps greater in
+England than in Germany, especially as unemployment is far greater in
+Great Britain than in Germany.[1177] It seems that Great Britain will
+pass through bad industrial times, and it should not be forgotten that
+the French Revolutions of 1789 and of 1848 were made by unemployed
+workmen upon whom Socialist and Communistic doctrines had taken a firm
+hold; that the distress caused by the siege of Paris led to the rising
+of the Commune in 1871; that between 1837 and 1848 the Chartist
+movement in Great Britain rose and declined in almost exact
+correspondence with the variations in the economic distress of the
+people.
+
+The present aspect of Great Britain resembles the aspect of
+pre-Revolution France, owing to the unequal distribution of property.
+"Almost three-quarters of the soil of France belonged to the nobility
+and the clergy, or to 350,000 people. The whole of the rest of the
+nation possessed less than one-third of the soil."[1178] The absence
+of a sturdy property-owning lower middle-class, the disappearance of
+the yeomen, is a source of instability and weakness to Great Britain.
+Vast numbers of British workers live from hand to mouth. They are
+being inflamed by Socialist agitators against the wealthy, and they
+are being promised an equal share in the whole wealth of the nation.
+In case of very acute distress, either through purely economic causes
+or through a war with a strong naval power, which might lead to
+starvation in a country which is absolutely dependent on foreign
+countries for its food, a revolutionary outbreak in the overgrown
+towns of Great Britain seems by no means impossible. The revolutionary
+centre of the world may conceivably move from Paris to London.
+
+The Socialists in Great Britain may not always remain a chaotic
+multitude led by rival agitators who fight and intrigue against one
+another. Socialists believe: "So soon as Socialism becomes popular,
+great statesmen and philosophers will arise and take their stand boldly
+with the people in their fight for industrial freedom."[1179] There are
+more than 2,000,000 trade unionists in Great Britain, and Socialism is
+spreading rapidly among them. "Already the working-class movement is
+largely a Socialistic movement and is in continual process of becoming
+more so."[1180] The political character of the trade unionists is
+changing owing to the influence of Socialism and of the new unions.
+"The differences between the 'old' and 'new' unions are becoming more
+and more accentuated. The former adhere to the 'No politics' cry,
+_i.e._ no working-class politics, and still pin their faith to the
+Liberal or even Tory party; while the latter, like their Continental
+comrades, understand that their emancipation can only be achieved by
+means of political action as a class."[1181] "It is not possible for
+the working-class movement to dissociate itself from the Socialists, or
+from Socialism, because Socialism, however vaguely the fact may yet be
+recognised, is as essentially the political expression of that movement
+as Toryism was the political expression of landlordism and Liberalism
+is that of the bourgeoisie. In other words, there can be no
+working-class movement as such without Socialism."[1182] "It is true
+that the present Parliamentary Labour party is committed to
+independence on 'Labour questions only,' but no one has yet defined
+what is a 'Labour question,' and still less has anyone attempted to
+show what political questions are not labour questions."[1183] The
+letters printed on pages 141-143 of this book show that Socialism and
+Labour are commingling.
+
+Socialism and Socialist influence have grown far more rapidly in Great
+Britain than is generally known. Their growth can be gauged not so
+much by the result of the General Election of 1906, and of some
+startling by-election results, as by the reports of the Socialist
+societies, and especially by the sale of their literature. Therefore
+the following facts indicating the growth of British Socialism should
+prove to be of considerable interest.
+
+The Independent Labour Party reported at its yearly meeting held at
+Derby on April 1 and 2, 1907:
+
+"No department of our activities has been more encouraging in its work
+this year than that of literature. Last year our literature sales
+amounted to _1,200l._, which was _600l._ more than the previous twelve
+months. This year they amount to _2,830l._, or _1,600l._ more than
+last year. The sales of books and pamphlets are nearly double that of
+last year. This is a magnificent result. Many branches have
+established literature stalls in the markets or public streets of
+their towns, and have met with much success. The fruits of this
+propaganda are certain, and will be reaped sooner or later by the
+branches concerned. The income is larger than has been the case in any
+former year, and amounts to the sum of _6,064l. 12s._, as against
+_1,884l. 7s. 9d._ for last year. The excess of assets over liabilities
+amounts to _3,729l. 2s. 5d._, as against _1,511l._ last year. The
+financial position of the party is thus becoming increasingly solid
+and stable."[1184]
+
+Since the time when that report was given, the Independent Labour
+Party has continued its rapid growth, as may be seen from the
+following "Facts of Progress" recently published by that party. "At
+the time of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Independent Labour
+Party, held at Derby at Easter 1907, there were then in existence 545
+branches of the party. Now (November 1907), there are 709 branches.
+Gain in seven months, 164 branches. There are few Parliamentary
+constituencies in the United Kingdom without branches, and it is hoped
+before the present year to make even these omissions good. There are
+now six branches of the Independent Labour Party in Ireland, and more
+to follow. The Independent Labour Party has now 845 of its members on
+local governing bodies, endeavouring to put into operation locally the
+principles for which the party stands. During the summer nearly 2,000
+meetings have been held each week throughout the country. Twenty-two
+special organisers have been at work for this last six months."[1185]
+
+The latest reports of the other Socialist Societies give a picture of
+a similarly great activity, and of a similarly rapid growth.
+
+It is true that the funds of the Socialist organisations are
+comparatively small, but it must not be forgotten that "1,000 men who
+subscribe _1d._ are stronger in the poll than one man who subscribes
+_1,000l._"[1186] Besides, the Independent Labour Party has since 1893
+spent more than _250,000l._ for purposes of propaganda. That is a
+large sum to be spent in agitation. Furthermore, it is significant
+that many Socialist pamphlets and books have been sold in more than a
+hundred thousand copies, and a few even in more than a million
+copies. The Socialist periodicals have a considerable circulation.
+"The circulation of the 'Clarion' alone is 74,000."[1187]
+
+The danger of British Socialism lies not only in its rapid increase
+among the workers, but also in the fact that it is making converts
+among the large class of people who possess no settled conviction of
+their own, and who are easily carried away by a plausible catch-phrase.
+The persons who count are the multitude of loose thinkers who are
+drifting towards Socialism without knowing it. "Politicians who have no
+suspicion that they are Socialists are advocating further instalments
+of Socialism with a recklessness of indirect results which scandalises
+the conscious Social-Democrat."[1188] "Year by year more legislation is
+proposed of which the effect is to draw upon the earnings of the
+efficient for the benefit of the inefficient. Year by year Parliament
+makes life harder for those whose labour benefits the State and easier
+for those who are a drag upon it."[1189] "There is in fact no definite
+and declared Socialist party in the present House of Commons, and yet
+what may be called the spirit of Socialism pervades the whole House to
+a greater extent than in any previous Parliament."[1190] For instance,
+Mr. Rutherford, M.P., in an anti-Socialistic speech brought forward a
+"Democratic Tory Programme" which, in the words of a Socialist
+periodical, was "cribbed almost bodily from the Socialist programme. He
+advocated among other reforms-nationalisation of the railways, State
+provision of work for the unemployed, payment of Members, manhood and
+womanhood suffrage, the suppression of adulteration, town planning on
+the German system, crime to be treated as a disease, compulsory closing
+of slums, taxation of site values, and State powers to purchase any
+site at the price on the rate-book, a national system of insurance
+against accident and sickness, feeding and clothing poor children, free
+opening of secondary schools and universities."[1191] In giving
+prominence to this "anti-Socialist" speech the "Labour Leader"
+sarcastically remarked: "The items do not, of course, take us quite as
+far as we Socialists would go; but they are fairly good to be going on
+with. Ours is to once again cordially welcome Mr. Rutherford as
+champion against Socialism."[1192]
+
+A further danger consists in this, that many Socialists in Parliament
+and out of it like to sail under a false flag, in accordance with the
+tactics usually employed by the Fabian Society (see _ante_, Chapter
+XXXIII). Socialist publications inform us: "Among Socialists who stood
+and were elected as official Liberals are P. Alden, Clement Edwards,
+and L.G. Chiozza Money."[1193] "Many Liberals, like Mr. Chiozza Money,
+Mr. Masterman, Mr. J.M. Robertson, not to speak of the Liberal-Labour
+group, are committed to Socialist or semi-Socialist legislation. Many
+Liberal newspapers, we cannot fairly deny, are avowedly on the side of
+Socialism. The Liberal rank and file are also in the majority of
+instances quite favourable to the general principles of
+municipalisation and Labour legislation. Above all, as has so often
+been predicted by us, the two political camps of landlordism and
+capitalism are bound to combine together against Socialism, and they
+can only do so effectively under the Imperialist, Tariff Reform,
+anti-Land Reform, and anti-Municipalisation flags. The Liberal party
+cannot attempt single-handed to withstand us."[1194] Socialism often
+poses as Liberalism and is accepted as such by the unwary.
+
+A further danger of British Socialism lies in the fact that it leads
+to the deterioration of the national character. "The strength of every
+community must finally depend on the character of the individuals who
+compose it. If they are self-reliant, energetic, and dutiful, the
+community will be strong; if, on the contrary, they have been taught
+to rely upon others rather than on themselves, to take life easily and
+to avoid unpleasant duties, then the community will be weak. Teach men
+that they owe no duty to their families, no duty to their country, and
+that their only responsibility is to humanity at large, and they will
+quickly begin to think and act as if they had no responsibility to
+anyone but themselves."[1195] "Many workmen are being ruined morally
+and materially by Socialistic doctrines, because directly a man
+becomes imbued with the idea that he is not receiving full recompense
+for his labours he thinks himself justified in doing as little as he
+can for his employer. The consequence is that his labour, which is to
+him his stock-in-trade, depreciates in value and when business
+slackens down he is one of the first to get the 'sack.'"[1196]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1174] See Karl Marx, _Capital_; Yorke, _Secret History of the
+International_; Stegmann und Hugo, _Handbuch_, p. 177; Kautsky,
+_Social Revolution_.
+
+[1175] Macdonald, _Socialism_, pp. 125, 126.
+
+[1176] _Encyclopćdia Britannica_, vol. xxxii. p. 666.
+
+[1177] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 546.
+
+[1178] Block, _Dictionnaire Général_, vol. ii. p. 822.
+
+[1179] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[1180] _Ibid._ p. 34.
+
+[1181] Aveling, _Working-Class Movement in England_, p. 40.
+
+[1182] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 38.
+
+[1183] _Ibid._ p. 39.
+
+[1184] _Independent Labour Party Annual Report Conference_, pp. 10,
+12, 9.
+
+[1185] _Labour Leader_, November 29, 1907.
+
+[1186] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1906, p. 80.
+
+[1187] _Clarion_, December 20, 1907.
+
+[1188] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 188.
+
+[1189] Lord Balfour of Burleigh in the _Times_, October 3, 1907.
+
+[1190] Cox, _Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[1191] _Labour Leader_, October 18, 1907.
+
+[1192] _Ibid._
+
+[1193] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, p. 58.
+
+[1194] _Labour Leader_, October 11, 1907.
+
+[1195] Cox, _Socialism_, p. 20.
+
+[1196] Daw, _Socialism Unmasked_, p. 7.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXV
+
+HOW THE PROGRESS OF SOCIALISM MAY BE CHECKED
+
+
+What can be done to check the growth of Socialism? Some most
+interesting statistics supplied by the German Social-Democratic party
+will furnish the best reply to that question. An analysis of the
+electorate of Magdeburg and Bremen, two typical commercial and
+industrial towns, gave the following result:
+
+
+COMPOSITION OF ELECTORATE
+
+                                 Magdeburg           Bremen
+                              Numbers Per cent.   Numbers Per cent.
+ 1. Capitalists                  4,491 =  8.08      5,085 =  8.34
+ 2. High officials                 559 =  1.06        197 =  0.32
+ 3. Medium officials             2,304 =  4.35        615 =  1.01
+ 4. Lower officials              4,364 =  7.75      3,567 =  5.85
+ 5. Professional men             1,422 =  2.55      1,047 =  1.72
+ 6. Newer middle-class           3,924 =  7.06      4,882 =  8.01
+ 7. Independent artisans         3,704 =  6.67      5,196 =  8.53
+ 8. Bakers and grocers             932 =  1.57      1,124 =  1.84
+ 9. Older middle-class           2,787 =  5.01      4,074 =  6.68
+10. Clerks and bookkeepers       3,121 =  5.62      5,247 =  8.61
+11. Working men in State and
+    municipal employment         1,424 =  2.55      1,415 =  2.32
+12. Working men in privateer
+    employment                  26,423 = 47.73     28,573 = 46.77
+                                ------   -----     ------   -----
+                                55,563 = 100       60,962 = 100[1197]
+
+Commenting upon the foregoing table, a German Socialist periodical
+wrote: "An analytical comparison of the electorate of Hamburg and
+Bremen reveals an extraordinary similarity in its social composition.
+It shows that the workers form hardly a majority of the population.
+They can be victorious only when they march hand in hand with
+professional men, the lower officials, and the newer middle-class.
+However, not all working men are Socialists. At the last election
+3,000 working men in Magdeburg, and 2,500 working men in Bremen, voted
+against Social-Democracy. The patriotic anti-Socialist working-men's
+associations are rapidly increasing their membership. A thousand
+workmen, one-third of the whole occupied at the Krupp-Gruson Works in
+Magdeburg, have joined the anti-Socialist working-men's associations.
+The 'working-men's associations for fighting Social-Democracy' have
+grown in a surprising fashion."[1198]
+
+The lower middle-class forms the strongest bulwark against the
+progress of Socialism, and Socialists know it. The philosopher of
+British Socialism, for instance, wrote: "The proletariat proper, the
+class which bears the future Socialist world in its womb, by no means
+at present everywhere outweighs, numerically, all other classes. On
+the contrary, so far as I am aware, this is only the case in Great
+Britain and some of the North American States, and even in these
+countries the majority is not large. The bulk of the non-proletarian
+sections of the democracy are by no means proletarian or
+Social-Democratic, even in their instincts, let alone Socialistic in
+their convictions. The predominating, or at all events most
+influential, elements in the non-proletarian democracy are what, for
+brevity, I have rather loosely termed the clerk and the shopkeeping
+class: in other words, they who are, or hope to become, small
+capitalists, the small middle-class. This last section of the 'people'
+or the democracy is, as such, the most formidable, because the most
+subtle, enemy with which the Socialist movement has to contend. The
+aim of the small capitalist, and of him who hopes to become one, is
+security and free play under the most advantageous conditions for his
+small capital to operate. On this account the little bourgeois, the
+small middle-class in its various sections, is the great obstacle
+which will have to be suppressed before we can hope to see even the
+inauguration of a consciously Socialist policy. It must be destroyed
+or materially crippled as a class before real progress can be
+made."[1199]
+
+Whilst many Socialists wish to destroy the lower middle-class, others,
+especially the Fabians, endeavour to convert it to Socialism, and to
+set it on against the wealthy. They argue: "The commercial clerk with
+his reading, his writing, his arithmetic, and his shorthand is a
+proletarian, and a very miserable proletarian, only needing to be
+awakened from his poor little superstition of shabby gentility to take
+his vote from the Tories and hand it over to us. The small tradesmen
+and ratepayers who are now allying themselves with the Duke of
+Westminster in a desperate and unavailing struggle--against the rising
+rates entailed by the eight hours day and standard wages for all
+public servants, besides great extensions of corporate activity in
+providing accommodation and education at the public expense, must
+sooner or later see that their interest lies in making common cause
+with the workers to throw the burden of taxation directly on to
+unearned incomes."[1200] "It only needs one evening's intelligent
+discussion of this monstrous state of affairs to make a beginning of a
+really sensible and independent organisation of the middle classes for
+their own defence and for their escape from between the two millstones
+of organised Labour and organised Plutocracy, which are at present
+grinding the last penny in the pound out of them."[1201] It is
+estimated that there are in England 500,000 clerks.[1202] With the
+object of permeating this large section of the middle class with
+Socialism, a new monthly paper, the "Clerk," has recently been started
+under Fabian auspices.
+
+Socialism is undermining the lower middle-class, and it is
+unconsciously being assisted in this policy by short-sighted
+anti-capitalistic Parliamentary legislation, which, as usual, hits
+hardest the smaller capitalists. If Great Britain wishes to erect a dam
+against the rising tide of Socialism, she must strengthen the lower
+middle-class in town and country by well-devised legislation, and she
+should before all re-create her peasantry. Great Britain should
+encourage the accumulation of small capitals by encouraging thrift. At
+present thrift is discouraged by the difficulty which small savers
+experience in obtaining satisfactory investments. The low interest of
+2-3/4 per cent. paid by the British savings-banks--Continental
+savings-banks give 4 per cent.--is quite inadequate; and the British
+Company Laws are so bad and sound investments so scarce that the small
+investor who wants a higher return than 2-3/4 per cent. is almost
+certain to lose his money if he buys stocks or shares. Leasehold
+investments are very unsatisfactory, because the object bought
+automatically reverts to the landlord, and small freehold properties
+are as a rule unobtainable under the present system of land-holding.
+Therefore the first and most important step to encourage thrift should
+be to enable the small saver to invest his savings profitably and
+securely in land and houses where it is under his own control.
+Co-operation also should be encouraged. Co-operative banking, which is
+highly developed in Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy, but almost
+unknown in Great Britain, would at the same time greatly benefit the
+small investor and the small _bonâ-fide_ borrower.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1197] _Die Neue Gesellschaft_, September 1907, p. 325.
+
+[1198] _Die Neue Gesellschaft_, September 1907, pp. 325, 326.
+
+[1199] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, pp. 40, 41.
+
+[1200] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, p. 26.
+
+[1201] _New Age_, November 1907, p. 23.
+
+[1202] _Clerk_, January 1908.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXVI
+
+IS SOCIALISM POSSIBLE?--A GLANCE INTO THE SOCIALIST STATE OF THE
+FUTURE
+
+
+The realisation of Socialism, the creation of a Socialistic
+commonwealth in which private property does not exist, seems
+impossible. Socialists entirely leave out of their calculations two
+elementary factors:
+
+
+NATURE, AND HUMAN NATURE
+
+A State devoid of private property is an unthinkable proposition.
+Private property is not a fortuitous creation, but a natural growth.
+It is founded not merely upon law, but upon immemorial custom which
+owes its rise to a fundamental human instinct, an instinct which has
+been a characteristic of the human race in all countries, and which is
+as old as humanity itself. The instinct of acquisition, of
+accumulation, and of property is common to all men from Central Africa
+to the poles. It is equally strongly developed in the most civilised
+nations and among savages.
+
+However, supposing that the instinct of acquisition, of accumulation,
+and of property, which is found not only among all races of mankind
+but even among the higher animals, could be overcome, would human
+nature allow of the creation of a co-operative commonwealth based on
+voluntary co-operation, not on compulsion? Could the brotherhood of
+man be made a reality, and would men co-operate without strife in that
+mutual friendship and good-fellowship which one finds but rarely,
+even among those who are connected by the closest ties of affection
+and blood relationship, unless self-interest acts as the determining
+factor? Did not Plato found his ideal commonwealth upon perfectly wise
+and virtuous men? "Does not Socialist society presuppose extraordinary
+human beings, real angels, as regards unselfishness and gentleness,
+joy of work and intelligence? Is not the Social Revolution, with the
+present brutal and egoistical race of men, bound to become the signal
+for desolating struggles for the booty or for general idleness in
+which it would go to ruin?"[1203]
+
+"Who is more ready to tilt against society than the average Socialist?
+And if the individuals in it are so deeply imbued with a double dose
+of original sin as not to be able to handle any part of distribution
+and exchange, it follows that you cannot trust the individual."[1204]
+"In a social State you must consider two things--man and his
+surroundings. You often forget man, because you think it easier to
+alter his surroundings. The real question is: Can you produce men fit
+for the new social State?"[1205]
+
+"Socialism postulates an intelligent democracy."[1206] "The
+proletariat will require high intelligence, strong discipline, perfect
+organisation of its great masses. We may expect that it will only
+succeed when it will have developed these qualities in the highest
+degree."[1207] "Socialists demand a higher morality than any now to be
+found."[1208] "It is incumbent upon Socialism to recognise the
+existence of an intellectual motive, and it must place that motive
+above the economic, because without it the economic struggle would be
+devoid of any constructive value; it would be a mere tug-of-war; it
+would never bring us to Socialism. It would lead to a scramble for the
+spoils and mutual throat-cutting."[1209] "If 'each for all and all for
+each' be nothing more than a text for a banner or a motto for a wall;
+if its truth has not captured the hearts and minds of men and women in
+that new society, we shall be an official-ridden people with our eye
+on the best posts in the State for ourselves or our sons; and we shall
+be as pitiable in our spiritual deformity as we are in our economic
+bondage."[1210] "Socialism demands more than that we should merely
+import Socialistic institutions into our midst. It insists on a moral
+regeneration of society of the most complete and searching kind in
+order to make a lasting foundation for the political and social
+changes we many of us long to see."[1211] "Convey it in what spirit we
+may, an appeal to class interest is an appeal to personal interest.
+Socialist propaganda carried on as a class war suggests none of those
+ideals of moral citizenship with which Socialist literature abounds,
+'each for all and all for each,' 'service to the community is the sole
+right of property' and so on. It is an appeal to individualism" [which
+seems to be a euphemism for envy and cupidity], "and results in
+getting men to accept Socialist formulć without becoming
+Socialists."[1212]
+
+Unfortunately there is nothing ideal and elevating in the Socialist
+teachings, as the previous chapters show. Socialism appeals to all the
+passions and to all the vices, such as hatred, jealousy, envy,
+cupidity. It encourages, or at least excuses, wastefulness,
+improvidence, profligacy, and drunkenness. Its aim is plunder.
+
+The voluntary co-operation of all for the benefit of all presupposes
+the existence of wise, virtuous, and unselfish citizens. Do the
+people in England, or in any other country, possess these high
+qualities, or are these qualities likely to be created by the
+teachings of the Socialists? A distinguished Socialist despairingly
+exclaimed: "That spirit which animated the apostles, prophets,
+martyrs, is alive in Japan to-day. Is it alive in us as a nation? If
+not, if we have replaced it to any extent by some selfish opposite, by
+any such diabolically careless sentiment as 'after me the deluge,'
+then we as a nation have lost our soul, sold it for mere individual
+prosperity, sold it in some poor cases for not even that, for mere
+liquid refreshment, and we are on the down grade."[1213] Another
+Socialist wrote: "We are all of us great-great-grandchildren of the
+beasts. We carry the bestial attributes in our blood, some more, some
+less. Who amongst us is so pure and exalted that he has never been
+conscious of the bestial taint?"[1214] "Descendants of barbarians and
+beasts, we have not yet conquered the greed and folly of our bestial
+and barbarous inheritance. Our nature is an unweeded garden. Our
+hereditary soil is rank."[1215]
+
+The Socialists themselves acknowledge that Socialism presupposes a
+nation composed of ideal individuals, industrious, gentle, mutually
+helpful, unselfish, forbearing, and wise. They also acknowledge that
+men are the descendants of barbarians and beasts. Do Socialist
+agitators really believe that they can convert the descendants of
+barbarians and beasts into ideal beings by constantly preaching to
+them the gospel of hatred, envy, selfishness, self-indulgence, and
+plunder, and by even encouraging them to continue poisoning themselves
+and their descendants by over-indulgence in alcoholic drink?[1216]
+Surely "the defective natures of citizens will show themselves in the
+bad acting of whatever social structure they are arranged into. There
+is no political alchemy by which you can get golden conduct out of
+leaden instincts."[1217]
+
+It is clear to most thinking Socialists that human nature, as at
+present constituted, will make the realisation of Socialism
+impossible. How do Socialists, then, propose to meet the difficulty?
+Very simply. By bold assertions and prophecies. That which all
+religions and all philosophers have been unable to accomplish during
+3,000 years, Socialists will effect as by the touch of a magician's
+wand. "Socialism will change human nature. The opportunity makes the
+man. Socialism will take away the desire for accumulating riches.
+Under such conditions the possession of riches will be a superfluous
+burden which no sane man will wish to bear."[1218] "As soon as high
+purpose, intense human attachments, are the springs of action and
+resolve, discipline will come into our movement to crush out base
+selfishness, vanity, and personal ambition,"[1219] This is very nice,
+but how are "high purpose" and "intense human attachment" to be made
+the "springs of action"? Unfortunately the writer keeps the secret to
+himself.
+
+The philosopher of British Socialism states: "Socialism only calls for
+enlightened selfishness. But the fact that this selfishness is
+enlightened and recognises that it can serve itself by serving the
+common interest will completely change its character, so that it will
+cease to be the narrow selfishness of to-day, which so often defeats
+its own ends. Selfishness passing through the refining fire of
+economic change ceases to be selfishness and becomes Socialism."[1220]
+If selfishness ceases to be selfishness and becomes Socialism, then it
+changes merely its name, and Socialism and selfishness are identical,
+which is quite correct. Other Socialist leaders prophesy: "May we not
+assume that under these conditions a new type of mankind will evolve
+which will surpass the highest type which culture has produced up till
+now? An overman, if you please, not as an exception, but as the
+rule."[1221]
+
+"Selfishness will become public spirit."[1222] "The desire to serve
+the common life, to advance its welfare, will be the highest ambition
+of the individual."[1223] "Just as the nightingale sings in the
+evening shades, or the lark trills in the summer sky, so man in
+natural surroundings" [does Socialism create "natural" surroundings or
+unnatural ones?] "will seek to gratify his higher nature. Socialism
+will create a condition of things favourable to the development of the
+higher type of individuality."[1224] "This is the religious aspect of
+labour. It is dignified, ennobling. That is the divine ideal, the
+aspect concerning labour which God intended should be realised. Just
+think of it! The ordinary working man as divinely taught and inspired
+as the prophets and seers of old, and having the capacity to
+understand the sublimest truths and the profoundest philosophy
+concerning human life and the eternal destinies."[1225]
+
+The statements given above, with their superlatives, their laboured
+philosophy, their lyrics, hysterics, and prophecies, are singularly
+unconvincing. The manner in which the simple question, "How do you
+propose to fit actual human nature into your scheme?" is answered by
+the Socialists, proves that they find that question unanswerable.
+History teaches us that revolutions based on plunder, euphemistically
+called confiscation, expropriation, or socialisation, have indeed
+altered human nature, but they have altered it for the worse. All
+revolutions have hitherto caused a fearful depravation of manners and
+led to the most hideous crimes--and will a Socialistic revolution
+prove an exception? Why should it be an exception? Are its teachings
+such as make it seem likely that a Socialistic revolution will prove
+an exception? An attempt to establish the Socialist Commonwealth would
+undoubtedly lead, not to a revolution, but to a series of revolutions,
+to Anarchism and to civil war. The tragedy of the great French
+Revolution might be acted over again.
+
+Now let us look into some practical questions which the Socialist
+State of the future will have to settle. Let us, for instance,
+inquire:
+
+
+HOW WILL LABOUR BE REMUNERATED?
+
+Many Socialists think that different workers should get different
+wages: "The citizens shall be consciously public functionaries, and
+their labours shall be rewarded according to results."[1226]
+"Socialism does not propose that everyone shall have an equal share of
+the product of collective labour."[1227] How, then, is the amount of
+the unequal wages to be calculated? Some Socialists, following Marx,
+propose to determine wages by means of labour-time. "Ascertain the
+time taken to produce two commodities and we know their relative
+exchange value. And this quality tallies with market valuations. So
+far as creating value is concerned, then, one man creates as much
+value as another, and on the basis of equal labour-time equal value,
+Socialists rest their argument of social equality."[1228] "The working
+time which the making of an article requires is the only scale by
+which its social value can be measured. Ten minutes of social work in
+one branch are exchangeable for ten minutes of social work in another.
+It will be easy to calculate how much social working time each single
+product requires."[1229] A hunter hunts all day and shoots a deer. A
+fisher fishes all day and catches a sprat. Will the hunter exchange
+his deer for the sprat, on the principle of equal labour-time? Will
+highly skilled workers be satisfied to receive the same wages as the
+most unskilled labourers? Will equal labour-time pay for all not lead
+to universal dawdling, shrinkage in production, and consequent
+starvation? Would workers not strive to get the maximum pay for the
+minimum work? To prevent dawdling, could it be ascertained how long it
+should take to repair a machine, paint a picture, amputate a leg,
+plough an acre?
+
+It is manifestly impossible to pay men of varying capacity and
+productive power equal labour-time wages. Therefore many Socialists,
+especially the Fabians, maintain: "The principle of inequality of
+payment must be recognised. It is a necessary consequence of
+inequality of ability."[1230] "Every man should receive from the
+Commonwealth a fair equivalent in payments or services for the
+payments or services which the Commonwealth receives from him. It is
+not possible to say exactly how much each citizen has contributed to
+the wealth of the State, and absolute economic justice is therefore
+impossible."[1231] The question now arises how is the "fair equivalent
+for services rendered" to be determined? Many Socialists teach the
+doctrine that "the labourer is entitled to the entire product of his
+labour."[1232] Should the labourer be given an equivalent to the
+product of his labour _minus_ various necessary expenditures? Could
+the value of the labour of an individual be calculated at all in the
+complicated processes of modern industry? What is the value produced
+by a day's labour of a ploughman, a railway porter, a postman, a
+book-keeper, a policeman, a machine-minder? Mr. Bax very sensibly
+argues: "What does each man produce of himself as an individual? Show
+me how much cotton any given factory operative has produced in the
+course of a year? I don't mean the amount of wages the capitalist has
+given him for the exploitation of his labour power during that
+period--but the actual product of his labour in the manufactured
+article. You could not do so, because his labour, like all modern
+labour, is associated; and the work of the individual producer is
+completely and indissolubly merged in that of the group (factory,
+mill) to which he belongs, which is again inseparable from that of the
+machinery employed in the process and from that of other
+groups."[1233]
+
+It is impossible to calculate the exact value of service to the
+community by work in a factory or a field as soon as the wages system
+based on demand and supply has ceased to exist. Besides, differential
+pay will be impossible, because none will be satisfied with the pay
+received, except those who receive the highest pay. Therefore the same
+Fabian Society which in other writings, such as those quoted in the
+foregoing, advocates unequal payment, concludes: "Inequality of pay
+would be odious; the impossibility of estimating the separate value of
+each man's labour with any really valid result, the friction which
+would arise, the jealousies which would be provoked, the inevitable
+discontent, favouritism, and jobbery that would prevail: all these
+things will drive the Communal Council into the right path--equal
+remuneration of all workers."[1234] The Fabians, like so many other
+Socialists, cannot apparently quite make up their mind whether to
+plunge into the Scylla of equal pay or into the Charybdis of unequal
+pay. Therefore they plunge alternately into the one or the other.
+
+Many Socialists are in favour of equal pay: "The credits granted to
+the citizens will be equal in all cases, without reference to skill,
+intelligence, or the nature of the service performed."[1235] "The
+labours of the bus driver or the mangler will be appraised just as
+highly as those of the Prime Minister, with this difference perchance,
+that if it can be clearly shown by statistics that buscraft uses up
+the life energy of a man more rapidly than statecraft, four hours of
+busmanship shall count, say, as five of statesmanship."[1236] Equal
+wages should logically be followed by equal treatment for all. "An
+anti-Socialist will say, 'How will you sail a ship in a Socialist
+condition?' How? Why, with a captain and mates and sailing-master and
+engineer (if it be a steamer) and A.B.s and stokers, and so on, and so
+on. Only there will be no first and second and third class among the
+passengers, the sailors and stokers will be as well fed and lodged as
+the captain or passengers, and the captain and the stoker will have
+the same pay."[1237]
+
+So confused are the minds even of the leading Socialists with regard
+to the important question of the remuneration of labour that Mr.
+William Morris, one of the founders of British Socialism, in a poem
+first recommends individualistic Socialism and pay according to
+results:
+
+    _For that which the worker winneth shall then be his indeed_,
+    Nor shall half be reaped for nothing by him that sowed no seed.
+
+Two lines later in the same poem he recommends Communism and equal pay
+for all, regardless of the work done:
+
+    _Then all Mine and Thine shall be Ours_, and no more
+        shall any man crave
+    For riches that serve for nothing but to fetter a
+        friend for a slave.[1238]
+
+The above extracts show that confusion reigns in the Socialist camp
+regarding the settlement of the Wage Question.
+
+Wage-earners are not philanthropists. Highly skilled men will not be
+content with wages equal to those of unskilled labour, not even in the
+name of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. In the absence of a free
+demand and supply, which automatically graduates wages in accordance
+with the social value of the work done, its attractiveness or
+unattractiveness, &c., it cannot scientifically, though it can perhaps
+autocratically, be determined how wages should be graduated. When it
+comes to the fixing of differential wages in the Socialist State of
+the future, quarrels will immediately arise, which will lead to strife
+and rebellion, for all workers will use arguments such as the
+following ones recently put forward by Mr. Smillie, President of the
+Lanarkshire Miners' County Union. In reply to the reproach that
+miners, by unduly high wages, increased the cost of coal to the poor,
+Mr. Smillie answered: "Miners are being blamed in some quarters for
+the high price of coal. Their wages at present range from _6s. 6d._ to
+_8s._ per day, or from _30s._ to _2l. 5s._ per week when broken time
+is taken into consideration. Will anyone grudge an income of this kind
+to a worker whose labour is of a most uncomfortable and exhausting
+nature, and who takes his life in his hand from the moment he steps
+into the cage until he reaches the surface again? The miner recognises
+that high-priced coal means pinching and suffering in the homes of the
+poor, and he has real sympathy for this class, but he argues that the
+true value of coal must include a reasonable sustenance for those who
+risk their lives in its production."[1239] If miners claim higher
+wages than other workers because their work is uncomfortable and
+dangerous, railway workers, sailors, and many others will raise the
+same claims; fishers and butchers will claim higher wages because
+their work is disgusting; factory workers because their work is
+sedentary and monotonous; waiters because it is menial; postmen
+because they have to walk; drivers because they have to sit still;
+washerwomen because they have to stand; farm labourers because they
+have to work in the cold; bakers because they have to work in the
+heat, &c. All workers would of course demand the maximum pay, and who
+could adjudicate on all the rival claims? The Wages Question seems
+likely to prove insoluble.
+
+
+HOW WILL LABOUR BE ORGANISED AND DIRECTED?
+
+We are told: "Labour will be organised on principles of perfect
+freedom. Everyone decides for himself in which branch he desires to be
+employed. If a superfluity of workmen occur in one branch and a
+deficiency in another, it will be the duty of the executive to arrange
+matters and readjust the inequality."[1240] In accordance with the
+variations in demand and supply and the rise and decay of industries,
+the introduction of labour-saving machinery, &c., labour requires
+continual redistribution. That redistribution is at present
+automatically effected largely through the rise and fall of wages. A
+rise in the wages of industries which require more labour, and a
+decline in the wages of industries which require less labour, cause
+labour to turn from shrinking to growing industries. When wages are no
+longer fixed with reference to commercial demand and supply, how will
+the periodical and necessary redistribution of labour be effected?
+Some Socialist leaders think: "As the workers, of course, will not be
+drafted into the different branches of production under military
+compulsion, irrespective of their wishes, it may well turn out that
+some will have a superfluity of labour, while others will suffer from
+scarcity. The necessary equilibrium could then be restored by reducing
+the wages in those industries where the applicants are too many and by
+raising them in those where the applicants are too few, till each
+branch has just the number of workers which it requires. It could be
+restored also by other means; for instance, by the shortening of the
+hours of labour in those industries that are short of workers. With
+all that, however, the general rate of wages throughout the working
+class will be influenced no longer by supply and demand, but by the
+quantity of available products. A general fall of wages in consequence
+of over-production will be impossible."[1241] In other words, the
+beautiful schemes of remuneration independent of the laws of supply
+and demand discussed in the foregoing would immediately break down. In
+order to redistribute labour, workers would either have to be
+compelled by direct force to work in those trades which required
+additional labour, or their wages or hours of work would arbitrarily
+be altered in order to effect the necessary changes by economic
+pressure--that is, by reducing their food. In other words, commercial
+demand and supply would break down the Utopian regulations of the
+Socialist Commonwealth as soon as they had been framed.
+
+While some Socialists wish to distribute and redistribute labour by
+arbitrarily changing wages and hours of labour, some of the more
+logical and scientific Socialist leaders are frankly in favour of
+compulsory labour: "We already see official salaries regulated, not
+according to the state of the labour market, but by consideration of
+the cost of living. This principle we seek to extend to the whole
+industrial world. Instead of converting every man into an independent
+producer, working when he likes and as he likes, we aim at enrolling
+every able-bodied person directly in the service of the community for
+such duties and under such kind of organisation, local or national, as
+may be suitable to his capacity and social function. If a man wants
+freedom to work or not to work, just as he likes, he had better
+emigrate to Robinson Crusoe's island or else become a millionaire. To
+suppose that the industrial affairs of a complicated industrial State
+can be run without strict subordination and discipline, without
+obedience to orders, and without definite allowances for maintenance,
+is to dream, not of Socialism but of Anarchism."[1242] "Everyone
+should have a legal right to an opportunity of earning his living in
+the society in which he has been born; but no one should or could have
+the right to ask that he shall be employed at the particular job which
+suits his peculiar taste and temperament. Each of us must be prepared
+to do the work which society wants doing, or take the consequences of
+refusal."[1243] And what consequences would refusal to do the allotted
+work at the allotted pay entail? Either dismissal, which would mean
+starvation--for the State, as the sole employer, would control all
+employment and all the food--or bodily chastisement, or imprisonment.
+There could be no strike on the part of dissatisfied workers, for the
+State--that is, the officials--holding all the wealth, would be able
+to starve them out in a week.
+
+Socialists admit: "Mankind is as lazy as it dares to be."[1244] "In
+the average man there is a strong tendency to mere idleness and
+aimlessness which, but for the compulsions and temptations of
+existing circumstances, might run to great lengths. The trouble is
+that, while the average man is willing to work occasionally where his
+choice is free, he considers his lot a hard one if necessity compels
+him to continue regularly at a given task. He is willing to work at
+almost anything save that at which he is asked to work. It is a common
+thing to hear even good workmen profess a dislike to their
+trade."[1245]
+
+How will shirking and idling be prevented in the Socialist
+Commonwealth when men are no longer compelled by economic necessity
+and free competition to do their best?
+
+The leading American exponent of Socialism prophesies that workers
+will work no longer in order to live in comfort, but that they will
+henceforth see in work a semi-religious duty, which they perform owing
+to their strong sense of beneficence: "In the New Commonwealth the
+butcher will be conscious and satisfied that 'the essential thing is
+not that he shall have a living, but that meat shall be supplied.' The
+work of the citizen will be the willing performance of social office.
+He will be a worker whose best efforts, best ardour, and highest aims
+will be drawn out by his sense of the beneficence of his work, even
+though it be such a coarse routine of manual labour as machinery
+should soon remove altogether from human hands. He will be habituated
+to regard his wages, not as a _quid pro quo_, but as the provision
+made by society to enable him to carry out his labour."[1246] Will the
+"sense of beneficence" induce men who are not satisfied with the
+condition and remuneration of labour to transport milk and other
+provisions during the night so that the townspeople may have them
+early in the morning? Will men be induced by their sense of duty to
+clean the sewers? To ask these questions is to answer them. Bebel
+puts the question, "What becomes of the difference between the
+industrious and the idle, the intelligent and the stupid?" and
+answers, "There will be no such difference, because that which we
+associate with these conceptions will have ceased to exist."[1247] "If
+there is one vice more certain than another to be unpopular in a
+Socialist community, it is laziness. The man who shirked would find
+his mates making his position intolerable even before he suffered the
+doom of expulsion."[1248] Arguments such as the above should really
+not be placed before grown-up people. They are only fit for the
+nursery.
+
+The tendency towards lazing and idling, the desire to make money
+without exertion, is strongly developed in Great Britain. "The essence
+of gambling is the craving to obtain something from others without
+giving an equivalent."[1249] Perhaps in no country is betting and
+gambling in every form so much in evidence as it is in Great Britain.
+Betting on the turf, missing-word competitions, limerick competitions,
+&c., draw every year many millions of pounds from the pockets of
+millions of British workers. How then can the natural tendency of men
+to loaf and idle and to live rather by their wits than by their work,
+which is strong in all men, be overcome in the Socialist State of the
+future? The fundamental book of the Fabian Society, the most
+scientific Socialist body in Great Britain, tells us: "A very small
+share of the profits arising from associated labour acts as a
+tremendous stimulus to each individual producer,"[1250] and it
+suggests, as do many Socialist writers, that the workers will do their
+best because they know that the more they produce the greater will be
+their individual share in the general production. Great Britain has
+12,000,000 workers. Therefore a worker will make as his own share an
+extra sovereign if by extra exertion he succeeds in producing an
+extra _12,000,000l._ worth of goods, a feat the accomplishment of
+which will require several thousand years. That is a "tremendous
+stimulus" to the individual producer! Can any argument be more foolish
+than the foregoing one?
+
+An influential Socialist writer tells us: "The credits granted to the
+citizens will be equal in all cases, without reference to skill,
+intelligence, or the nature of the service performed; but no credits
+will be given to the able-bodied shirkers, who will thus be starved
+into doing their share of the world's work without other
+compulsion."[1251] Other Socialist writers have put forth similar
+views. This is a cheerful outlook for the free citizens of the free
+Socialist Commonwealth. The workers will become "wage-slaves" in the
+fullest sense of the term. They will have to submit to forced labour,
+arbitrary wages, and arbitrary hours of labour, and those who do not
+produce as much as the official overseers require--and they may have a
+private grudge against some unfortunate worker who does his best--will
+be starved until they work harder. The lot of savages ruled by the
+knout, the kourbash, and the sjambok will be preferable to the lot of
+men ruled by starvation in the free Socialist Commonwealth of the
+future. The former have at least some liberty, while the latter will
+be kept by officials, who will distribute food and force them to work
+by rewards of food alternated by starvation, like performing dogs and
+apes.
+
+To carry on the business of the country the Socialist Government would
+have to drop the principle of perfect freedom and to rely on coercion,
+and it would be justified in doing so. If, as Mr. Blatchford has
+repeatedly told us, "man has no right to himself because he did not
+make himself," if man belongs not to himself and his family, but to
+"society," it logically follows that society may compel him to work,
+apportioning to him his task and his pay, without reference to his
+wishes. Society being represented by its officials, elected or
+appointed, these officials would absolutely dispose of the people.
+Great Britain would be ruled like a gigantic convict prison.
+
+The spirit in which even moderate Socialists already contemplate the
+freedom of the individual may be seen from an address on Sweated
+Labour which Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., delivered in Glasgow in
+autumn 1907. He said: "There was no use tinkering with the problem.
+Personally, he was not in favour of home work at all. To eliminate it
+might seem a cold-blooded way of dealing with sweating, but it was the
+only way that would give definite and final results. He would,
+however, proceed carefully and scientifically. Home work had got
+extremes, but one section was much riper for treatment than the other,
+and he would begin with the worst. The first difficulty was to find
+out the sweated workers. It was certain that a great percentage
+escaped detection by sanitary inspectors. Now his proposal was that,
+instead of the sanitary inspectors hunting for the home worker, the
+home worker should hunt for the inspector; and this he sought to
+accomplish under the Bill introduced last session, by making it
+necessary for the home worker to take out a licence and by making it
+obligatory on the employer to keep an absolutely complete list of his
+workers. The factory inspector must have right of access, and a
+certificate must be obtained from him for a separate licence. The
+casual home-worker would be discouraged." In other words, factory
+inspectors should apparently be authorised to break without a search
+warrant into private houses. They should certainly be empowered to
+prosecute a working man if he defended the privacy of his house by
+refusing the inspector admittance. That measure would abolish the
+sanctity of the home. The "Right to Work," which the Socialists so
+loudly champion, would be taken from the home-worker, and one cannot
+help asking: Is that high-handed measure devised for the benefit of
+the sweated or for that of the highly paid workers, represented by Mr.
+Macdonald, who wish to abolish the competition of underpaid
+home-workers? Sweated labour can be abolished and must be abolished,
+and it can be abolished, as I may show in another book, without
+destroying the home. If Mr. Macdonald should have his way, the
+Socialist principle, "Property is robbery," will have to be
+supplemented with the principle "Liberty is tyranny."
+
+The unchecked absolutism of a Socialist State will hardly be palatable
+to Socialist workers who have been told that Socialism means freedom,
+and these see the only solution in the establishment of Anarchism:
+"The damnable idea of being marshalled and drilled or numbered and
+docketed like any other merchandise in a state of glorified capitalism
+is not the Socialist's ideal, but its antithesis, no matter what the
+capitalists and their protagonists, the pseudo-Socialists, choose to
+name it. We don't want to be driven to the gate of the municipal or
+other factory to hustle and elbow our fellows out of the way so that
+we may catch the official's eye in the mad and sordid scramble for
+mere belly food, for a mere animal subsistence. With the advent of
+Socialism, the whole of the capitalist State and its superstructure
+will collapse, with its cant of living wages, its Brotherhoods of Man,
+and the rest of its nauseous humbug."[1252] "If the worker continues
+to be paid in wages, he necessarily will remain the slave or the
+subordinate of the one to whom he is forced to sell his labour force;
+be the buyer a private individual or the State--it would still be an
+odious tyranny."[1253] "Socialism will entail compulsory service on
+all able-bodied members of the community, or rather the State. For
+that is what we shall have; the State with its hosts of
+functionaries, its big pots and its little pots, and its never-ending
+officialism and petty tyrannies. Organisation must either be
+compulsory or free. If compulsory, you have the military spirit with
+all its attendant evils; if free, you have the Anarchist spirit with
+all the advantages that arise when the fetters that hinder individual
+initiative and development are removed."[1254]
+
+The foregoing should suffice to show that the Socialist State could
+organise work only by relying on forced labour and by creating the
+most unbearable despotism which the world has seen, or by "organising"
+the chaos of Anarchism, and it is difficult to say which of the two
+would be the more hideous solution.
+
+
+HOW WILL THE SOCIALIST STATE BE GOVERNED?
+
+Socialists tell us rather vaguely: "Socialism means the elevation of
+the struggle for existence from the material to the intellectual
+plane. Socialism will raise the struggle for existence into a sphere
+where competition shall be emulation, where the treasures are
+boundless and eternal, and where the abundant wealth of one does not
+cause the poverty of another."[1255] "State employment, when the State
+itself is only an organised democracy and class distinctions cease,
+means not slavery, but freedom."[1256] "Freedom and equality will then
+be no longer empty and cheap phrases, but will have a meaning; when
+all men are really free and equal, they will honour and advance one
+another."[1257] "In Socialistic administrations there are no
+employers, no superiors, no oppression; all are equals and enjoy equal
+rights."[1258] "Under Socialism all the work of the nation would be
+managed by the nation."[1259] "Under Socialism the State, as we have
+known the State in the past, will have disappeared; for under
+Socialism there will be no classes, but all the people will form one
+class, and the Government and organisation will be democratic, each
+individual having an equal voice in directing the affairs of the
+common life."[1260] "The State will no longer be the bureaucratic
+State of to-day, but a democratic State assisted directly by the whole
+people."[1261] "All adult members of the commune, without distinction
+of sex, take part in the necessary elections, and determine to what
+persons the conduct of affairs shall be entrusted. There is no such
+thing as a hierarchical system."[1262] "Appointments will be made from
+below. In the Post Office Department, for example, the letter carriers
+will elect their immediate superiors; these, we will say, the
+post-masters; and these, in their turn, the Post-Master
+General."[1263]
+
+In other and plainer words, the Socialist State would, according to
+the authorities quoted, be ruled by the same system by which it is
+ruled at present, although elections might be more numerous, and
+although the suffrage might be given a wider basis. Now if the system
+of government remains the same as it is at present, is there any
+reason for anticipating better results than those obtained at present?
+Will the elected administrators no longer place personal and party
+interests above national ones? And will not the infinitely greater
+range of administrative functions make it more difficult to exercise
+control and to allocate responsibilities, and thus make
+irresponsibility, favouritism, dishonesty, and the evasion of
+punishment more easy and more frequent? Is a larger number of voters
+likely to pick out abler administrators than a small one? Does not the
+elective system, according to the Socialists themselves, cause the
+scum to rise to the top, and result in the election of plausible
+windbags?[1264] Are the people's votes never won by any other means
+than the testimony of results? Will there no longer be the fascination
+of eloquence, the attraction of boundless promises, the glamour of
+prejudice, the tie of party, the pressure put by an Association upon
+its members? If amateurs show now little ability in administering a
+few comparatively simple things, is it likely that results will be
+better when they have to administer everything? Will not amateur
+government prove an absolute failure?
+
+Most thinking Socialists clearly foresee that the Socialist State of
+the future could not possibly be administered by amateurs; that it
+would have to be administered by experts, by permanent officials; that
+Socialism would mean the death-knell of elected governors, and
+therefore of democracy, as may be seen in Chapter XV. of this book.
+The philosopher of British Socialism tells us: "Socialism aims at the
+supersession of democracy, as of every other form of government. The
+will of the majority of an ideal democracy, a social democracy, must,
+as regards its special expressions, be subordinate to the general
+moral canon of a Socialist Commonwealth. That in affairs of
+management, of tactics, of administration, or in decisions requiring
+special knowledge, authority, in its nature dictatorial, is necessary,
+all must admit. There must be a controlling, an authoritative voice in
+direction; so much must be clear, one would think, to all practical or
+reasonable persons when once stated. The real point to determine is
+the nature and limits of that amount of dictatorial power which, we
+must admit, is essential in any organised community of which we can at
+present conceive. _Social Democracy_, while it means all _for_ the
+people, does not mean the impossible absurdity that everything should
+be directly regulated _by_ the people, _i.e._ by a direct popular
+vote."[1265] These views seem irrefutable, and it follows that not
+only for economic reasons, but for political reasons as well, the
+establishment of the Socialist State will lead to the establishment of
+a "dictatorial authority."
+
+If Socialism be introduced, the fall of democracy and the
+establishment of absolutism cannot possibly be avoided. Democratic
+States are ruled by public opinion. The voice of an individual does
+not carry very far. Therefore public opinion can be formed only by
+means of an independent Press. An independent Press is the strongest,
+one might almost say the only, guarantee of national liberty. As long
+as there are numerous independent papers owned by private people,
+papers which represent all shades of opinion, everyone who has
+something to say can always freely express his opinion in one set of
+papers or the other. A striking speech is read the next day by the
+whole nation; a striking injustice to a single individual, or a
+Government blunder, may be taken up by the whole nation. The
+disappearance of private property will necessarily mean the
+disappearance of the free Press, and therefore of public opinion. All
+newspapers would be owned, edited, and printed by the Government, and
+is any Government likely to assist a hostile opposition by printing
+its views, and to assist in bringing about a revolution, probably
+accompanied by bloodshed and its own destruction? Such a thing has
+never been. Such a thing will never be. People might be dissatisfied
+and be ill-treated by the Socialist Government; they might be starved
+to death or shot by the thousand; there might be risings and
+rebellions and civil war in some parts of the country; the fleet might
+be defeated and the colonies lost--yet not a word need appear in the
+Socialist Government Press.
+
+Some Socialists are childish enough to argue: "Though the printing
+press will be a collective institution, it will be available to all.
+Anyone, whatever unpopular opinions he may entertain, however hostile
+to the administrators he may be, will be entitled to have anything
+decent printed, provided he is ready to pay for the work done, or to
+guarantee, or induce his friends to guarantee, that the cost will be
+defrayed."[1266] "It would always be open to individuals or to groups
+of individuals to publish anything they pleased on covering the cost
+of publication. With the comparative affluence which would be enjoyed
+by each member of the community, anyone who really cared to reach the
+public ear would be able to do so by diminishing his expenditure in
+other directions."[1267]
+
+The Government would certainly neither print, nor circulate through
+its post-office and newsagents, matter which it would consider to be
+dangerous to its existence or seditious. The assertion that a private
+individual in the Socialist Commonwealth might at his own expense
+circulate his views throughout the country--there would be no more
+millionaires but only wage-earners--is like asserting that a
+bricklayer might with his savings pay off the British National Debt.
+
+Lacking an independent public opinion, elections could be managed by
+the officials through the official Press in their own interest;
+elections would become a sham, and would no doubt soon fall into
+disuse. The official class would become a caste of hereditary rulers
+governing millions of serfs.
+
+The foregoing makes it clear that in political as in economic matters
+the Socialist State must fall a prey to the most complete absolutism
+which the world has known, an absolutism which probably, through a
+series of revolutions and civil wars, would at last end in anarchy. At
+present a dissatisfied worker can change his employer, he can get
+justice in the Law Courts, and in extreme cases he can put his
+grievances before the nation. In the Socialist State there would be
+only one authority--the all-controlling and all-powerful State, or
+rather an all-controlling and all-powerful bureaucracy. The nation
+would be composed of two classes: permanent officials possessing
+absolute power, and ordinary citizens possessing neither power nor
+right; overseers and workers; slave-drivers and slaves; and the only
+way of escaping the tyranny of the State--for absolute and unchecked
+power has always led, and will always lead, to tyranny--would be by
+committing suicide. As in Rome under the rule of Nero and Caligula,
+suicide would be the only way to liberty.
+
+A leading Socialist wrote with unconscious humour: "The Utopist needs
+no knowledge of facts. Indeed such a knowledge is a hindrance. For him
+the laws of social evolution do not exist. He is a law unto himself;
+and his men are not the wayward, spasmodic, irregular organisms of
+daily life, but automata obeying the strings he pulls. In a word, he
+creates, he does not construct. He makes alike his materials and the
+laws within which they work, adapting them all to an ideal end. In
+describing a new Jerusalem the only limits to its perfection are the
+limits of the writer's imagination.... Humanity will rise to heights
+undreamed of now; and the most exquisite Utopias, as sung by the poet
+and idealist, shall to our children seem but dim and broken lights
+compared with their perfect day. All that we need are Courage,
+Prudence, and Faith. Faith above all."[1268] Every reader of this book
+will no doubt heartily agree with the latter remark. Socialists are
+wise to appeal rather to blind faith than to plain common-sense.
+
+The philosopher of British Socialism tells us: "Socialism is the great
+modern protest against _un_reality, against the delusive shams which
+now masquerade as verities."[1269] Another Socialist leader asserts:
+"Socialism is a scientific scheme of national government entirely
+wise, just, and practical."[1270] A third leader affirms: "Socialism
+is neither more nor less than the science of Sociology."[1271] The
+"Socialist Catechism" asks: "How may Socialists reply to the taunt
+that their scheme is impracticable? By quoting the opinion of John
+Stuart Mill that the difficulties of Socialism are greatly overrated;
+and they should declare that, so far from being an impracticable
+Utopian scheme, it is the necessary and inevitable result of the
+historical evolution of society."[1272]
+
+Socialism stands condemned, not so much by the criticism of its
+opponents as by the doctrines and proposals of its leaders, and these
+are the men who aspire to rule the universe and who claim: "We mean
+the establishment of a political power in place of the present
+class-State, which shall have for its conscious and definite aim the
+common ownership and control of the _whole_ of the world's industry,
+exchange, &c."[1273]
+
+I think the readers of the foregoing pages will be inclined to believe
+that Socialism is methodised insanity.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1203] Kautsky, _Social Revolution_, p. 41.
+
+[1204] Socialism, _For and Against_, p. 7.
+
+[1205] Clemenceau, in Jaurčs' _Practical Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[1206] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[1207] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 42.
+
+[1208] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 5.
+
+[1209] Macdonald, _Socialism and Society_, p. 126.
+
+[1210] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 7.
+
+[1211] Ford, _Woman and Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[1212] Macdonald, _Socialism and Society_, pp. 122, 123.
+
+[1213] Sir Oliver Lodge, _Public Service_ v. _Private Expenditure_, p.
+11.
+
+[1214] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, p. 37.
+
+[1215] _Ibid._ p. 251.
+
+[1216] See _ante_, Chapter XXIII.
+
+[1217] Herbert Spencer, _The Man versus the State_, p. 43.
+
+[1218] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[1219] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[1220] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 30.
+
+[1221] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 43.
+
+[1222] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 14.
+
+[1223] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[1224] _Ibid._ p. 18.
+
+[1225] Ward, _Religion and Labour_, pp. 7, 8.
+
+[1226] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 77.
+
+[1227] Kautsky, _The Social Republic_, p. 32.
+
+[1228] Hazell, _Summary Marx's Capital_, p. 6.
+
+[1229] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and the Future_, p. 193.
+
+[1230] Sir Oliver Lodge, _Public Service versus Private Expenditure_,
+p. 10.
+
+[1231] _New Age_, November 21, 1907.
+
+[1232] See _ante_, p. 61 ff.
+
+[1233] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 81.
+
+[1234] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 163, 164.
+
+[1235] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 91.
+
+[1236] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 170.
+
+[1237] Morris, _Communism_, pp. 14, 15.
+
+[1238] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 40.
+
+[1239] _Forward_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[1240] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future_, pp. 183, 184.
+
+[1241] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, pp. 16, 17.
+
+[1242] Sidney Webb, _Socialism True and False_, pp. 17, 18.
+
+[1243] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 7.
+
+[1244] _The Economics of Direct Employment_, p. 6.
+
+[1245] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, pp. 102, 103.
+
+[1246] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 169.
+
+[1247] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 194.
+
+[1248] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 167.
+
+[1249] Ward, _The Ideal City_, p. 7.
+
+[1250] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 167.
+
+[1251] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 91.
+
+[1252] _Socialist_, December 1907.
+
+[1253] Kropotkin, _Anarchism, its Philosophy and Ideal_, p. 15.
+
+[1254] _Freedom_, October 1907.
+
+[1255] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 1.
+
+[1256] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, p. 10.
+
+[1257] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 14.
+
+[1258] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 199.
+
+[1259] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[1260] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[1261] Jaurčs, _Practical Socialism_, p. 6.
+
+[1262] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 181.
+
+[1263] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 126.
+
+[1264] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, pp. 3, 4.
+
+[1265] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, pp. 75, 76.
+
+[1266] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 135.
+
+[1267] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 159.
+
+[1268] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 149, 169.
+
+[1269] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. ix.
+
+[1270] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[1271] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, Preface.
+
+[1272] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_.
+
+[1273] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 9.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXVII
+
+CONCLUSION
+
+
+The leading Socialists claim that Socialism is at the same time a
+scientific doctrine and a practical policy. A perusal of this book
+should suffice to prove that it is neither the one nor the other. On
+its scientific side it consists of twenty catch-phrases which are very
+effective for propaganda purposes, but which are contrary to general
+experience and to common-sense. On its practical side it consists of a
+number of fantastic proposals which are likewise contrary to general
+experience and to common-sense.
+
+Socialism has two faces. The one which is turned towards the cultured
+and towards the non-Socialists of the middle class constantly asserts
+that Socialism is a scientific and perfect system of well-ordered
+government and co-operation, which will evolve order and harmony out
+of the chaos of individualism and of competition, and which will raise
+men to the highest level of perfection. The other, which is turned
+towards the masses, and which is by far the more important, is purely
+predatory in character. It appeals to all the passions of the
+multitude. It denounces law, religion, charity, thrift, temperance,
+and all existing institutions. It preaches envy, hatred, greed,
+selfishness, violence, civil war, and general plunder. It sets class
+against class, and creates among its supporters a frame of mind which
+makes not for harmony, order, and co-operation, but for disorder,
+revolution, and anarchy.
+
+The followers of Socialism do not see in it a science. "With the
+speculative side of Socialism the average man has but a small concern;
+it is its common-sense which appeals to him. By inherited instinct we
+are all communists at heart."[1274] The attraction of Socialism to the
+masses lies in its promise of the spoliation of the rich and of the
+general division of their wealth. It is true that Socialists
+habitually and very emphatically protest that Socialism is not a
+system of robbery and of general division. It is true that Socialists
+merely propose that all private property should be transferred to the
+State by expropriation--which is a euphemism for confiscation--and
+that the State should manage it for the general good of the masses.
+However, that is a distinction without a difference. Property is
+valuable because of the income which it yields. Therefore it comes for
+all practicable purposes to the same, whether the Socialist leaders
+propose dividing all the private property or all the income derived
+from that property. A prominent Socialist writer has asked: "Is not
+honesty--the sense of right of possession in the fruits of our
+labour--the very basis of Socialism?"[1275] Regretfully one must
+answer that question with a very emphatic "No."
+
+Socialism is not a system of organisation and of national
+co-operation, but merely a plan of spoliation and of general division.
+That may clearly be seen from the fact that the Socialist leaders have
+not the slightest desire to create a Socialistic model commonwealth,
+and thus demonstrate the practical value of their highly speculative
+doctrines, in a new country where Socialism could be introduced
+peacefully, easily, and without a revolution, where co-operation and
+exchange would be comparatively simple because wants are simple, the
+commodities produced are few, and the opposition of vested interests
+would be _nil_. In spite of all these great advantages, the Socialist
+leaders prefer introducing Socialism into old countries where the
+confiscation of the existing property seems a shorter way to wealth
+than work, and where confiscation will have the most satisfactory
+results to the despoilers.
+
+We have seen that the various Socialistic organisations agree on
+hardly one point in their constructive policy. However, they
+absolutely agree in their main purpose--spoliation. On that point
+there is absolute unanimity among all the British Socialists, and they
+condemn State Socialism (see Chapter XXXII.) because State Socialism
+would not mean confiscation and general division. Besides, it would
+not enable the Socialist leaders to overturn the State and to seize
+the reins of Government. British Socialism is purely destructive in
+character, and if Socialism should ever be established in Great
+Britain it would lead not to national co-operation, but to civil war
+among the various Socialistic sections for the spoils, and to a series
+of sanguinary _coups d'état_ similar to those which arose out of the
+great French Revolution.
+
+The "scientific" proposal of transferring all private property to the
+State, and of using that property for the common good, merely
+circumscribes the word and act of confiscation and of general
+division. Therefore we may say that Socialism has no scientific basis,
+unless we choose to call science a collection of fallacies expressed
+in involved terms so as to deceive the simple. Karl Marx was not a
+scientist but a professional demagogue and revolutionist, and his
+merit from the Socialists' point of view consists only in this, that
+he elaborated a formula of roundabout spoliation and general division,
+which he took from his Anarchist predecessors, and gave it a much
+needed, though rather transparent, cloak of scientific respectability.
+
+Socialism is, in the first place, a business proposition. Therefore,
+if it were practical, it should appeal particularly to business men.
+However, it is noteworthy that the loudest champions of British
+Socialism are not business men, of whom but few are to be found in the
+Socialist ranks, but pushing writers in search of self-advertisement,
+whose special domain is the highly spiced and the sensational, writers
+who, knowing that many people mistake eccentricity for genius and
+paradoxical absurdity for brilliancy, have discarded common-sense, let
+their imaginations run riot, and outbid one another for notoriety.
+
+The complaints of the Socialists about the unequal distribution of
+wealth are as old as is humanity itself. Since the earliest times
+demagogues have endeavoured to obtain a following by working upon the
+misery, envy, short-sightedness, and passions of the poor, by
+promising them equality and boundless wealth to be obtained by the
+simple process of seizing and dividing up the property of the
+well-to-do. The identical arguments and proposals which are now put
+forward in the name of Marx, and of modern "scientific" Socialism, as
+something new and original may be found throughout literature since
+the very dawn of history.[1276] However, history teaches us that,
+although countless Socialistic experiments have been made, all
+attempts at enriching the poor by spoliation and at creating an
+artificial equality among men have proved a failure. They have
+invariably ended in national ruin, and have left the masses poorer and
+more miserable than ever. The reason of this universal failure is
+obvious. Man cannot reconstruct Nature. He may violate, but cannot
+alter, the laws of Nature. Inequality rules throughout Nature, and it
+seems as little possible to equalise the fortunes, as it is to
+equalise the bodily and mental powers, of men. We all are the slaves
+of Nature. The inequality of natural gifts and the division of labour
+are the principal causes of the division of men into classes and of
+the unequal distribution of wealth. Nature is only governed by obeying
+her. We can certainly diminish poverty, but we cannot, for any length
+of time, maintain an artificial equality among naturally unequal men.
+
+The first duty of the State, as of the individual, is
+self-preservation. British Socialism, being by those teachings which
+it addresses to its supporters a revolutionary doctrine in the worst
+sense of the term, and therefore a purely destructive factor, must
+unconditionally be resisted and combated. However, at the same time
+all that can be done must be done to alleviate the distress of the
+British masses, which is undoubtedly very great, and which makes them
+exceedingly receptive to the revolutionary doctrines of Socialism. As
+it would require too much space to deal with the social problem in
+Great Britain in its entirety, only a few of the most important points
+can be touched upon.
+
+The greatest scourge of the British worker is no doubt irregular and
+ill-paid employment. The first step to improve his position is
+therefore to improve employment. Hence the most urgent reform is the
+revision of Great Britain's economic policy. Great Britain's present
+economic policy, Free Trade, was based upon the supposition that Great
+Britain, as Cobden prophesied, was, and always would remain, the
+workshop of the world; that other countries were compelled to buy
+British manufactures because British manufactures were as necessary to
+them as foreign foodstuffs are now to Great Britain. In 1846, when
+Free Trade was introduced, there was some reason for that supposition.
+Before the advent of electricity manufacturing was based exclusively
+upon coal. Great Britain's absolute predominance in manufacturing for
+the markets of the whole world immediately before the introduction of
+Free Trade may therefore best be seen from the following table:
+
+PRODUCTION OF COAL IN 1845[1277]
+
+               Quantity produced.      Percentage of
+                       Tons           world's production
+  Great Britain      31,500,000             64.2
+  Belgium             4,960,077             10.1
+  United States       4,400,000              8.9
+  France              4,141,617              8.4
+  Prussian States     3,500,000              7.0
+  Austrian States       659,340              1.4
+                     ----------             ----
+                     49,161,034              100
+
+The above table shows that Great Britain produced two-thirds of the
+world's coal, and the coal of most other countries was supposed to be
+unsuitable for manufacturing purposes. However, Great Britain produced
+not only two-thirds of the world's coal, but she produced likewise
+two-thirds of the world's iron, she consumed two-thirds of the world's
+cotton, and she possessed two-thirds of the world's shipping. Her
+railway mileage was greater than that of the whole Continent of
+Europe.[1278]
+
+Times have changed. Great Britain is no longer the workshop of the
+world. British manufactures are no longer indispensable to foreign
+countries. In the present age of steel, the production of steel is the
+best index of a nation's manufacturing eminence, and how greatly
+conditions have changed, and are still changing, to England's
+disadvantage may be seen from the following figures:
+
+OUTPUT OF STEEL
+
+         United States.  Germany.       Great Britain.
+            Tons            Tons           Tons
+  1890    4,277,000       2,127,000      3,679,000
+  1906   23,246,000      11,135,000      6,462,000
+
+Great Britain, which formerly produced nine-tenths of the world's
+steel, produces now little more than one-tenth of the world's steel.
+
+As Great Britain has to buy vast quantities of food and raw material
+from foreign countries, she must sell to foreign countries vast
+quantities of manufactured goods. However, market after market is
+being closed to her industries by ever-rising tariff walls, and the
+profits from her exports have been greatly diminished through foreign
+competition. Her home market has been reduced through the decay of her
+agriculture and the shrinkage of her agricultural population, and it
+is systematically spoiled by combinations of foreign manufacturers.
+Foreign syndicates determine not only the price of British wheat and
+meat, but of British iron and other manufactures too, and they
+endeavour to ruin the British industries completely. Great Britain,
+far from being the world's manufacturer, has become the world's
+dumping ground. From the richest country in the world she is rapidly
+becoming one of the poorer countries of the world. Her industries are
+suffering, and the result is bad times, low wages, irregular
+employment, unemployment, poverty, and distress. It is noteworthy
+that, on an average, unemployment among the skilled workers in
+free-trade Great Britain is always five times greater than it is in
+protectionist Germany;[1279] that British emigration per million is
+eleven times larger than German emigration; that German savings-banks
+deposits are four times larger than British savings-banks deposits,
+and that the former increase ten times faster than the latter.[1280]
+
+What can be done to improve the position of the British workers?
+Emigration on the largest scale has proved a palliative, but no
+remedy. During the last twenty years almost five million people have
+left Great Britain. Yet the labour market is as over-stocked, and
+unemployment and poverty are as great, as ever. Besides, the United
+States and the British colonies may not always be able to absorb the
+vast and ever-growing numbers of British unemployed workers.
+Employment and wages depend upon the prosperity of industries, and the
+prosperity of industries depends on a sufficiency of markets. The
+British industries have not a sufficiency of markets. Therefore the
+British population suffers from irregular employment, unemployment,
+and consequent want and misery; and want and misery among the British
+masses are likely to continue increasing and ever increasing until
+Great Britain adapts her economic policy to the altered circumstances
+of the time, protects the industries by which her workers live, and
+secures a sufficient outlet for their productions by preferential
+arrangements with the self-governing Dominions. Under the shelter of
+Protection at home and with the aid of preferential arrangements
+throughout the empire, Great Britain will be able vastly to extend her
+manufacturing industries. Great Britain has unrivalled facilities for
+manufacturing. Whilst the manufacturing centres of the United States,
+Germany, France, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Italy, and other countries
+lie far inland near their coalfields, Great Britain has the unique
+advantage of being able to manufacture on the seashore, where coal,
+iron, great manufacturing towns, and excellent harbours lie in close
+proximity. The potentialities of the British industries under fair
+conditions and under the wise care of a fostering Government are
+boundless.
+
+Under the shelter of Protection the rural industries of Great Britain
+may be revived, especially if the British peasantry be re-created. A
+hundred years ago the great agricultural authority, Arthur Young,
+wrote: "The magic of property turns sand into gold. Give a man a bleak
+rock, and he will turn it into a garden. Give him a nine years' lease
+of a garden, and he will convert it into a desert." Since the time
+when these words were written most European countries have created a
+freehold peasantry by buying out the landed proprietors and settling
+the rural labourers on the land, and Great Britain will be wise in
+following their example.
+
+The tripartite question of Fiscal Protection for the home market, of
+an Imperial Customs Union, and of Imperial Federation is not a party
+question. It is a question of life or death for Great Britain. It may
+soon become a question of prosperity or starvation for the masses.
+Great Britain stands at the parting of the ways. She must either
+protect and re-create her industries, federate with her colonies, and
+make the British Empire a reality, or sink into insignificance, and
+history knows no instance of a great nation becoming a small one
+without the most intense suffering to the masses of the people. Great
+Britain must either adopt that constructive and protective national
+policy which the greatest statesmen and Empire builders of modern
+times--Richelieu, Cromwell, Colbert, Lord Chatham, George Washington,
+Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, Stein, and Bismarck--have
+pursued, or she will share the fate of the great commercial world
+empires of the past, from Phoenicia to the Netherlands. She must
+either follow the policy of Mr. Chamberlain, build up the Empire and
+make it strong and prosperous, or that of revolutionary demagogues,
+who will wreck the Empire and drag Great Britain through plunder and
+ruin to destruction and anarchy.
+
+The experience of other industrial nations allows us to conclude that
+a wisely framed protective tariff will save the British industries and
+improve employment and wages. But better wages alone will not improve
+the position of the workers. A large part of the British working class
+must alter their personal habits, and especially their drinking
+habits. At present every rise in wages leads immediately to a great
+increase in the Drink Bill, and therefore benefits rather the brewer
+than the worker. "The strongest answer to the theory that poverty
+causes drink is the statistical fact that as wages rise general
+drunkenness follows, insanity increases, and criminal disorders due to
+drink keep pace with all three. Wherever one seeks for information
+dispassionately, one sees that drink does cause poverty to a greater
+extent, overwhelmingly so, than that poverty causes drink. Poverty is
+due to intemperance in varying degrees from twenty-five to fifty-one
+per cent, of cases and areas investigated."[1281] "The Committee on
+Physical Deterioration in 1904 declared that if the drink question
+were removed three-fourths of the difficulty with regard to poverty
+and deterioration would disappear with it."[1282] The drinking section
+of the working class spends _18l. 15s. 4d._ per family on drink,[1283]
+a sum much larger than that spent on rent. "There are two great causes
+of physical deterioration--these are dirt and drink. The former is
+responsible for nearly every form of disease. The latter is the direct
+cause of the vast number of defects."[1284] "The most urgently needed
+public health reform of the present day is not so much one of
+environment as one of personal life."[1285]
+
+Many British workmen are incredibly wasteful. When one visits
+public-houses and working-men's clubs, when one goes to racecourses,
+football or other matches, and music-halls, the British workers seem
+to be the richest in the world. When one looks at their homes, their
+clothes, and especially their savings, they seem to be the poorest in
+the world. British working men drink, waste, and gamble to a much
+greater extent than foreign working men. Therefore not only the higher
+paid American workers, but also the lower paid French, German, and
+Swiss workers, are better housed, better clothed, and better fed--and
+are therefore better off and healthier--than British workers.[1286]
+Besides, as their savings are much larger they are better able to
+stand a short spell of ill-luck or of bad times. Whether a working man
+is prosperous or poor, happy or unhappy, depends--under fair
+conditions of employment, which Protection should create--perhaps more
+on his personal habits and on those of his wife than on the actual
+amount he receives in wages. Social reform, to be effective, must be
+assisted in the home. The worker must aid the social reformer. Outside
+assistance alone will little benefit wasteful and improvident men who
+refuse to help themselves.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1274] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, pp. 33, 34.
+
+[1275] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 96.
+
+[1276] See Mencius' Works in Legge's _Chinese Classics_; Euripides,
+_The Suppliants_; Aristotle, _Politics_, vii. 5; Aristophanes,
+_Ecclesiazusae_ and _Plutus_; Plutarch, _Tiberius Gracchus_, 9;
+Livius, ii. 32; Sallust, _Catiline's Conspiracy_, 20, 23, 37-39;
+Virgil, _Georgics_, i. 125; Tibullus, i. 3, 35 Propertius, ii. 13,
+iii. 5, 11; Seneca, _Epistles_, 90, &c.
+
+[1277] Taylor, _Statistics of Coal_, p. xxi.
+
+[1278] See _Encyclopćdia Britannica_, 8th edition, 1853-1860,
+articles: Cotton, Iron, Railways; Meyer, _Konversations Lexikon_,
+1839-1855, article: Grossbritannien; Porter, _Progress of the Nation_,
+1847; MacCulloch, _British Empire_, 1846; MacCulloch, _Dictionary of
+Commerce_, 1847; Macgregor, _Commercial Statistics_, 1844-1850, &c.
+
+[1279] See _Board of Trade Labour Gazette_ and _Reichs Arbeitsblatt_.
+
+[1280] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, 546 ff.
+
+[1281] Burns, _Labour and Drink_, pp. 15, 18.
+
+[1282] Newman, _The Health of the State_, p. 189.
+
+[1283] Whittaker, _Drink Problem_, p. 10.
+
+[1284] McMillan, _The Child and the State_, p. 4.
+
+[1285] Newman, _Health of the State_, p. 194.
+
+[1286] See _Reports of the Mosely Industrial Commission to the United
+States_; _The Brassworkers of Berlin and of Birmingham_; _The
+Gainsborough Commission, Life and Labour in Germany_; Horsfall, _The
+Improvement of the Dwellings--The Example of Germany_; Marr, _Housing
+Conditions in Manchester_; _City of Birmingham, Report of the Housing
+Committee_; Steele, _The Working Classes in France_; Rowntree and
+Sherwell, _The Temperance Problem_; Rowntree, _Poverty_; the
+publication of Charles Booth, &c.
+
+
+
+
+APPENDIX
+
+OFFICIAL PROGRAMMES OF THE SOCIALISTIC ORGANISATIONS
+
+
+SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC FEDERATION
+
+    _Programme and Rules as revised previous to the Annual
+        Conference held at the Labour Institute, Bradford, Easter
+        1906_
+
+_Object._--The Social-Democratic Federation is a part of the
+International Social-Democracy. It believes:--
+
+1. That the emancipation of the working class can only be achieved
+through the socialisation of the means of production, distribution,
+and exchange, and their subsequent control by the organised community
+in the interests of the whole people.
+
+2. That, as the proletariat is the last class to achieve freedom, its
+emancipation will mean the emancipation of the whole of mankind,
+without distinction of race, nationality, creed, or sex.
+
+3. That this emancipation can only be the work of the working class
+itself,[1287] organised nationally and internationally into a distinct
+political party, consciously striving after the realisation of its
+ideals: and, finally,
+
+4. That, in order to ensure greater material and moral facilities for
+the working class to organise itself and to carry on the class war,
+the following reforms must immediately be carried through:--
+
+
+IMMEDIATE REFORMS
+
+_Political._--Abolition of the Monarchy.
+
+Democratisation of the Governmental machinery, viz. Abolition of the
+House of Lords, Payment of Members of Legislative and Administrative
+bodies. Payment of Official Expenses of Elections out of the Public
+Funds, Adult Suffrage, Proportional Representation, Triennial
+Parliaments, Second Ballot, Initiative, and Referendum. Foreigners to
+be granted rights of citizenship after two years' residence in the
+country, without any fees. Canvassing to be made illegal. All
+elections to take place on one day, such day to be made a legal
+holiday and all premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquors
+to be closed.
+
+Legislation by the people in such wise that no legislative proposal
+shall become law until ratified by the majority of the people.
+
+Legislative and Administrative independence for all parts of the
+Empire.
+
+_Financial and Fiscal._--Repudiation of the National Debt.
+
+Abolition of all indirect taxation and the institution of a cumulative
+tax on all incomes and inheritances exceeding _300l._
+
+_Administrative._--Extension of the principle of Local
+Self-Government.
+
+Systematisation and co-ordination of the local administrative bodies.
+
+Election of all administrators and administrative bodies by Equal
+Direct Adult Suffrage.
+
+_Educational._--Elementary education to be free, secular, industrial,
+and compulsory for all classes. The age of obligatory school
+attendance to be raised to 16.
+
+Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher education,
+both general and technical, and all such education to be free.
+
+State Maintenance for all attending State schools.
+
+Abolition of school rates; the cost of education in all State schools
+to be borne by the National Exchequer.
+
+_Public Monopolies and Services._--Nationalisation of the land and the
+organisation of labour in agriculture and industry under public
+ownership and control on co-operative principles.
+
+Nationalisation of the Trusts.
+
+Nationalisation of Railways, Docks, and Canals, and all great means of
+transit.
+
+Public ownership and control of Gas, Electric Light, and Water
+supplies, as well as of Tramway, Omnibus, and other locomotive
+services.
+
+Public ownership and control of the food and coal supply.
+
+The establishment of State and municipal banks and pawnshops and
+public restaurants.
+
+Public ownership and control of the lifeboat service.
+
+Public ownership and control of hospitals, dispensaries, cemeteries,
+and crematoria.
+
+Public ownership and control of the drink traffic.
+
+_Labour._--A legislative eight-hour working day, or 48 hours per week,
+to be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to be
+inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law.
+
+Absolute freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee
+against any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or
+infringe it.
+
+No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until 16 years of
+age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law.
+
+Public provision of useful work at not less than trade union rates of
+wages for the unemployed.
+
+Free State Insurance against sickness and accident, and free and
+adequate State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers.
+Public assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights.
+
+The legislative enactment of a minimum wage of _30s._ for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work.
+
+_Social._--Abolition of the present workhouse system, and reformed
+administration of the Poor Law on a basis of national co-operation.
+
+Compulsory construction by public bodies of healthy dwellings for the
+people; such dwellings to be let at rents to cover the cost of
+construction and maintenance alone, and not to cover the cost of the
+land.
+
+The administration of justice and legal advice to be free to all;
+justice to be administered by judges chosen by the people; appeal in
+criminal cases; compensation for those innocently accused, condemned,
+and imprisoned; abolition of imprisonment for contempt of court in
+relation to non-payment of debt in the case of workers earning less
+than _2l._ per week; abolition of capital punishment.
+
+_Miscellaneous._--The disestablishment and disendowment of all State
+Churches.
+
+The abolition of standing armies, and the establishment of national
+citizen forces. The people to decide on peace and war.
+
+The establishment of international courts of arbitration.
+
+The abolition of courts-martial; all offences against discipline to be
+transferred to the jurisdiction of civil courts.
+
+
+INDEPENDENT LABOUR PARTY
+
+_Constitution and Rules. 1907-8_
+
+_Object._--An Industrial Commonwealth founded upon the Socialisation
+of Land and Capital.
+
+_Methods._--The education of the community in the principles of
+Socialism.
+
+The Industrial and Political Organisation of the Workers.
+
+The Independent Representation of Socialist Principles on all elective
+bodies.
+
+_Programme._--The true object of industry being the production of the
+requirements of life, the responsibility should rest with the
+community collectively, therefore:
+
+The land, being the storehouse of all the necessaries of life, should
+be declared and treated as public property.
+
+The capital necessary for industrial operations should be owned and
+used collectively.
+
+Work, and wealth resulting therefrom, should be equitably distributed
+over the population.
+
+As a means to this end, we demand the enactment of the following
+measures:
+
+1. A maximum of 48 hours working week, with the retention of all
+existing holidays, and Labour Day, May 1, secured by law.
+
+2. The provision of work to all capable adult applicants at recognised
+trade union rates, with a statutory minimum of sixpence per hour.
+
+In order to remuneratively employ the applicants, Parish, District,
+Borough, and County Councils to be invested with powers to:
+
+      (_a_) Organise and undertake such industries as they may
+          consider desirable.
+
+      (_b_) Compulsorily acquire land; purchase, erect, or
+          manufacture buildings, stock, or other articles for
+          carrying on such industries.
+
+      (_c_) Levy rates on the rental values of the district, and
+          borrow money on the security of such rates for any of the
+          above purposes.
+
+3. State pensions for every person over 50 years of age, and adequate
+provision for all widows, orphans, sick, and disabled workers.
+
+4. Free secular, moral, primary, secondary, and university education,
+with free maintenance while at school or university.
+
+5. The raising of the age of child labour, with a view to its ultimate
+extinction.
+
+6. Municipalisation and public control of the drink traffic.
+
+7. Municipalisation and public control of all Hospitals and
+Infirmaries.
+
+8. Abolition of indirect taxation and the gradual transference of all
+public burdens on to unearned incomes with a view to their ultimate
+extinction.
+
+The Independent Labour Party is in favour of adult suffrage, with full
+political rights and privileges for women, and the immediate extension
+of the franchise to women on the same terms as granted to men; also
+triennial Parliaments and second ballot.
+
+
+THE LABOUR PARTY
+
+has no official programme. A semi-official programme, contained in a
+statement of its Secretary, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., will be found
+on page 425 of this book.
+
+
+THE FABIAN SOCIETY
+
+_Basis._--The Fabian Society consists of Socialists.
+
+It therefore aims at the reorganisation of Society by the emancipation
+of Land and Industrial Capital from individual and class ownership,
+and the vesting of them in the community for the general benefit. In
+this way only can the natural and acquired advantages of the country
+be equitably shared by the whole people.
+
+The Society accordingly works for the extinction of private property
+in Land and of the consequent individual appropriation, in the form of
+Rent, of the price paid for permission to use the earth, as well as
+for the advantages of superior soils and sites.
+
+The Society, further, works for the transfer to the community of the
+administration of such industrial Capital as can conveniently be
+managed socially. For, owing to the monopoly of the means of
+production in the past, industrial inventions and the transformation
+of surplus income into Capital have mainly enriched the proprietary
+class, the worker being now dependent on that class for leave to earn
+a living.
+
+If these measures be carried out, without compensation (though not
+without such relief to expropriated individuals as may seem fit to the
+community), Rent and Interest will be added to the reward of labour,
+the idle class now living on the labour of others will necessarily
+disappear, and practical equality of opportunity will be maintained by
+the spontaneous action of economic forces with much less interference
+with personal liberty than the present system entails.
+
+For the attainment of these ends the Fabian Society looks to the
+spread of Socialist opinions, and the social and political changes
+consequent thereon, including the establishment of equal citizenship
+for men and women. It seeks to achieve these ends by the general
+dissemination of knowledge as to the relation between the individual
+and Society in its economic, ethical, and political aspects.
+
+
+THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF GREAT BRITAIN
+
+_Object._--The establishment of a system of society based upon the
+common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments
+for producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of the
+whole community.
+
+DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES
+
+The Socialist Party of Great Britain holds that society as at present
+constituted is based upon the ownership of the means of living (_i.e._
+land, factories, railways, &c.) by the capitalist or master class, and
+the consequent enslavement of the working class, by whose labour alone
+wealth is produced.
+
+That in society, therefore, there is an antagonism of interests,
+manifesting itself as a class struggle, between those who possess but
+do not produce, and those who produce but do not possess.
+
+That this antagonism can be abolished only by the emancipation of the
+working class from the domination of the master class, by the
+conversion into the common property of society of the means of
+production and distribution, and their democratic control by the whole
+people.
+
+That as in the order of social evolution the working class is the last
+class to achieve its freedom, the emancipation of the working class
+will involve the emancipation of all mankind, without distinction of
+race or sex.
+
+That this emancipation must be the work of the working class itself.
+
+That as the machinery of government, including the armed forces of the
+nation, exists only to conserve the monopoly by the capitalist class
+of the wealth taken from the workers, the working class must organise
+consciously and politically for the conquest of the powers of
+government, national and local, in order that this machinery,
+including these forces, may be converted from an instrument of
+oppression into the agent of emancipation, and the overthrow of
+privilege, aristocratic and plutocratic.
+
+That as all political parties are but the expression of class
+interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically
+opposed to the interests of all sections of the master class, the
+party seeking working-class emancipation must be hostile to every
+other party.
+
+The Socialist Party of Great Britain, therefore, enters the field of
+political action determined to wage war against all other political
+parties, whether alleged labour or avowedly capitalist, and calls upon
+the members of the working class of this country to muster under its
+banner to the end that a speedy termination may be wrought to the
+system which deprives them of the fruits of their labour, and that
+poverty may give place to comfort, privilege to equality, and slavery
+to freedom.
+
+
+PLATFORM OF THE SOCIALIST LABOUR PARTY
+
+The Socialist Labour Party is a political organisation seeking to
+establish political and social freedom for all, and seeing in the
+conquest by the Socialist Working Class of all the governmental and
+administrative powers of the nation the means to the attainment of
+that end.
+
+It affirms its belief that political and social freedom are not two
+separate and unrelated ideas, but are two sides of the one great
+principle, each being incomplete without the other.
+
+The course of society politically has been from warring but democratic
+tribes within each nation to a united government under an absolutely
+undemocratic monarchy. Within this monarchy again developed revolts
+against its power, revolts at first seeking to limit its prerogatives
+only, then demanding the inclusion of certain classes in the
+governing power, then demanding the right of the subject to criticise
+and control the power of the monarch, and finally, in the most
+advanced countries this movement culminated in the total abolition of
+the monarchical institution, and the transformation of the subject
+into the citizen.
+
+In industry a corresponding development has taken place. The
+independent producer, owning his own tools and knowing no master, has
+given way before the more effective productive powers of huge capital,
+concentrated in the hands of the great capitalist. The latter,
+recognising no rights in his workers, ruled as an absolute monarch in
+his factory. But within the realm of capital developed a revolt
+against the power of the capitalist. This revolt, taking the form of
+trade unionism, has pursued in the industrial field the same line of
+development as the movement for political freedom has pursued in the
+sphere of national government. It first contented itself with protests
+against excessive exactions, against all undue stretchings of the
+power of the capitalist; then its efforts broadened out to demands for
+restrictions upon the absolute character of such power, _i.e._, by
+claiming for trade unions the right to make rules for the workers in
+the workshop; then it sought to still further curb the capitalist's
+power by shortening the working day, and so limiting the period during
+which the toiler may be exploited. Finally, it seeks by Boards of
+Arbitration to establish an equivalent in the industrial world for
+that compromise in the political world by which, in constitutional
+countries, the monarch retains his position by granting a parliament
+to divide with him the duties of governing, and so hides while
+securing his power. And as in the political history of the race the
+logical development of progress was found in the abolition of the
+institution of monarchy, and not in its mere restriction, so in
+industrial history the culminating point to which all efforts must at
+last converge lies in the abolition of the capitalist class, and not
+in the mere restriction of its powers.
+
+The Socialist Labour Party, recognising these two phases of human
+development, unites them in its programme, and seeks to give them a
+concrete embodiment by its demand for a Socialist Republic.
+
+It recognises in all past history a preparation for this achievement,
+and in the industrial tendencies of to-day it hails the workings out
+of those laws of human progress which bring that object within our
+reach.
+
+The concentration of capital in the form of trusts at the same time as
+it simplifies the task we propose that society shall undertake, viz.
+the dispossession of the capitalist class, and the administration of
+all land and instruments of industry as social property, of which all
+shah be co-heirs and owners.
+
+As to-day the organised power of the State theoretically guarantees to
+every individual his political rights, so in the Socialist Republic
+the power and productive forces of organised society will stand
+between every individual and want, guaranteeing that right to life
+without which all other rights are but mockery.
+
+Short of the complete dispossession of the capitalist class which this
+implies there is no hope for the workers.
+
+SPEED THE DAY.
+
+
+THE CHRISTIAN SOCIAL UNION
+
+The Union consists of members of the Church of England who have the
+following objects at heart:--
+
+1. To claim for the Christian law the ultimate authority to rule
+social practice.
+
+2. To study in common how to apply the moral truths and principles of
+Christianity to the social and economic difficulties of the present
+time.
+
+3. To present Christ in practical life as the living Master and King,
+the enemy of wrong and selfishness, the power of righteousness and
+love.
+
+
+THE CHURCH SOCIALIST LEAGUE
+
+_Principles._--The Church has a mission to the whole of human life,
+Social and Individual, Material and Spiritual.
+
+2. The Church can best fulfil its social mission by acting together in
+its corporate capacity.
+
+3. To this end the members of the League accept the principles of
+Socialism.
+
+_Object._--To secure the corporate action of the Church on these
+principles.
+
+_Method._--1. To cultivate by the regular use of prayer and sacraments
+the life of brotherhood.
+
+2. Members undertake to help each other in fulfilling the object of
+the League by speaking and lecturing and in other ways.
+
+3. Members shall co-operate as far as possible to secure the
+consideration of social questions at their various Ruridecanal and
+Diocesan Conferences and the election of Socialists on these and other
+representative bodies.
+
+4. Members shall work for the disestablishment of the patron and the
+substitution of the Church in each parish in conjunction with the
+Church in the diocese in the patron's place.
+
+5. To secure the representation of the wage-earning classes upon all
+the representative bodies of the Church.
+
+
+GUILD OF ST. MATTHEW
+
+_Objects._--1. To get rid, by every possible means, of the existing
+prejudices, especially on the part of "Secularists," against the
+Church, her sacraments and her doctrines: and to endeavour to "justify
+God to the people."
+
+2. To promote frequent and reverent worship in the Holy Communion, and
+a better observance of the teaching of the Church of England as set
+forth in the Book of Common Prayer.
+
+3. To promote the study of social and political questions in the light
+of the Incarnation.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1287] This paragraph is not to be understood as debarring individual
+members of the possessing classes from participating in the work of the
+movement.
+
+
+
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY
+
+OF BOOKS, PAMPHLETS, PERIODICALS, REPORTS, AND PAPERS QUOTED IN THIS
+VOLUME
+
+
+_Abolition of Poor Law Guardians._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+ADAMS, FRANCIS: "_The Mass of Christ._" Labour Press Society.
+  Manchester.
+
+_The Advance of Socialism._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_After Bread--Education._ Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+_Allotments, and How to Get Them._ Fabian Society. London. 1894.
+
+_An Appeal to Soldiers._ (Leaflet.) Social Democratic Federation.
+  London.
+
+_Are You a Socialist?_ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.
+  1907.
+
+AVELING, E.M.: _The Working-class Movement in England._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1896.
+
+BAKOUNINE: _Dieu et l'État._ Paris. 1895.
+
+_Ball, John, Priest and Prophet of the Peasants' Revolt._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London.
+
+BALL, SYDNEY: _The Moral Aspects of Socialism._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1896.
+
+BARKER, J. ELLIS: _Modern Germany._ Smith, Elder & Co. London. 1907.
+
+_Battersea Vanguard._ (Monthly Newspaper.) Battersea Socialist
+  Council, Battersea. London.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _Essays in Socialism._ Grant Richards. London.
+  1907.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _Ethics of Socialism._ Swan Sonnenschein. London.
+  1902.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _Outlooks from the New Standpoint._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London. 1903.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _The Religion of Socialism._ Swan Sonnenschein.
+  London. 1902.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _A Short History of the Paris Commune._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT, and H. QUELCH: _New Catechism of Socialism._
+  Twentieth Century Press. 1907.
+
+BEBEL, AUGUST: _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future._ William
+  Reeves. London.
+
+BENSON, T.D.: _Socialism._ Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+BENSON, T.D.: _Socialism and Service._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+BENSON, T.D.: _Woman, the Communist._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+_A Bill to Provide Work through Public Authorities for Unemployed
+  Persons._ Independent Labour Party. London. 1907.
+
+_Birmingham Housing Committee, Report._ Jones Ltd. Birmingham. 1906.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Britain for the British._ Clarion Press. London.
+  1902.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Clarion Ballads._ Clarion Newspaper Co. London.
+  1896.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _"Competition": a Plain Lesson for the Workers._
+  Clarion Press. London. 1906.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _God and My Neighbour._ Clarion Press. London. 1907.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Land Nationalisation._ Clarion Press. London. 1906.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Merrie England._ Clarion Office. London. 1894.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Not Guilty: a Defence of the Bottom Dog._ Clarion
+  Press. London. 1906.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _The Pope's Socialism._ Clarion Office. London.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Real Socialism: What it Is, and what it is Not._
+  Clarion Press. London. 1907.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Socialism: a Reply to the Encyclical of the Pope._
+  Clarion Office. London.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Some Tory Socialisms._ Clarion Newspaper. London.
+  1895.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _What is this Socialism._ London Clarion Scouts.
+  London. 1907.
+
+BLISS: _Encyclopedia of Social Reform._ Funk & Wagnalls Company. New
+  York. 1897.
+
+BLOCK: _Dictionnaire Général de la Politique._ O. Lorenz. Paris.
+  1863.
+
+BROCKHAUS: _Konversations-Lexikon._ Brockhaus. Berlin. 1901-1903.
+
+_Brassworkers, The, of Berlin and of Birmingham._ King & Son.
+  London. 1905.
+
+BURNS, JOHN: _Labour and Drink._ Lees and Raper Memorial Trustees.
+  London.
+
+_Burns, John, and the Unemployed._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+BURNS, JOHN: _The Man with the Red Flag._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+_Capital and Land._ Fabian Society. London. 1904.
+
+_The Case for an Eight Hours Bill._ Fabian Society. London. 1891.
+
+_The Case for a Legal Minimum Wage._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+"CASEY": _Who are the Bloodsuckers?_ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+_Christliche Arbeiterpflichten._ Buchhandlung Vorwärts. Berlin.
+  1905.
+
+_The Church and Socialism._ The Church Family Newspaper. London.
+  1907.
+
+_Clarion_. (Weekly Paper.) Clarion Newspaper Co. London.
+
+_Clarion Song Book._ Clarion Press. London. 1907.
+
+_The Class War._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+
+_The Clerk._ (Monthly Paper.) Speaight & Sons. London.
+
+CLIFFORD, Rev. JOHN: _Socialism and the Teaching of Christ._ Fabian
+  Society. London. 1897 and 1906.
+
+_Commercialism and Child Labour: an Indictment and Some Remedies._
+  Independent Labour Party. London. 1900.
+
+CONNELL, JOHN: _Socialism and the Survival of the Fittest._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+_Cottage Plans and Common Sense._ Fabian Society. London. 1902.
+
+COX, HAROLD: _Socialism in the House of Commons._ Longmans, Green &
+  Co. London. 1907.
+
+_Daily Mail Year Book._ Associated Newspapers, Ltd. London. 1908.
+
+DAVIDSON, J. MORRISON: _Book of Lords._ Henderson's. London. 1907.
+
+DAVIDSON, J. MORRISON: _Christ, State, and Commune._ C.W. Daniel.
+  London. 1906.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _The Democrat's Address._ William Reeves. London.
+  1892.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _Free Rails and Trams._ William Reeves. London.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _Free Trade versus Fettered Transport._ Francis
+  Riddell Henderson, London. 1904.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _Gospel of the Poor._ 4th edit. Francis Riddell
+  Henderson. London.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _New Book of Kings._ Francis Riddell Henderson.
+  London. 1902.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _The Old Order and the New._ 7th edit. Francis
+  Riddell Henderson. London.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _Useless, Dangerous, Ought to be Abolished._ William
+  Reeves. London.
+
+DAW, GEORGE W., M.N.S.: _Socialism, Unmasked._ Anti-Socialist Press.
+  London.
+
+"_The Deadly Parallel._" (Monthly Paper.) Henderson. London.
+
+DEARMER, Rev. PERCY: _Socialism and Christianity._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_Debate, April 17, 1884_: _Will Socialism Benefit the English
+  People?_ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+DEBS, E.V.: _Industrial Unionism._ Socialist Labour Press.
+  Edinburgh. 1907.
+
+DE LEON, DANIEL: _Reform or Revolution._ Socialist Labour Press.
+  Edinburgh. 1906.
+
+_Deputation of Unemployed to the Right Hon. A.J. Balfour on November
+  6, 1905._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1905.
+
+DIACK, W.: _Socialism and Current Politics._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London.
+
+DODD, F. LAWSON: _Municipal Milk and Public Health._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1905.
+
+_The Economics of Direct Employment._ Fabian Society. London. 1900
+  and 1906.
+
+_Eight Hours by Law._ Fabian Society. London. 1893 and 1906.
+
+ELTZBACHER, PAUL: _Der Anarchismus._ Guttentag. Berlin. 1899.
+
+ENGELS, FREDERICK: _Socialism Utopian and Scientific._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London. 1892.
+
+_English Progress towards Social Democracy._ Fabian Society. London.
+  1892 and 1906.
+
+_Fabian Election Manifesto, 1892._ Fabian Society. London. 1892.
+
+_Fabian Essays in Socialism._ Walter Scott. London.
+
+_Fabian Society, Twenty-fourth Annual Report._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_Fabianism and the Fiscal Question: an Alternative Policy._ Fabian
+  Society. London. 1904.
+
+_Facts for Socialists._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+FISHER, F. VICTOR: "_The Babies' Tribute._" Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+FORD, Miss I.O.: _Women and Socialism._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+"_Forward._" (Weekly Newspaper.) Glasgow.
+
+_"Freedom": a Journal of Anarchist Communism._ (Monthly Newspaper.)
+  London.
+
+_The Free Feeding of School Children._ Reprinted from "The Lancet."
+  Offices of "The Lancet." London. 1907.
+
+_Gainsborough Commission: Report on Life and Labour in Germany._
+  Simpkin, Marshall. London. 1907.
+
+GLASIER, KATHERINE BRUCE: _Socialism for Children._ Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+GLASIER, LIZZIE, and RUSSELL, ALFRED: _Socialist Sunday Schools and
+  Our Methods_. Civic Press. Glasgow. 1907.
+
+GLYDE, Councillor: _Britain's Disgrace_. Wadsworth & Co., Rydal
+  Press. Keighley.
+
+GLYDE, Councillor: _Liberal and Tory Hypocrisy_. Wadsworth & Co.,
+  Rydal Press. Keighley.
+
+GLYDE, Councillor: _The Misfortune of being a Working Man_.
+  Wadsworth & Co., Rydal Press. Keighley.
+
+GLYDE, Councillor: _A Peep behind the Scenes on a Board of
+  Guardians_. Wadsworth & Co., Rydal Press. Keighley.
+
+GRIFFIN, T.H.: _A Municipal Bread Supply_. Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+GRONLUND, LAURENCE: _The Co-operative Commonwealth_. Edited by
+  George Bernard Shaw. William Reeves. London.
+
+GUYOT, YVES: _La Banqueroute du Socialisme Scientifique_. Félix
+  Alcan. Paris. 1907.
+
+GUYOT, YVES: _Les Principes du Collectivisme_. Bureau de l'Acacia.
+  Paris. 1907.
+
+GUYOT, YVES: _Pretensions of Socialism_. Liberty and Property
+  Defence League. London. 1895.
+
+HALL, LEONARD: _Land, Labour, and Liberty_. Clarion Newspaper Co.
+  London. 1899.
+
+HALL, LEONARD: _Old and New Unionism_. Labour Press Society.
+  Manchester. 1894.
+
+_Handbuch für Sozialdemokratische Wähler_. Buchhandlung Vorwärts.
+  Berlin. 1903.
+
+HARDIE, KEIR: _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_
+  Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+HARDIE, KEIR: _The Citizenship of Women: a Plea for Women's
+  Suffrage_. Independent Labour Party. 1906.
+
+HARDIE, KEIR: _From Serfdom to Socialism_. George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+HARDIE, KEIR: _John Bull and His Unemployed_. Independent Labour
+  Party. London. 1905.
+
+HARE, W.L.: _Famine in India: its Causes and Effects._ P.S. King &
+  Son. London.
+
+HAZELL, A.P.: _The Red Catechism for Socialist Children._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+HAZELL, A.P.: _A Summary of Marx's "Capital."_ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1907.
+
+HEADLAM, STEWART D.: _Christian Socialism._ Fabian Society. London.
+  1907.
+
+HEADLAM, STEWART D.: _The Socialist's Church._ George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+HIRD, DENNIS: _From Brute to Brother._ Clarion Press. London. 1907.
+
+HOBART, H.W.: _Social-Democracy._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+  1907.
+
+HORSFALL, T.C.: _The Improvement of the Dwellings and Surroundings
+  of the People._ University Press. Manchester. 1904.
+
+_Houses for the People._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+_How to Finance Municipal Enterprises._ Co-operative Brotherhood
+  Trust, Limited. London.
+
+_How to Lose and How to Win an Election._ (Fabian Tract.) Fabian
+  Society. London.
+
+_How Trade Unions Benefit Workmen._ Fabian Society. London.
+
+HYDER, JOSEPH: _The Case for Land Nationalisation._ Land
+  Nationalisation Society. London. 1907.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Colonies and Dependencies._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1904.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Darkness and Dawn of May Day._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1907.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _The Historical Basis of Socialism in England._ Paul.
+  London. 1883.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: "_Real Reform._" Nuttall & Co. Burnley.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Social Democracy: The Basis of its Principles and
+  the Causes of its Success._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Socialism and Slavery._ William Reeves. London.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _The Transvaal War and the Degradation of England._
+  London. 1899.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Unrest in India._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+  1907.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Will Socialism Benefit the English People?_
+  Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+_Imperialism: its Meaning and its Tendency._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London. 1900.
+
+_Independent Labour Party Report._ Independent Labour Party. London.
+  May 1907.
+
+_Independent Labour Party Song Book._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+_Independent Labour Party: a Statement of Principles._ (Leaflet.)
+  Independent Labour Party. London. 1907.
+
+_Independent Labour Party Year Book._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London. 1908.
+
+IRVING, DAN: _The Municipality, from a Worker's Point of View._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+JACKSON, HOLBROOK: _Bernard Shaw._ Grant Richards. London. 1907.
+
+JAMESON, WILLIAM: _Land Lessons for Town Folk._ Clarion Newspaper
+  Co. London. 1896.
+
+JAURČS, JEAN: _Practical Socialism._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1906.
+
+JAURČS, JEAN: _Studies in Socialism._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London. 1907.
+
+JOHNSTON, THOS., and HUGH ADAM: _The Railway Difficulty, and How to
+  Solve it._ Forward Printing and Publishing Co., Limited. Glasgow.
+
+JONES, T.I.: _Mining Royalties and all about Them._ Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+JOWETT, F.W.: _The Socialist and the City._ George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+JOYNES, J.L.: _The Socialist Catechism._ W. Reeves. London.
+
+_Justice._ (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Social-Democratic
+  Federation. London.
+
+KAUTSKY, KARL: _The Class Struggle._ Socialist Labour Press.
+  Edinburgh. 1907.
+
+KAUTSKY, KARL: _The Socialist Republic._ Socialist Labour Press.
+  Edinburgh. 1907.
+
+KAUTSKY, KARL: _The Social Revolution, and on the Morrow of the
+  Social Revolution._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+KESSACK, J.O. CONNOR: _The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way Out._
+  Glasgow Clarion Scouts. Glasgow. 1907.
+
+KIRTLAN, Rev. E.J.B.: _Socialism for Christians._ Northampton
+  Pioneer and Publishing Co. Northampton. 1907.
+
+KROPOTKIN, PETER: _Anarchism: its Philosophy and Ideal._ T.H. Keell.
+  London. 1907.
+
+KROPOTKIN, PETER: _La Conquéte du Pain._ Paris. 1895.
+
+KROPOTKIN, PETER: _Paroles d'un Révolté._ Paris.
+
+KROPOTKIN, PETER: _Wage System._ T.H. Keell. London.
+
+_Labour Church Hymn Book._ Labour Church Union. Bradford. 1907.
+
+_Labour Gazette._ (Official Monthly.) Board of Trade. London.
+
+_Labour Leader._ (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Independent
+
+_Labour Party._ Labour Leader, Limited. London.
+
+_A Labour Policy for the Public Authorities._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1899.
+
+LAFARGUE, PAUL: _Right to Leisure._ Labour Literature Society.
+  Glasgow. 1893.
+
+LANSBURY, GEORGE: _The Principles of the English Poor Law._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London. 1897.
+
+L'AUTON, J.T.: _The Nationalisation of Society._ Modern Press.
+  London. 1887.
+
+LEAKEY, JAMES: _Co-operators and the Labour Platform._ Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _The Class War._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _Commune of Paris: its Story and Meaning._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _Lives of the Chicago Martyrs._ Leatham. Aberdeen.
+  1891.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _Socialism and Character._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1897.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _An Up-to-date View of the French Revolution._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+LEE, H.W.: _First of May: The International Labour Day._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1900.
+
+LISTER, The Hon. C.A.: _Riches and Poverty._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+_Local Government in Ireland._ Fabian Society. London. 1900.
+
+LODGE, Sir OLIVER: _Competition versus Co-operation._ Liverpool
+  Fabian Society. Liverpool. 1907.
+
+LODGE, Sir OLIVER: _Public Service versus Private Expenditure._
+  Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+MCCLURE, W.S.: _Socialism._ Socialist Labour Press. Edinburgh.
+  1906.
+
+MCCULLOCH: _British Empire._ Longman, Brown. London. 1846.
+
+MCCULLOCH: _Dictionary of Commerce._ Longman, Brown. London. 1847.
+
+MACDONALD, J.R.: _Labour and the Empire._ George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+MACDONALD, J.R.: _The New Unemployed Bill of the Labour Party._
+  Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+MACDONALD, J.R.: _Socialism._ T.C. & E.C. Jack. London. 1907.
+
+MACDONALD, J.R.: _Socialism and Society._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London. 1907.
+
+MACGREGOR, JOHN: _Commercial Statistics._ Charles Knight. London.
+  1844-1850.
+
+MCLACHLAN, J.M.: _The Tyranny of Usury._ McLachlan. Manchester.
+
+MCMILLAN, MARGARET: _The Child and the State._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+MCMILLAN, MARGARET: _Child Labour and the Half-time System._ Clarion
+  Newspaper. London. 1896.
+
+_Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain._ Socialist Party
+  of Great Britain. London.
+
+MANN, TOM: _The International Labour Movement._ Clarion Office.
+  London. 1697.
+
+MARR: _Housing Conditions in Manchester and Salford._ Sherratt &
+  Hughes. Manchester. 1904.
+
+MARTYN, CAROLINE E.D.: _Co-operation._ Labour Press Society.
+  Manchester.
+
+MARX, KARL: _Capital._ Swan Sonnenschein. London. 1888.
+
+MARX, KARL: _A Discourse on Free Trade._ W. Reeves. London. 1889.
+
+MARX, KARL: _Wage-labour and Capital._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1906.
+
+MARX, KARL, and ENGELS, F.: _Manifesto of the Communist Party._ W.
+  Reeves. London. 1888.
+
+MENGER, ANTON: _L'État Socialiste._ Société Nouvelle de Librairie.
+  Paris. 1904.
+
+MILL, J. STUART: _Political Economy._ Routledge. London.
+
+MILLAR, F.: _Socialism, its Fallacies and Dangers._ Watts & Co.
+  London.
+
+_Minority Report of the Royal Commission on Labour, 1891-1894._
+  Labour Press Society. Manchester. 1894.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _Art, Labour, and Socialism._ Socialist Party of
+  Great Britain. London. 1907.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _Communism._ Fabian Society. London. 1903 and
+  1907.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _A Factory as it Might Be._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1907.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _Monopoly: or How Labour is Robbed._ W. Reeves.
+  London.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _Useful Work versus Useless Toil._ W. Reeves.
+  London.
+
+MORRIS and BAX: _Socialism, its Growth and Outcome._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London. 1897.
+
+_Mosely Industrial Commission Reports._ Cassell & Co. London. 1903.
+
+_Municipal Bakeries._ Fabian Society. London. 1900.
+
+_Municipal Bread Supply._ Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+_Municipal Drink Traffic._ Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+_Municipal Fire Insurance._ Fabian Society. London. 1901.
+
+_Municipal Slaughter-houses._ Fabian Society. London. 1899.
+
+_Municipal Socialism: a Series of Articles._ "The Times." London.
+  1902.
+
+_Municipal Steamboats._ Fabian Society. London. 1901.
+
+_Municipalisation by Provinces._ Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+_Municipalisation of the Gas Supply._ Fabian Society. London. 1900.
+
+MUSE, C.E.: _Poverty and Drunkenness._ Clarion Office. London.
+
+_Nation in Arms._ (Monthly Paper.) National Service League. London.
+
+_National Union Gleanings._ (Monthly.) Simpkin, Marshall. London.
+
+NEIL: _Songs of the Social Revolution._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+_Neue Gesellschaft, Die._ (Monthly Magazine.) Verlag der Neuen
+  Gesellschaft. Berlin.
+
+_New Age._ (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Fabian Society. London.
+
+NEWMAN, GEORGE, M.D.: _The Health of the State._ Headley Brothers.
+  London. 1907.
+
+NORDHOFF: _Communistic Societies of the United States._ John Murray.
+  London. 1875.
+
+NORMAN, C.H.: _Empire and Murder._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+  1906.
+
+NORMAN, C.H.: _Our Factory Workers._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_Nouvelle Biographie Générale._ Paris. 1853-1865.
+
+NOYES, J.: _History of American Socialism._ Philadelphia. 1870.
+
+OAKESHOTT, J.F.: _Humanising of the Poor Law._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1894.
+
+_Overcrowding in London._ Fabian Society. London. 1900.
+
+PALGRAVE: _Dictionary of Political Economy._ Macmillan. London.
+  1891-1900.
+
+_Parish Council Cottages, and How to get them._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1900.
+
+_Parish and District Councils: What they are and What they can do._
+  Fabian Society. London. 1907.
+
+PEARSON, KARL: _The Ethic of Free Thought._ A. & C. Black. London.
+  1901.
+
+PEARSON, KARL: _Socialism and Sex._
+
+PEDDER, D.C.: _The Secret of Rural Depopulation._ Fabian Society
+  London. 1904.
+
+PENNY, JOHN: _The Political Labour Movement._ Clarion Press. London.
+
+_Platform, Constitution, Rules, and Standing Orders of the Socialist
+  Labour Party of Great Britain._ Glasgow.
+
+PLECHANOFF, GEORGE: _Anarchism and Socialism._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1906.
+
+_Poems for Socialists._ James Leatham. Aberdeen. 1891.
+
+PORTER, G.R.: _Progress of the Nation._ Murray. London. 1847.
+
+_Programme and Rules, Social-Democratic Federation._
+  Social-Democratic Federation. London, 1906.
+
+_Protect the Home._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+  1906.
+
+PROUDHON: _What is Property?_ William Reeves. London. 1899.
+
+_Public Control of Electric Power and Transit._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1905.
+
+QUELCH, H.: _Economics of Labour._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+  1906.
+
+QUELCH, H.: _Social Democracy and the Armed Nation._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1900.
+
+QUELCH, H.: _The Social-Democratic Federation: its Objects, its
+  Principles, and its Work._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+QUELCH, H.: _Trade Unionism, Co-operation, and Social Democracy._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+_Reformers' Year Book._ London.
+
+_Reichs Arbeitsblatt._ (Monthly Paper.) Carl Heyman's Verlag.
+  Berlin.
+
+REID, W.: _Socialism and the Drink Traffic._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1906.
+
+_Report of 27th Annual Conference (1907) of the Social-Democratic
+  Federation._ Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+
+_Report on Fabian Policy._ Fabian Society. London. 1896.
+
+_The Revival of Agriculture._ Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+_Rich and Poor._ Independent Labour Party. Blackburn.
+
+RICHARDSON, J.: _How it Can be Done; or, Constructive Socialism._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+_Ritual, A Socialist._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1893.
+
+ROGERS, THOROLD: _Six Centuries of Work and Wages._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London. 1906.
+
+ROSCHER: _Politik._ Cotta. Stuttgart. 1893.
+
+ROSCHER: _System der Volkswirtschaft._ Cotta. Stuttgart. 1906.
+
+ROTHSTEIN, TH.: _Socialist Annual._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+ROWNTREE, S.: _Poverty._ Macmillan & Co. London. 1903.
+
+ROWNTREE and SHERWELL: _The Temperance Problem._ Hodder & Stoughton.
+  London. 1901.
+
+SCHÄFFLE: _The Impossibility of Social Democracy._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London.
+
+SCHÄFFLE: _The Quintessence of Socialism._ Swan Sonnenschein. 1902.
+
+_S.D.F. Song-Book._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+SHAW, BERNARD: _The Fabian Society and its Early History._ Fabian
+  Society. London. 1892.
+
+SHAW, BERNARD: _The Impossibilities of Anarchism._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1893.
+
+SHAW, BERNARD: _Socialism for Millionaires._ Fabian Society. 1901.
+
+SHORT, A.W.: _Municipal Milk Supply._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+_Should the Working Class Support the Liberal Party?_ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1906.
+
+SIMKHOWITSCH: _Die Feldgemeinschaft._ 1898.
+
+_S.L.P. Bulletin._ (Periodical.) Socialist Labour Press. Edinburgh.
+  1907.
+
+SMART, H. RUSSELL: _The Right to Work._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+SMART, H. RUSSELL: _Socialism and the Budget._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+SNELL, HARRY: _Secular Education the Only Way._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+SNOWDEN, ETHEL: _The Woman Socialist._ George Allen. London. 1907.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _The Christ that is to be._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _The Individual under Socialism._ Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _Old Age Pensions._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _A Straight Talk to Ratepayers._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _The Socialists' Budget._ George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+_The Social Crusade._ (Periodical.) Bradford.
+
+_Social Democrat._ (Monthly Magazine.) Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+_Social-Democratic Federation Annual Conference._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1906 and 1907.
+
+_Social-Democratic Federation Programme and Rules._
+  Social-Democratic Federation. London. 1906.
+
+_Socialism: a Cancerous Growth._ Coventry Clarion Fellowship.
+  Coventry. 1907.
+
+_Socialism: For and Against._ Independent Labour Party. Stockport.
+  1907.
+
+_Socialism and Labour Policy._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+_Socialism and the Single Tax: a Debate between Mr. W.C. Wright and
+  H. Quelch._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+_Socialism and Trade Unionism: Wherein do they Differ?_ Issued by
+  Socialistic Group of the London Society of Compositors. Twentieth
+  Century Press. London.
+
+_Socialism made Plain, and the Unemployed._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1895.
+
+_Socialist, The._ (Monthly Paper.) Organ of the Socialist Labour
+  Party. Edinburgh.
+
+_Socialist Annual, The._ Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+
+_Socialist Party of Great Britain: Manifesto and Declaration of
+  Principles._ Socialist Party of Great Britain. London.
+
+_Socialist Ritual, A._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1893.
+
+_Socialist Standard._ (Monthly Newspaper.) Organ of the Socialist
+  Party of Great Britain. London.
+
+_Some Objections to Socialism Considered and Answered._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+_Some Socialistic Proposals: a Brief Analysis._ London Municipal
+  Society. London.
+
+_Songs of the Social Revolution._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+SORGE, F.A.: _Socialism and the Worker._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1906.
+
+SOWERBY, W.: _The Agricultural Deadlock._ Clarion Newspaper Co.
+  London. 1896.
+
+_Sozialistische Monatshefte._ (Monthly Review.) Berlin.
+
+SPENCER, GEORGE: _Nationalisation of the Land._ Henderson. London.
+
+SPENCER, HERBERT: _The Man versus The State._ Williams & Norgate.
+  London. 1907.
+
+SQUIRE, JACK C.: _Socialism and Art._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_State Maintenance of Children._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic
+  Federation. London.
+
+_State Railways for Ireland._ Fabian Society. London. 1899.
+
+STEELE, HENRY: _The Working Classes in France._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1904.
+
+STEGMANN und HUGO: _Handbuch des Sozialismus._ Zurich. 1896.
+
+STIRNER: _Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum._ Leipzig. 1845.
+
+SUTHERS, R.B.: _"Killed by High Rates"--Or Rent?_ Clarion Press.
+  London. 1905.
+
+SUTHERS, R.B.: _Mind Your Own Business._ Clarion Press. London.
+  1907.
+
+SUTHERS, R.B.: _Municipal Debt and its Dangers._ Clarion Newspaper
+  CO. London.
+
+SUTHERS, R.B.: _My Right to Work._ Clarion Press. London. 1906.
+
+TAYLOR, R.C.: _Statistics of Coal._ John Chapman. London. 1848.
+
+THOMPSON, ALEX. M.: _Hail, Referendum_! Clarion Newspaper. London.
+  1896.
+
+THOMPSON, A.M.: _Internationalism and Peace._ Clarion Press. London.
+  1903.
+
+THOMPSON, A.M.: _The Only Way to Democracy._ Clarion Newspaper Co.
+  London. 1900.
+
+THOMPSON, A.M.: _The Referendum, and Initiative in Practice._
+  Clarion Newspaper Co. London. 1899.
+
+THOMPSON, A.M.: _That Blessed Word "Liberty."_ Clarion Newspaper Co.
+  London.
+
+TILLETT, BEN: _Trades Unionism and Socialism._ Clarion Newspaper.
+  London. 1897.
+
+"THE TIMES": _Municipal Socialism._ "The Times." London. 1902.
+
+_To the Man in the Street._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation.
+  London.
+
+_Twentieth Century Politics._ Fabian Society. London. 1901.
+
+_The Unemployed._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+
+VANDAL, A.: _Avénement de Bonaparte._ Plon-Nourrit et Cie. Paris.
+  1903.
+
+VANDERVELDE, EMIL: _Drink and Socialism._ Central Temperance Book
+  Room. London.
+
+VERITAS: _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ P. Lindley.
+  Manchester.
+
+VORWÄRTS. (Daily Paper.) Berlin.
+
+WARD, W.: _All Things in Common._ Exeter Publishing Co. London.
+  1906.
+
+WARD, W.: _Are All Men Brothers?_ E. Dalton. London. 1907.
+
+WARD, W.: _Ideal City._ Exeter Publishing Co. London. 1906.
+
+WARD, W.: _Our Own Native Land._ Exeter Publishing Co. London. 1906.
+
+WARD, W.: _Prevention is Better than Cure._ E. Dalton. London. 1907.
+
+WARD, W.: _Religion and Labour._ Exeter Publishing Co. London. 1906.
+
+WARD, W.: _The War Drum Shall Throb No Longer._ Exeter Publishing
+  Co. London. 1906.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _A Corner in Flesh and Blood._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _Milk and Postage Stamps._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _A Nation of Slaves._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _Simple Division._ Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _Whose Dog Art Thou?_ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+WATTS, J. HUNTER: _State Maintenance for Children._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1904.
+
+_Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+WEBB, BEATRICE and SIDNEY: _Industrial Democracy._ Printed by the
+  Authors. London. 1901.
+
+WEBB, SIDNEY: _Difficulties of Individualism._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1896.
+
+WEBB, S.: _Labour in the Longest Reign_, 1837-1897. Fabian Society.
+  London.
+
+WEBB, S.: _The London Programme._ Swan Sonnenschein & Co. London.
+  1892.
+
+WEBB, S.: _Socialism: True and False._ Fabian Society. London 1894.
+
+WELLS, H.G.: _Socialism and the Middle Classes, in "Fortnightly
+  Review," November 1906._ London.
+
+WELLS, H.G.: _This Misery of Boots._ Fabian Society. London. 1907.
+
+WEMYSS, EARL OF: _Socialist Spectre._ Watts & Co. London. 1907.
+
+_What Socialism Is._ Fabian Society. London.
+
+_What Socialism Means._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+_What Socialism Means for Women._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+_What the Farm Labourer Wants._ Fabian Society. London. 1894.
+
+_What Use is a Vote?_ (Leaflet.) Social Democratic Federation.
+  London.
+
+WHEATLEY, JOHN: "_How the Miners are Robbed._" Reformers' Bookstall.
+  Glasgow. 1907.
+
+WHITE, J.D.: _Island Economy._ F.R. Henderson. London. 1904.
+
+WHITTAKER, T.P.: _Economic Aspect of the Drink Problem._ Lees and
+  Raper Memorial Trustees. London.
+
+_Who are the Bloodsuckers?_ Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+_Why Labour Men should be on Town Councils._ (Leaflet.) Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+WIDDUP, J.R.: _What Political Economy Teaches._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London.
+
+WILDE, OSCAR: _The Soul of Man under Socialism, in "Fortnightly
+  Review" February 1891._ London.
+
+WILLIAMS, T.R.: _The Difficulties of Socialism._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+_Will Socialism Benefit the English People?_ (Debate.) Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+WILSON, Rev. J. STITT: _The Social Crusade._ (Periodical.) Bradford.
+
+WOODWORTH: _Christian Socialism in England._ Swan Sonnenschein & Co.
+  London. 1903.
+
+_The Workers' Burden._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+
+
+
+ANALYTICAL INDEX
+
+     NOTE.--_The abbreviation "f." following a page number
+     signifies "and following page"; "ff." "and following pages."_
+
+
+ABSOLUTISM, Socialism makes for, 460 ff.
+
+ABSTINENCE, Co-operation, and Thrift denounced by Socialists, 131 ff.,
+  311 ff.
+
+ADMINISTRATION, Imperial, Socialist views regarding, 179 f.
+  National, Socialist views regarding, 213 f.
+
+ADULT suffrage demanded, 213
+
+ADULTERATION, cause of, 84 f.
+
+AGITATORS, Socialistic, appeal to passions, 10, 446, 470
+  Socialist wish to govern themselves, 411
+
+AGRICULTURE, Socialist views on, 261 ff., 288 ff.
+
+AIMS and policy of Socialists, 92 ff.
+
+ALCOHOLIC DRINK, expenditure of British workers on, 166, 319, 479
+
+ALLOTMENTS, 262 ff.
+
+ANANIAS, the story of, 385
+
+ANARCHISM and Socialism, similarity of views and aims of, and connection
+  between them, 81, 90, 118, 328, 381 f., 394 ff.
+
+ANARCHISTS, Chicago, and Socialists, 401 f.
+
+ANGLO-FRENCH agreements, views of Socialists on, 188
+
+ANTWERP DOCK strike, 295
+
+APPROPRIATION without adequate compensation is theft, 102
+
+ARBITRATION, international, Socialists on, 188, 190 f.
+
+ARMED nation, why many Socialists are in favour of, 193 ff.
+
+ARMIES, standing, are to be dissolved, 194 ff.
+
+ARMY reform of Mr. Haldane, condemned by Socialists, 197 ff.
+  Socialist propaganda to undermine discipline and cause revolt in, 200 ff.
+  Socialist proposals regarding the, 192 ff.
+
+ASSIGNATS, history of the, 283 f.
+
+ATHEISM, Socialism and, 354 ff.
+
+
+BANKS and banking, Socialist views on, 258 f., 278 ff.
+
+BARRICADES, Socialist views on, 258 f., 278 ff.
+
+BARTER, international, proposed by Socialists, 279
+
+BENEFICENCE, sense of, relied on by Socialists as principal motive in
+  men, 458 f.
+
+BETTING, expenditure of working men on, 166
+
+BLACKLEGS, British, in Antwerp and Hamburg, 295 f.
+
+BREMEN, Socialism in, 440
+
+BRITISH EMPIRE--_see_ Empire, British
+
+BROTHERHOOD OF MAN promised and proclaimed by Socialists, 25 f.,
+  185 ff., 370, 382, 444
+
+BUDGET, national, Socialist proposals regarding, 160 ff.
+
+
+CADE, JACK, 326 f.
+
+CAPITAL is theft, 81 f., 102, 370
+  national growth of, owing to savings of capitalists, 64 f.
+  private, cannot leave the country, 153 f.
+    is immoral, 80 ff.
+    is not to be tolerated, 152 ff.
+  why its constant increase is necessary, 45
+
+CAPITALISTS and landowners are thieves, 38, 102, 370 f.
+  and workers, division of national income between, 40 ff., 75 ff.
+    relations between, 30 ff., 75 ff.
+  are the managers and trustees of the national wealth, 35
+  employ labour only at a profit, 33
+  exploit the poor, 31, 75 ff.
+  greatest, were originally working men, 60
+  live in idleness, 30, 75 ff.
+  maintain the workers, not the workers the capitalists, 168
+  private, are responsible for commercial crises, 67 ff.
+    are responsible for unemployment, 65 ff., 125 f.
+      useless and unnecessary, 155, 168
+    benefit from unemployment, 69 f.
+    have no rights and no claims to consideration, 154
+    their disappearance would be a blessing, 155, 168
+    usefulness of, 64 f., 168, 315
+
+CARNEGIE, ANDREW, on drink, 321 f.
+
+CATECHISM for the mob, 367
+  the Red, 372 ff.
+
+CHEAPNESS, Socialist views on, 290 ff.
+
+CHICAGO Anarchists and Socialists, 401 f.
+
+CHILDREN, free maintenance of, demanded, 138
+  free meals for--_see_ Free Maintenance
+  production of, to be regulated by the State, 347 f.
+  will belong not to parents but to society, 345 f.
+  will belong to parents, 348
+
+CHRIST, name of, used for electioneering purposes, 363
+
+CHRISTIAN Socialism, 375 ff.
+  programmes of, 490 f.
+
+CHRISTIANITY and religion, Socialist attitude towards, 354 ff.
+
+CIVILISATION, Socialist views on, 11 ff.
+
+"CLARION," circulation of, 437
+
+CLASS war doctrine, the, 72 ff.
+  disproved, 79
+
+CLASSES of society, are there only two? 72 ff.
+
+CLERGY, Socialist views on the, 13
+
+COAL, production of, in 1845, 475
+
+COBDEN, Socialists on, 287
+
+CODE NAPOLÉON, 329, 344
+
+COIN--_see_ Money
+
+COMMANDMENTS, the capitalists' ten, 368
+  the Socialist ten, 371 f.
+
+COMMONS, House of, Socialist views on the, 209 ff.
+
+COMMUNE of Paris, Socialists and the insurrection of the, 407 ff.
+
+COMMUNISM and Socialism, 381 ff.
+  early Christian, 386
+  in Sparta, 389
+  of Fourier, 392 f.
+  Socialist recommendations of, 21, 381 ff.
+  why it is impossible, 393
+
+COMMUNIST manifesto quoted, 77 f., 92, 103, 107, 112, 183 f., 332 f., 405
+
+COMMUNITY of women, 331 ff.
+
+COMPENSATION has no place in Socialist ethics, 100 f.
+  or no compensation in expropriating private property? 95 ff., 149 f.
+
+COMPETITION and co-operation, 82 ff., 312 ff., 444 ff., 470
+
+COMPLAINTS, the, of Socialists, 30 ff.
+
+COMPULSORY labour, necessity of, in Socialist commonwealth, 455 ff.
+
+CONFISCATION, plans of, 95 ff.
+  probable result of, 168 f., 251 f., 254
+
+CONTRACT, freedom of, useless to workers, 33
+
+CO-OPERATION and competition, 82 ff., 312 ff., 444 ff., 470
+  cannot benefit British worker, 31
+  greatly benefits British worker, 315 ff.
+  is opposed by Socialists, 84, 131 ff., 311 ff.
+  thrift and abstinence denounced by Socialists, 131 ff., 311 ff.
+
+CO-OPERATIVE societies, record and statistics of the British, 315 ff.
+
+COURTS-MARTIAL, Socialist agitation against, 201 f.
+
+CRIME--_see_ Justice, Theft
+
+CRIMES, sexual, Socialist views on, 340 ff.
+
+CRISES caused by private capitalists, 67 ff.
+  could they be prevented by Socialists? 70 f., 124 f.
+
+CROWN, the--_see_ also Monarchy
+  is unfit to administer the Empire, 179
+
+CURRENCY--_see_ Money
+
+
+DEBT, Local, huge increase and danger of, 246 ff.
+  Local, will it be repudiated? 248
+  National, repudiation of, 110, 156 ff.
+
+DEMONETISATION of gold and silver--see Money
+
+DESERTION of family, frequency of, 307
+
+DISARMAMENT, Socialists and, 189 ff.
+
+DISTRIBUTION, alteration of, will abolish misery, 65 ff.
+  is more important than production, 65 ff.
+    disproved, 70 f.
+
+DIVISION, general, of existing property disclaimed, 93
+  is the principal aim of Socialists, 471 f.
+
+DOCTRINES, fundamental, of Socialism, 50 ff.
+
+DOWNING STREET, Socialist views regarding government from, 179 f.
+
+DRINK, expenditure of workers on, 166, 319, 479
+
+DRUNKENNESS, condemned and combated by foreign Socialists, 322 ff.
+  excused and encouraged by British Socialists, 319 ff.
+
+DUTIES--_see_ Budget
+
+
+ECONOMIC policy of Great Britain, 474 ff.
+
+EDUCATION, Socialist views and proposals on, 302 ff.
+
+EMIGRATION, 476 f.
+
+EMPIRE, British, federation of, opposed by Socialists, 173 f.
+  federation of, is necessary, 478
+  German Socialists' views on the, 181 f.
+  has been a failure, 179
+  Socialists and the, 170 ff.
+
+EMPLOYERS and capitalists benefit from unemployment, 69 f.
+  and workers' interests are opposed, 77
+    identical, 79
+  are useless, 168
+
+ENGLAND--_see_ Great Britain
+
+ENTERPRISE, Governmental and municipal, inefficiency and wastefulness
+  of, 85 ff., 251 ff.
+  municipal, 240 ff.
+    is undertaken regardless of cost and profit, 252 ff.
+
+EQUALITY of all races proclaimed by Socialists, 185 ff.
+
+ESPERANTO, why studied by Socialists, 188
+
+ESTATE Duty--_see_ Budget
+
+EXPENDITURE, local, 246
+
+EXPROPRIATION of private property without compensation, 95 ff., 149 f.
+
+
+FABIAN SOCIETY, details regarding, 94, 418 ff.
+  programme of, 486 f.
+
+FAMILY, desertion of, very frequent, 307
+  Karl Marx on, 332
+  Socialism and the, 330 ff.
+
+FATALISM of Socialists, 327 f., 360 f.
+
+FEDERATION, Imperial, opposed by Socialists, 173 f.
+  why necessary, 478
+
+FEEDING of school-children--_see_ Free Maintenance
+
+FISCAL policy, Socialist views on, 285 ff.
+  reform, why it is necessary, 474 ff.
+
+FOOD--_see_ Agriculture and Protection
+
+FORCED labour, necessity of, in Socialist Commonwealth, 455 ff.
+
+FOREIGN policy, Socialist views on, 183 ff.
+
+FOURIER, Communism of, 392 f.
+
+FRANCE, aspect of, before the Revolution, 433
+
+FRANCHISE and suffrage in Great Britain and other countries, 213
+
+FREEDOM of contract useless to workers, 33
+
+FREE love, 330 ff.
+  maintenance for children, 138, 303 ff.
+  trade and protection, Karl Marx on, 300
+    Socialist views on, 285 ff.
+    why it must be abandoned, 474 ff.
+
+FRONTIERS are to be abolished, 184 ff.
+
+
+GAMBLING spirit in Englishmen, 459
+
+GERMAN and British Socialism compared, 88, 236, 432 f.
+  Socialists' patriotic and imperial attitude, 181 f., 190 f., 205, 433
+    views on colonial policy, 181 f, 190 f.
+      Great Britain, 181 f., 190 f.
+
+GERMANY, composition of electorate in, 440
+
+GLASGOW, vast Socialist plans regarding, 252
+
+GOD--_see_ Religion
+
+GOLD and silver money are to be abolished, 21, 258 f., 278 ff.
+
+GOVERNMENT--_see also_ Administration
+  complaints about, 11 f., 394 ff., 411 ff.
+  of Socialist State, 463 ff.
+
+GREAT BRITAIN, aspect of, resembles pre-Revolution France, 433
+  changed economic position of, 475 ff.
+  dangerous position of, 484 f.
+  German Socialists' views on, 181 f., 190 f.
+
+GRIEVANCES of Socialists, 30 ff.
+
+GRONLAND advises Socialists to appeal to the passions, 10
+
+
+HALDANE, Mr., and Woolwich Arsenal dismissals, 296
+
+HAMBURG DOCK strike, 295
+
+HISTORY, all, is untrue, 91
+
+HOME--_see_ Family
+
+HOME RULE, Socialists and, 180
+
+HOUSE OF COMMONS, Socialist views on the, 209 ff.
+
+HOUSE OF LORDS, Socialist views on the, 211
+    to be abolished, 109, 110, 216 i.
+
+HUMAN nature and Socialism, 444 ff.
+
+HUNGRY children--_see_ Free Maintenance
+
+
+IDLING, how it is to be prevented, 457 ff.
+
+IMMORALITY, sexual, Socialist views regarding, 336 ff.
+
+IMPERIAL federation opposed by Socialists, 173 f.
+
+INCOME, national, how divided between capitalists and workers, 40 ff.,
+  75 ff.
+  of workers and capitalists compared, 40 ff, 75 ff.
+
+INCOME-TAX--_see_ Budget
+
+INCREASING misery, law of, 56 ff.
+  disproved, 57 f.
+
+INDEBTEDNES, local, 246 ff.
+
+INDEPENDENT LABOUR PARTY, details regarding, 417 f., 435 f.
+  programme of, 485 f.
+
+INDIA, Socialist views and aims regarding, 174 ff.
+
+INHERITANCE, right of, 103 ff., 108
+
+INTEMPERANCE--_see_ Drink, Drunkenness, Temperance
+
+INTEREST, profit and rent are theft, 38, 80 ff., 102, 371, 374
+  Socialist objections to, 38, 80, 258 f., 280 f.
+
+INTERNATIONAL Arbitration, Socialists on, 188, 190 f.
+  relations, Socialist views on, 183 ff., 469
+
+INTOXICATING drink--_see_ Drink, Drunkenness, Temperance
+
+IRON law of wages, 53 ff., 245, 312 f., 319 f.
+  disproved, 54 ff., 313 f., 320
+
+
+JUDGES, English, Socialists on, 325 f.
+
+JUSTICE and Law, Socialist Views regarding, 100 f., 114, 325 ff., 396 f.
+
+
+KEIR HARDIE resembles John the Baptist, 28
+
+
+LABOUR CHURCH, the, and its teaching, 369
+  fewer hours of, promised by Socialists, 117 f.
+  forced, would be necessary in Socialist commonwealth, 455 ff.
+  is the only source of wealth, 50 ff.
+    disproved, 52
+  organisation of, in Socialist commonwealth, 455 ff.
+  Party, details regarding, 424 ff.
+    informal programme of, 425 f.
+  representation committee, details regarding, 424
+  remuneration of, in Socialist commonwealth, 450 ff.
+  sweated, proposals regarding, 461
+  time theory, 450 f.
+
+LABOURER is entitled to entire product of labour, 38, 61, 451
+    absurdity of demand, 62 ff., 451 ff.
+  receives only from one-third to one-fifth of his rightful wage, 30,
+  43, 48 f.
+
+LABOURERS, rural, 266 f.
+
+LAND--_see_ also Agriculture
+  and Landlords and Socialists, 145 ff.
+  belongs to all, 102 f., 145 ff.
+  individual men have no right to, 102 f., 145 ff.
+  is to be had rent free from Socialist State, 146
+  is not to be had rent free from Socialist State, 146 f.
+  is to be seized without compensation to owners, 95 ff., 149 f., 486
+  property in, is robbery, 38, 102, 145 ff., 370
+
+LAND settlement policy of Socialists, 262 ff.
+
+LAND Tax--_see_ Budget
+
+LANDOWNERS and capitalists are thieves, 38, 102
+
+LAW and Justice, Socialist views regarding, 100 f., 114, 325 ff., 396 f.
+  iron, of wages, 53 ff., 245, 312 f., 319 f.
+    disproved, 54 ff., 313 t, 320
+  of increasing misery, 56 ff.
+    disproved, 57 f.
+
+LAZINESS, how it is to be prevented, 457 ff.
+
+LIBERAL PARTY, Socialist dissatisfaction with, 233 ff.
+  views of and attitude towards the, 226 ff.
+
+LITERATURE, Socialist, increase of sales of, 435 ff.
+
+LOAFERS and tramps, ideal conditions for, to be created by Socialists, 254
+
+LOCAL expenditure, 245 f.
+  Government, Socialist views and proposals regarding, 166, 240 ff.
+  indebtedness, 246 ff.
+
+LONDON, fantastic schemes regarding, 249 ff.
+
+LORDS, abolition of the House of, demanded, 109, 110, 216 f.
+  House of, views of Socialists on the, 211
+
+LOVE, free, 330 ff.
+
+
+MAGDEBURG, Socialism in, 440
+
+MAINTENANCE, free, for children, demanded, 138, 303 ff.
+  why demanded, 138, 308
+
+MAN, brotherhood of, promised and proclaimed by Socialists, 25 f.,
+  185 ff., 370, 382, 444
+  has no right to himself, 102
+  is not responsible for his actions, 327 f.
+
+MAN, nature of, and Socialism, 444 ff.
+
+MARRIAGE--_see also_ Family, Women
+  is akin to prostitution, 335 f.
+
+MARX and Engels, Communists' manifesto quoted, 77 f., 92, 103, 107 f.,
+  112, 183 f., 332 f., 405
+
+MARX, KARL, appreciation of, 89
+  on Christianity and religion, 359, 366
+  on Free Trade and Protection, 300
+  on women and the family, 332 f.
+  political programme of, 107 f.
+  unmerited praise of, 88 f.
+  was not a scientist, but a demagogue and a revolutionary, 472
+
+MEALS, free, for school children--_see_ Free Maintenance
+
+MEMBERS of Parliament, payment of, advocated, 213, 216
+
+MIDDLE CLASS, importance of strengthening the, 441 ff.
+  Socialistic attempt to permeate the, 442 f.
+
+MIDDLEMAN, promised suppression of, by Socialists is illusory, 241 f.
+
+MILITARY LAW, Socialist agitation against, 201 f.
+
+MILLIONAIRES are criminals, 81
+
+MINES and minerals to be taken over without compensation, 149
+
+MIR, the, 388
+
+MIRABEAU on paper money, 283 f.
+
+MISERY, law of, increasing, 56 ff.
+  disproved, 57 f.
+
+MONARCHY, abolition of, 109, 110, 207 f.
+  Socialism and the, 207 f.
+
+MONEY, abolition of gold and silver proposed, 21, 258, 278 ff.
+    consequences of, 279 f.
+  banks and banking, Socialist views on, 258 f., 278 ff.
+
+MORALITY, sexual. Socialist views regarding, 336 ff.
+
+MUNICIPAL and national enterprise, inefficiency and wastefulness of,
+  85 ff., 251 ff.
+  enterprise, 240 ff.
+  enterprises are undertaken regardless of cost and profit, 252 ff.
+  Socialism, 240 ff.
+
+
+NATIONAL budget, Socialist views regarding, 160 ff.
+  debt, repudiation of, 110, 156 ff.
+  enterprise, inefficiency and wastefulness of, 85 ff., 251 ff.
+  income, how divided between capitalists and workers, 40 ff., 75 ff.
+
+NATIONALISATION of land--_see_ Land
+
+NATURE, human, and Socialism, 444 ff.
+
+
+OFFENCES, sexual, Socialist views on, 340 ff.
+
+OLD-AGE pensions, Socialist plans regarding, 19, 122 f.
+
+OPINION, public, under Socialism, 466 f.
+
+ORGANISATION of work proposed by Socialists, 17, 70 f., 124 I, 455 ff,
+  fallacies regarding, 70 f., 85 ff., 124 f., 241 f.
+
+ORGANISATIONS, Socialist, and their policy, 415 ff.
+
+OVER-PRODUCTION, complaints as to, 66 f.
+    are not justified, 70 f.
+  can it be prevented by Socialists? 70 f., 124 f.
+  is not the cause of crises and unemployment, but ill-balanced
+  production, 70 f.
+
+OVERWORK, complaints of, 16
+
+
+PAPER money, unlimited issues of, proposed, 258 f., 278 ff.
+  consequences of, 279 f.
+
+PARIS Commune, Socialists and the insurrection of the, 407 ff.
+
+PARLIAMENT, Socialism and, 209 ff.
+  Socialist spirit in, 437 f.
+  unofficial Socialists in, 438
+
+PARLIAMENTARY Government to be abolished, 218 ff.
+
+PARTIES, Socialist attitude towards the, 225 ff.
+  the Socialist and their policy, 415 ff.
+
+PASSIONS, Socialists appeal to the, 10, 446, 470
+
+PATRIOTISM, Socialism is destructive of, 114, 186 f., 202 ff.
+
+PAUPERISM and distress, growth of, under Socialist régime, 242 f.
+
+PAYMENT of Members of Parliament advocated, 213, 216
+
+PEACE conference, 189 ff.
+
+PEASANT proprietors are everywhere hostile to Socialism, 263
+  Socialists object to, 262 ff.
+
+PEASANTRY, importance of re-creating the, 443
+
+PENSIONS to workers, 19, 122
+
+POLICY, agricultural, of Socialists--_see_ Agriculture
+  and aims of Socialists, 92 ff.
+  fiscal, of Socialists--_see_ Free Trade and Protection
+  foreign, of Socialists--_see_ Foreign Policy
+
+POPLAR, 243
+
+POSTAGE, Socialist proposals regarding, 166 f.
+
+POST OFFICE, British, praised by Socialists, 21
+    condemned by Socialists, 411, 413
+  fallacies regarding business aptitude of, 85 ff.
+  servants, Socialist proposals regarding, 166 f.
+
+POVERTY and drink and gambling, 166, 319, 479 f.
+  extravagant Socialist estimates of, 165, 242, 302 f.
+  complaints about, 16, 33, 165
+  of the poor is caused by wealth of the rich, 30, 34 ff., 161
+    disproved, 35, 159
+
+PRESS, the, under Socialism, 466 f.
+
+PRIVATE trader to be abolished, 242 ff.
+
+PRODUCTION, ill-balanced, causes crises and unemployment, 70 f.
+  is carried on for the profit of a class, 36
+  is less important than distribution, 65 ff.
+  is more important than distribution, 71
+
+PROFIT, what it is and why it is necessary, 39, 45
+  interest and rent are theft, 38, 80 ff., 102, 371, 374
+  the working at a, objected to, 33, 38 ff., 252 ff.
+  sharing in Socialist commonwealth, 459
+
+PROGRAMME, political, of Karl Marx, 107 f.
+
+PROGRAMMES of Socialism, 92, 107 ff., 481 ff.
+
+PROPERTY--_see also_ Capital, Land, Mines
+  instinct of, is as old as humanity, 444
+
+"PROPERTY is theft," 81 f., 102, 370 f.
+
+PROPERTY, private, general division of, disclaimed, 93
+  is the real object of Socialism, 471 ff.
+  private, is immoral, 80 ff.
+    is to be acquired without compensation, 95 ff., 149 f., 486
+    ought to be abolished, 82, 92
+    Socialist plans regarding, 95 ff., 149 f.
+  right to, denned by Socialists, 80, 96 ff., 102, 145
+
+PROSTITUTION, 339 ff.
+  is akin to marriage, 335 f.
+
+PROTECTION, why it must be adopted, 474 ff.
+  and Free Trade, Karl Marx on, 300
+    Socialist views on, 285 ff.
+
+PROUDHON quoted, 81, 90
+
+PROVIDENCE--_see_ Thrift
+
+PUBLIC opinion under Socialism, 466 f.
+
+
+RAILWAY rates, preferential to foreigners denounced, 269 ff.
+
+RAILWAYS and shipping, Socialist views on, 269 ff.
+  nationalisation of, demanded, 271 f.
+    seems too speculative an undertaking, 277
+  should be run free of charge to all, 272 ff.
+  wastefulness and inefficiency of, 269 ff.
+
+RATES, alarming increase of, 245 f.
+  increase of, means increase of rent, 243, 245
+
+RED CATECHISM, the, 372 ff.
+
+REFERENDUM demanded by Socialists, 217 ff.
+  opposed by Socialists, 220
+
+REFORM, fiscal, why it is necessary, 474 ff.
+  social, the true, 480
+
+RELIGION and Christianity, Socialist attitude towards, 354 ff.
+  Socialism is a, 26, 364 ff.
+  Socialist views on present, 13, 354 ff.
+  the, of Socialism, 364 ff.
+
+RENT, interest and profit are theft, 38, 80 ff., 102, 371, 374
+
+REVOLUTION, French, parallels furnished to Socialist proposals by the,
+  168 f., 283 f, 352 f., 365 f.
+  aspect of France before the, 433
+  Socialists and, 404 ff.
+
+REVOLUTIONARY aims and plans of Socialists, 77 ff., 112 ff., 183 ff.,
+  200 ff., 394 ff., 403, 404 ff., 410, 470 ff.
+
+REVOLUTIONS always cause depravity of morals, 450
+
+RICH, the, are the managers and trustees of the national wealth, 35
+  are thieves, 80, 102, 370 f.
+  cause poverty of the poor, 30, 34 ff., 161
+    disproved, 35, 159
+
+RICHES of the rich are the cause of poverty, 30, 34 ff., 161
+  disproved, 35, 159
+
+RIGHT to work, sinister aim of Socialists in proclaiming, 128 f.
+  disregarded by Socialists, 461
+
+RIGHTS of individual defined, 102
+
+ROBBERY encouraged by Socialists, 82, 114
+
+ROCHDALE Pioneers, history of the, 315 f.
+
+RURAL labourers, 266 f.
+
+
+SAVING--_see_ Thrift
+
+SAVINGS, contemplated confiscation of, 157 ff.
+
+SAVINGS banks deposits, 46
+
+SELFISHNESS and Socialism, 444 ff.
+
+SEXUAL crimes. Socialist views on, 340 ff.
+  offences and crimes, 340 ff.
+
+SMALL holdings, 262 ff.
+
+SOCIAL-Democratic Federation, details regarding, 415 ff.
+  programme of, 481 ff.
+
+SOCIALISM and Anarchism, similarity of views and aims of, and connection
+    between, 81, 90, 118, 328, 381 f., 394 ff.
+  and Christianity and religion, 354 ff.
+  and Communism, 381 ff.
+  and education, 302 ff.
+  and Free Trade and Protection, 285 ff.
+  and law and justice, 325 ff.
+  and the monarchy, 207 f.
+  and Parliament, 209 ff.
+  and revolution, 395 ff., 404 ff.
+  appeals to passions, 10, 446, 470
+  British and German compared, 88, 206
+  Christian, 375 ff.
+  definitions of, I ff., 390, 469
+  flourishes on dissatisfaction and misery, 131
+  fundamental doctrines of, 50 ff.
+  growth and danger of, 431 ff.
+  is a religion, 2, 26 ff., 364 ff.
+  is a science, 1, 2, 3, 87
+  is based, not on science, but on deception, 91
+  is destructive of patriotism, 114, 186 f., 202 ff.
+  is it possible? 444 ff.
+  is merely a plan of spoliation and of general division, 471 f.
+  is not a science, 87, 89 f., 470 ff.
+  means absolutism, 460 ff.
+  municipal, 240 ff.
+    disregards cost and profit, 252 ff.
+  presupposes perfect men, 444 ff.
+  principal demand of, 92
+  programme of, 92 ff.
+  progress of, how it may be checked, 440 ff.
+  promises to alter human nature, 448 f.
+    to abolish war, 186 f., 189
+    to make all races equal, 185 ff.
+    why it is impossible, 390 f., 444 ff.
+
+SOCIALIST and Anarchist doctrines compared, 81, 90 f.
+  Labour Party, details regarding, 428
+    programme of, 488 ff.
+  literature, increase of sales of, 435 ff.
+  organisations, the, and their policy, 415 ff.
+  Party of Great Britain, details regarding, 428
+    programme of, 487 f.
+  spirit in Parliament, 437 f.
+  State, how will it be governed? 463 ff.
+    of the future, 5 f., 17 ff., 444 ff.
+    -enterprise, will it be more efficient than private enterprise? 85 ff.
+  Sunday schools, 369 ff.
+
+SOCIALISTS, aims and policy of, 92 ff.
+  and Chicago Anarchists, 401 f.
+  and land and landlords, 145 ff.
+  and revolution, 395 ff., 404 ff.
+  and rural labourers, 266 f.
+  and terrorist outrages, 402 f.
+  and the Empire, 170 ff.
+  and the two Parties, 225 ff.
+  and the working masses, 115 ff.
+  and Trade Unionists, official connection between, 141 ff., 434 f.
+    relations between, 131 ff., 424 ff., 434 f.
+  are antagonistic to providence, thrift, and temperance, 312 ff.
+  are hostile to the Empire, 170 ff.
+    to their own country, 114, 186 f.
+  assert that all history is garbled, 91
+  assert that man has no right to himself, 102
+  condemn imperial administration, 179 f.
+    national administration, 213 f., 394 ff., 411 ff.
+    State Socialism, 411 ff.
+  consist of two classes, revolutionaries and visionaries, 183
+  demand free maintenance for children, 138
+    Government purchase of all British railways and shipping, 271 ff.
+  denounce co-operation, thrift, and abstinence, 131 ff.
+  desire the destruction of the State, 381 f., 394 ff., 411 ff.
+  different aims, proposals, and views of, 6 f.
+  disregard right to work, 461
+  encourage theft, 82
+  excuse and encourage drunkenness, 319 ff.,
+  grievances of the, 30 ff.
+  numbers of, in various countries, 432
+  on Free Trade and Protection, 285 ff.
+  oppose co-operation, 84, 312
+  promise brotherhood of man, 25 f., 185 ff., 370, 382, 444
+    equal wages for all, 22
+    gratis amusements, 22
+      baths, 250
+      clothing, 21
+      concerts, 250
+      food, 21
+      fuel, 21
+      libraries, 250
+      lodging, 21
+      travel and transport on railways and tramways, 22, 250, 272 S.
+        on ships, 275 f.
+      wash-houses, 250
+      working men's clubs, 250
+    to transform the world into a paradise, 19 ff.
+  propose issuing paper money in unlimited quantities, 258 f., 278 ff.
+  revolutionary aims and plans of, 77 ff., 112 ff., 183 ff., 200 ff.,
+  394 ff., 403, 404 ff., 410
+  try to destroy discipline in the army and so cause it to revolt, 200 ff.
+  unofficial in Parliament, 438
+  wish for an international language, 188
+    to abolish parliamentary government, 218 ff.,
+      the army, 192 ff.
+      the existing languages, 310
+      the monarchy, 109, 110, 207 f.
+    to capture or abolish Parliament, 209 ff.
+    to conquer Parliament, 238 f.
+    to dissolve the army, 192 ff.
+  German, on Peace Conferences, disarmament, and international
+  arbitration, 190 f.
+    patriotic and imperial attitude of, 181 f., 190 f., 205, 433
+    views of, on colonial policy, 181 f., 190 f.
+      regarding Great Britain, 181 f., 190 f.
+
+SOCIETY, Socialist views on, 10 ff.
+
+SPARTA, Communism in, 389
+
+SPENCER, Herbert, 447 f.
+
+SPOLIATION, plans of, 95 if., 149 f.
+  probable result of, 168 f., 251 f., 254
+
+STAMP duties, proposals regarding, 166 f.
+
+STATE enterprise usually inefficient, 85 ff., 251 ff.
+  Socialism, Socialist attitude towards, 411 ff.
+  Socialist, of the future, 5 f., 17 ff., 444 ff.
+    how will it be governed? 463 ff.
+  Socialists are hostile to the, and desire its destruction, 381 f.,
+  394 ff., 411 ff.
+
+STOCKS, Municipal, are no longer first-class investments, 258
+
+STUTTGART, International Socialist Congress at, 90, 177
+
+SUFFRAGE, adult, demanded, 213
+  and franchise in Great Britain and other countries, 213
+  reform demanded, 213 f.
+
+SUNDAY, will it be abolished? 365
+  schools, Socialist, 369 ff.
+
+SURPLUS-VALUE doctrine, 58 ff., 244 f.
+  disproved, 59 f.
+
+SWEATED labour proposals of Socialists, 461
+
+
+TARIFF reform, Socialist views on, 285 ff.
+
+TAXATION, indirect, condemned by Socialists, 165 f.
+  leading Socialist principle of, 255
+  local--_see_ Rates
+  national--_see_ Budget
+
+TAXING private property out of existence, plans for, 99 f., 149, 153,
+  160 ff., 244 f., 255
+
+TEMPERANCE condemned by British Socialists, 319 ff.
+  praised and encouraged by foreign Socialists, 322 ff.
+  providence, and thrift are antagonistic to Socialism, 131 ff., 312 ff.
+    Socialistic views on, 131 ff., 311 ff.
+
+TEN COMMANDMENTS, the capitalists', 368
+  the Socialist, 371 f.
+
+TERRORIST outrages. Socialist views on, 402 f.
+
+THEFT encouraged by Socialists, 82, 114
+
+THRIFT denounced by Socialists, 131 ff., 155, 311 ff.
+  is immoral, 314 f.
+  is theft, 155
+  providence, and temperance are antagonistic to Socialism, 131 ff.,
+  312 ff.
+    Socialist views on, 131 ff., 311 ff.
+
+TRADE Unionists and Socialists, official connection between, 141 ff.,
+  434 f.
+      relations between, 131 ff., 424 ff., 434 f.
+  Unions and unemployed problem, 127 ff.
+    have become Socialistic, 141 ff., 434 f., 471
+    secretaries are to administer the Empire, 179
+
+TRADER, private, to be abolished, 242 ff.
+
+TRAMPS and loafers, ideal conditions for, to be created by Socialists, 254
+
+
+UNDERFEEDING--_see_ Free Maintenance
+
+UNEMPLOYED, the, 37, 474 ff.
+  and agriculture, 266
+
+UNEMPLOYMENT benefits employers, 69 f.
+  could it be prevented by Socialists? 124 f.
+  is due to private capital, 65 ff., 125 f.
+    disproved, 126 f.
+  real causes of, 70 f., 124 ff., 474 ff.
+  sinister aims of Socialists regarding, 128 f.
+  Socialist plans regarding, 123 ff.
+    views on, 67 ff., 123 ff.
+
+USURY--_see_ Interest
+
+
+VOTES for women, 222 ff.
+
+
+WAGES, amount and purchasing-power of, depends on production, 120 f.
+  are to be abolished, 6, 21
+  are not to be abolished, 22, 278, 386 f., 450 ff.
+  are to be equal for all, 22, 278, 386 f., 450 ff.
+  are not to be equal for all, 390, 450 ff.
+  different views of Socialists regarding, 6, 450 ff.
+  factors determining amount of, 54 ff., 313 f.
+  great increase of, in Socialist State promised by Socialists, 118 ff.
+    doubted by German Socialists, 120
+  iron law of, 53 ff., 245, 312 f., 319 f.
+    disproved, 54 ff., 313 f., 320
+  rise in, 57 f.
+
+WAR will be abolished by Socialists, 186 f., 189
+
+WEALTH creates poverty, 30, 34 ff., 161
+    disproved, 35, 159
+  is a crime, 80 ff.
+  labour is the only source of, 50 ff.
+    disproved, 52
+  love of, will disappear, 23, 448
+  various sources of, 52
+  why unequally distributed, 473
+
+WEST HAM, 243, 363
+
+WOMAN, the family, and the home. Socialism and, 330 ff.
+  will be given the vote, 222 ff., 349
+  will be made equal to man, 349 f.
+  will be made free, 349
+  will have to work for a living, 349 f.
+  will her privileges be abolished? 350 f.
+  will receive wages for childbearing, 345
+
+WOMEN, community of, 331
+  Karl Marx on, 332 f.
+
+WOMEN'S Freedom League, 429
+  Social and Political Union, 429
+    split in, 429
+  suffrage. Socialist views on, 222 ff.
+
+WOOLWICH Arsenal dismissals, 296.
+
+WORK, fewer hours of, promised by Socialists, 117 f.
+  is a curse, 115
+  organisation of, in Socialist Commonwealth, 455 ff.
+  remuneration of, in Socialist Commonwealth, 450 ff.
+  Socialist views regarding, 115 ff.
+
+WORKERS and capitalists, division of national income between, 40 ff.,
+  75 ft.
+    relations between, 30 ff.
+  are entitled to entire produce of their labour, 38, 61 ff., 451
+    absurdity of demand, 62 ff., 451 ff.
+  are most prosperous where capitalists are richest, 35, 159
+  are swindled out of their earnings, 34
+  become capitalists every day, 60
+  British, are slaves, 15, 18, 31 f.
+    how to improve conditions of, 474 ff.
+  cannot acquire capital, 31 ff.
+  expenditure of, on betting, 166, 479 f.
+  on drink, 106, 319, 479 f.
+  miserable state of, 13 ff.
+  possess absolutely nothing, 33
+  poverty of, 16, 33, 165
+  receive only from one-third to one-fifth of their rightful wages,
+  30, 43, 48 f.
+  value of property owned by, 46
+
+WORKING masses and Socialists, 115 ff.
+
+
+PRINTED BY
+SPOTTISWOODE AND C. LTD., NEW-STREET SQUARE
+LONDON
+
+
+
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+
+
+
+    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
+    | Typographical errors corrected in text:                   |
+    |                                                           |
+    | Page  84: reponsible replaced with responsible            |
+    | Page  89: Britian replaced with Britain                   |
+    | Page 103: repected replaced with respected                |
+    | Page 108: furthur replaced with further                   |
+    | Page 112: Social-Democrary replaced with Social-Democracy |
+    | Page 157: MacLachlan replaced with McLachlan              |
+    | Page 167: interefere replaced with interfere              |
+    | Page 178: self-goverment replaced with self-government    |
+    | Page 212: parasities replaced with parasites              |
+    | Page 217: 'which will be be made' replaced with           |
+    |           'which will be made'                            |
+    | Page 260: Parliamentry replaced with Parliamentary        |
+    | Page 279: Co-opervative replaced with Co-operative        |
+    | Page 280: irreligous replaced with irreligious            |
+    | Page 290: beleagured replaced with beleaguered            |
+    | Page 322: democrary replaced with democracy               |
+    | Page 328: L'Etat replaced with L'État                     |
+    | Page 334: (fn 905) Fornightly replaced with Fortnightly   |
+    | Page 337: marrige replace with marriage                   |
+    | Page 350: L'Etat replaced with L'État                     |
+    | Page 406: Parlement replaced with Parliament              |
+    | Page 425: indentical replaced with identical              |
+    | Page 446: enconomic replaced with economic                |
+    | Page 419: Progessives replaced with Progressives          |
+    |                                                           |
+    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BRITISH SOCIALISM***
+
+
+******* This file should be named 28361-8.txt or 28361-8.zip *******
+
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/6/28361
+
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
diff --git a/28361-8.zip b/28361-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9c9e1f5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28361-8.zip
diff --git a/28361-h.zip b/28361-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..521345f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28361-h.zip
diff --git a/28361-h/28361-h.htm b/28361-h/28361-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6c2380d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28361-h/28361-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,21510 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />
+<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of British Socialism, by J. Ellis Barker</title>
+    <style type="text/css">
+    p {  margin-top: .5em;
+         text-align: justify;
+         margin-bottom: .5em;
+         text-indent: 1em;
+         }
+    h1   {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h5,h6 {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h2 {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h3 {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h4 {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h1.pg,h3.pg   {
+         text-align: center; font-family: Times-roman, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    hr { width: 33%;
+         margin-top: 1em;
+         margin-bottom: 1em;
+       }
+    body{margin-left: 10%;
+         margin-right: 10%;
+        }
+    a  {text-decoration: none} /* no lines under links */
+    div.centered {text-align: center;} /* work around for IE centering with CSS problem part 1 */
+    div.centered table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: left;} /* work around for IE centering with CSS problem part 2 */
+    ul        {list-style-type: none} /* no bullets on lists */
+    ul.nest   {margin-top: .15em; margin-bottom: .15em; text-indent: -1.5em;} /* spacing for nested list */
+    ul.nest2  {margin-top: .15em; margin-bottom: .15em; text-indent: -3em;} /* spacing for nested list */
+    ul.nest3  {margin-top: .15em; margin-bottom: .15em; text-indent: -4.5em;} /* spacing for nested list */
+    li        {margin-top: .15em; margin-bottom: .15em;} /* spacing for list */
+
+    .cen      {text-align: center; text-indent: 0em;} /* centering paragraphs */
+    .sc       {font-variant: small-caps;} /* small caps */
+    .noin     {text-indent: 0em;} /* no indenting */
+    .now      {white-space: nowrap;} /* no wrapping */
+    .hang     {text-indent: -2em;} /* hanging indents */
+    .block    {margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 5%;} /* block indent */
+    .block1   {margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%;} /* block indent */
+    .block2   {margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%;} /* block indent */
+    .right    {text-align: right; padding-right: 2em;} /* right aligning paragraphs */
+    .totoc    {position: absolute; right: 2%; font-size: 75%; text-align: right;} /* Table of contents anchor */
+    .tdr      {text-align: right; padding-right: .5em; vertical-align: bottom;} /* right align cell */
+    .tdr2     {text-align: right; padding-right: .5em; vertical-align: top;} /* right align cell */
+    .tdr3     {text-align: right; padding-right: 2em; vertical-align: bottom;} /* right align cell */
+    .tdc      {text-align: center;} /* center align cell */
+    .tdl      {text-align: left;}  /* left align cell */
+    .tdlp     {text-align: left; padding-left: .5em;}  /* left align cell */
+    .tdlsc    {text-align: left; font-variant: small-caps;} /* aligning cell content and small caps */
+    .tdcsc    {text-align: center; font-variant: small-caps;} /* aligning cell content and small caps */
+    .bb       {border-bottom: solid black 1px;}
+    .bl       {border-left: solid black 1px;}
+    .bt       {border-top: solid black 1px;}
+    .br       {border-right: solid black 1px;}
+    .tr       {margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; margin-top: 5%; margin-bottom: 5%; padding: 1em; background-color: #f6f2f2; color: black; border: dotted black 1px;} /* transcriber's notes */
+
+    .pagenum  { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
+               /*  visibility: hidden;  */
+               position: absolute; right: 2%;
+               font-size: 75%;
+               color: silver;
+               background-color: inherit;
+               text-align: right;
+               text-indent: 0em;
+               font-style: normal;
+               font-weight: normal;
+               font-variant: normal;} /* page numbers */
+
+    .footnotes        {border: dashed 1px;}
+    .footnote         {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 90%;}
+    .footnote .label  {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right; font-size: 90%;}
+    .fnanchor         {vertical-align: text-top; font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;}
+
+    .poem             {margin-left: 25%; margin-right: 15%; text-align: left;}
+    .poem br          {display: none;}
+    .poem .stanza     {margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em;}
+    .poem span        {display: block; margin: 0; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i1     {display: block; margin-left: 1em;}
+    .poem span.i2     {display: block; margin-left: 2em;}
+    .poem span.i4     {display: block; margin-left: 4em;}
+    .poem span.i6     {display: block; margin-left: 6em;}
+    .poem span.i8      {display: block; margin-left: 8em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.pn     { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
+                        /*  visibility: hidden;  */
+                            position: absolute; right: 2%;
+                            font-size: 75%;
+                            text-align: right;
+                            text-indent: 0em;
+                            font-style: normal;
+                            font-weight: normal;
+                            color: silver; background-color: inherit;
+                            font-variant: normal;} /* page numbers in poems */
+
+    hr.full { width: 100%;
+              margin-top: 0em;
+              margin-bottom: 0em;
+              border: solid black;
+              height: 5px; }
+    pre      {font-size: 85%; }
+    </style>
+</head>
+<body>
+<h1 class="pg">The Project Gutenberg eBook of British Socialism, by J. Ellis Barker</h1>
+<pre>
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at <a href = "http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a></pre>
+<p>Title: British Socialism</p>
+<p>       An Examination of Its Doctrines, Policy, Aims and Practical Proposals</p>
+<p>Author: J. Ellis Barker</p>
+<p>Release Date: March 19, 2009  [eBook #28361]</p>
+<p>Language: English</p>
+<p>Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1</p>
+<p>***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BRITISH SOCIALISM***</p>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<h3 class="pg">E-text prepared by Jeannie Howse, Carl Hudkins,<br />
+    jnik (media provider),<br />
+    and the Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team<br />
+    (http://www.pgdp.net)</h3>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<div class="tr">
+<p class="cen" style="font-weight: bold;">Transcriber's Note:</p>
+<br />
+<p class="noin">Inconsistent hyphenation in the original document has been preserved.</p>
+<p class="noin">This e-book has many unusual words and spelling that have been retained.</p>
+<p class="noin" style="text-align: left;">Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.
+For a complete list, please see the <span style="white-space: nowrap;"><a href="#TN">end of this document</a>.</span></p>
+</div>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<hr class="full" />
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+
+<h2>BRITISH SOCIALISM</h2>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+
+<h1>BRITISH SOCIALISM</h1>
+
+<h4>AN EXAMINATION OF</h4>
+
+<h3>ITS DOCTRINES, POLICY, AIMS<br />
+AND PRACTICAL PROPOSALS</h3>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<h4>BY</h4>
+<h3>J. ELLIS BARKER</h3>
+<h6>AUTHOR OF<br />
+'MODERN GERMANY: HER POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC PROBLEMS, ETC.'<br />
+'THE RISE AND DECLINE OF THE NETHERLANDS'</h6>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<h5>LONDON<br />
+SMITH, ELDER, &amp; CO.<br />
+NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS<br />
+1908</h5>
+
+<br />
+<a name="toc" id="toc"></a><hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[v]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CONTENTS</h3>
+<br />
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="80%" summary="Table of Contents">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr" width="10%" style="font-size: 80%;">CHAPTER</td>
+  <td class="tdl" width="80%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr" width="10%" style="font-size: 80%;">PAGE</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">I.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_I">Introduction&mdash;What is Socialism?</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">1  </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">II.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_II">Some Socialist Views of Present Society and of the Society of the Future</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">10 </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">III.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_III">The Grievances of the Socialists</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">30 </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">IV.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_IV">The Fundamental Doctrines of Socialism</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">50 </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">V.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_V">The Aims and Policy of the Socialists</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">92 </td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">VI.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_VI">The Attitude of Socialists towards the Working Masses</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">115</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">VII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_VII">The Attitude of Socialists towards Trade Unionists and Co-operators</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">131</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">VIII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_VIII">Socialist Views and Proposals regarding Land and the Landlords</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">145</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">IX.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_IX">Socialist Views and Proposals regarding Capital and the Capitalists</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">152</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">X.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_X">Socialist Views and Proposals regarding Taxation and the National Budget</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">160</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XI.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XI">Socialism and the Empire</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">170</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XII">Socialist Views on International Relations and Foreign Policy</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">183</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XIII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIII">Socialism and the Army</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">192</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XIV.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIV">Socialism and the Monarchy</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">207</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XV.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XV">Socialist Views on Parliament and the National Administration</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">209</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XVI.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XVI">The Attitude of the Socialists towards the Two Parliamentary Parties</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">225</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XVII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XVII">Socialism and Local Government</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">240</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XVIII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XVIII">Socialism and Agriculture</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">261</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XIX.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIX">Socialist Views on British Railways and Shipping</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">269<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">[vi]</a></span></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XX.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XX">Some Socialist Views on Money, Banks, and Banking</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">278</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXI.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXI">Some Socialist Views on Free Trade and Protection</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">285</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXII">Socialism and Education</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">302</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXIII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXIII">The Attitude of Socialists Towards Providence, Thrift, and Temperance</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">311</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXIV.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXIV">Socialist Views on Law and Justice</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">325</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXV.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXV">Socialism and Woman, the Family and the Home</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">330</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXVI.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXVI">The Socialist Attitude Towards Christianity and Religion</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">354</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXVII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXVII">The Religion of Socialism</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">364</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXVIII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXVIII">Christian Socialism</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">375</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXIX.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXIX">Socialism and Communism</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">381</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXX.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXX">Socialism and Anarchism</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">394</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXXI.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXXI">Socialism and Revolution</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">404</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXXII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXXII">State Socialism</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">411</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXXIII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXXIII">The Socialist Organisations: their Mutual Relations and their Policy</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">415</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXXIV.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXXIV">The Growth and Danger of British Socialism</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">431</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXXV.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXXV">How the Progress of Socialism may be Checked</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">440</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXXVI.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXXVI">Is Socialism Possible?&mdash;a Glance into the Socialist State of the Future</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">444</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr2">XXXVII.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#CHAPTER_XXXVII">Conclusion</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">470</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdlsc" colspan="2"><a href="#APPENDIX">Appendix&mdash;Official Programmes of the Socialistic Organisations</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">481</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdlsc" colspan="2"><a href="#BIBLIOGRAPHY">Bibliography</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">493</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdlsc" colspan="2"><a href="#ANALYTICAL_INDEX">Analytical Index</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">509</td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_I" id="CHAPTER_I"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span><br />
+
+<h1>BRITISH SOCIALISM</h1>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER I<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>INTRODUCTION&mdash;WHAT IS SOCIALISM?</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">What is Socialism?</p>
+
+<p>It is exceedingly difficult to answer that question in a few words,
+for Socialism is exceedingly elusive and bewildering in its doctrines,
+its aims, and its proposals.</p>
+
+<p>Its opponents have described it as "a doctrine of sordid materialism
+and of atheism," they have denounced it as "the gospel of everlasting
+bellyful,"<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> and as "the coming slavery."<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> They have stated that
+Socialism means to abolish religion, that it "would try to put
+laziness, thriftlessness, and inefficiency on a par with industry,
+thrift, and efficiency, that it would strive to break up not merely
+private property, but, what is far more important, the home, the chief
+prop upon which our whole civilisation stands."<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Socialists, on the other hand, claim that "Socialism presents the
+only living ideal of human existence"<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a>; that "Socialism is science
+applied with knowledge and understanding to all branches of human
+activity"<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a>; that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span>"Socialism is freedom,"<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> and that it is
+exceedingly just, for "the justice of Socialism will see all things,
+and therefore understand all things."<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> One of the Socialist leaders
+has told us "Socialism is much more than either a political creed or
+an economic dogma. It presents to the modern world a new conception of
+society and a new basis upon which to build up the life of the
+individual and of the State."<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> Another informs us "Socialism to
+Socialists is not a Utopia which they have invented, but a principle
+of social organisation which they assert to have been discovered by
+the patient investigators into sociology whose labours have
+distinguished the present century."<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> A third has stated that
+"Socialism is really neither more nor less than the science of
+sociology."<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> A fourth asserts that "it is a scientific scheme of
+national government entirely wise, just, and practical."<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> A fifth
+states "Socialism to me has always meant not a principle, but certain
+definite economic measures which I wish to see taken."<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p>
+
+<p>Other Socialists have taught that "Socialism is an ethical system
+founded on justice and truth; it is a heartfelt, soul-inspiring
+religion, resting upon the love of God."<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> "Socialism is a theory of
+social organisation, which reconciles the individual to society. It
+has discovered how the individual in society can attain to a state of
+complete development."<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> "Socialism is the right of the community,
+acting in its corporate capacity, to intervene in the lives and
+labours of men and women."<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span>"Socialism is nothing but the
+extension of democratic self-government from the political to the
+industrial world."<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> "Socialism is an endeavour to substitute for
+the anarchical struggle or fight for existence an organised
+co-operation for existence."<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> "Socialism may be described as an
+endeavour to readjust the machinery of industry in such a way that it
+can at once depend upon and issue in a higher kind of character and
+social type than is encouraged by the conditions of ordinary
+competitive enterprise."<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> "Socialism is the development of policies
+concerning the welfare of society."<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> "It is not arbitrary
+destruction and reconstruction, but a natural process of
+development."<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> "The idea of Socialism will conquer the world, for
+this idea is nothing but the real, well understood interest of
+mankind."<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> "Its principles will carry the whole human race to a
+higher state of perfection."<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> "It is the great modern protest
+against unreality, against the delusive shams which now masquerade as
+verities."<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> "Socialism is of the character of a historical
+discovery."<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> "Socialism, the inspiring principle of all Labour
+Parties, whether they know it or not, is the next world movement&mdash;the
+movement of the constructive intellect."<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialism is rich in promises, and its claims to our consideration and
+support are manifold. Are these claims justified or not? Are the
+Socialists or the Anti-Socialists right in their conception of
+Socialism?</p>
+
+<p>The Socialists maintain that all opposition to Socialism is based
+either on self-interest or ignorance, and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span>principally upon the
+latter. Therefore one of the Socialist leaders wrote: "Those who wish
+to understand Socialism will be wise to study Socialist books and
+papers. One does not expect a true and fair account of any theory or
+cause from its enemies. The man who takes his ideas of Trade-Unionism
+from the Free Labour League, his ideas of Liberalism from the Tory
+papers, his ideas of South African affairs&mdash;or any other affairs&mdash;from
+the Yellow Press, will be misled into all manner of absurdities and
+errors. The statements of party politicians and party newspapers on
+most controversial subjects are prejudiced and inaccurate; but there
+is no subject upon which the professional misleaders of the people are
+so untrustworthy and so disingenuous as they are upon the subject of
+Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> A leading Socialist organ complained: "Our opponents
+decline to deal with the fundamental principles of Socialism&mdash;its
+unanswerable indictment of the capitalist system, with all its
+concomitants of wage-slavery and slumdom; prostitution and child
+murder&mdash;and prefer instead to indulge in calumniation and
+misrepresentation of Socialism. We need not complain about that. It is
+a tribute to the soundness of the Socialist position, to the
+irrefutability of its principles, the impregnability of the rock of
+economic truth upon which it is based, that our enemies dare not
+oppose the principles of Socialism, dare not attempt to meet the
+charge Socialism levels against the existing order."<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a></p>
+
+<p>There is much truth in these complaints. The general public and most
+writers and speakers know very little about Socialism, because this
+most interesting subject has been very inadequately treated in the
+existing books.</p>
+
+<p>The existing books on Socialism describe, analyse, and criticise the
+Socialist doctrines only in the abstract <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span>as a rule. However,
+Socialism is not only an elaborate economic doctrine, it is at the
+same time a complete system of practical politics. Hence it does not
+suffice to study the doctrines of Socialism by themselves. In order to
+understand Socialism we must also investigate its practical proposals.</p>
+
+<p>Following the methods of our political economists, most writers on
+Socialism have, unfortunately, treated Socialism rather as a
+scientific abstraction than as a business proposition. Consequently
+the most important practical details of Socialism, such as: What are
+the views of the Socialist with regard to the Monarchy, the Army, the
+Banks, the National Currency, the Law, Education? what are their
+practical aims as regards Parliamentary Representation, Foreign
+Policy, Agriculture, Taxation, Old-age Pensions, Fiscal Policy? what
+are their relations with the Parliamentary Parties, the Trade-Unions,
+the Co-operators, etc? what is their attitude towards International
+Communism and Anarchism? is English Socialism an Evolutionary or a
+Revolutionary Movement?&mdash;these and many other questions are touched
+but lightly or are not touched at all.</p>
+
+<p>It is somewhat difficult to deal fully with the practical proposals of
+the Socialists, because the Socialists are very averse from
+formulating their aims and disclosing their plans. An English
+Socialist wrote: "To dogmatise about the form which the Socialist
+State shall take is to play the fool."<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> Another one stated: "It is
+quite impossible, at this time, nor would it be desirable, if
+possible, to lay down any hard and fast line as to the development of
+the details of Socialist organisation. Broad principles are all that
+can with any degree of confidence be spoken about. The details will
+arrange themselves, as the time arrives when it becomes necessary to
+settle them."<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span>Gronlund, perhaps the most prominent American
+Socialist, stated: "Socialists do not profess to be architects. They
+have not planned the future in minute detail."<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> Herr Bebel, the
+leader of the German Social-Democratic Party, said on February 3,
+1893, in the Reichstag, replying to the Roman Catholics, "We do not
+ask from you the details of the future life of which you speak so
+incessantly. Why, then, do you ask us about the future society?"<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a>
+Although we are told that "Socialism claims the consideration of
+mankind, because it comes forward and offers a complete scheme to
+improve the conditions of human life,"<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> Socialists carefully
+abstain as a rule from giving us the details of that scheme.</p>
+
+<p>The Socialists of all countries have very excellent reasons for
+keeping to themselves the details of their plans for the future.
+Nevertheless, a careful search through their numerous writings will
+enable us to obtain a fairly clear and comprehensive view of their
+political and economic plans and intentions.</p>
+
+<p>Great Britain does not as yet possess a great Socialist party but only
+a number of Socialist groups and factions which are totally at
+variance as regards their aims, policy, and tactics. "They differ as
+to the best means of getting what they want, and as to the best ways
+of managing the work, and as to the proper way of sharing the
+earnings. Some Socialists still believe that Socialism will have to be
+got by force. I think there are not many. Some are in favour of buying
+the land, the railways, the machinery, and other things; and some are
+in favour of taking them, by force, or by new laws. Then some say that
+there should be no wages paid at all, but that everyone should do an
+equal share of work, and take whatever he needed from the nation's
+goods. Others say that all men should <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span>do an equal share of work, and
+have an equal share of the goods, or of the earnings. Others say it
+would be better to pay wages, as now, but to let the wages be fixed by
+the Government, or by corporations, or other officials, and that all
+wages should be equal. Others, again, say that wages should be paid,
+that the wages should be fixed as above stated, and that different
+kinds of work should be paid for at different rates. In one kind of
+Socialism the civil engineer, the actor, the general, the artist, the
+tram guard, the dustman, the milliner, and the collier would all be
+paid the same wages. In another kind of Socialism there would be no
+wages, but all would be called upon to work, and all who worked would
+'take according to their needs.' In another kind of Socialism the
+civil engineer would be paid more than the navvy, the opera singer
+more than the milliner, the general more than the sergeant, and the
+editor more than the scavenger."<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a></p>
+
+<p>Notwithstanding these numerous and important differences, of which
+more will be learned in the course of this book, British Socialists
+are absolutely united in certain important respects. "The policies of
+Socialism are a changeable quantity, though the principle is as fixed
+as the Northern Star."<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> "Socialism is as flexible in its form as it
+is definite in its principles."<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p>
+
+<p>A superficial study of Socialism reveals to us not a single and
+generally accepted plan, but a confused and confusing mass of mutually
+contradictory plans and doctrines. Therefore he who wishes to know
+what Socialism is, must study the many-headed movement in its entirety
+and give an impartial hearing to all its advocates. We can understand
+Socialism only if we are acquainted with practically its entire
+literature.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span>Unfortunately the literature of Socialism is very vast. A complete
+collection of modern Socialist literature would embrace at least
+thirty thousand items. Therefore a full analysis of international
+Socialism based upon the study of the original sources is a forbidding
+undertaking. I have consequently limited myself to the investigation
+of the British Socialist movement, although I have cast a cursory
+glance upon foreign Socialism whenever it seemed necessary to do so.</p>
+
+<p>I have consulted altogether about a thousand books and pamphlets, and
+have given representative extracts from four hundred or five hundred
+of those which seemed most proper to elucidate the subject of this
+book. Having given space to the views of all the Socialist groups,
+this book is a summary of the whole literature of British Socialism
+and a key to it. It is based exclusively on first-hand evidence, and
+every statement contained in it can instantly be verified by reference
+to the original sources indicated in the footnotes. In the
+Bibliography at the end of this volume the full title, publisher's
+address, and date of publication of all sources drawn upon are given,
+so that readers will have no difficulty in procuring any Socialist
+books they may want for further study.</p>
+
+<p>Most of the books quoted are unknown to booksellers, and are not in
+public libraries. Even the British Museum Library possesses only part
+of the publications used in this book, which is the first to exploit
+fully the whole Socialist party literature. Whilst most books on
+Socialism take note only of Socialist text-books addressed to
+students, the present volume considers chiefly the propaganda
+literature which is educating the Socialist rank and file and shaping
+its political views. For all practical political purposes the
+propaganda literature is undoubtedly by far the more important of the
+two to the statesman and the citizen.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span>The present volume is the only book of its kind, and I hope that the
+Socialist movement in Germany, France, and the United States will be
+treated with similar completeness by writers of these countries. The
+perusal of the present volume will enable us to form an opinion of the
+merits or demerits of the Socialistic theories and practical plans,
+and make it possible for us to separate the grain from the chaff, the
+wisdom from the folly, in the teachings of the Socialists. Thus we
+shall be able to see which of their complaints and proposals are
+justified and practical, and which are unjustified and unpractical.</p>
+
+<p>Popular dissatisfaction, Socialistic and non-Socialistic, points to
+the existence of ills in the body politic, and the Socialistic
+agitation is exceedingly valuable inasmuch as it draws general
+attention to these ills. Some complaints of the Socialists will be
+found to be imaginary, others are very real.</p>
+
+<p>It would be a sterile undertaking merely to analyse and criticise
+Socialism and the Socialistic proposals. Therefore, after having
+described the policy, ideals, and aims of the Socialists, I mean to
+analyse the disease of which Socialism is a consequence and a symptom,
+and to propose practical measures for curing it.</p>
+
+<p>In the course of this book I shall show that Socialism seems likely to
+become a very great danger in this country&mdash;a far greater danger than
+is generally realised. Therefore its opponents will be wise not to
+sneer at Socialism, but to study it and to try to understand it. That
+task will be found worth our while, and only after it shall we be able
+to further Socialism if it is beneficial, to combat it if it is
+pernicious, and to correct it if it is only the misguided expression
+of genuine suffering and want. Indifference to a great and dangerous
+political movement such as Socialism may have the gravest
+consequences. Idlers do not make history. They suffer it.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Millar, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 21.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Herbert Spencer, <i>The Man versus the State</i>, p. 18 ff.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Roosevelt, Presidential Message, December 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> Walter Crane in Squire, <i>Socialism and Art</i>, Foreword.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 256.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> Kessack, <i>Capitalist Wilderness</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> Ford, <i>Woman and Socialism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Socialism and Slavery</i>, Preface.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Impossibilities of Anarchism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> "Veritas," <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> <i>Labour Record</i>, February 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> <i>Will Socialism benefit the British People?</i> p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> Ball, <i>The Moral Aspects of Socialism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> Williams, <i>The Difficulties of Socialism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 257.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> Sorge, <i>Socialism and the Worker</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. ix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> Lafargue, in Bliss, <i>Encyclopedia of Social Reform</i>, p.
+1264.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Labour and the Empire</i>, p. 108.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>What is this Socialism?</i> p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> <i>Justice</i>, October 19, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 96.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 44.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 126.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> Guyot, <i>Pretensions of Socialism</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> Hird, <i>From Brute to Brother</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> Robert Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a> Williams, <i>Difficulties of Socialism</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> Bliss, <i>Encyclopedia of Social Reform</i>, p. 1265.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_II" id="CHAPTER_II"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER II<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS OF PRESENT SOCIETY AND OF THE SOCIETY OF THE FUTURE</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">"We are not indebted to reason," wrote the greatest American
+Socialist, "for the landmarks of human progress, for the introduction
+of Christianity, the institution of the monastic orders, the Crusades,
+the Reformation, the American Revolution, or the abolition of slavery.
+Man is only irresistible when he acts from passion. The masses of men
+are never moved except by passions, feelings, interests."<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a>
+"Socialism has the advantage of appealing to the interests as well as
+to the enthusiasm of all except the few who think the world good
+enough as it is.... It is, of course, to the discontented wage-workers
+that the Socialist can appeal with the greatest chance of
+success."<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> These indiscreet words, which might have been written by
+the most implacable of Anti-Socialists, sum up and explain the
+Socialistic agitation and tactics. They are a proclamation and an
+avowal, and the worst enemy of Socialism would have found it difficult
+to pen a more damaging statement. Socialists rely not on reason or
+justice, but on unreason and passion, for the victory of their cause;
+and that fact is very much to be regretted, for it is bound to create
+prejudice and suspicion, and to greatly weaken their case.</p>
+
+<p>The British Socialists, seeking to rouse the passions of men,
+habitually rely on exaggeration and misrepresentation. They do not
+tire of painting the present <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span>state of society in the darkest colours
+and of describing with an unbounded but hardly justifiable optimism
+and enthusiasm the advantages which will accrue to society when
+Socialism has come to rule. It will be seen that in describing society
+of the present and society of the future, Socialists let their
+imagination run riot in the most astounding fashion.</p>
+
+<p>To the Socialist modern civilisation is worse than a failure. "Our
+civilisation seems all so savage and bestial and filthy and
+inartistic; all so cowardly and devilish and despicable. We fight by
+cheatery and underselling, and adulteration and bribery, and unmanly
+smirking for our bone of a livelihood; all scrambling and biting round
+the platter when there is abundance for all, if we were orderly and
+courteous and gentlemanly; all crushing the weaker; all struggling to
+the platter-side for the privilege of wearing tall hats and of giving
+good advice to the poor dogs outside. We, the well-fed, shout lordily
+to the hungry and cheer them with legends to the effect that though
+the poor are juggled out of earth, they may be masters in Heaven. Our
+civilisation is barbarous."<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Where'er we go, to east or west<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">North or south, 'tis all the same;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Civilisation at it's best<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Is savagery's newer name.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">For we see on every hand<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">'Midst the whirr and noise of trade<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The toilers, crushed and trampled, and<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Into beasts of burden made.<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"The one reality of the nineteenth century is the scramble for wealth;
+politics, literature, science, religion, art, are, apart from
+money-getting, mere lifeless wraiths."<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> Government in general, and
+British Government in <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span>particular, is vicious, tyrannous, and
+neglectful, and deserves the utmost contempt. "National Government is
+devised for other objects than the adjustment of essential, economic,
+and hygienic arrangements for the redemption of human life; to use it
+for such a purpose is gross tyranny and a deadly blow at the very
+foundations of morality and religion! Governments exist for quite
+other purposes than this&mdash;to pay a million pounds yearly to one family
+and its immediate parasites, to supply power of life and death over
+the people to the exploiting class and fat places to their satellites
+and creatures, to squander hundreds of millions on gunpowder and
+armaments, to use the whole socialised power of the nation to overawe,
+exploit, rob, and ruin the so-called lower races&mdash;all these are the
+proper objects of government according to our orthodox wiseacres, but
+to use the same obvious instrument adequately to protect human life at
+home, and that life, to quote Mr. Burns, 'the weakest, the smallest,
+and the dearest to us all,' is to undermine the foundations of British
+manliness and to poison the fountain of British liberty and greatness.
+Such is the curious <i>m&eacute;lange</i> of selfishness, hypocrisy, prejudice,
+ignorance, and incoherence which passes muster for argument amongst
+our anti-Socialist opponents."<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p>
+
+<p>British social legislation has been a failure. Never was the lot of
+the workers worse than it is now. "Your legislation for the past
+hundred years is a perpetual and fruitless effort to regulate the
+disorders of your economic system. Your poor, your drunken, your
+incompetent, your sick, your aged, ride you like a nightmare. You have
+dissolved all human and personal ties. The salient characteristic of
+your civilisation is its irresponsibility. The making of dividends is
+the universal preoccupation; the well-being of the labourer is no
+one's concern. You depend on variations of supply and demand which
+you <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span>can neither determine nor anticipate. The failure of a harvest,
+the modification of a tariff in some remote country dislocates the
+industry of millions, thousands of miles away. You are at the mercy of
+a prospector's luck, an inventor's genius, a woman's caprice&mdash;nay, you
+are at the mercy of your own instruments. Your capital is alive and
+cries for food."<a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a></p>
+
+<p>Virtue has disappeared, religion is a fraud, clergy and priesthood are
+mercenary, cowardly, and interested time-servers. "The priests and the
+parsons are salary-slaves as much as the workers are wage-slaves. The
+majority of them dare not preach the Gospel of Humanity, Justice, and
+Socialism from their pulpits owing to their fear of their paymasters.
+Religion is divorced from business, politics, the administration of
+public authorities, the treatment of the aged worker, and written
+across the actions of the professing Christians is 'Self-interest;
+every man for himself and the Workhouse take the hindmost.'"<a name="FNanchor_43_43" id="FNanchor_43_43"></a><a href="#Footnote_43_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a></p>
+
+<p>Life is hell, and only Socialism can regenerate the world.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Things are all wrong, and we must put them right<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">So say all Socialists, and truly too.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Man does not get the chance here to subdue<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The brute in self; and hence the fearful blight<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Which makes one sicken at the dreadful sight<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Of all society in one hell stew.<a name="FNanchor_44_44" id="FNanchor_44_44"></a><a href="#Footnote_44_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Apparently all British workers spend their lives in terrible misery
+and constant privation. Hunger and despair are their constant
+companions, and they will see in Socialism their only salvation even
+if Socialism should destroy individual liberty, for to them individual
+liberty is a word without meaning. One of the most <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span>prominent British
+Socialists, Mr. Philip Snowden, M.P., in a pamphlet addressed to
+working men, writes: "Let those who fear that Socialism will destroy
+individual liberty and hinder intellectual development go with their
+talk to the machine-workers of our great northern towns, who are
+chained for eleven hours a day to a monotonous toil, with the eye of
+the overseer and the fear of dismissal spurring them on to an exertion
+which leaves them at the end of their day's work physical wrecks, with
+no ambition but to restore their wasted energies at the nearest
+public-house. Let them go with their talk of the blessings of
+civilisation to the pottery and chemical workers, whose systems are
+poisoned, whose sight is destroyed, where, through the bodies of the
+parents being saturated with poison, half the children are born dead,
+and of the rest not one in four lives to be five&mdash;tell them to hold
+fast to their share of the blessings of our glorious civilisation. Or
+go to the sweaters' victims, living, eating, working, dying in one
+room, for which a vampire landlord will take in rent one-half of all
+the family can earn by working day and night&mdash;talk to them of
+individual liberty and warn them of the tyranny of the coming
+Socialism. Or go on a bitterly cold winter morning to the dock gates
+of one of our great ports and see thousands of men waiting in the hope
+of a day's job, and watch how a few here and there of the strongest
+are selected, and the rest left to another day of hunger and despair;
+or, wait still, and see how a few remain behind in the hope that their
+mate may meet with an accident and 'they can snatch at the work he
+had.' Why, to talk of individual freedom and equality of opportunity
+under a system of cannibalistic competition like this is like the
+mocking laughter of a raving maniac gloating over the torture of the
+victim it holds in its murderous grip."<a name="FNanchor_45_45" id="FNanchor_45_45"></a><a href="#Footnote_45_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> In another popular
+pamphlet the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span>worker is told: "After all, John, does it not strike you
+that there is some foul iniquity in a system which allows one part of
+the community to do another portion of it to death and to rob and
+enslave those it is pleased to let live? Do you not see that those
+your capitalists find it convenient and profitable to employ may live;
+and that those they do not choose to employ must die? Do you not see
+that these are hurried and driven hither and thither in haggard,
+destitute misery; are thrust into festering heaps in your foul slums;
+into your gaols, and penitentiaries, and workhouses; that they wander
+in hopeless misery, hungering within sight of food, penniless amid
+plenty, enforcedly idle, and work to which they can have no access
+lying upon every hand of them, as though the world were under an
+enchantment and God were dead!"<a name="FNanchor_46_46" id="FNanchor_46_46"></a><a href="#Footnote_46_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a></p>
+
+<p>The British working man, as he is generally known, is a manly and very
+independent personage. As a rule his master is more afraid of him than
+he is of his master. Yet, according to the picture drawn of him by the
+Socialists, he is a timorous, cowardly, whining, pitiful creature who
+has to cringe to his tyrannic employers:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">See the toiler, how he slaves<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">For a trifle of his toil.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">How disease and death he braves,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Yet the masters take the spoil;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And how often, cap in hand,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Trembling, pleading piteously,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">He is forced to take his stand<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">In the mart of slavery.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Oh! ye tyrants of the earth,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Who make others' ruin your trade,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">'Midst licentious love and mirth<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Fashion, pomp, and church parade.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Do you never think, oh, tell<br /></span><span class='pn'><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span>
+<span class="i1">Of the hideous crime and shame<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">That has made this earth a hell<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Of commercial fraud and shame?<a name="FNanchor_47_47" id="FNanchor_47_47"></a><a href="#Footnote_47_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>During the week the British workers work at most five and a half days
+out of seven, and as a rule they work during from eight to ten hours a
+day. Generally speaking, the pace at which British workmen work is not
+forced. Except in a few special industries overwork among the working
+men is practically unknown. Besides, the pace at which work is
+performed is as a rule determined not by the employer, but by the
+employees. Nevertheless we read, "It is monstrous that, while some
+half million of men are vainly seeking employment, millions of their
+fellows should have no respite from arduous ill-requited toil and
+should be hastening to a premature death through overwork."<a name="FNanchor_48_48" id="FNanchor_48_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_48_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> In
+prose and verse the British workers are constantly told that they are
+slaves<a name="FNanchor_49_49" id="FNanchor_49_49"></a><a href="#Footnote_49_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> who are driven into starvation and suicide:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Let them brag until in the face they are black<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">That over oceans they hold their sway,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Of the flag of Old England, the Union Jack,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">About which I have something to say.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">'Tis said that it floats o'er the free; but it waves<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Over thousands of hard-worked, ill-paid British slaves,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Who are driven to pauper and suicide graves&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The starving poor of Old England.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i4"><i>Chorus.</i><br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i4">'Tis the poor, the poor the taxes have to pay,<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">The poor who are starving every day,<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Who faint and die on the King's highway&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">The starving poor of Old England.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">There's the slaves of the needle and the slaves of the mine,<br /></span><span class='pn'><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span>
+<span class="i1">The postmen, and the sons of the plough,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And the hard-worked servants on the railway line,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Who get little by the sweat of their brow.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">'Tis said that the labourer is worthy of his hire;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">But of whom does he get it? we'd like to enquire.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Not of any mill-owner, or farmer, or squire,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Who grind down the poor of Old England.<a name="FNanchor_50_50" id="FNanchor_50_50"></a><a href="#Footnote_50_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Now let us cast a glance at the Socialist picture of the society of
+the future under Socialistic rule.</p>
+
+<p>The first thing which Socialism would do would be to organise work,
+for "practical Socialism is a kind of national scheme of co-operation,
+managed by the State."<a name="FNanchor_51_51" id="FNanchor_51_51"></a><a href="#Footnote_51_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> There would be no more employers, for
+"under Socialism all the work of the nation would be managed by the
+nation for the nation,"<a name="FNanchor_52_52" id="FNanchor_52_52"></a><a href="#Footnote_52_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> and all would have plenty to eat, because
+"Socialism would leave no man to starve."<a name="FNanchor_53_53" id="FNanchor_53_53"></a><a href="#Footnote_53_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> "All the work of the
+nation would be organised&mdash;that is to say, it would be ordered or
+arranged so that no one need be out of work, and so that no useless
+work need be done, and so that no work need be done twice where once
+would serve."<a name="FNanchor_54_54" id="FNanchor_54_54"></a><a href="#Footnote_54_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is expected that the national organisation and administration of
+all the industries would prove more efficient than private enterprise.
+We are assured that "under Socialism the efficiency of production
+developed by Capitalism will not only be preserved but improved.
+Mechanical invention will be encouraged and utilised to the
+utmost."<a name="FNanchor_55_55" id="FNanchor_55_55"></a><a href="#Footnote_55_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> Compulsory labour, State regulation of work, and
+increased production would lead to increased consumption and increased
+comfort. "Who would deny <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span>that, if it is everybody's duty to work, if
+the production of unnecessary&mdash;nay, even of injurious&mdash;articles is
+abolished, if production is organised in conformity with the real
+wants and pleasures of mankind&mdash;who would deny, I ask, that the
+standard of life of the whole human race might be raised infinitely
+above its present grade?"<a name="FNanchor_56_56" id="FNanchor_56_56"></a><a href="#Footnote_56_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a></p>
+
+<p>Although Socialism would make work compulsory to all, and place every
+man, woman, and child under the direction of the great Socialist
+organisation with its army of officials, and although it would destroy
+individual liberty as at present understood, by placing the daily life
+of every citizen under Government regulations and restrictions, it
+would bring with it a greater liberty. Unfortunately the Socialists
+fail to say what that liberty consists in, and we must take their
+assurances in lieu of details. "Those who fear that Socialism will
+destroy individual liberty fail to distinguish between liberty and
+licence. Individualism is licence&mdash;it is the freedom of the individual
+to do as he likes without regard to the effect of his action on
+others, or even without regard to his own best welfare. Socialism is
+liberty; for it will restrict the freedom of the individual to inflict
+injury upon others or to do what is morally injurious to himself."<a name="FNanchor_57_57" id="FNanchor_57_57"></a><a href="#Footnote_57_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialism will release the British slaves out of their slavery, and
+restore them to everlasting freedom. "Such Socialism as we champion
+means for all future generations not slavery, but full and
+never-ending freedom."<a name="FNanchor_58_58" id="FNanchor_58_58"></a><a href="#Footnote_58_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> "Socialism declares it to be the duty of
+man to remove all artificial barriers to the improvement of
+circumstances, in order that humanity, as a whole, may have freedom
+and all possible assistance to attain to its full stature, physically,
+mentally, and spiritually."<a name="FNanchor_59_59" id="FNanchor_59_59"></a><a href="#Footnote_59_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span>With the introduction of the Socialist <i>r&eacute;gime</i> the earth would, as by
+a magician's wand, be transformed into a paradise. Over-population,
+bad harvests, the maladjustment of international demand and supply,
+and individual folly, laziness, wastefulness, improvidence, and
+passion would apparently no longer have the same unfortunate
+consequences which they have now. "The struggle for individual
+existence disappears...."<a name="FNanchor_60_60" id="FNanchor_60_60"></a><a href="#Footnote_60_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> "The words 'poor' and 'charity' will be
+expunged from the dictionary as relics of a barbarous past."<a name="FNanchor_61_61" id="FNanchor_61_61"></a><a href="#Footnote_61_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a>
+"There would be no starvation, there would be no pauperism, there
+would be no sweaters; there would be no barefooted children in the
+streets; there would be no fraudulent trustees, no bankrupts; there
+would be no slums, no annual massacre of innocents by preventable
+disease; there would be hardly such a thing known as ignorance, there
+would be scarcely any drunkenness, and crime would shrink to
+microscopic dimensions."<a name="FNanchor_62_62" id="FNanchor_62_62"></a><a href="#Footnote_62_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Practical Socialism would educate the people. It would provide cheap
+and pure food. It would extend and elevate the means of study and
+amusement. It would foster literature and science and art. It would
+encourage and reward genius and industry. It would abolish sweating
+and jerry-work. It would demolish the slums and erect good and
+handsome dwellings. It would compel all men to do some kind of useful
+work. It would recreate and nourish the craftsman's pride in his
+craft. It would protect women and children. It would raise the
+standard of health and morality; and it would take the sting out of
+pauperism by paying pensions to honest workers no longer able to
+work."<a name="FNanchor_63_63" id="FNanchor_63_63"></a><a href="#Footnote_63_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a></p>
+
+<p>"There is something in Socialism to kill ignorance and to destroy
+vice. There is something in it to shut up <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span>the gaols, to do away with
+prostitution, to reduce crime and drunkenness, and wipe out for ever
+the sweater and the slums, the beggars and the idle rich, the useless
+fine ladies and lords, and to make it possible for sober and willing
+workers to live healthy, and happy, and honourable lives."<a name="FNanchor_64_64" id="FNanchor_64_64"></a><a href="#Footnote_64_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Socialist Government would apparently be all-powerful and
+all-wise. At any rate, it would improve the character of the people.
+"Socialism would teach and train all children wisely; it would foster
+genius and devotion to the common good; it would kill scamping, and
+loafing, and jerrymandering; it would give us better health, better
+homes, better work, better food, better lives, and better men and
+women."<a name="FNanchor_65_65" id="FNanchor_65_65"></a><a href="#Footnote_65_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a></p>
+
+<p>When Socialism is introduced and private capital abolished, the golden
+age of the world will begin:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">When all mankind are workers,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And no drones in the hive;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Oh, what a happy, glorious time<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">They'll have who are alive.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">This world will be a garden,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">An Eden full of bliss;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Oh, brother&mdash;sister&mdash;won't you strive<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">For such a state as this?<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">There will be no starving children, no;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Nor tramps, nor beggars then;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">No workhouses, nor prisons, and<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">No slums, nor sweater's den.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The land-grabber and the vampire,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And the fleecer of our toil,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Will all have ceased to crush us<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">In their vile rush for the spoil.<a name="FNanchor_66_66" id="FNanchor_66_66"></a><a href="#Footnote_66_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>So far we have looked chiefly at the economic consequences which the
+introduction of Socialism is going to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span>bring about. However, according
+to the Socialists, it is not true that "Socialism is merely sordid and
+material, and has no regard for the more ideal side of human
+interests. The Socialist recognises, far more than others, the higher
+ideals of human life as being its true end."<a name="FNanchor_67_67" id="FNanchor_67_67"></a><a href="#Footnote_67_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a> Therefore "Socialism
+seeks to improve the physical, mental, and spiritual environment of
+every man, woman, and child, so that all mankind may be purer,
+healthier, happier, stronger, nobler, and that each generation may be
+nearer perfection than the one immediately preceding."<a name="FNanchor_68_68" id="FNanchor_68_68"></a><a href="#Footnote_68_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> In other
+words, "the creation of a higher type of mankind than the modern man
+will be the result of Socialism. Men will have no need to think, day
+in, day out, where to get the bread for to-morrow."<a name="FNanchor_69_69" id="FNanchor_69_69"></a><a href="#Footnote_69_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> "Material
+conditions form the fundamental basis of human existence. When these
+become common property, free to all and abundant for all, they will
+cease to have that importance they now possess. The sordid struggle
+for mere material things will disappear; free play will be given to
+man's higher faculties, and the struggle, competition, or emulation
+between man and man will be for the realisation of his highest
+conceivable aspirations."<a name="FNanchor_70_70" id="FNanchor_70_70"></a><a href="#Footnote_70_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a></p>
+
+<p>According to many Socialists, money and wages would disappear. Food,
+clothing, lodging, &amp;c., would be given gratis to the citizens. "Under
+ideal Socialism there would be no money at all and no wages. The
+industry of the country would be organised and managed by the State,
+much as the Post Office now is; goods of all kinds would be produced
+and distributed for use, and not for sale, in such quantities as were
+needed; hours of labour would be fixed, and every citizen would take
+what he or she desired from the common stock. Food, clothing,
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span>lodging, fuel, transit, amusements, and all other things would be
+absolutely free, and the only difference between a prime minister and
+a collier would be the difference of rank and occupation."<a name="FNanchor_71_71" id="FNanchor_71_71"></a><a href="#Footnote_71_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a></p>
+
+<p>Not only food, clothing, and shelter would be supplied gratis by a
+bountiful State to the people. In order to banish <i>ennui</i> from among
+the workers, entertainments and amusements also would be provided,
+free of charge. Gratis travel on the railways would make life a
+permanent holiday, and the last cause of dissatisfaction would be
+removed by transferring the surroundings of the gratuitously
+maintained and amused people into a garden of Eden. "I would have the
+towns rebuilt with wide streets, with detached houses, with gardens
+and fountains and avenues of trees. I would make the railways, the
+carriage of letters, and the transit of goods as free as the roads and
+bridges. I would make the houses loftier and larger, and clear them of
+all useless furniture. I would institute public dining-halls, public
+baths, public washhouses on the best plans, and so set free the hands
+of those slaves&mdash;our English women. I would have public parks, public
+theatres, music-halls, gymnasiums, football and cricket fields, public
+halls and public gardens for recreation and music and refreshment. I
+would have all our children fed and clothed and educated at the cost
+of the State. I would have them all taught to play and to sing. I
+would have them all trained to athletics and to arms. I would have
+public halls of science. I would have the people become their own
+artists, actors, musicians, soldiers, and police. Then, by degrees, I
+would make all these things free."<a name="FNanchor_72_72" id="FNanchor_72_72"></a><a href="#Footnote_72_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> In the words of the Socialist
+poet&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">We'll grow up true men and women<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And enjoy life from our birth.<a name="FNanchor_73_73" id="FNanchor_73_73"></a><a href="#Footnote_73_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span>Men, being no longer compelled to work hard for a living, will lose
+the desire for wealth and all that wealth supplies and will devote
+themselves more and more to the culture of their mind. "Under
+Socialism the possession of riches will cease to be a ruling passion,
+for honest labour will be a guarantee against want, and riches will no
+longer be the passport to social position. Under such conditions the
+possession of riches will be a superfluous burden which no sane man
+will wish to bear."<a name="FNanchor_74_74" id="FNanchor_74_74"></a><a href="#Footnote_74_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> "When land and capital are the common property
+of all the people, class distinctions, as we know them at present,
+will no longer exist. The Mind will then be the standard by which a
+man's place among his fellows will be determined."<a name="FNanchor_75_75" id="FNanchor_75_75"></a><a href="#Footnote_75_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a> Hence
+"Socialism means the elevation of the struggle for existence from the
+material to the intellectual plane. Socialism will raise the struggle
+for existence into a sphere where competition shall be emulation,
+where the treasures are boundless and eternal, and where the abundant
+wealth of one does not cause the poverty of another."<a name="FNanchor_76_76" id="FNanchor_76_76"></a><a href="#Footnote_76_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a></p>
+
+<p>The poet has described in a vision this phase of the golden age of
+Socialism as follows:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">A strain of distant music<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Floats on the gentle breeze,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Its captivating sweetness<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Bends e'en the proudest knees;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Now soft as angel whispers,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Then, loud as trumpet's blast<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">It sounds the knell of sorrows<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And pains for ever past.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Now sweeter and more varied,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The music doth appear;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Ten thousand harps &AElig;olian<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Seem to be drawing near.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Ten thousand angels' voices<br /></span><span class='pn'><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span>
+<span class="i1">Are mingled with the strain,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Chanting the song of Freedom&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Justice has come to reign;<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Telling of bounteous harvests,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Of waving golden corn,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Waiting the reaper's sickle,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And asking to be shorn;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Lands rich with milk and honey<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Promised in days of yore;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Asking all those that hunger<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">To eat and faint no more.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">The song grows loud and mighty<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">As thunder in the storm,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The tyrant quakes and trembles,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And hides his guilty form;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And stronger and still stronger<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The joyous chorus grows&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Rejoice! all ye that labour,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Ye triumph o'er your foes.<a name="FNanchor_77_77" id="FNanchor_77_77"></a><a href="#Footnote_77_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"Socialism, being at the same time the sublimest science, art, and
+religion, will naturally elevate man. The British people will become a
+nation of scientists and philosophers who, throwing natural enjoyments
+aside, will lead a life of pure intellectual happiness. Mortal men
+will become demi-gods. Socialism will justify God's way to man."<a name="FNanchor_78_78" id="FNanchor_78_78"></a><a href="#Footnote_78_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a>
+"Socialism comes as the Angel of Light bearing to mankind this message
+of truth. Socialism, equipped with all the learning of the ages, takes
+up the ripest teaching of the poet, the philosopher, the economist,
+the scientist, the historian, and joins the conclusion of each
+together into one harmonious whole. Now we know that suffering,
+misery, and poverty are a <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span>violation of God's will. Now we know that
+the fulness of time has come for us to cast the last relic of our
+fallen nature from us and to follow the beckoning angel who is waiting
+to lead us back through the gates of Paradise into an Eden of
+intellectual joys."<a name="FNanchor_79_79" id="FNanchor_79_79"></a><a href="#Footnote_79_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">These things shall be! a loftier race<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Than e'er the world hath known shall rise<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">With flame of freedom in their souls,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And light of science in their eyes.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">They shall be gentle, brave, and strong,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">To spill no drop of blood, but dare<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">All that may plant man's lordship firm<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">On earth, and fire, and sea, and air.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Nation with nation, land with land,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Unarmed shall live as comrades free;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">In every heart and brain shall throb<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The pulse of one fraternity.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">New arts shall bloom of loftier mould,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And mightier music thrill the skies,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And every life shall be a song<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">When all the earth is paradise.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">These things&mdash;they are no dreams&mdash;shall be<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">For happier men when we are gone.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">These golden days for them shall dawn,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Transcending aught we gaze upon.<a name="FNanchor_80_80" id="FNanchor_80_80"></a><a href="#Footnote_80_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>All men will be brothers. The difference among nations and races will
+disappear by the rule of love and justice. "Justice is to be the
+foundation on which we must build: not the kind of justice we have
+hitherto considered as sufficient for us, and which many countries
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span>pride themselves is their watchword and standard, but a justice that
+demands freedom for all."<a name="FNanchor_81_81" id="FNanchor_81_81"></a><a href="#Footnote_81_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Equal rights it gives, my brothers,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">To the eagle and the dove;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Right to air, and light, and knowledge,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Right to rise your toil above&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Hearken! hearken! O, my brothers,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">For this new great Right is Love.<a name="FNanchor_82_82" id="FNanchor_82_82"></a><a href="#Footnote_82_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Wars will be abolished.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">There's a good time coming, boys,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">A good time coming;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The pen shall supersede the sword,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And right, not might, shall be the lord<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">In the good time coming.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Worth, not birth, shall rule mankind,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And be acknowledged stronger;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The proper impulse has been giv'n&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Wait a little longer.<a name="FNanchor_83_83" id="FNanchor_83_83"></a><a href="#Footnote_83_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Being a religion of peace and love, and preaching the brotherhood of
+man, Socialism will conquer the world. "Socialism with its promise of
+freedom, its larger hope for humanity, its triumph of peace over war,
+its binding of the races of the earth into one all-embracing
+brotherhood, must prevail."<a name="FNanchor_84_84" id="FNanchor_84_84"></a><a href="#Footnote_84_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> "We mean the establishment of a
+political power which shall have for its conscious and definite aim
+the common ownership and control of the <i>whole</i> of the world's
+industry, exchange, &amp;c."<a name="FNanchor_85_85" id="FNanchor_85_85"></a><a href="#Footnote_85_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a></p>
+
+<p>According to many Socialists, Socialism is not an original religion,
+but it is the most sublime form of Christianity. "Socialism is in
+accordance with the revealed will of God."<a name="FNanchor_86_86" id="FNanchor_86_86"></a><a href="#Footnote_86_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a> "Karl Marx was an
+utter <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span>pagan, but there is not an essential proposition in 'Das
+Kapital' that Jesus of Nazareth did not inculcate. Is it a question of
+rent? You are as much entitled to immunity from it as the birds of the
+air, or the grass of the fields. Is it a question of usury or
+interest? Lend, hoping for nothing again. Is it a question of profit
+or inequitable exchange? Do unto others as ye would that they should
+do unto you."<a name="FNanchor_87_87" id="FNanchor_87_87"></a><a href="#Footnote_87_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a> "Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism? Unless we are
+prepared to deny the truth of the Gospel, there can be but one
+answer&mdash;Yes. And Socialism naturally evolves from Christianity."<a name="FNanchor_88_88" id="FNanchor_88_88"></a><a href="#Footnote_88_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a>
+Socialism will mean the establishment of the rule of Christ upon
+earth. "The political democracy, dominated by the social ideal, will
+be the coming of Christ to rule the nations in righteousness."<a name="FNanchor_89_89" id="FNanchor_89_89"></a><a href="#Footnote_89_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a> The
+Socialist leaders see visions. "I do sometimes dream dreams, and I see
+a vision of what the world will be when this spirit of love and
+sacrifice which has actuated some noble spirits in all ages and which
+shone with the glory of full perfection in the life and example of
+Jesus of Nazareth&mdash;I sometimes see, as through a glass darkly, a
+vision of what the world will be when this spirit of love and
+sacrifice shall animate all men. I see our modern towns swept away,
+and in their place beautiful cities whose buildings reflect the pride
+of the community in their common life, and whose healthy homes show
+the value society attaches to the individual life. I see everywhere a
+change come over the face of the landscape; every meadow smiles with
+plenty, every valley blossoms as the rose, every hill is green with
+the glory of Lebanon. I see a revived art and a revived literature. I
+see a people healthy, happy, cultured, contented, whose wealth is
+life, full and free, 'whose ways are ways of pleasantness, whose
+flowery <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span>paths are paths of peace.' And my vision extends, though more
+dimly, beyond the confines of my own dear land, and I see this spirit
+of brotherhood among the nations has broken down international
+barriers, and international hatred is no more. The sword is beaten
+into a ploughshare, the spear into a pruning-hook, and the peoples of
+all lands are one, each freely sharing of its special bounties to add
+to the comforts of all."<a name="FNanchor_90_90" id="FNanchor_90_90"></a><a href="#Footnote_90_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a></p>
+
+<p>The new Christian religion, like the old one, demands its saints and
+its martyrs, if not the reincarnation of Christ. "The only way to
+regain the earthly paradise is by the old, hard road to
+Calvary&mdash;through persecution, through poverty, through temptation, by
+the agony and bloody sweat, by the crown of thorns, by the agonising
+death, and then the resurrection to the New Humanity&mdash;purified by
+suffering, triumphant through Sacrifice."<a name="FNanchor_91_91" id="FNanchor_91_91"></a><a href="#Footnote_91_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a></p>
+
+<p>The new Christ also has his forerunner and herald. "Mr. Keir Hardie,
+M.P., the leader of the Labour Party, resembles John the Baptist,"<a name="FNanchor_92_92" id="FNanchor_92_92"></a><a href="#Footnote_92_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a>
+and the Socialist leaders will do even greater things than did Christ.
+We are told: "When Christ told His disciples that it was possible for
+them to do greater things than they had seen Him do they must have
+been fairly staggered. Just think for a moment of the nature of the
+works He had done, most of them in their very presence. Those who are
+striving to obtain a better social order and provide a fairer
+distribution of the good gifts of God among the sons of men, these men
+I say, in so far as their efforts are successful, are doing greater
+things than Christ did when He performed the miracle of feeding the
+hungry."<a name="FNanchor_93_93" id="FNanchor_93_93"></a><a href="#Footnote_93_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Man is only irresistible when he acts from passion. The masses of men
+are never moved except by passions <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span>feelings, interests. It is of
+course to the discontented wage-earners that the Socialist can appeal
+with the greatest chance of success."<a name="FNanchor_94_94" id="FNanchor_94_94"></a><a href="#Footnote_94_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a> All Socialists agree in
+depicting to the workers life in present society as hell incarnate and
+in giving a picture of life in the Socialist State of the future which
+resembles the descriptions found in the "Arabian Nights" tales. They
+only disagree in this: that some promise him heaven, whilst those
+possessed of less enthusiasm promise him only an earthly paradise.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>The Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 187.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 184.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> <i>Forward</i>, October 12, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_39_39"><span class="label">[39]</span></a> Neil, <i>Songs of the Social Revolution</i>, p. 22.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_40_40"><span class="label">[40]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 140.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_41_41"><span class="label">[41]</span></a> Fisher, <i>The Babies' Tribute</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_42_42"><span class="label">[42]</span></a> Glyde, <i>The Misfortune of being a Working Man</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_43_43" id="Footnote_43_43"></a><a href="#FNanchor_43_43"><span class="label">[43]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_44_44" id="Footnote_44_44"></a><a href="#FNanchor_44_44"><span class="label">[44]</span></a> Neil, <i>Songs of the Social Revolution</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_45_45" id="Footnote_45_45"></a><a href="#FNanchor_45_45"><span class="label">[45]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, pp. 4-5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_46_46" id="Footnote_46_46"></a><a href="#FNanchor_46_46"><span class="label">[46]</span></a> Washington, <i>A Corner in Flesh and Blood</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_47_47" id="Footnote_47_47"></a><a href="#FNanchor_47_47"><span class="label">[47]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 29.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_48_48" id="Footnote_48_48"></a><a href="#FNanchor_48_48"><span class="label">[48]</span></a> Quelch, <i>The Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_49_49" id="Footnote_49_49"></a><a href="#FNanchor_49_49"><span class="label">[49]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p.
+18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_50_50" id="Footnote_50_50"></a><a href="#FNanchor_50_50"><span class="label">[50]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 32.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_51_51" id="Footnote_51_51"></a><a href="#FNanchor_51_51"><span class="label">[51]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_52_52" id="Footnote_52_52"></a><a href="#FNanchor_52_52"><span class="label">[52]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>What is this Socialism?</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_53_53" id="Footnote_53_53"></a><a href="#FNanchor_53_53"><span class="label">[53]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 96.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_54_54" id="Footnote_54_54"></a><a href="#FNanchor_54_54"><span class="label">[54]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>What is this Socialism?</i> pp. 5, 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_55_55" id="Footnote_55_55"></a><a href="#FNanchor_55_55"><span class="label">[55]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 74.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_56_56" id="Footnote_56_56"></a><a href="#FNanchor_56_56"><span class="label">[56]</span></a> Sorge, <i>Socialism and the Worker</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_57_57" id="Footnote_57_57"></a><a href="#FNanchor_57_57"><span class="label">[57]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, pp. 12, 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_58_58" id="Footnote_58_58"></a><a href="#FNanchor_58_58"><span class="label">[58]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Socialism and Slavery</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_59_59" id="Footnote_59_59"></a><a href="#FNanchor_59_59"><span class="label">[59]</span></a> "Veritas," <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_60_60" id="Footnote_60_60"></a><a href="#FNanchor_60_60"><span class="label">[60]</span></a> Engels, <i>Socialism: Utopian and Scientific</i>, p. 81.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_61_61" id="Footnote_61_61"></a><a href="#FNanchor_61_61"><span class="label">[61]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 170.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_62_62" id="Footnote_62_62"></a><a href="#FNanchor_62_62"><span class="label">[62]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>The Pope's Socialism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_63_63" id="Footnote_63_63"></a><a href="#FNanchor_63_63"><span class="label">[63]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 102.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_64_64" id="Footnote_64_64"></a><a href="#FNanchor_64_64"><span class="label">[64]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 89.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_65_65" id="Footnote_65_65"></a><a href="#FNanchor_65_65"><span class="label">[65]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 89.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_66_66" id="Footnote_66_66"></a><a href="#FNanchor_66_66"><span class="label">[66]</span></a> Neil, <i>Songs of the Social Revolution</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_67_67" id="Footnote_67_67"></a><a href="#FNanchor_67_67"><span class="label">[67]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 43.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_68_68" id="Footnote_68_68"></a><a href="#FNanchor_68_68"><span class="label">[68]</span></a> "Veritas," <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_69_69" id="Footnote_69_69"></a><a href="#FNanchor_69_69"><span class="label">[69]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 43.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_70_70" id="Footnote_70_70"></a><a href="#FNanchor_70_70"><span class="label">[70]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 44.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_71_71" id="Footnote_71_71"></a><a href="#FNanchor_71_71"><span class="label">[71]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 103.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_72_72" id="Footnote_72_72"></a><a href="#FNanchor_72_72"><span class="label">[72]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 43, 44.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_73_73" id="Footnote_73_73"></a><a href="#FNanchor_73_73"><span class="label">[73]</span></a> Neil, <i>Songs of the Social Revolution</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_74_74" id="Footnote_74_74"></a><a href="#FNanchor_74_74"><span class="label">[74]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_75_75" id="Footnote_75_75"></a><a href="#FNanchor_75_75"><span class="label">[75]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 24.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_76_76" id="Footnote_76_76"></a><a href="#FNanchor_76_76"><span class="label">[76]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_77_77" id="Footnote_77_77"></a><a href="#FNanchor_77_77"><span class="label">[77]</span></a> <i>Clarion Song Book</i>, p. 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_78_78" id="Footnote_78_78"></a><a href="#FNanchor_78_78"><span class="label">[78]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_79_79" id="Footnote_79_79"></a><a href="#FNanchor_79_79"><span class="label">[79]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_80_80" id="Footnote_80_80"></a><a href="#FNanchor_80_80"><span class="label">[80]</span></a> <i>Clarion Song Book</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_81_81" id="Footnote_81_81"></a><a href="#FNanchor_81_81"><span class="label">[81]</span></a> Ford, <i>Women and Socialism</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_82_82" id="Footnote_82_82"></a><a href="#FNanchor_82_82"><span class="label">[82]</span></a> <i>Clarion Song Book</i>, p. 31.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_83_83" id="Footnote_83_83"></a><a href="#FNanchor_83_83"><span class="label">[83]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_84_84" id="Footnote_84_84"></a><a href="#FNanchor_84_84"><span class="label">[84]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 104.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_85_85" id="Footnote_85_85"></a><a href="#FNanchor_85_85"><span class="label">[85]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_86_86" id="Footnote_86_86"></a><a href="#FNanchor_86_86"><span class="label">[86]</span></a> "Veritas," <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_87_87" id="Footnote_87_87"></a><a href="#FNanchor_87_87"><span class="label">[87]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Gospel of the Poor</i>, p. 153.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_88_88" id="Footnote_88_88"></a><a href="#FNanchor_88_88"><span class="label">[88]</span></a> "Veritas," <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_89_89" id="Footnote_89_89"></a><a href="#FNanchor_89_89"><span class="label">[89]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Christ that is to be</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_90_90" id="Footnote_90_90"></a><a href="#FNanchor_90_90"><span class="label">[90]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Christ that is to be</i>, pp. 13, 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_91_91" id="Footnote_91_91"></a><a href="#FNanchor_91_91"><span class="label">[91]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_92_92" id="Footnote_92_92"></a><a href="#FNanchor_92_92"><span class="label">[92]</span></a> "Veritas," <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_93_93" id="Footnote_93_93"></a><a href="#FNanchor_93_93"><span class="label">[93]</span></a> Ward, <i>Prevention is Better than Cure</i>, pp. 2, 5, and
+6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_94_94" id="Footnote_94_94"></a><a href="#FNanchor_94_94"><span class="label">[94]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>The Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 184.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_III" id="CHAPTER_III"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER III<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE GRIEVANCES OF THE SOCIALISTS</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">"Socialism is not only a theory of another and better system of
+society: it is an indictment of the existing order."<a name="FNanchor_95_95" id="FNanchor_95_95"></a><a href="#Footnote_95_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a> The Socialist
+conception of society as at present constituted, given in the
+preceding chapter, will have prepared the reader to some extent for
+the Socialist grievances. These grievances are three in number, and
+may be summed up as follows:</p>
+
+<p>(1) The workers are for all practical purposes slaves who are kept in
+chains and forced to work by the capitalist class.</p>
+
+<p>(2) The rich men cause the poverty of the poor by defrauding them of
+the largest part of their wages.</p>
+
+<p>(3) The workers receive only from one third to one fourth of the wage
+which is their rightful due.</p>
+
+<p>Let us look into these grievances.</p>
+
+<p>According to the Socialist leaders, the workers&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Helots in hunger nursed<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Slaves of their reign accursed<a name="FNanchor_96_96" id="FNanchor_96_96"></a><a href="#Footnote_96_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a>&mdash;<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p class="noin">keep the rich in affluence. Nevertheless they themselves are kept in
+poverty, degradation, and slavery by the capitalists whom they nourish
+by their labour. "The landlord owns the raw material and can live in
+idleness. The capitalist owns the machinery and can live in idleness.
+The worker has nothing, except his ability to work, and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span>he cannot
+work without the consent of the landlord and the capitalist.
+Therefore, he is virtually a slave. He cannot control his own
+life."<a name="FNanchor_97_97" id="FNanchor_97_97"></a><a href="#Footnote_97_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a></p>
+
+<p>As a matter of fact the position of the worker is worse than was that
+of the slave. "It did not always pay to starve a slave, because if he
+died you might have to buy another one. Therefore the lot of the slave
+under a good master was in many respects better than that of the
+proletariat in our great cities."<a name="FNanchor_98_98" id="FNanchor_98_98"></a><a href="#Footnote_98_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a> "Poverty rather than property is
+the reward of labour to-day."<a name="FNanchor_99_99" id="FNanchor_99_99"></a><a href="#Footnote_99_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a> "Poverty is our reward for creating
+plenty, and the class that lives in luxury by exploiting our labour
+contemptuously informs us that the law of supply and demand condemns
+us to suffer the most hideous privation whenever our excessive
+industry has created a glut of all the things that satisfy human
+needs."<a name="FNanchor_100_100" id="FNanchor_100_100"></a><a href="#Footnote_100_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a></p>
+
+<p>The workers are unfree, being enslaved by the capitalists. It is true
+that they possess freedom of contract, but freedom of contract, like
+individual liberty, is an illusion, because the workers, being
+penniless, are compelled to accept whatever work is obtainable, and to
+be satisfied with whatever wages are offered. "The right to sell in
+the markets is now well established, but the chief difficulty with the
+majority of workers lies in the fact that they have nothing but their
+labour to sell, and a market is not easy to find even for that."<a name="FNanchor_101_101" id="FNanchor_101_101"></a><a href="#Footnote_101_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a></p>
+
+<p>Although co-operation has made millions of workers in Germany, France,
+Belgium, and other countries prosperous and independent, independence
+is, according to the Socialists, for some unspecified reason,
+unobtainable for the workers of Great Britain, and co-operation is a
+failure. "The chance of the great bulk of the labourers ever coming to
+work upon their own land and capital in <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span>associations for co-operative
+production, has become even less hopeful than it ever was."<a name="FNanchor_102_102" id="FNanchor_102_102"></a><a href="#Footnote_102_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a>
+"Everywhere the workman is coming to understand that it is practically
+hopeless for him, either individually or co-operatively, to own the
+constantly growing mass of capital by the use of which he lives."<a name="FNanchor_103_103" id="FNanchor_103_103"></a><a href="#Footnote_103_103" class="fnanchor">[103]</a>
+The advent of the great industry has not benefited but harmed him.
+"The supersession of the small by the great industry has given the
+main fruits of invention and the new power over Nature to a
+comparatively small proprietary class, upon whom the mass of the
+people are dependent for leave to earn their living."<a name="FNanchor_104_104" id="FNanchor_104_104"></a><a href="#Footnote_104_104" class="fnanchor">[104]</a> "The worker
+is now a mere item in a vast industrial army over the organisation and
+direction of which he has no control. He is free, but free only to
+choose to which master he will sell his labour&mdash;free only to decide
+from which proprietor he will beg that access to the new instruments
+of production without which he cannot exist."<a name="FNanchor_105_105" id="FNanchor_105_105"></a><a href="#Footnote_105_105" class="fnanchor">[105]</a></p>
+
+<p>As the capitalist class owns the factories, workshops, &amp;c., the worker
+has become to that class a slave in the full and generally accepted
+meaning of the word. "The effect of private property in land and
+capital is in all essential respects the same as was the effect of
+private property in human beings. In each case slavery is the result.
+The form may have changed, but the substance remains."<a name="FNanchor_106_106" id="FNanchor_106_106"></a><a href="#Footnote_106_106" class="fnanchor">[106]</a> "The
+labourer to-day is a slave, and labour has become a mark of
+bondage."<a name="FNanchor_107_107" id="FNanchor_107_107"></a><a href="#Footnote_107_107" class="fnanchor">[107]</a> Except for a slight difference in outward form, the
+British wage-slaves are no better off than were the black slaves on
+the sugar plantations in the past. "Much as the 'free-born Briton' may
+dislike to hear the painful truth recited, it is a fact, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span>not to be
+controverted, that four-fifths of our total population are bound as
+completely and as miserably as ever was a black African slave to a
+Western planter. There is no real freedom which is not economic
+freedom. He is a slave who depends for his bread upon the will or the
+whim of a man like himself, or of a number of such masters."<a name="FNanchor_108_108" id="FNanchor_108_108"></a><a href="#Footnote_108_108" class="fnanchor">[108]</a> In
+other words, capitalism and slave-owning are for all practical
+purposes synonymous words, as may be seen from the Socialist
+Catechism: "<i>Q.</i> What constitutes the chief difference between
+capitalism and slave-owning? <i>A.</i> The fact that the capitalist goes
+through the form of bargaining with the labourer as to the amount of
+the portion of the produce that shall be returned to him.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What
+is this farce called? <i>A.</i> Freedom of contract.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> In what sense is
+it free? <i>A.</i> In this sense&mdash;that the labourer is free to take what is
+offered or nothing.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Has he anything to fall back upon? <i>A.</i> He
+has absolutely nothing in countries where the tyranny of capitalism is
+untempered by any form of Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_109_109" id="FNanchor_109_109"></a><a href="#Footnote_109_109" class="fnanchor">[109]</a></p>
+
+<p>To those working men who might object that it is a gross exaggeration
+to say that the British worker is a slave, and that he is penniless,
+the Socialist agitator answers: "What? You are a free man and not a
+slave? There are no slaves in this country? What is a slave? One who
+works at the bidding of another, and only by permission of another,
+and for the profit of that other. Does not that fit your case exactly?
+Do you work when you like and idle when you like? Not you! You work
+when the capitalist requires your labour, when your services will be
+useful in making a profit for him. When that is not the case you can
+starve in the gutter, although there may be all the necessaries of
+life in profusion around you. These things do not belong to you,
+although you and your class have made them; they are so much <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span>wealth
+which your masters have acquired from your unpaid labour, things which
+you have produced, but for which you have never been paid, out of
+which you have been swindled by the natural operation of the system of
+wage-slavery of which you are the unconscious victim. From this
+condition of things there is no escape while the whole of the people
+do not own the means of production. Nothing but the abolition of the
+class ownership of the means of life, and the substitution of
+ownership of the whole people, will abolish this form of
+slavery."<a name="FNanchor_110_110" id="FNanchor_110_110"></a><a href="#Footnote_110_110" class="fnanchor">[110]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing grievance is absurd. If regular work for a regular wage,
+agreed upon by contract, is slavery, then all salaried men from the
+Prime Minister and the Lord Chancellor downward are also
+"wage-slaves."</p>
+
+<p>The Socialist agitator, after having told the working men that they
+are no better off than negro slaves, then asks his hearers, as a rule:
+"Why is it that the producers in this country are the poorest of the
+population? Why is it that those who do not produce are the
+richest?"<a name="FNanchor_111_111" id="FNanchor_111_111"></a><a href="#Footnote_111_111" class="fnanchor">[111]</a> The manner in which this question is put suggests the
+reply. Indeed, all Socialists agree in holding the rich responsible
+for the poverty of the poor, as the following utterances will show:
+"Socialism contends that the poverty of the poor is caused by robbery
+on the part of the rich. The mansion explains the hovel. Belgravia has
+its counterpart in Shoreditch. The factory, the foundry, the
+ship-building yard account for the shooting lodge, the yacht, and the
+tours in foreign lands. The long day's toil of one class renders
+possible the life-long play of the other."<a name="FNanchor_112_112" id="FNanchor_112_112"></a><a href="#Footnote_112_112" class="fnanchor">[112]</a> "If you have no
+unemployed at the top of the social ladder you will have none at the
+bottom."<a name="FNanchor_113_113" id="FNanchor_113_113"></a><a href="#Footnote_113_113" class="fnanchor">[113]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span>"The riches of the rich class are the cause of the poverty of the
+masses."<a name="FNanchor_114_114" id="FNanchor_114_114"></a><a href="#Footnote_114_114" class="fnanchor">[114]</a> "You make the automobile, he rides in it. If it were not
+for you, he would walk; and if it were not for him, you would
+ride."<a name="FNanchor_115_115" id="FNanchor_115_115"></a><a href="#Footnote_115_115" class="fnanchor">[115]</a> "Colossal poverty is the foundation of colossal wealth; he
+who would eliminate the poverty of the masses assails the wealth of
+the few."<a name="FNanchor_116_116" id="FNanchor_116_116"></a><a href="#Footnote_116_116" class="fnanchor">[116]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing arguments, or rather assertions, may sound very
+convincing and may be exceedingly useful for propaganda purposes, but
+they are disproved by facts. If the existence of the rich were the
+cause of the poverty of the masses, the workers in countries which
+possess few rich capitalists, such as Ireland, Spain, Italy, Servia,
+and Bulgaria, should be exceedingly well off; the workers in the
+countries where the richest millionaires live, such as the United
+States, should be the poorest. In reality, the American workmen are
+the most prosperous, whilst the workers in Ireland and other
+millionaire-less countries are the poorest. Rich men are not the
+consumers, but merely the trustees and managers, of the national
+wealth which is invested chiefly in reproductive undertakings&mdash;mills,
+railways, mines, &amp;c.&mdash;which supply comforts and conveniences to all.</p>
+
+<p>The capitalists, the employers, British Socialists say, have become
+rich by defrauding the worker of his wages. The worker must starve so
+that a few rich people may live in luxury, and things will become
+better for the worker only when there are no more rich men. "The gains
+of the capitalist are simply the losses of labour! The partly or
+wholly unearned incomes of the rich consist of the unpaid, withheld
+wages of the industrious poor."<a name="FNanchor_117_117" id="FNanchor_117_117"></a><a href="#Footnote_117_117" class="fnanchor">[117]</a> "Only by living off another man's
+labour and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span>denying another man the fruits of his toil can riches be
+acquired. Riches are directly responsible for poverty, and the art of
+being rich is the art of keeping one's neighbour poor. When there are
+no rich there will be no poor. To the wealth of the few, acquired at
+the expense of the many, and not to drink or want of thrift, are all
+the evils of our social life to be ascribed."<a name="FNanchor_118_118" id="FNanchor_118_118"></a><a href="#Footnote_118_118" class="fnanchor">[118]</a> "Production is
+carried on to-day purely in the interest and for the profit of the
+class which owns the instruments of production."<a name="FNanchor_119_119" id="FNanchor_119_119"></a><a href="#Footnote_119_119" class="fnanchor">[119]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">There are ninety-and-nine who live and die<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">In want and hunger and cold,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">That one may revel in luxury,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And be wrapped in its silken fold;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The ninety-and-nine in their hovels bare,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The one in a palace with riches rare.<a name="FNanchor_120_120" id="FNanchor_120_120"></a><a href="#Footnote_120_120" class="fnanchor">[120]</a><br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Ye poor of wealthy England,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Who starve and sweat and freeze<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">By labour sore to fill the store<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Of those who live at ease;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">'Tis time to know your real friends,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">To face your real foe,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And to fight for your right<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Till ye lay your masters low;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Small hope for you of better days<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Till ye lay your masters low.<a name="FNanchor_121_121" id="FNanchor_121_121"></a><a href="#Footnote_121_121" class="fnanchor">[121]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The working men are, according to the Socialist agitators, "excluded"
+from property by the capitalist class which owns all the land,
+factories, machinery, &amp;c. The capitalist class has thus reserved for
+itself a monopoly of all the instruments of production. Consequently,
+"the only means by which the excluded class can live is by working for
+the capitalist class&mdash;by getting some one or <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span>other of the capitalist
+class to allow them access to the tools and materials in his
+possession, and pay them wages in return for their labour."<a name="FNanchor_122_122" id="FNanchor_122_122"></a><a href="#Footnote_122_122" class="fnanchor">[122]</a>
+However, the capitalists do not grant to the workers access to the
+instruments of production free of charge. They exact a toll from them,
+and employ them only if, by so doing, they can secure a profit for
+themselves. In the fact that an employer will engage workmen only if
+he can make a profit by their labour, the Socialists see a cruel
+injustice. "Your capitalist class draw upon this excluded horde of
+landless, toolless, foodless lack-alls, and do actually find work for
+as many as they can employ at a profit to themselves. This excluded
+class have no rights&mdash;not even the elementary right to exist. What God
+meant by creating them when He knew, or might have known, that
+everything belonged to the capitalists, nobody can understand."<a name="FNanchor_123_123" id="FNanchor_123_123"></a><a href="#Footnote_123_123" class="fnanchor">[123]</a>
+"The whole of our industrial system is founded on a principle existing
+nowhere else in Nature, the principle of production and distribution
+for profit. If no employer can make a profit out of the worker's
+labour he is cast into the unemployed army."<a name="FNanchor_124_124" id="FNanchor_124_124"></a><a href="#Footnote_124_124" class="fnanchor">[124]</a> "Seven out of every
+eight persons in your community, 37,500,000 of the men, and women, and
+children who form your nation, can lay no claim to any right to
+exist&mdash;exist only on sufferance. If one or other of the irresponsible
+persons who own the country can be induced to allow them to earn their
+bread, well and good; if not, they must die. At the present moment
+there are 700,000 persons shut out in this manner from any chance of
+obtaining food to eat. You call it being 'out of work,' and can see
+the spectral army, 700,000 strong, hungry and in want. They are not
+kept idle and hungry because there is no 'work.' The earth is there
+with all its boundless store that their 'work' would turn into wealth
+if they could but get at it. They <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span>are kept idle because those who own
+the country cannot find them employment at a profit to themselves,
+because the blind, fatuous insanity of your 'system of trade' makes no
+provision even for keeping its slaves in work."<a name="FNanchor_125_125" id="FNanchor_125_125"></a><a href="#Footnote_125_125" class="fnanchor">[125]</a></p>
+
+<p>According to the Socialists, the employer of labour has no right to
+work at a profit, and the capitalist has no right to demand rent or
+interest. "The great central truth of Socialistic economy, ever to be
+kept in mind, is Adam Smith's definition of wages: 'The produce of
+labour is the natural recompense or wages of labour.' From this
+'natural recompense' rent and profit are, in Socialist eyes,
+unnatural, illegitimate abstractions, to be recovered and added to
+wages as speedily as possible."<a name="FNanchor_126_126" id="FNanchor_126_126"></a><a href="#Footnote_126_126" class="fnanchor">[126]</a> "Profit is the result of unpaid
+labour; it is the produce of the working man, for which the latter
+receives no equivalent. If he received his proper and just share, if
+the capitalist could not deprive him of this, then the capitalist
+could make no profit."<a name="FNanchor_127_127" id="FNanchor_127_127"></a><a href="#Footnote_127_127" class="fnanchor">[127]</a></p>
+
+<p>Not only are "rent" and "profit" illegitimate abstractions, but they
+are downright theft. Every landowner, every banker, every
+manufacturer, every shopkeeper is a thief. All business for profit is
+swindling. "Land-rent and capital-rent are thefts from the produce of
+labour."<a name="FNanchor_128_128" id="FNanchor_128_128"></a><a href="#Footnote_128_128" class="fnanchor">[128]</a> "The manufacturer aims primarily at producing, by means
+of the labour he has stolen from others, not goods, but profits."<a name="FNanchor_129_129" id="FNanchor_129_129"></a><a href="#Footnote_129_129" class="fnanchor">[129]</a>
+"What is successful business but cheating? What is the whole basis of
+capitalist industry but the use of the means of production, not for
+the legitimate end of producing wealth for use, but for the purpose of
+making profit for the few <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span>by despoiling, sweating, pillaging, and
+murdering the many?"<a name="FNanchor_130_130" id="FNanchor_130_130"></a><a href="#Footnote_130_130" class="fnanchor">[130]</a></p>
+
+<p>Even the more moderate Socialists complain that work is carried on by
+the employers only "at a profit to themselves," and they wish to
+abolish this state of affairs, which, they argue, is demoralising to
+the working men, and is the cause of low wages and unemployment. "The
+workman is called into the workshop when capital can profitably employ
+him, and turned adrift again the moment capital finds it can no longer
+turn his services to profitable account. He is not consulted as to
+when he shall be employed or when cast adrift. His necessities and
+those of his dependents are no concern of anyone save himself. He has
+no right to employment, no one is under obligation to find him work,
+nor is he free to work for himself, since he has neither the use of
+land nor the command of the necessary capital."<a name="FNanchor_131_131" id="FNanchor_131_131"></a><a href="#Footnote_131_131" class="fnanchor">[131]</a> "So long as
+industry is carried on for profit instead of for use, for gain instead
+of for need, so long must the evils of low wages and no wages go
+on."<a name="FNanchor_132_132" id="FNanchor_132_132"></a><a href="#Footnote_132_132" class="fnanchor">[132]</a></p>
+
+<p>The grievance that the manufacturers manufacture "not for use but for
+profit" is ridiculous. The manufacturers manufacture things which the
+public will buy and use. There is consequently no distinction between
+manufacturing for use and manufacturing for profit, except this, that
+no manufacturer will give his time and trouble, and run considerable
+risks, without adequate compensation. The complaint must therefore be
+limited to the fact that the employer of labour makes a profit. The
+question now arises: "What does the manufacturer do with his
+earnings?" In the vast majority of cases he will use by far the larger
+part of his profits for renewing machinery and enlarging his works,
+and thus increase the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span>national capital and the national power of
+production, spending privately only a director's salary which he would
+also receive as a director-employee of the Socialist commonwealth.
+"The employer who works without a profit breaks himself,"<a name="FNanchor_133_133" id="FNanchor_133_133"></a><a href="#Footnote_133_133" class="fnanchor">[133]</a> and in
+breaking himself he breaks up the factory. Universal production
+regardless of profit would lead to universal bankruptcy, whilst the
+curtailing of profits may lead to a proportionate curtailment in the
+expansion of industry and in the production of articles for use, and
+to general poverty. It has the same effect whether the workers destroy
+the capitalist's capital or whether they break the machinery and
+devastate the corn-fields.</p>
+
+<p>The complaints of the Socialists as to the way in which the workers
+are exploited by the capitalist class are founded not only on
+arguments such as those given in the foregoing but on figures as well,
+and these are exceedingly curious and interesting. Under titles such
+as "How the Worker is Robbed,"<a name="FNanchor_134_134" id="FNanchor_134_134"></a><a href="#Footnote_134_134" class="fnanchor">[134]</a> statements are made every day, and
+by all Socialists, which are to prove that the national income is
+inequitably divided between capitalists and workers. These statements
+are calculated to make every workman's blood boil, and they seem to
+confirm the contention of the Socialists that the capitalists
+inhumanely plunder the working masses. However, these figures are so
+palpably false and so grossly misleading that attention cannot
+sufficiently strongly be drawn to the deception which is constantly
+being practised upon the workers. I hope, therefore, that my readers
+will patiently and carefully consider the following.</p>
+
+<p>The figures relating to the yearly income of the "capitalist class"
+and the "working class" which are given in innumerable Socialistic
+writings, and which are brought forward at almost every Socialist
+meeting and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span>lecture, are usually taken from a pamphlet entitled
+"Facts for Socialists from the Political Economists and
+Statisticians," published by the Fabian Society. The copy lying before
+me bears the notice, "Tenth Edition (Revised), 111th thousand, 1906."
+That pamphlet furnishes the statistical basis of fact to the Socialist
+agitation. Its effect may be measured by its enormous circulation. It
+contains a vast number of quotations from Blue-books, political
+economists, and statisticians; and a certain show of learning, of
+thoroughness, and of conscientiousness gives it at first sight the
+appearance of being a reliable and honest production. However,
+appearances are proverbially deceptive.</p>
+
+<p>According to "Facts for Socialists," the whole national income amounts
+to 1,800,000,000<i>l.</i> per year (page 3), and is derived from the
+following sources:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">"I.&mdash;Rent</h4>
+
+<p>"The total profits from the ownership of lands, houses, tithes, &amp;c.,
+the rents of mines, quarries, ironworks, gasworks, waterworks, canals,
+fishings, shootings, markets, tolls, &amp;c., must amount to at least
+290,000,000<i>l.</i><a name="FNanchor_135_135" id="FNanchor_135_135"></a><a href="#Footnote_135_135" class="fnanchor">[135]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">"II.&mdash;Interest on Capital</h4>
+
+<p>"The profits of public companies, foreign investments, railways, &amp;c.,
+assessed to income tax in the United Kingdom, the interest payable
+from British public funds and from Indian, Colonial, and Foreign
+Governments' funds, and the interest on capital employed in private
+undertakings of manufacture or trade cannot be less than
+360,000,000<i>l.</i> Adding hereto the rent (290,000,000<i>l.</i>), we have a
+total of 650,000,000<i>l.</i> for rent and interest together. This
+represents the proportion <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span>of the nation's income claimed from the
+workers, <i>not in return for any service rendered to the community, but
+merely as the payment for permission to use the land and the already
+accumulated capital of the country</i>.<a name="FNanchor_136_136" id="FNanchor_136_136"></a><a href="#Footnote_136_136" class="fnanchor">[136]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">"III.&mdash;Profits and Salaries</h4>
+
+<p>"The numbers and total income of this large class cannot be exactly
+ascertained. It includes workers of all grades, from the exceptionally
+skilled artisan to the Prime Minister, and from the city clerk to the
+President of the Royal Academy. It is convenient for statistical
+purposes to include in it all those who do not belong to the 'manual
+labour class.' If we take the 'rent of ability' to have increased in
+the same proportion as the assessments to income tax, this prosperous
+body may be estimated to receive for its work as profits and salaries
+about 460,000,000<i>l.</i> annually.<a name="FNanchor_137_137" id="FNanchor_137_137"></a><a href="#Footnote_137_137" class="fnanchor">[137]</a>"</p>
+
+<p>Adding up the income from "Rent," "Interest and Capital," and "Profits
+and Salaries," the pamphlet continues:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">"The Classes</h4>
+
+<p>"The total drawn by the legal disposers of what are sometimes called
+the 'three rents' of land, capital, and ability amounts at present to
+about 1,110,000,000<i>l.</i> yearly, or just under two-thirds of the total
+produce.</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">"And the Masses</h4>
+
+<p>"Allowing for the increase since these estimates were made, we may
+safely say that the manual labour class receives for all its millions
+of workers only some 690,000,000<i>l.</i>"<a name="FNanchor_138_138" id="FNanchor_138_138"></a><a href="#Footnote_138_138" class="fnanchor">[138]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span>In a short table the distribution of the national income is then given
+as follows:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" width="70%" summary="Distribution of the National Income">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="80%">Rent</td>
+  <td class="tdr3" width="20%">&pound;290,000,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Interest</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">360,000,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Profits and Salaries</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bb">460,000,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 7%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">Total (that is, the income of the legal proprietors of the three
+    natural monopolies of land, capital, and ability)</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bt">1,110,000,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Income of manual labour class</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bb">690,000,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Total produce</td>
+  <td class="tdr bt now">&pound;1,800,000,000<a name="FNanchor_139_139" id="FNanchor_139_139"></a><a href="#Footnote_139_139" class="fnanchor">[139]</a></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p>At first sight it seems outrageous that "the income of the legal
+proprietors of the three natural monopolies of land, capital, and
+ability" should come to 1,110,000,000<i>l.</i> per annum, and the income of
+the manual labour class only to 690,000,000<i>l.</i> per annum, about
+one-third of the whole, especially as we learn on page 4 of the
+pamphlet that the "idle rich" are only a small fraction of the
+community. This statement would prove the assertion that the idle rich
+are causing the poverty of the poor to be correct if it were honest
+and fair, but it is neither the one nor the other.</p>
+
+<p>In the first place the foregoing statement divides the nation into two
+classes "the masses" and "the classes": manual labourers and "the
+legal proprietors of the three natural monopolies." As the pamphlet is
+addressed to the uncritical body of general readers, and especially to
+working men, these will naturally divide, owing to the artful wording
+of the phrase, the national income between manual labourers and
+capitalist monopolists. According to this pamphlet everyone who is not
+a labourer is a capitalist monopolist. Therefore the capitalist
+monopolist class includes all lawyers and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span>doctors, all parsons and
+clerks, all officers and salaried officials. Every business man, every
+farmer, every fisherman, every greengrocer, every baker, every
+butcher, every sailor, every cobbler, every chimney-sweep, every
+clerk, being not a wage-earning labourer, is "one of the legal
+proprietors of the three natural monopolies," or in plainer language,
+a monopolist. At least, the income of this very large class has
+barefacedly been credited to the capitalist class, whilst its members
+have been utilised (on page 4 of the pamphlet) to swell the ranks of
+the workers. This is dishonesty number one.</p>
+
+<p>The income of the exceptionally skilled artisans, who also form a very
+large class, is credited on page 7 to the "classes" under the heading
+"profits and salaries." They also are included among the
+"monopolists," although their number has likewise been utilised (on
+page 4) to swell the number of the workers. This is dishonesty number
+two.</p>
+
+<p>Let us now look at the result of the dishonest Fabian juggling with
+figures by comparing the statement regarding the national income
+contained in the Fabian pamphlet with a recent statement of Mr.
+Chiozza Money, M.P., who is a Socialist, and who divides the national
+income as follows:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" width="70%" summary="Distribution of the National Income">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="70%" style="padding-left: 3%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">Income of working class (33,000,000 people)</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr" width="10%">about</td>
+  <td class="tdr3" width="20%">&pound;650,000,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 3%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">Income of middle class (all except manual
+   labourers and the rich&mdash;small business
+   men, managers, clerks, public servants,
+   &amp;c., with incomes up to &pound;700&mdash;9,750,000
+   people)</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr">about</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">475,000,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 3%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">  Income of rich (with incomes &pound;700 and
+   above) (1,250,000 people)</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr">about</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bb">600,000,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 10%;">Total</td>
+  <td class="tdr">about</td>
+  <td class="tdr bt now">&pound;1,725,000,000<a name="FNanchor_140_140" id="FNanchor_140_140"></a><a href="#Footnote_140_140" class="fnanchor">[140]</a></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span>From the foregoing statement it appears that the rich draw not
+two-thirds, but only one-third, of the national income, and this fact
+should be carefully borne in mind in view of the contents of the
+following pages.</p>
+
+<p>The pamphlet states on page 6 that 650,000,000<i>l.</i> per annum are paid
+in the shape of rent and interest, "not in return for any service
+rendered to the community, but merely as the payment for permission to
+use the land and the already accumulated capital of the country." The
+national capital is invested chiefly in perishable objects such as
+houses, factories, railways, steamships, mines, &amp;c., which depreciate
+unless kept in proper repair. There is wear and tear in capital as in
+everything else. Capital is lost and destroyed every day. Lastly, the
+national capital is growing, and must continue growing, in accordance
+with the growing capital requirements of the time and the growing
+number of its inhabitants, or the country will decay. New houses, new
+factories, new railways, new steamships must be built and new mines be
+opened to increase the comfort of all. From 200,000,000<i>l.</i> to
+300,000,000<i>l.</i> are thus reinvested every year in Great Britain, and
+only by this constant process of reinvestment is it possible to
+maintain and increase the productive power of the country for the
+benefit of all. The 200,000,000<i>l.</i> to 300,000,000<i>l.</i> which are
+yearly reinvested in reproductive undertakings are found by the
+capitalists, the trustees, directors and managers, not the consumers,
+of the national industry and of the national wealth. This sum comes
+out of their earnings, which thus benefit not only the capitalists but
+the whole nation. Much irrelevant statistical matter is given in the
+pamphlet, but this large item is left out. That is dishonesty number
+three.</p>
+
+<p>On page 6 the profits of public companies are treated as "Interest on
+capital," and interest on capital is disparagingly called "unearned
+income" on page 7. Most <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span>British industries are carried on by limited
+companies, and limited companies are as a rule formed in this way,
+that the partners in the former private enterprise become directors.
+As directors they receive a purely nominal salary. They work as much
+as they did whilst the business was a private concern, and their
+income depends on their usually very large holding of shares. The
+large director-shareholders, and their number is very great, earn
+their dividends by hard work. Nevertheless their whole income is
+included in the item "interest on capital," and called "unearned
+income." This is dishonesty number four.</p>
+
+<p>On page 7 the property of the "manual labour class," or the poor, in
+land and capital is given as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" width="70%" summary="Distribution of the National Income">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="80%" style="padding-left: 3%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">In 1901 the deposits in P.O. Savings Bank were</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr3" width="20%">&pound;140,392,916</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 10%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">The deposits in Trustee Savings Banks were</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr3">51,966,386</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 10%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">Consols purchased for small holders were</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr3">14,450,877</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 3%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">In 1900 the capital of Building Societies was</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr3">46,775,143</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 10%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">The funds of Trade-Unions, Co-operative,
+      Friendly, and Provident Societies were</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr3">72,219,991</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 10%; padding-right: 1%;"><span style="text-indent: -2%;">The funds of Industrial Life Assurance
+      Societies were</span></td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bb">22,998,793</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 10%;">Total</td>
+  <td class="tdr bt now">&pound;348,804,106<a name="FNanchor_141_141" id="FNanchor_141_141"></a><a href="#Footnote_141_141" class="fnanchor">[141]</a></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p>In reality the property of the "manual labour class" in land and
+capital amounts not to 348,804,106<i>l.</i>, but to at least
+1,000,000,000<i>l.</i><a name="FNanchor_142_142" id="FNanchor_142_142"></a><a href="#Footnote_142_142" class="fnanchor">[142]</a> This is dishonesty number five.</p>
+
+<p>The imports of Great Britain are larger than the exports by about
+150,000,000<i>l.</i> The larger part of the money paid for these imports
+goes in wages paid to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span>foreigners, and is paid away by the British
+capitalist class out of their earnings. British wage-earners surely
+cannot expect to be paid wages in respect of articles made abroad.
+However, no allowance for this large item has been made in comparing
+the appropriation of the national income between capital and labour.
+This is dishonesty number six.</p>
+
+<p>Between one hundred and two hundred million pounds of the national
+income is derived from foreign investments. The income derived from
+foreign investments should in fairness either be left out of the
+account or the income of foreign labour, received in respect of these
+investments, be added to the British labour income. In comparing the
+income of capital and labour, the pamphlet takes note of the earnings
+of British capital on all five continents and on the sea, and compares
+with it only the income of British labour&mdash;although foreign, not
+British labour, produces the foreign income of British capital.</p>
+
+<p>Giving as authority an ancient Board of Trade Return, and wishing to
+magnify the difference in the earnings of the idle rich and the
+industrious poor, the average yearly income of "those of the manual
+labour class who are best off" is given at 48<i>l.</i> per adult. This
+means 18<i>s.</i> per week. In view of the fact that most British workers
+earn between 1<i>l.</i> and 2<i>l.</i> per week, that in many Trade-Unions the
+<i>average</i> wage is about 35<i>s.</i> per week, the figures given are
+palpably wrong unless the female workers are included. Whether this is
+the case or no is not stated, but even if the wages of both sexes
+should be joined together they appear to be very considerably
+understated. This is dishonesty number seven.</p>
+
+<p>There are many more unfair, misleading, and dishonest statements in
+this pamphlet which it would lead too far to enumerate.</p>
+
+<p>Most of the important pamphlets issued by the Fabian Society are
+signed by their authors. The fact that the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span>most effective, "Facts for
+Socialists," is unsigned seems to indicate that the author&mdash;apparently
+a well-known leader of the Fabians&mdash;had some sense of shame, and it is
+to be hoped that the Fabian Society will immediately, and publicly,
+repudiate this dishonest pamphlet.</p>
+
+<p>The statements contained in the pamphlet "Facts for Socialists," may
+be misleading and utterly dishonest, but they are very useful for
+propaganda purposes. Nothing is more likely to inflame the masses than
+to be told that the "idle rich" take more than two-thirds of the
+national income. The practical effect of this pamphlet may be seen in
+utterances such as the following: "It has been estimated that in our
+country of the wealth produced, one-third is enjoyed by those who earn
+it and two-thirds by those who have not laboured for it. To put it in
+other words, of every three pounds earned by labour, one pound goes to
+him who earned it and two pounds to others who have done nothing
+towards its production."<a name="FNanchor_143_143" id="FNanchor_143_143"></a><a href="#Footnote_143_143" class="fnanchor">[143]</a> "For two-thirds of his time the worker
+is a slave, labouring not for himself but for others."<a name="FNanchor_144_144" id="FNanchor_144_144"></a><a href="#Footnote_144_144" class="fnanchor">[144]</a> "On the
+average at the present time the workers produce nearly four times as
+much as they consume."<a name="FNanchor_145_145" id="FNanchor_145_145"></a><a href="#Footnote_145_145" class="fnanchor">[145]</a> "Nearly two-thirds of the wealth produced
+is retained by an eighth of the population."<a name="FNanchor_146_146" id="FNanchor_146_146"></a><a href="#Footnote_146_146" class="fnanchor">[146]</a> "The great mass of
+the people, the weekly wage-earners, four out of five of the whole
+population, toil perpetually for less than a third of the aggregate
+product of labour, at an annual wage averaging at most 40<i>l.</i> per
+adult, and are hurried into unnecessarily early graves by the severity
+of their lives."<a name="FNanchor_147_147" id="FNanchor_147_147"></a><a href="#Footnote_147_147" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> "Out of the wealth which his labour creates, the
+worker receives but one-third. He is paid one-third the value of his
+labour, and when he <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span>seeks to lay it out he is robbed of one-half its
+purchasing power, and all this is done by a Christian people."<a name="FNanchor_148_148" id="FNanchor_148_148"></a><a href="#Footnote_148_148" class="fnanchor">[148]</a>
+"<i>Q.</i> How does the capitalist act? <i>A.</i> He extorts from those
+labourers who are excluded from the land a share of all that they
+produce, under threat of withholding from them the implements of
+production and thus refusing to let them work at all.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> On what
+terms does the capitalist allow the labourers to work? <i>A.</i> The
+capitalist agrees to return to them as wages about a quarter of what
+they have produced by their work, keeping the remaining three-quarters
+for himself and his class.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What is this system called? <i>A.</i> The
+capitalist system."<a name="FNanchor_149_149" id="FNanchor_149_149"></a><a href="#Footnote_149_149" class="fnanchor">[149]</a> "By analysing the returns of the income-tax,
+various economists show that the value received by the working class
+and the superintendents of labour amount to a third or less of the
+wealth produced. The income-tax returns, however, are not a very
+reliable test of the degree of exploitation, though, of course, they
+afford us valuable and incontestable evidence that the worker does not
+receive more than a third of what he produces. One to four, or one to
+five, in my opinion, expresses more accurately the rate of
+exploitation."<a name="FNanchor_150_150" id="FNanchor_150_150"></a><a href="#Footnote_150_150" class="fnanchor">[150]</a></p>
+
+<p>I am not prepared to give an estimate how the national income is
+distributed between hand workers, brain workers, and men who live on
+their income without doing any useful work, because such an estimate
+could be arrived at only by guesswork. However, it is quite clear that
+it is untrue that the wage-earners receive only one-third, one-fourth,
+or one-fifth of the wages which they ought to receive, as is
+constantly stated.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_95_95" id="Footnote_95_95"></a><a href="#FNanchor_95_95"><span class="label">[95]</span></a> <i>Justice</i>, October 19, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_96_96" id="Footnote_96_96"></a><a href="#FNanchor_96_96"><span class="label">[96]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_97_97" id="Footnote_97_97"></a><a href="#FNanchor_97_97"><span class="label">[97]</span></a> <i>The Worker's Burden</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_98_98" id="Footnote_98_98"></a><a href="#FNanchor_98_98"><span class="label">[98]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Social Democracy</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_99_99" id="Footnote_99_99"></a><a href="#FNanchor_99_99"><span class="label">[99]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_100_100" id="Footnote_100_100"></a><a href="#FNanchor_100_100"><span class="label">[100]</span></a> <i>Protect the Home</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_101_101" id="Footnote_101_101"></a><a href="#FNanchor_101_101"><span class="label">[101]</span></a> <i>John Ball</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_102_102" id="Footnote_102_102"></a><a href="#FNanchor_102_102"><span class="label">[102]</span></a> <i>Facts for Socialists</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_103_103" id="Footnote_103_103"></a><a href="#FNanchor_103_103"><span class="label">[103]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p.
+15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_104_104" id="Footnote_104_104"></a><a href="#FNanchor_104_104"><span class="label">[104]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_105_105" id="Footnote_105_105"></a><a href="#FNanchor_105_105"><span class="label">[105]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_106_106" id="Footnote_106_106"></a><a href="#FNanchor_106_106"><span class="label">[106]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a
+Week?</i> p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_107_107" id="Footnote_107_107"></a><a href="#FNanchor_107_107"><span class="label">[107]</span></a> McClure, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 27.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_108_108" id="Footnote_108_108"></a><a href="#FNanchor_108_108"><span class="label">[108]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_109_109" id="Footnote_109_109"></a><a href="#FNanchor_109_109"><span class="label">[109]</span></a> Joynes, <i>The Socialist Catechism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_110_110" id="Footnote_110_110"></a><a href="#FNanchor_110_110"><span class="label">[110]</span></a> <i>To the Man in the Street</i>, Social-Democratic
+Federation Leaflet.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_111_111" id="Footnote_111_111"></a><a href="#FNanchor_111_111"><span class="label">[111]</span></a> Hyndman in Debate, <i>Will Socialism Benefit the English
+People?</i> p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_112_112" id="Footnote_112_112"></a><a href="#FNanchor_112_112"><span class="label">[112]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Class War</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_113_113" id="Footnote_113_113"></a><a href="#FNanchor_113_113"><span class="label">[113]</span></a> <i>Socialism, For and Against</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_114_114" id="Footnote_114_114"></a><a href="#FNanchor_114_114"><span class="label">[114]</span></a> Snowden, <i>Socialists' Budget</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_115_115" id="Footnote_115_115"></a><a href="#FNanchor_115_115"><span class="label">[115]</span></a> Debs, <i>Industrial Unionism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_116_116" id="Footnote_116_116"></a><a href="#FNanchor_116_116"><span class="label">[116]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>Class Struggle</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_117_117" id="Footnote_117_117"></a><a href="#FNanchor_117_117"><span class="label">[117]</span></a> Hall, <i>The Old and New Unionism</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_118_118" id="Footnote_118_118"></a><a href="#FNanchor_118_118"><span class="label">[118]</span></a> Lister, <i>Riches and Poverty</i>, pp. 13, 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_119_119" id="Footnote_119_119"></a><a href="#FNanchor_119_119"><span class="label">[119]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_120_120" id="Footnote_120_120"></a><a href="#FNanchor_120_120"><span class="label">[120]</span></a> <i>Poems for Socialists</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_121_121" id="Footnote_121_121"></a><a href="#FNanchor_121_121"><span class="label">[121]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_122_122" id="Footnote_122_122"></a><a href="#FNanchor_122_122"><span class="label">[122]</span></a> Washington, <i>A Corner in Flesh and Blood</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_123_123" id="Footnote_123_123"></a><a href="#FNanchor_123_123"><span class="label">[123]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_124_124" id="Footnote_124_124"></a><a href="#FNanchor_124_124"><span class="label">[124]</span></a> Benson, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_125_125" id="Footnote_125_125"></a><a href="#FNanchor_125_125"><span class="label">[125]</span></a> Washington, <i>Nation of Slaves</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_126_126" id="Footnote_126_126"></a><a href="#FNanchor_126_126"><span class="label">[126]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_127_127" id="Footnote_127_127"></a><a href="#FNanchor_127_127"><span class="label">[127]</span></a> <i>Some Objections to Socialism</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_128_128" id="Footnote_128_128"></a><a href="#FNanchor_128_128"><span class="label">[128]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 45.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_129_129" id="Footnote_129_129"></a><a href="#FNanchor_129_129"><span class="label">[129]</span></a> Morris, <i>Useful Work and Useless Toil</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_130_130" id="Footnote_130_130"></a><a href="#FNanchor_130_130"><span class="label">[130]</span></a> <i>Some Objections to Socialism</i>, p. 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_131_131" id="Footnote_131_131"></a><a href="#FNanchor_131_131"><span class="label">[131]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 52.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_132_132" id="Footnote_132_132"></a><a href="#FNanchor_132_132"><span class="label">[132]</span></a> Hall, <i>The Old and New Unionism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_133_133" id="Footnote_133_133"></a><a href="#FNanchor_133_133"><span class="label">[133]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_134_134" id="Footnote_134_134"></a><a href="#FNanchor_134_134"><span class="label">[134]</span></a> <i>The Socialist Annual</i>, 1907, p. 16 f.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_135_135" id="Footnote_135_135"></a><a href="#FNanchor_135_135"><span class="label">[135]</span></a> <i>Facts for Socialists</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_136_136" id="Footnote_136_136"></a><a href="#FNanchor_136_136"><span class="label">[136]</span></a> <i>Facts for Socialists</i>, pp. 6, 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_137_137" id="Footnote_137_137"></a><a href="#FNanchor_137_137"><span class="label">[137]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_138_138" id="Footnote_138_138"></a><a href="#FNanchor_138_138"><span class="label">[138]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_139_139" id="Footnote_139_139"></a><a href="#FNanchor_139_139"><span class="label">[139]</span></a> <i>Facts for Socialists</i>, pp. 8, 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_140_140" id="Footnote_140_140"></a><a href="#FNanchor_140_140"><span class="label">[140]</span></a> See <i>Daily News</i>, November 28, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_141_141" id="Footnote_141_141"></a><a href="#FNanchor_141_141"><span class="label">[141]</span></a> <i>Facts for Socialists</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_142_142" id="Footnote_142_142"></a><a href="#FNanchor_142_142"><span class="label">[142]</span></a> See Mr. Quail's paper in the <i>Contemporary Review</i> for
+August 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_143_143" id="Footnote_143_143"></a><a href="#FNanchor_143_143"><span class="label">[143]</span></a> Ward, <i>The Ideal City</i>, pp. 5, 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_144_144" id="Footnote_144_144"></a><a href="#FNanchor_144_144"><span class="label">[144]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_145_145" id="Footnote_145_145"></a><a href="#FNanchor_145_145"><span class="label">[145]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_146_146" id="Footnote_146_146"></a><a href="#FNanchor_146_146"><span class="label">[146]</span></a> <i>Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain</i>, p.
+8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_147_147" id="Footnote_147_147"></a><a href="#FNanchor_147_147"><span class="label">[147]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p.
+8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_148_148" id="Footnote_148_148"></a><a href="#FNanchor_148_148"><span class="label">[148]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a
+Week?</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_149_149" id="Footnote_149_149"></a><a href="#FNanchor_149_149"><span class="label">[149]</span></a> Joynes, <i>The Socialist Catechism</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_150_150" id="Footnote_150_150"></a><a href="#FNanchor_150_150"><span class="label">[150]</span></a> Hazell, <i>Summary of Marx's "Capital,"</i> p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_IV" id="CHAPTER_IV"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER IV<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINES OF SOCIALISM</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">In describing the doctrines of Socialism I do not mean to state in
+detail the whole of the Socialistic theories. Such a statement would
+fill a volume, it would be excessively tedious to most readers, and it
+is for all practical purposes quite unnecessary. A statement of the
+leading doctrines on which the activity of the Socialists is
+based&mdash;the doctrines which are constantly asserted and which are the
+fundamental dogmas of the Socialist faith&mdash;will enable us to obtain a
+clear view of the foundations upon which the theoretic fabric of
+Socialism is built, and to judge whether that foundation is scientific
+and sound, or unscientific and unsound.</p>
+
+<p>The basic doctrine of Socialism, upon which the great edifice of
+Socialistic theory has been reared, may be summed up in the phrase</p>
+
+<p class="cen sc">"Labour is the only Source of Wealth"</p>
+
+<p class="noin">Therefore we read in the celebrated pamphlet "Facts for Socialists,"
+of which some important extracts were given in the preceding chapter:
+"Commodities are produced solely by the 'efforts and sacrifices'
+(Cairns), whether of muscle or of brain, of the working portion of the
+community, employed upon the gifts of Nature. Adam Smith 'showed that
+labour is the only source of wealth.... It is to labour, therefore,
+and to labour only, that man owes everything possessed of
+exchangeable <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span>value (McCulloch's 'Principles of Political Economy,'
+Part II., section 1). 'No wealth whatever can be produced without
+labour' (Professor Henry Fawcett (Cambridge), 'Manual of Political
+Economy,' p. 13),"<a name="FNanchor_151_151" id="FNanchor_151_151"></a><a href="#Footnote_151_151" class="fnanchor">[151]</a></p>
+
+<p>This statement is scarcely honest, for it quotes opinions of Adam
+Smith and others which are erroneous, as will be seen in the
+following, and which have been generally abandoned. This statement may
+impose upon the simple by its show of learning, but it is somewhat
+vague, for it only suggests, but does not distinctly assert, that
+manual labour is the only source of wealth. However, in most&mdash;one
+might say in nearly all&mdash;Socialist books, pamphlets, and declarations
+of policy we find the basic doctrine of Socialism asserted in a form
+which leaves no doubt that according to the Socialist theories the
+manual labour of the labourer is the only source of wealth.</p>
+
+<p>The founder of modern Socialism declared, "Labour is the only source
+of wealth,"<a name="FNanchor_152_152" id="FNanchor_152_152"></a><a href="#Footnote_152_152" class="fnanchor">[152]</a> and his disciples&mdash;at least his British
+disciples&mdash;support that declaration. "All wealth is due to labour;
+therefore, to the labourers all wealth is due."<a name="FNanchor_153_153" id="FNanchor_153_153"></a><a href="#Footnote_153_153" class="fnanchor">[153]</a> "Labour applied
+to natural objects is the source of all wealth."<a name="FNanchor_154_154" id="FNanchor_154_154"></a><a href="#Footnote_154_154" class="fnanchor">[154]</a> The Socialist
+Party of Great Britain declares: "Wealth is natural material converted
+by labour-power to man's use, and as such is consequently produced by
+the working class alone."<a name="FNanchor_155_155" id="FNanchor_155_155"></a><a href="#Footnote_155_155" class="fnanchor">[155]</a> The Independent Labour party asserts:
+"No man or class of men made the first kind of wealth, such as land,
+minerals, and water. Therefore no man or class of men should be
+allowed to call these things their own, or to prevent others from
+using them (except on certain conditions), as the landowners and
+mine-owners do now. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span>The only class of human beings who make the
+second kind of wealth are the workers. Working men and women produce
+and prepare for us all those things which we use or consume, such as
+food, clothing, houses, furniture, instruments and implements, trams,
+railways, pictures, books, gas, drains, and many other things. They
+produce all the wealth obtained by toil from the land."<a name="FNanchor_156_156" id="FNanchor_156_156"></a><a href="#Footnote_156_156" class="fnanchor">[156]</a></p>
+
+<p>Those who maintain that labour, or, as some Socialists assert, the
+labourer's labour, is the only source of wealth, look merely at the
+mechanical factor, but omit the force which directs and controls it.
+The Socialistic argument "We can run the mills without the
+capitalists, but they cannot run them without us"<a name="FNanchor_157_157" id="FNanchor_157_157"></a><a href="#Footnote_157_157" class="fnanchor">[157]</a> is misleading.
+Labour is certainly an indispensable ingredient in production, but it
+is no more indispensable than is direction, invention, and thrift.
+Hence it is as absurd to assert "All wealth is due to labour" as to
+say "All wealth is due to invention," or "All wealth is due to
+thrift." As the brain is more important than the hand, at least in a
+highly organised state of production, so invention, organisation,
+management, and thrift are more important than manual labour, because
+invention, organisation, management, and thrift alone enable manual
+labour, working with modern machinery, to be highly productive. In
+fact, it may be asserted that wealth is created not so much by labour
+as by the saving of labour. A factory-owner who is dissatisfied with
+the profits of his factory or with its products does not get better
+workers, but gets a better manager or better machinery, keeping his
+workers. This fact proves that labour is the least important factor in
+modern production. The doctrine "Labour is the only source of wealth"
+is untenable and absurd.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span>Another fundamental doctrine of Socialism is that of</p>
+
+<p class="cen sc">"The Iron Law of Wages"</p>
+
+<p class="noin">According to that law, "wages under competition can never be higher
+than that which will just support the labourer and enable him to renew
+his kind."<a name="FNanchor_158_158" id="FNanchor_158_158"></a><a href="#Footnote_158_158" class="fnanchor">[158]</a> In the words of Lassalle, the inventor of the Iron Law
+of Wages, "the wages of the labourer are limited to the exact amount
+necessary to keep him alive."<a name="FNanchor_159_159" id="FNanchor_159_159"></a><a href="#Footnote_159_159" class="fnanchor">[159]</a></p>
+
+<p>The British Socialist writers tell us: "The average price of
+wage-labour is the minimum wage&mdash;<i>i.e.</i> that quantum of the means of
+subsistence which is absolutely requisite to keep the labourer in bare
+existence."<a name="FNanchor_160_160" id="FNanchor_160_160"></a><a href="#Footnote_160_160" class="fnanchor">[160]</a> "The labourer cannot as a rule command more than his
+cost of subsistence in return for his labour. This principle, that the
+return to labour is determined by the cost of subsistence of the
+labourer, is generally known as 'The Iron Law of Wages.' But has not
+this law been discarded even by some Socialists? There have been
+attempts in some quarters to demonstrate that this law does not
+actually operate with the rigidity at first claimed for it; but in
+truth, it stands as firmly to-day as when insisted upon by
+Lassalle."<a name="FNanchor_161_161" id="FNanchor_161_161"></a><a href="#Footnote_161_161" class="fnanchor">[161]</a> "Capitalism always keeps the wages down to the lowest
+standard of subsistence which the people will accept,"<a name="FNanchor_162_162" id="FNanchor_162_162"></a><a href="#Footnote_162_162" class="fnanchor">[162]</a> for "the
+basis of wages is the cost of subsistence of the labourer. This is
+called the 'Iron Law of Wages.'"<a name="FNanchor_163_163" id="FNanchor_163_163"></a><a href="#Footnote_163_163" class="fnanchor">[163]</a> "By the Iron Law of Wages the
+recompense of the workers always tends to the minimum on which they
+are willing to subsist. If they are content with water to drink and
+cabbage to eat, they may be sure that the means of buying whisky or
+roast beef will <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span>very soon be taken from them. Messrs. Rentmonger,
+Interestmonger, and Profitmonger will speedily scent additional swag,
+and they will have it, too."<a name="FNanchor_164_164" id="FNanchor_164_164"></a><a href="#Footnote_164_164" class="fnanchor">[164]</a> "The 'Iron Law of Wages' reduces the
+wages to as near the level of the means of subsistence as local
+circumstances will admit of."<a name="FNanchor_165_165" id="FNanchor_165_165"></a><a href="#Footnote_165_165" class="fnanchor">[165]</a> If these arguments were correct it
+would follow that the workers could cause their wages to rise by
+drinking wine instead of whisky, and by smoking Havana cigars instead
+of pipe-tobacco.</p>
+
+<p>This theory of wages is called the "Iron Law of Wages" because of its
+absolute and pitiless rigidity. For instance, the Iron Law of Wages
+will prevent lower prices of food benefiting the workman in any way.
+"If the working class is enabled to buy cheap bread, the operation of
+the 'Iron Law of Wages' will secure all the advantage for the
+capitalists, as it did in the days of the saintly Bright, when the
+corn laws were repealed. Capital is always the same in its effect on
+the working-class, whether manipulated by an individual capitalist,
+joint-stock enterprise, municipality, or government, and with each
+step in concentration the working-class gets relatively less and the
+master class gets richer, more corrupt, and more bestial, as recent
+events in Berlin and elsewhere show."<a name="FNanchor_166_166" id="FNanchor_166_166"></a><a href="#Footnote_166_166" class="fnanchor">[166]</a> The "Iron Law of Wages" is
+irrefutable and irresistible. "Economists have come to talk about the
+'Iron Law of Wages' with as much assurance as if it were an
+irreversible law of Nature."<a name="FNanchor_167_167" id="FNanchor_167_167"></a><a href="#Footnote_167_167" class="fnanchor">[167]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Iron Law of Wages exists chiefly in the imagination of British
+Socialists. The general wage of British workmen living in towns ranges
+from, say 18<i>s.</i> to more than 2<i>l.</i> per week, and its amount does not
+depend on the cost of subsistence, but on the working skill and
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span>various other factors. If the Iron Law of Wages were correct, wages
+would be almost uniform. The Iron Law of Wages can possibly apply only
+to one small class of workers, the lowest and least skilled labourers,
+provided that unemployment is so great among them that they abandon
+collective bargaining and underbid one another down to the level of
+subsistence. When workers are organised, the Iron Law of Wages does
+not apply. The level of wages depends, broadly speaking, on supply and
+demand. Wages rise when two employers run after one workman; wages
+fall when two workmen run after one employer. An employer who engages
+a workman does not ask, "How much do you eat?" but "What can you do?"
+and he proportions the worker's remuneration not to his appetite, but
+to his ability and his value as a producer. The wages paid to married
+men and to unmarried men are identical in the same trade. If there was
+an "Iron Law of Wages," the wages of married men should be about twice
+as large as those of unmarried men.</p>
+
+<p>The Iron Law of Wages is manifestly absurd. It has therefore been
+officially abandoned by the German Socialists at the Halle Congress of
+1890 "as being scientifically untenable."<a name="FNanchor_168_168" id="FNanchor_168_168"></a><a href="#Footnote_168_168" class="fnanchor">[168]</a> "German Social
+Democracy no longer recognises the Iron Law of Wages."<a name="FNanchor_169_169" id="FNanchor_169_169"></a><a href="#Footnote_169_169" class="fnanchor">[169]</a> The
+British Socialists have not abandoned it, probably not because they
+believe it to be scientifically correct&mdash;no one can believe that&mdash;but
+because it is a plausible and effective means of poisoning the minds
+of the people.</p>
+
+<p>As regards the factors which determine wages, one of the foremost
+Socialist authorities says: "Thoughtful workmen in the staple trades
+have become convinced by their own experience, no less than by the
+repeated arguments of the economists, that a rising standard of wages
+and other conditions of employment must depend <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span>ultimately on the
+productivity of labour, and therefore upon the most efficient and
+economical use of credit, capital, and capacity."<a name="FNanchor_170_170" id="FNanchor_170_170"></a><a href="#Footnote_170_170" class="fnanchor">[170]</a> In other words,
+productivity and profit determine wages, and it is ridiculous that
+Socialists argue: "Over 90 per cent. of our women do not drink, back
+horses, smoke, attend football or cricket matches, they do not stop
+off their work to watch England and Australia play at cricket, and the
+result is they are paid less wages than men in our factories for doing
+the same work."<a name="FNanchor_171_171" id="FNanchor_171_171"></a><a href="#Footnote_171_171" class="fnanchor">[171]</a> Does Councillor Glyde really believe that women's
+wages would rise as soon as they took to smoking and drinking?</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">The Law of Increasing Misery</h4>
+
+<p>According to this law the improvements in machinery, the increase of
+capital and increase of production do not benefit the worker. They
+only lead to a decline in wages and thus increase the workers' misery.
+"In proportion as the use of machinery and division of labour
+increases, in the same proportion the burden of toil also increases
+whether by prolongation of the working hours, by increase of the work
+exacted in a given time, or by increased speed of the machinery,
+&amp;c."<a name="FNanchor_172_172" id="FNanchor_172_172"></a><a href="#Footnote_172_172" class="fnanchor">[172]</a> "The faster productive capital increases, the more does the
+division of labour and the employment of machinery extend. The more
+the division of labour and the employment of machinery extend, so much
+the more does competition increase among the labourers and so much the
+more do their average wages dwindle. And thus the forest of arms
+outstretched by those who are entreating for work becomes ever denser
+and the arms themselves grow ever leaner."<a name="FNanchor_173_173" id="FNanchor_173_173"></a><a href="#Footnote_173_173" class="fnanchor">[173]</a> "The more the worker
+labours the less reward he receives for it; <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span>and that for this simple
+reason, that he competes against his fellow-workmen and thus compels
+them to compete against him and to offer their labour on as wretched
+conditions as he does, and that he thus, in the last result, competes
+against himself as a member of the working-class."<a name="FNanchor_174_174" id="FNanchor_174_174"></a><a href="#Footnote_174_174" class="fnanchor">[174]</a> "The worker in
+the factory gets, as a worker, absolutely no advantage from the
+machinery which causes the product of his labour to be multiplied a
+hundredfold."<a name="FNanchor_175_175" id="FNanchor_175_175"></a><a href="#Footnote_175_175" class="fnanchor">[175]</a> "John Stuart Mill, it will be remembered,
+questioned whether mechanical invention had lightened the labours of a
+single human being."<a name="FNanchor_176_176" id="FNanchor_176_176"></a><a href="#Footnote_176_176" class="fnanchor">[176]</a> "With increasing powers of production, the
+worker's share, and therefore his purchasing power, grows less."<a name="FNanchor_177_177" id="FNanchor_177_177"></a><a href="#Footnote_177_177" class="fnanchor">[177]</a>
+"Wage-labour rests exclusively on competition between the
+labourers."<a name="FNanchor_178_178" id="FNanchor_178_178"></a><a href="#Footnote_178_178" class="fnanchor">[178]</a> "The iron law of competition means, and must mean,
+continued degradation for the workers, even though their physical
+condition in youth may be improved."<a name="FNanchor_179_179" id="FNanchor_179_179"></a><a href="#Footnote_179_179" class="fnanchor">[179]</a> "The worker in the factory
+is now seen to work no shorter hours or gain no higher wages merely
+because the product of his labour is multiplied a hundredfold by
+machinery which he does not own. 'The remuneration of labour as such,'
+wrote Cairnes in 1874, 'skilled or unskilled, can never rise much
+above its present level.'"<a name="FNanchor_180_180" id="FNanchor_180_180"></a><a href="#Footnote_180_180" class="fnanchor">[180]</a></p>
+
+<p>The celebrated "Doctrine of Increasing Misery" stands in diametrical
+opposition to those facts with which nowadays every child is
+acquainted. During the time when our Socialists have been preaching
+the "Doctrine of Increasing Misery" working hours have been very
+greatly diminished and wages have not been reduced, but have risen by
+about 100 per cent. During the same time working hours in Germany have
+also been <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span>reduced and wages have risen up to 400 per cent.<a name="FNanchor_181_181" id="FNanchor_181_181"></a><a href="#Footnote_181_181" class="fnanchor">[181]</a> The
+German Socialists have been honest enough to abandon the Doctrine of
+Increasing Misery under the guidance of Bernstein; the French have
+dropped it under the guidance of Sorel; the Dutch have seen its
+absurdity, guided by Vandervelde, their foremost leader. The British
+Socialists, on the other hand, have not abandoned it, though they must
+see its absurdity, probably because, though palpably and ridiculously
+false, the Doctrine of Increasing Misery is considered to be a useful
+and effective part of the Socialist agitator's stock-in-trade.</p>
+
+<p>The next doctrine to be considered is</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">The Surplus-Value Doctrine</h4>
+
+<p>The Socialists argue that the position of the worker cannot improve
+because the capitalist, possessing the monopoly of property, pockets
+all that the worker produces except the mere cost of his subsistence,
+which, owing to the "Iron Law of Wages," is given to the workman in
+the form of wages. "The amount of wealth which the labourer produces
+in the time for which he has sold his labour-force is out of all
+proportion to what it costs to produce and maintain his labour-force
+for that time. This, the difference between what he produces and his
+own cost of production, is surplus-value, and is taken and divided up
+by the capitalist into rent, interest, profit. This surplus-value,
+then, this profit, is so much robbery effected by taking advantage of
+the necessity of the proletarian&mdash;the naked propertyless
+labourer."<a name="FNanchor_182_182" id="FNanchor_182_182"></a><a href="#Footnote_182_182" class="fnanchor">[182]</a> "All that the worker produces beyond what is
+absolutely necessary to keep himself and his offspring in life, this
+surplus beyond subsistence&mdash;this difference between the recompense of
+labour and its products&mdash;this unrighteous <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span>subtrahend, this swag, is
+the booty alike of slavelord, serflord, and drudgelord, or
+capitalist."<a name="FNanchor_183_183" id="FNanchor_183_183"></a><a href="#Footnote_183_183" class="fnanchor">[183]</a> The question now arises: "How does the capitalist
+secure this surplus-value of labour without paying for it? If the
+workman is free, why cannot he insist on receiving, not the mere
+exchange-value of his commodity&mdash;'labour-power'&mdash;but the full value of
+the labour he expends for the capitalist? The capitalist obtains this
+surplus-value owing to his monopoly of the means of production. The
+labourer cannot, as a rule, command more than his cost of subsistence
+in return for his labour&mdash;although his wages, like the prices of all
+commodities, sometimes rise above this and sometimes fall
+below&mdash;because, although apparently free, he is really not free. He
+must sell his labour-power in order to live; he has no other commodity
+to dispose of. Consequently he must accept the terms that the
+purchaser will offer, subject only to two conditions&mdash;his own cost of
+subsistence and the fluctuations of the market."<a name="FNanchor_184_184" id="FNanchor_184_184"></a><a href="#Footnote_184_184" class="fnanchor">[184]</a> "Owing to the
+monopoly of the means of production in the past, industrial inventions
+and the transformation of surplus income into capital have mainly
+enriched the proprietary class, the worker being now dependent on that
+class for leave to earn a living."<a name="FNanchor_185_185" id="FNanchor_185_185"></a><a href="#Footnote_185_185" class="fnanchor">[185]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Surplus-Value Doctrine, like the preceding doctrines, is founded
+rather upon imagination than upon fact. In the first place, it is
+absurd to speak of a "capitalist class" which, having a "monopoly of
+the means of production," exploits "the naked and propertyless
+labourer." This picture is a fancy picture. In the second place,
+"class" is not synonymous with "caste." The population is not divided
+into two rigidly defined and limited castes of capitalists and
+wage-earners. There is neither a monopoly of capital nor a monopoly of
+labour. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span>Capital is founded by thrift. Most respectable workmen are
+capitalists to a greater or lesser extent. Every day workmen become
+capitalists. It should not be forgotten that many of the wealthiest
+men, such as Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Krupp, the first
+Rothschild, Sir Thomas Lipton, Passmore Edwards, and many others, have
+risen from the ranks and were working men&mdash;and every day capitalists
+lose their money and become workmen. Workmen may become capitalists by
+thrift. Co-operating workmen in England, France, Germany, and other
+countries own vast industrial undertakings, banks, &amp;c. In those
+districts where thrift and co-operation are general (France,
+Switzerland, Holland) the "naked and propertyless labourers"
+disappear, whilst in equally prosperous districts where improvidence
+is general, they are many. The prosperity of the working classes in
+France, Switzerland, Holland, and other countries disproves the
+assertion that the workman is condemned to everlasting poverty because
+of the Surplus-Value Doctrine.</p>
+
+<p>Assertions in support of the "Surplus-Value Doctrine" such as
+"Carnegie and other millionaires have wrung their wealth literally out
+of the bodies of the underfed"<a name="FNanchor_186_186" id="FNanchor_186_186"></a><a href="#Footnote_186_186" class="fnanchor">[186]</a> are as malicious as they are
+untrue. Men like Carnegie and Krupp have not "wrung their wealth out
+of the bodies of the underfed," but out of Nature. They have created
+vast industries in barren places, and the industries which they have
+created nourish now tens of thousands of working men. Men like Krupp
+and Carnegie have diminished misery, not increased it. Their capital,
+created by their brains with the assistance of labour out of Nature,
+has rather enriched labour than that labour has enriched Carnegie and
+Krupp. Their wealth is not dead wealth; it produces wages and articles
+of use. The "Surplus-Value Doctrine" is a grotesque distortion of, and
+an unjustified protest against, the fact that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span>manufacturers and other
+organisers and directors of labour will not work for nothing.</p>
+
+<p>We have seen in the foregoing that, according to the fundamental
+Socialist doctrines, "labour is the only source of wealth." We have
+also seen that, according to the "Iron Law of Wages" and the "Law of
+Increasing Misery," the workmen are condemned to great, permanent, and
+constantly increasing misery. Further, we have learned that, according
+to the "Surplus-Value Doctrine," all the fruit of their labour, minus
+the cost of their bare subsistence, is taken from the workers by the
+capitalists. Hence it is only natural and logical that the assertion
+of the fundamental doctrines, namely&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="block">
+<p class="noin">1. Labour is the only source of wealth,<br />
+2. Wages maintains mere animal existence,<br />
+3. The misery of the workers is constantly increasing,<br />
+4. The position of the worker is hopeless,</p>
+</div>
+
+<p class="noin">has led to this fifth doctrine:</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">The Labourer is Entitled to the Entire Product of His Labour</h4>
+
+<p>This doctrine is put forth by practically all British Socialists, not
+only as a doctrine but also as a demand. For instance "the New School
+of Trades-Unionists declare themselves in open and uncompromising
+revolt against the established relations between capital and labour;
+and they expound a new political economy which says that nothing less
+than the full fruits of industry shall be reckoned the fair reward of
+the producing class. They want the whole four-fourths of their
+earnings, instead of the one-fourth at present doled back in
+wages."<a name="FNanchor_187_187" id="FNanchor_187_187"></a><a href="#Footnote_187_187" class="fnanchor">[187]</a> This demand must have precedence over all other measures
+whatsoever, for "until you have settled <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span>the material question as to
+how the producers of wealth are to get for themselves the full value
+of what they produce by their labour, it is impossible to settle
+anything else."<a name="FNanchor_188_188" id="FNanchor_188_188"></a><a href="#Footnote_188_188" class="fnanchor">[188]</a></p>
+
+<p>According to many Socialists, Socialism would immediately abolish
+their grievances and give to the worker the entire produce of his
+labour. "At present the frugal workman only gets about one-third of
+his earnings. Under Socialism he would get all his earnings."<a name="FNanchor_189_189" id="FNanchor_189_189"></a><a href="#Footnote_189_189" class="fnanchor">[189]</a>
+"Under the new order all will be productive workers, receiving an
+equivalent for what they produce&mdash;not merely one-half of it as now
+under the wage-system&mdash;in some form."<a name="FNanchor_190_190" id="FNanchor_190_190"></a><a href="#Footnote_190_190" class="fnanchor">[190]</a> Under the heading "Basis of
+the Fabian Society," the Fabian Society publishes a statement of the
+fundamental principles of that Society in which we read: "If these
+measures" (confiscation of all private property) "be carried out,
+without compensation (though not without such relief to expropriated
+individuals as may seem fit to the community), rent and interest will
+be added to the reward of labour, the idle class now living on the
+labour of others will necessarily disappear, and practical equality of
+opportunity will be maintained by the spontaneous action of economic
+forces with much less interference with personal liberty than the
+present system entails."</p>
+
+<p>The absurdity of the demand for "the entire product of labour," which
+is raised by Socialists on behalf of the labourer is clear even to the
+most superficial thinker. The majority of Socialists know quite well
+that writing off, repairs, renewals, the replacing of machinery, the
+enlargement of factories, &amp;c., cannot be done gratis, that the
+distribution of the whole produce of labour to the workers can be
+effected only by neglecting and destroying the means of production.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span>The impossibility of giving to the worker the "whole product of his
+labour" by abolishing the private capitalist is clearly recognised and
+honestly admitted by the German Socialists. Kautsky, for instance,
+writes: "If the income of the capitalists were added to that of the
+workers, the wages of each would be doubled. Unfortunately, however,
+the matter will not be settled so simply. If we expropriate
+capitalism, we must at the same time take over its social
+functions&mdash;among these the important one of capitalist accumulation.
+The capitalists do not consume all their income; a portion of it they
+put away for the extension of production. A proletarian <i>r&eacute;gime</i> would
+also have to do the same in order to extend production. It would not
+therefore be able to transfer, even in the event of a radical
+confiscation of capital, the whole of the former income to the working
+class. Besides, a portion of the surplus value which the capitalists
+now pocket, they must hand over to the State in the shape of taxes.
+For these reasons our Socialists are guilty of wilful deception if
+they tell the workers that under a Socialist <i>r&eacute;gime</i> their wages
+would be doubled and trebled."<a name="FNanchor_191_191" id="FNanchor_191_191"></a><a href="#Footnote_191_191" class="fnanchor">[191]</a> Nevertheless, the doctrine and the
+demand that "the labourer is entitled to the entire product of his
+labour" is not abandoned by British Socialists, apparently because it
+is extremely useful for arousing the passions of the workers against
+the capitalists in accordance with Gronlund's advice,<a name="FNanchor_192_192" id="FNanchor_192_192"></a><a href="#Footnote_192_192" class="fnanchor">[192]</a> and for
+bringing new adherents to the Socialist camp.</p>
+
+<p>Only the Fabian Society, the more scientific section of the English
+Socialists, has mildly protested against this absurd doctrine and
+demand, but that protest has not been heeded. In a little-read
+pamphlet of that Society, the following statement may be found: "The
+Fabian Society steadfastly discountenances all schemes for <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span>securing
+to any person or any group of persons the entire product of their
+labour. It recognises that wealth is social in its origin and must be
+social in its distribution" (which means in plain English, must be
+preserved by the thrifty few, official or non-official, for the use of
+the unthrifty many), "since the evolution of industry has made it
+impossible to distinguish the particular contribution that each person
+makes to the common product, or to ascertain the value."<a name="FNanchor_193_193" id="FNanchor_193_193"></a><a href="#Footnote_193_193" class="fnanchor">[193]</a>
+Notwithstanding these emphatic statements, the Fabian Society
+preserves with characteristic duplicity<a name="FNanchor_194_194" id="FNanchor_194_194"></a><a href="#Footnote_194_194" class="fnanchor">[194]</a> the statement in its
+programme that "rent and interest, will be added to the reward of
+labour."</p>
+
+<p>Most British Socialist writers are not aware, or rather pretend not to
+be aware, of the necessity of preserving and increasing the national
+capital. In "Land, Labour, and Liberty," we read: "Whilst in 1845 the
+total wealth of this country was estimated at 4,000,000,000<i>l.</i>, it is
+now estimated at over 12,000,000,000<i>l.</i> The monopolist classes,
+without denying themselves anything, and whilst producing
+comparatively nothing, have piled up an additional eight thousand
+millions. The superfluous handful of mere possessors remain the
+flowers and foliage of society; the three-quarters of the nation of
+indispensable producers remain the manure."<a name="FNanchor_195_195" id="FNanchor_195_195"></a><a href="#Footnote_195_195" class="fnanchor">[195]</a> This writer, like
+most Socialists, though acknowledging the enormous growth of the
+national capital of Great Britain, pretends that the "monopolist
+classes" have not denied themselves anything. If that were true, the
+national capital would still amount to only 4,000,000,000<i>l.</i> as in
+1845. Great Britain would have few factories, no new machinery, no
+steamships, and but a very few miles of railway. But for the
+self-denial, the thrift of the "superfluous handful of mere
+possessors," Englishmen would still live <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span>in the Hungry Forties and
+Great Britain would be able to nourish only about 20,000,000 people as
+she did in 1845. National capital and the comforts and conveniences
+which it supplies to all are at least as much the result of thrift,
+inventiveness, enterprise, and wise direction as of manual labour.</p>
+
+<p>The foregoing shows that, to say the least, the grievances of the
+Socialists are greatly&mdash;one might almost say grotesquely&mdash;exaggerated,
+and that they are largely founded on a perversion of facts; a
+perversion which can be easily explained by the desire of the
+Socialist leaders to arouse the blind passions of the discontented
+wage-earners in accordance with Gronlund's advice, quoted on page 10.</p>
+
+<p>The next doctrine which should be considered may be summed up in the
+words:</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">"The Existing Misery can be Abolished, not by Increasing
+Production, <br />but by Altering the Distribution of the Wealth
+Produced"</h4>
+
+<p>"The Socialist emphatically denies the assertion that the poor must
+always be with us. The productive capacity of society is now so great
+that none need want, and all are able to earn their livelihood, and
+more, except where they are prevented from doing so by sickness,
+infirmity, or by the existence of laws and customs which the
+individual cannot himself, acting alone, remove."<a name="FNanchor_196_196" id="FNanchor_196_196"></a><a href="#Footnote_196_196" class="fnanchor">[196]</a> "There is a
+demand for the labour of every man under any well-ordered social
+system. If there is a waste of men now, it is the fault of the wage
+system."<a name="FNanchor_197_197" id="FNanchor_197_197"></a><a href="#Footnote_197_197" class="fnanchor">[197]</a> "Sufficient wealth is produced in this country to-day
+which would, under a well-ordered state of society, enable every man,
+woman, and child to have a sufficiency <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span>of all things essential to a
+healthy human life. To-day the people produce this wealth, and, after
+they have produced it, quite two-thirds of it is taken from them by a
+very small section of the people. Consequently we have a very few
+rich, and many that are poor."<a name="FNanchor_198_198" id="FNanchor_198_198"></a><a href="#Footnote_198_198" class="fnanchor">[198]</a> "We may claim to have solved the
+problem of how to produce enough, and the question which confronts us
+is how to bring distribution into line with the productive capacity of
+our people."<a name="FNanchor_199_199" id="FNanchor_199_199"></a><a href="#Footnote_199_199" class="fnanchor">[199]</a> "The old argument that there is not enough work to
+do cannot be seriously listened to by anyone who has walked through a
+London or Manchester slum. There is work in the world for all, just as
+there is wealth in the world for all, and every man has a right to
+work, just as he has a right to wealth."<a name="FNanchor_200_200" id="FNanchor_200_200"></a><a href="#Footnote_200_200" class="fnanchor">[200]</a> "The chief problem is
+not the production of more wealth, but its equitable
+distribution."<a name="FNanchor_201_201" id="FNanchor_201_201"></a><a href="#Footnote_201_201" class="fnanchor">[201]</a></p>
+
+<p>The increase of production and therefore of reproductive capital in
+the form of machinery, mines, railways, ships, &amp;c., in which most of
+the "Surplus-Value" is invested, is explained to be a matter of
+secondary consideration and importance, and it is stated that the
+world suffers rather from over-production than from under-production.
+"The tendency of the conditions of employment under present
+circumstances, under the capitalist system, always is for production
+to outstrip consumption."<a name="FNanchor_202_202" id="FNanchor_202_202"></a><a href="#Footnote_202_202" class="fnanchor">[202]</a> "Our power to produce has always, since
+the beginnings of capitalism, shown a tendency to grow more rapidly
+than our power to consume."<a name="FNanchor_203_203" id="FNanchor_203_203"></a><a href="#Footnote_203_203" class="fnanchor">[203]</a> "Then because there is a plethora of
+goods and a dearth of purchasers, the workshops are closed and Hunger
+lashes the working population with his thousand-thonged whip. The
+workers, stupefied by the dogma of work, do not <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span>understand that the
+cause of their present misery is the overwork that they have inflicted
+on themselves during the time of sham prosperity."<a name="FNanchor_204_204" id="FNanchor_204_204"></a><a href="#Footnote_204_204" class="fnanchor">[204]</a> "For some
+insane reason the capitalist has thought of nothing but
+production."<a name="FNanchor_205_205" id="FNanchor_205_205"></a><a href="#Footnote_205_205" class="fnanchor">[205]</a> "If, by a fiat from heaven, the wealth of the world
+were doubled to-morrow and the present system of capitalistic monopoly
+and commercial competition were allowed to continue, the social misery
+would, in a very short time, reappear in a form even still more
+accentuated, were that possible. Individualism, commercialism,
+capitalism&mdash;call it what we may&mdash;has demonstrably produced the
+evil."<a name="FNanchor_206_206" id="FNanchor_206_206"></a><a href="#Footnote_206_206" class="fnanchor">[206]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">The Existing Capitalist System is Responsible for Poverty, Want,
+and Unemployment</h4>
+
+<p>Unemployment is largely caused by commercial crises, commercial crises
+are caused by over-production, over-production is caused by the fact
+that the national industries are divided and the industrial output is
+regulated not by the nation in accordance with the national demand but
+by irresponsible private individuals whose aim is profit, not the
+fulfilment of a national demand. "The causes of commercial depression
+lie in the non-consumption of the incomes of our millionaires."<a name="FNanchor_207_207" id="FNanchor_207_207"></a><a href="#Footnote_207_207" class="fnanchor">[207]</a>
+Another Socialist writer asserts: "Our era is cursed with crises
+occurring far more frequently than plagues and causing as much misery.
+Economists say that these crises are caused by over-production.
+Private enterprise compels every producer to produce for himself, to
+sell for himself, to keep all his transactions to himself, without
+regard to anybody else in the wide world. Merchants have got no
+measure at hand by which they can, even approximately, either
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span>estimate the effective demand of their customers or ascertain the
+producing capacity of their rivals. Production by all these
+manufacturers is, and must necessarily be, absolutely planless. This
+planless production must end in the market being overstocked with
+commodities of one kind or another; that is, that it must end in
+'over-production.' In the trade which has been thus overdone, prices
+fall and wages come down; or a great manufacturer fails and a smaller
+or greater number of workmen are discharged. Crises are therefore the
+direct result of private enterprise."<a name="FNanchor_208_208" id="FNanchor_208_208"></a><a href="#Footnote_208_208" class="fnanchor">[208]</a> "Why are men&mdash;men that is
+who are able and willing, nay, eager and anxious, to work&mdash;unemployed?
+Because, it is said, there is nothing for them to do. Nothing for them
+to do? Is all the necessary work of the world, then, already finished,
+so that there is nothing more remaining for anyone to do? No; it is
+not because all the necessary and useful work is done that men are
+unemployed, it is because all the means of production&mdash;all the
+machines, tools, and implements of labour and all the raw
+material&mdash;are owned by a class, and may only be used by permission of
+that class, and when that class can make a profit out of their
+use."<a name="FNanchor_209_209" id="FNanchor_209_209"></a><a href="#Footnote_209_209" class="fnanchor">[209]</a> "It is indisputable that modern poverty is artificial. It
+is neither the result of divine anger nor the niggardliness of Nature.
+It is the product of the private ownership of land and capital by
+which men are prevented from earning their living unless the
+proprietary class can make profit from their labour. The inevitable
+result of this system is that in all industries and at all times there
+are more men seeking employment than there is employment for.<a name="FNanchor_210_210" id="FNanchor_210_210"></a><a href="#Footnote_210_210" class="fnanchor">[210]</a>"
+"Your system of private ownership, in conferring the possession and
+control of the nation's storehouse of wealth and of the instruments by
+which all further wealth <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span>must be obtained from it, upon your
+capitalist class, has reduced the nation at large into nothing more
+nor less than an elaborate machine which your capitalists use for
+extracting wealth from the earth for their own benefit.... It is not
+well that by a foolish and wicked system of government, one small
+class of the community should be enabled to organise its production in
+such a manner that the full stream of wealth is diverted into their
+own possession whilst the mass of the nation by whose labour it is
+obtained are defrauded of it, and brought into a state of subtle
+slavery worse both in kind and degree than could be possible under any
+system of direct and open slavery."<a name="FNanchor_211_211" id="FNanchor_211_211"></a><a href="#Footnote_211_211" class="fnanchor">[211]</a> "Unemployment is an
+inevitable feature of capitalism, and is impossible of removal without
+at the same time abolishing the capitalist system that produces it.
+That is a fact known to any Socialist with the most elementary
+knowledge of the economics of capitalism. Unemployment is caused by
+the exactions of the capitalist class. The prime cause of unemployment
+is the robbery of the workers by which the capitalist class
+appropriate the whole of the wealth produced by the workers, returning
+to them just as much on the average as will keep them physically fit
+to continue working. The difference between the quantities produced
+and consumed by the working class (a difference continually increasing
+with every increase in the productivity of labour) represents a
+surplus which all the waste and all the luxury of its owners cannot
+absorb, with the result that the markets are glutted with an excess of
+commodities. Thus the 'over-production,' the crisis, and the
+slackening of production involving an increase of unemployment."<a name="FNanchor_212_212" id="FNanchor_212_212"></a><a href="#Footnote_212_212" class="fnanchor">[212]</a></p>
+
+<p>Employers of labour profit directly from unemployment, and will
+therefore presumably do all they can to bring it about. "Employers and
+other well-to-do people <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span>have no interest in finding work for the
+workless. They benefit from the unemployment of the poor."<a name="FNanchor_213_213" id="FNanchor_213_213"></a><a href="#Footnote_213_213" class="fnanchor">[213]</a> The
+foregoing statement is as malicious as it is absurd. Employers do not
+desire unemployment, partly from humanitarian reasons, partly because
+it is a loss to them. The father of English Socialism taught: "The
+labourer perishes if capital does not employ him. Capital perishes if
+it does not exploit labour."<a name="FNanchor_214_214" id="FNanchor_214_214"></a><a href="#Footnote_214_214" class="fnanchor">[214]</a> In other words, unemployed labour
+means unemployed capital; besides, those business men who do not
+actually dismiss their workers suffer also through unemployment,
+because the unemployed are supported by the rates.</p>
+
+<p>The doctrines that "the existing misery can be abolished, not by
+increased production but by altering the distribution of the wealth
+produced," and that the "capitalist system is responsible for want,
+poverty, and unemployment," are manifestly unsound. A larger
+consumption of food, clothing, &amp;c., can be effected only by a larger
+production. Gluts and crises, with consequent unemployment, occur, not
+through general over-production, which would benefit all, but by
+ill-balanced production, as the following example will prove: Imagine
+an island off the African coast on which there are two villages, the
+inhabitants of which require only two commodities, loin-cloths and
+mealies. One village manufactures loin-cloths, the other raises
+mealies, and these are exchanged against each other. These villages
+fulfil the Socialistic ideal. There are no capitalists and no
+middlemen, and production is only "for use," not "for profit."
+Balanced over-production will result in this, that every native will
+have a superabundance of loin-cloths and food. But supposing that the
+agriculturists go in for loin-cloth making, finding that occupation
+more congenial, and that they abandon much agriculture; or supposing
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span>that inclement weather, or a plague of grasshoppers, should seriously
+curtail the harvest, then there will soon be a glut of loin-cloths and
+a crisis. The cry of over-production will arise among the loin-cloth
+makers, but that cry will be unjustified and absurd. The more the
+people make the more they will have, provided production is properly
+balanced. The doctrine that we suffer from over-production and that
+the capitalist system is at fault, that altered distribution rather
+than increased production will abolish misery, and that Socialism can
+prevent want and unemployment by a scientific organisation of
+production, is wrong.</p>
+
+<p>Socialists may, of course, argue, "In the Socialist State production
+would be organised, and controlled, and properly balanced and
+harmonised," an argument which is irrelevant with regard to the
+over-production doctrine, and which besides is unsound, although it
+may be found in most Socialistic writings. As production is
+world-wide, the Socialists' control of production would also have to
+be world-wide. It would involve not only the control of all human
+energy throughout the world, but also the control of the seasons, of
+the weather, of insect plagues, of fashions, of appetite, &amp;c.</p>
+
+<p>The foregoing proves that "men can never become richer till the
+produce of their labour increases. The more they produce the richer
+they will be, provided there be a demand for the produce of their
+labour. If a shoemaker makes four pairs of shoes in a day he will be
+twice richer than he would be if he made only two pairs in a day,
+provided that an increased demand is co-existing. The question,
+therefore, 'How can we become richer?' is reduced to this one, 'How
+can we increase the produce of labour and at the same time maintain an
+equivalent demand for that produce?'"<a name="FNanchor_215_215" id="FNanchor_215_215"></a><a href="#Footnote_215_215" class="fnanchor">[215]</a> The doctrines that want and
+unemployment are due to over-production and to the capitalist system
+are wrong.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span>We now come to the</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">Doctrine of the Class War</h4>
+
+<p>Having, by the fundamental doctrines enumerated in the foregoing,
+proved that all misery of the working masses is caused by the
+existence of a capitalist class which has enslaved the workers, the
+Socialists conclude that there is a natural antagonism between capital
+and labour; that social life is dominated by the Class War.</p>
+
+<p>"The Socialists say that the present form of property-holding divides
+society into two great classes."<a name="FNanchor_216_216" id="FNanchor_216_216"></a><a href="#Footnote_216_216" class="fnanchor">[216]</a> "Capitalist society is divided
+into two classes: owners of property and owners of no property."<a name="FNanchor_217_217" id="FNanchor_217_217"></a><a href="#Footnote_217_217" class="fnanchor">[217]</a>
+"Society is to-day divided into two classes with opposing interests,
+one class owning the means of life, and the other nothing but their
+power to work. Never in the history of society was the working-class
+so free from all traces of property as to-day."<a name="FNanchor_218_218" id="FNanchor_218_218"></a><a href="#Footnote_218_218" class="fnanchor">[218]</a> "There are in
+reality but two classes, those who live by labour and those who live
+upon those who labour, the two classes of exploiter and
+exploited."<a name="FNanchor_219_219" id="FNanchor_219_219"></a><a href="#Footnote_219_219" class="fnanchor">[219]</a> "Society has been divided mainly into two economic
+classes, a relatively small class of capitalists who own tools in the
+form of great machines they did not make and cannot use, and a great
+body of many millions of workers who did make these tools and who do
+use them, and whose very lives depend upon them, yet who do not own
+them."<a name="FNanchor_220_220" id="FNanchor_220_220"></a><a href="#Footnote_220_220" class="fnanchor">[220]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is usually said that society has three classes, but Socialists
+maintain that there are in reality only two classes. William Morris
+still divided society into three groups, which, however, at closer
+inspection will be found to form but two classes. According to Morris,
+"Civilised States consist of (1) the class of rich people doing no
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span>work, who consume a great deal while they produce nothing. Therefore,
+clearly they have to be kept at the expense of those who do work, just
+as paupers have, and are a mere burden on the community. (2) The
+middle class, including the trading, manufacturing, and professional
+people of our society. It is their ambition and the end of their whole
+lives to gain, if not for themselves, yet at least for their children,
+the proud position of being obvious burdens on the community. Here
+then is another class, this time very numerous and all-powerful, which
+produces very little and consumes enormously, and is therefore
+supported, as paupers are, by the real producers. (3) The class that
+remains to be considered produces all that is produced and supports
+both itself and the other classes, though it is placed in a position
+of inferiority to them, real inferiority, mind you, involving a
+degradation both of mind and body. To sum up, then, civilised States
+are composed of three classes&mdash;a class which does not even pretend to
+work, a class which pretends to work but which produces nothing, and a
+class which works."<a name="FNanchor_221_221" id="FNanchor_221_221"></a><a href="#Footnote_221_221" class="fnanchor">[221]</a> In other words, William Morris divided
+society into two classes: propertied non-producers and non-propertied
+toilers.</p>
+
+<p>According to practically all living English Socialists, there are but
+two classes in society. "Modern society is divided into two
+classes&mdash;the possessors of property and the non-possessors: the
+dominant class and the subject class; the class which rules and the
+class which has to obey. He who possesses sufficient wealth to
+exercise control over the labour of others, to exploit that labour for
+his own profit, belongs to the one class; he who possesses nothing but
+the power to labour contained in his own body, and who is therefore
+compelled to sell that labour power in order to live, belongs to the
+other. It is this struggle and conflict between these two classes
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span>that Socialists call the class war, a recognition of which is
+essential to a clear conception of what the Socialist movement
+involves."<a name="FNanchor_222_222" id="FNanchor_222_222"></a><a href="#Footnote_222_222" class="fnanchor">[222]</a> "Society is divided into two opposite classes, one,
+the capitalists and their sleeping partners the landlords and
+loanmongers, holding in their hands the means of production,
+distribution, and exchange, and being therefore able to command the
+labour of others; the other, the working class, the wage-earners, the
+proletariat, possessing nothing but their labour power, and being
+consequently forced by necessity to work for the former."<a name="FNanchor_223_223" id="FNanchor_223_223"></a><a href="#Footnote_223_223" class="fnanchor">[223]</a> "In
+society there is an antagonism of interests, manifesting itself as a
+class struggle between those who possess but do not produce, and those
+who produce but do not possess."<a name="FNanchor_224_224" id="FNanchor_224_224"></a><a href="#Footnote_224_224" class="fnanchor">[224]</a> "The people of this unfortunate
+country have been aptly divided by Mr. Gladstone into the 'masses' and
+the 'classes'&mdash;that is to say, into those who live by their own labour
+and those who live on the labour of others. Among the latter tribe of
+non-producers are included all manner of thieves, pick-pockets,
+burglars, sharpers, prostitutes, Peers of Parliament, their families
+and menials, all, or nearly all, the 'six hundred and odd scoundrels
+of the House of Commons,' the twenty thousand State parsons, who every
+Sunday shamelessly travesty the Christian religion in the interest of
+the 'classes.'"<a name="FNanchor_225_225" id="FNanchor_225_225"></a><a href="#Footnote_225_225" class="fnanchor">[225]</a></p>
+
+<p>The theory of dividing society into two classes, capitalists and
+workers, or as others put it, "exploiters and exploited," is
+manifestly absurd, and its absurdity has been pointed out by a few
+Socialists. "It is not true that there are only two great economic
+classes in the community. The Communist Manifesto, even in its day,
+admitted as much, but made no place for the fact in its theories.
+There is an economic antagonism between <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span>landlords and capitalists as
+well as between capitalists and workmen."<a name="FNanchor_226_226" id="FNanchor_226_226"></a><a href="#Footnote_226_226" class="fnanchor">[226]</a> Besides, most
+capitalists are workers, and probably the great majority of English
+workers are capitalists to a larger or smaller extent.</p>
+
+<p>Now let us study the Socialists' description of the hostile forces
+which are engaged in the Class War.</p>
+
+<p>According to the Socialist teaching, the property-owners as a class
+are useless idlers who impoverish the workers and who shamelessly
+spend their whole income on demoralising luxuries. "The idlers and
+non-workers produce no wealth and take the greater share. They live on
+the labour of those who work. Nothing is produced by idleness; work
+must be done to obtain a thimble, a pin, and even a potato for dinner.
+The non-workers get the greater share of the wealth, and the greater
+part of this share is wasted. Therefore it is not good to have any
+people in the land who do not work. Only those who are old or sick
+should be kept by the toil of the rest."<a name="FNanchor_227_227" id="FNanchor_227_227"></a><a href="#Footnote_227_227" class="fnanchor">[227]</a> Taking their figures
+from the pamphlet "Facts for Socialists," of which details have been
+given on pp. 41-48, the Independent Labour party states under the
+heading of "Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers": "The total incomes of
+persons in the United Kingdom amount in round figures to
+1,800,000,000<i>l.</i> How is this wealth distributed? 250,000 persons
+actually receive a total of 585,000,000<i>l.</i>&mdash;that is, one-thirtieth of
+the population receive one-third of the national income. Nearly the
+whole of these large incomes are unearned&mdash;<i>i.e.</i> they are made up of
+rents, interest, dividends, &amp;c. This small class of rent and interest
+receivers perform no useful function. We may describe these people as
+social parasites, absolutely useless, yet levying toll to the extent
+of 6<i>s.</i> 8<i>d.</i> in every 20<i>s.</i> value of wealth created."<a name="FNanchor_228_228" id="FNanchor_228_228"></a><a href="#Footnote_228_228" class="fnanchor">[228]</a> "At
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[76]</a></span>present more than 600,000,000<i>l.</i> of the national income goes in the
+form of unearned rent and interest to support an idle class who spend
+it mainly on profitless and demoralising luxuries."<a name="FNanchor_229_229" id="FNanchor_229_229"></a><a href="#Footnote_229_229" class="fnanchor">[229]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing extracts make it clear that, in the eyes of Socialists,
+practically all citizens, manual labourers excepted, are "drones and
+parasites." Directors, managers, doctors, chemists, ships' captains,
+teachers, &amp;c., and even workmen of exceptional ability also, rob the
+general body of workers of half their wages and subsist only owing to
+the monopoly of property-holders who control the distribution of
+wealth. Upon these curious premisses are based the conclusions: "The
+profits and salaries of the class who share in the advantages of the
+monopoly of the instruments of production, or are endowed by Nature
+with any exceptional ability of high marketable value, amount
+according to the best estimate that can be formed, to about
+460,000,000<i>l.</i> annually, while out of a national income of some
+1,800,000,000<i>l.</i> a year the workers in the manual labour
+class&mdash;four-fifths of the whole population&mdash;obtain in wages not more
+than 690,000,000<i>l.</i> It may be safely said that the workers from top
+to bottom of society pay a fine of one-half the wealth they produce to
+a parasitic class before providing for the maintenance of themselves
+and their proper dependents."<a name="FNanchor_230_230" id="FNanchor_230_230"></a><a href="#Footnote_230_230" class="fnanchor">[230]</a> "It is this robbery and waste on
+the part of the minority which keeps the majority poor."<a name="FNanchor_231_231" id="FNanchor_231_231"></a><a href="#Footnote_231_231" class="fnanchor">[231]</a> "So long
+as the instruments of production are in unrestrained private
+ownership, so long must the tribute of the workers to the drones
+continue, so long will the toiler's reward inevitably be reduced by
+their exactions."<a name="FNanchor_232_232" id="FNanchor_232_232"></a><a href="#Footnote_232_232" class="fnanchor">[232]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Socialism regards the capitalist proper not as a useful captain of
+industry, but as a mere share-holding, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[77]</a></span>dividend-drawing parasite upon
+labour, and the Socialist party presses forward to his elimination
+from the field of production."<a name="FNanchor_233_233" id="FNanchor_233_233"></a><a href="#Footnote_233_233" class="fnanchor">[233]</a> "The workers who have produced all
+this wealth only get a part&mdash;the smallest part at that&mdash;of the wealth
+they produce. Now we Socialists say that this wealth produced by the
+labour of the workers should belong to them, and not to the
+capitalists who produce nothing. Seeing that the interest of the
+worker is to get as much of this wealth, and on the other hand the
+capitalist wants as much of this wealth, as he can get, therefore we
+say that the interests of the workers and of the capitalists are not
+identical, but opposite."<a name="FNanchor_234_234" id="FNanchor_234_234"></a><a href="#Footnote_234_234" class="fnanchor">[234]</a> "The interest of the working class can
+only be served even in the smallest degree by the curtailment of the
+power of the master class; that every material advance is useless
+except in so far as it helps to effect other achievements, and that
+the realisation of Labour politics, the well-being of the working
+class, can only be accomplished by its complete emancipation from
+capitalism."<a name="FNanchor_235_235" id="FNanchor_235_235"></a><a href="#Footnote_235_235" class="fnanchor">[235]</a> In other words, the Socialist writers quoted agree
+in this: that the lot of the wage-earners can be improved only by
+taking the wealth from the rich. In order to introduce Socialism the
+present social order must be overturned. With this object in view they
+have addressed declarations of war to the owners of property.</p>
+
+<p>We owe to Marx not only the Class War doctrine, but also a declaration
+of war to the propertied class: "The Communists everywhere support
+every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political
+order of things. In all these movements they bring to the front, as
+the leading question in each, the property question, no matter what
+its degree of development at the time. Finally they labour everywhere
+for the union and agreement of the democratic parties of all
+countries. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[78]</a></span>The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims.
+They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the
+forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling
+classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have
+nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working
+men of all countries, unite!"<a name="FNanchor_236_236" id="FNanchor_236_236"></a><a href="#Footnote_236_236" class="fnanchor">[236]</a></p>
+
+<p>Marx's disciples have issued similar declarations. For instance, in
+the official programme of the Social Democratic Federation we read:
+"The Social Democratic Federation is a militant Socialist organisation
+whose members, men and women, belong almost entirely to the working
+class. Its object is the realisation of Socialism, the emancipation of
+the working class from its present subjection to the capitalist class.
+To this end the Social Democratic Federation proclaims and preaches
+the Class War."<a name="FNanchor_237_237" id="FNanchor_237_237"></a><a href="#Footnote_237_237" class="fnanchor">[237]</a> "There is no way in which the Class War can be
+avoided. You cannot have the reward of your labour and the idler have
+it too. There is just so much wealth produced every day. It may be
+more, it may be less; but there is always just so much, and the more
+the capitalist gets the less you will get, and <i>vice versa</i>. We preach
+the gospel of hatred, because in the circumstances it seems the only
+righteous thing we can preach. The talk about the 'Gospel of Love' is
+simply solemn rubbish. It is right to hate stealing, right to hate
+lying, it is right to hate meanness and uncleanness, right to hate
+hypocrisy, greed, and tyranny. Those who talk of the Gospel of Love
+with landlordism and capitalism for its objects want us to make our
+peace with iniquity."<a name="FNanchor_238_238" id="FNanchor_238_238"></a><a href="#Footnote_238_238" class="fnanchor">[238]</a> "The Class War is inevitable under the
+present form of property-holding, and for it there can be neither
+truce, quarter, nor ending, save by the extinction of the class
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[79]</a></span>system itself. The identity of interests between capitalism and
+labour is a shibboleth that can only be given any sane meaning at all
+in the cynical sense that the interests of the wolf and the lamb are
+also 'identical' when the wolf has got the lamb inside him."<a name="FNanchor_239_239" id="FNanchor_239_239"></a><a href="#Footnote_239_239" class="fnanchor">[239]</a></p>
+
+<p>The doctrine of the Class War is a holy faith, the expropriation of
+property-owners is a divine task. "Unless we hate the system which
+prevents us from being what we otherwise might have been, we will not
+be able to strive against it with the patient, never-flagging zeal
+which our work, to be well done, requires. And to keep alive and
+undimmed this flame of hatred, divine not diabolical, we require to
+not only look around us, but especially to look back upon the world as
+it has been and to the example of those who have fought the good
+fight. To Socrates, to Savonarola, to John Ball, Wat the Tyler, and
+Jack Cade, in our land the first forerunners of Socialism; to Bruno
+and Vanini, to Cromwell, Milton, Hampden, and Pym, to John Eliot,
+Harry Vane; to Defoe, Mure, and Thomas Spence; to Ernest Jones,
+Bronterre O'Brien, and Robert Owen; to Wolfe Tone and Robert Emmet; to
+Allen, Larkin, and O'Brien; to Vera Sassoulitch, Marie Spiridonova,
+Sophia Perovsky; to Karl Marx."<a name="FNanchor_240_240" id="FNanchor_240_240"></a><a href="#Footnote_240_240" class="fnanchor">[240]</a> The company of reformers and
+revolutionists seems somewhat mixed.</p>
+
+<p>The doctrine that the interests of employers and employees are
+irreconcilably opposed, not identical, is false, Socialist rhetoric to
+the contrary notwithstanding. As soon as a calamity threatens
+capital&mdash;for instance, a rise in raw cotton or a cotton
+famine&mdash;masters and men are seen to be in the same boat and devise
+combined measures for meeting the difficulty. The doctrine of the
+Class War is opposed to common experience and to common-sense.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[80]</a></span>Let us now take note of the doctrine</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">Private Property is Immoral and Private Wealth is a Crime</h4>
+
+<p>In the Class War right is, according to the Socialists, on the side of
+the propertyless. Not only are the owners of property objectionable in
+their persons, being "drones and parasites" who squander the earnings
+of the poor on riotous living, as we have learned in the foregoing
+pages, but private property as an institution is immoral in itself and
+ought to be abolished. No man has a right to be rich; no man can
+become rich honestly. Hence it follows that all rich men are robbers,
+thieves, and swindlers. "The poor owe no duty to the rich, unless it
+be the duty which an honest man owes to the thief who has robbed him.
+The rich have no right to any of their possessions, for there is but
+one right, and that is the right of the labourer to the fruits of his
+labour, and the rich do not labour. No man has any right to be rich.
+No man ever yet became rich by fair means. No man ever became rich by
+his own industry."<a name="FNanchor_241_241" id="FNanchor_241_241"></a><a href="#Footnote_241_241" class="fnanchor">[241]</a> "No man or class of men made the first kind of
+wealth, such as land, minerals, and water. Therefore no man or class
+of men should be allowed to call these things their own."<a name="FNanchor_242_242" id="FNanchor_242_242"></a><a href="#Footnote_242_242" class="fnanchor">[242]</a> As
+private property is immoral in itself, it is doubly immoral to lend
+out such property and to charge rent or interest for the use of it.
+Mr. G.J. Wardle, M.P., said, in a recent speech at Glasgow, that rent
+"was social immorality, and the State or society which allowed crimes
+of that kind to go on unpunished could never be a moral society. The
+same thing applied to interest on money. From the moral standpoint
+interest is unearned by the man who gets it, and it does not matter
+how that is cloaked over, that is the fact. Nowadays it was counted
+the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[81]</a></span>greatest virtue to lend at so much per cent. That was a socially
+immoral proceeding, and because it was socially immoral it ate like a
+canker into the heart of society. As Socialists they objected to
+profit."<a name="FNanchor_243_243" id="FNanchor_243_243"></a><a href="#Footnote_243_243" class="fnanchor">[243]</a></p>
+
+<p>There are Socialists who preach the same doctrine of immorality and
+criminality of private property in more decided terms. They assert
+that it is criminal and immoral to make a profit as a compensation for
+the work of directing and taking heavy capital risks in productive
+business because such profits are opposed to the principle, "The
+labourer is entitled to the whole product of his labour" (see page
+61). "A man has a 'right' to that which he has produced by the unaided
+exercise of his own faculties; but he has not a right to that which is
+not produced by his own unaided faculties; nor to the whole of that
+which has been produced by his faculties aided by the faculties of
+another man."<a name="FNanchor_244_244" id="FNanchor_244_244"></a><a href="#Footnote_244_244" class="fnanchor">[244]</a> "Everyone who pockets gains without rendering an
+equivalent to society is a criminal. Every millionaire is a criminal.
+Every company-chairman with nominal duties, though his salary be but
+400<i>l.</i>, is a criminal. Everyone who lends his neighbour 5<i>l.</i> and
+exacts 5<i>l.</i> 5<i>s.</i> 0<i>d.</i> in return, is a criminal."<a name="FNanchor_245_245" id="FNanchor_245_245"></a><a href="#Footnote_245_245" class="fnanchor">[245]</a> "When
+Proudhon advanced the somewhat startling proposition, 'Property is
+theft,' he merely stated positively what good, orthodox Adam Smith, in
+his 'Wealth of Nations' set forth more urbanely when he wrote, 'The
+produce of labour (it is clear from the context that he meant the
+whole produce), is the natural recompense or wages of labour.'"<a name="FNanchor_246_246" id="FNanchor_246_246"></a><a href="#Footnote_246_246" class="fnanchor">[246]</a>
+"'Property' is theft, said Proudhon, and surely private property in
+the means of production is not only theft, but the means of more
+theft."<a name="FNanchor_247_247" id="FNanchor_247_247"></a><a href="#Footnote_247_247" class="fnanchor">[247]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[82]</a></span>Starting from the premiss that profit is immoral, the philosopher of
+British Socialism logically concludes: "The cheapest way of obtaining
+goods is not to pay for them, and if a buyer can avoid payment for the
+goods he obtains, he has quite as much right to do so as the seller
+has to receive for them double or treble their cost price and call it
+profit."<a name="FNanchor_248_248" id="FNanchor_248_248"></a><a href="#Footnote_248_248" class="fnanchor">[248]</a></p>
+
+<p>Private property being, according to the Socialist doctrines, immoral
+and criminal, it follows that</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">"Private Property Ought to be Abolished"</h4>
+
+<p>Let us take note of an utterance in support of that doctrine: "If the
+life of men and women were a thing apart from that of their
+neighbours, there would be no need for a Socialist party nor any call
+for social reform. But man is not an entity; he is only part of a
+mighty social organism. Every act of his has a bearing upon the like
+of his fellow. It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the
+moral title to private property in anything. Private property exists
+entirely on sufferance. Private property therefore cannot be justly
+allowed when it interferes with the law of our social life or
+intercepts the progress of social development."<a name="FNanchor_249_249" id="FNanchor_249_249"></a><a href="#Footnote_249_249" class="fnanchor">[249]</a></p>
+
+<p>Let us now consider the doctrine</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">"Competition should be Replaced by Co-operation"</h4>
+
+<p>Socialists teach: "Under Socialism you would have all the people
+working together for the good of all. Under non-Socialism you have all
+the persons working separately (and mostly against each other), each
+for the good of himself. So we find Socialism means co-operation and
+non-Socialism means competition."<a name="FNanchor_250_250" id="FNanchor_250_250"></a><a href="#Footnote_250_250" class="fnanchor">[250]</a> "Socialism <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[83]</a></span>is constructive as
+well as revolutionary, and Socialists propose to replace competition
+by co-operation."<a name="FNanchor_251_251" id="FNanchor_251_251"></a><a href="#Footnote_251_251" class="fnanchor">[251]</a></p>
+
+<p>The question now arises: "On what ground do capitalists defend the
+principle of competition? <i>A.</i> On the ground that it brings into play
+a man's best qualities.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Does it effect this? <i>A.</i> This is
+occasionally its result, but it also brings out his worst qualities by
+stimulating him to struggle with his fellows for the relative
+improvement of his own position rather than for the absolute
+advancement of the interests of all."<a name="FNanchor_252_252" id="FNanchor_252_252"></a><a href="#Footnote_252_252" class="fnanchor">[252]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Apart altogether from its injustice, competitive capitalism, regarded
+as a system of serving the community, is a business bungle. What the
+party of the Fourth Estate objects to in the existing commercial and
+industrial system is, not merely the stealages which go on under the
+guise of rent, profit, and interest, but the enormous waste arising
+from lack of consolidation and co-operation in the processes of
+production and distribution."<a name="FNanchor_253_253" id="FNanchor_253_253"></a><a href="#Footnote_253_253" class="fnanchor">[253]</a> "During the last half-century we
+have lost more by our 'business principle' of dividing up our national
+work into competing one-man and one-company speculations, and
+insisting on every separate speculation paying its own separate way,
+than by all the tariffs and blockades that have been set up against
+us."<a name="FNanchor_254_254" id="FNanchor_254_254"></a><a href="#Footnote_254_254" class="fnanchor">[254]</a> "In our age there is, as we have seen, throughout our whole
+economic sphere, no social order at all. There is absolute social
+anarchy. Against this anarchy Socialism is a protest."<a name="FNanchor_255_255" id="FNanchor_255_255"></a><a href="#Footnote_255_255" class="fnanchor">[255]</a> "There is
+only one remedy for both the waste and the stealages, and that is the
+substitution of public enterprise with organisation for private
+enterprise with competition."<a name="FNanchor_256_256" id="FNanchor_256_256"></a><a href="#Footnote_256_256" class="fnanchor">[256]</a> "Socialism means the socialising of
+the means and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[84]</a></span>instruments of production, distribution, and exchange.
+For the individual capitalist it would substitute, as the director and
+controller of production and distribution, the community in its
+organised capacity. The commercial and industrial chaos and waste
+which are the outcome of monopolistic competition would give place to
+the orderliness of associated effort, and under Socialism society
+would for the first time in history behave like an organism."<a name="FNanchor_257_257" id="FNanchor_257_257"></a><a href="#Footnote_257_257" class="fnanchor">[257]</a>
+Private capitalism and consequent competition are responsible not only
+for waste and muddle, but also for the adulteration of food and other
+necessaries of life. "Every man who knows anything of trade knows how
+general is the knavish practice of adulteration. Now all adulteration
+is directly due to competition. Did not Mr. John Bright once say that
+adulteration is only another form of competition?"<a name="FNanchor_258_258" id="FNanchor_258_258"></a><a href="#Footnote_258_258" class="fnanchor">[258]</a></p>
+
+<p>There is much truth in the contention of the Socialists that
+co-operation is mightier, and often better, than free competition.
+However, that is no new discovery, and the introduction of Socialism
+is not needed to bring about co-operation. In Germany, Switzerland,
+and Denmark national and private co-operation are far more developed
+than in Great Britain, and waste, muddle, and stealages are rare in
+those countries, although none of these is ruled by a Socialist
+Government. Co-operation, national as well as private, is developing
+also in Great Britain, and it will continue to develop as its value
+becomes more and more understood. It is a curious fact that
+Socialists, though they recommend co-operation in the abstract, oppose
+it in the concrete for similar reasons. They fear that satisfied and
+prosperous co-operators will oppose Socialism.<a name="FNanchor_259_259" id="FNanchor_259_259"></a><a href="#Footnote_259_259" class="fnanchor">[259]</a></p>
+
+<p>The assertion that adulteration is due to competition is not founded
+upon fact. Adulteration springs from <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[85]</a></span>many causes, and would continue
+to flourish even under the Socialistic <i>r&eacute;gime</i>. If all cowkeepers
+were salaried officials of the Socialist State or municipality, they
+might nevertheless mix water with the milk to obtain milk for their
+own consumption and that of their families, and to diminish the labour
+of milking. Adulteration may be abolished by efficient supervision and
+well-devised and rigorously enforced sanitary laws.</p>
+
+<p>Let us now glance at the doctrine</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">"The Socialist State will Arise by Natural Development, and it
+will <br />Handle Business more Efficiently than do Private
+Individuals"</h4>
+
+<p>"The State now registers, inspects, and controls nearly all the
+industrial functions which it has not yet absorbed. The inspection is
+often detailed and rigidly enforced. The State, in most of the larger
+industrial operations, prescribes the age of the worker, the hours of
+work, the amount of air, light, cubic space, heat, lavatory
+accommodation, holidays, and meal-times; where, when, and how wages
+shall be paid; how machinery, staircases, lift-holes, mines, and
+quarries are to be fenced and guarded; how and when the plant shall be
+cleaned, repaired, and worked."<a name="FNanchor_260_260" id="FNanchor_260_260"></a><a href="#Footnote_260_260" class="fnanchor">[260]</a> "Step by step political power and
+political organisation have been used for industrial ends, until a
+Minister of the Crown is the largest employer of labour in the
+country, and at least 200,000 men, not counting the army and navy, are
+directly in the service of the community, without the intervention of
+the profit of any middleman."<a name="FNanchor_261_261" id="FNanchor_261_261"></a><a href="#Footnote_261_261" class="fnanchor">[261]</a></p>
+
+<p>From the fact that the State inspects many things and carries on some
+business, it does not by any means follow that the State should
+inspect all things and could efficiently carry on all business.
+Questions such as "If the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[86]</a></span>State can build battleships and make
+swords, why not also trading ships and ploughshares,"<a name="FNanchor_262_262" id="FNanchor_262_262"></a><a href="#Footnote_262_262" class="fnanchor">[262]</a> are
+ridiculous. One might as well ask, "If Messrs. Whiteley or Marshall
+Field can supply furniture, houses, dresses, and funerals, being
+universal providers, why not also battleships, armies, and colonies?"
+It is also not true that the State or municipal corporations have more
+business ability than private business men. As an example of
+successful business management Socialists are fond of pointing to the
+Post Office, and of asserting that no private company could work as
+efficiently and as cheaply. These statements are erroneous. The
+success of the British Post Office, as of every post office, is due
+not to ability but to monopoly, as the following example will prove.
+Private individuals in Germany discovered some years ago a flaw in the
+legislation regarding the Post Office which enabled them to compete
+with the Imperial Post Office, not in postal business between
+different towns, but in local delivery. Private post offices sprang up
+in many towns and began to deliver letters at the rate of two pfennigs
+(one farthing) each. Although the German Post Office is the most
+efficient Post Office in Europe, it could not compete with these
+private post offices, and, after lengthy competition, steps had to be
+taken to extend the postal monopoly to town deliveries. The British
+Post Office, like most public offices, is a most conservative
+institution. Every progress and every reform had to be forced upon it
+by outside agitation. Services such as money delivery at private
+residences, cash on delivery parcels, &amp;c., which other countries have
+enjoyed during several decades, are stubbornly denied to England.
+Private competition would probably have furnished these conveniences
+long ago. In London the Messenger Boy Company competes with the Post
+Office in the carrying of express letters, and various private
+carriers compete with it in delivering parcels, and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[87]</a></span>in both instances
+the private trader supplies a better and cheaper service than the
+Government Post Office. A comparison of the Post Office telephone in
+England and the private telephone in America shows the great
+superiority of the latter. The slow and ultra-conservative British
+Post Office supplies no proof that the Government would handle
+production and distribution better than private enterprise. On the
+contrary.</p>
+
+<p>British Socialists claim unanimously that their theories and demands
+are founded upon science. "The Socialist doctrine systematises the
+industrial changes. It lays down a law of capitalist evolution. It
+describes the natural history of society. It is not, therefore, only a
+popular creed for the market-place, but a scientific inquiry for the
+study. Like every theory in Sociology, it has a political bearing, but
+it can be studied as much detached from politics as is
+Darwinism."<a name="FNanchor_263_263" id="FNanchor_263_263"></a><a href="#Footnote_263_263" class="fnanchor">[263]</a> Do the fundamental doctrines of British Socialism
+bear out the claims of its champions? The foregoing pages prove that
+the scientific basis of Socialism, or rather of British Socialism,
+consists of a number of doctrines which cannot stand examination and
+which are disproved by daily experience and by common-sense.</p>
+
+<p>The question now suggests itself: "How is it that the British
+Socialists base their demands on pseudo-scientific doctrines of
+obvious absurdity?"</p>
+
+<p>British Socialism has been imported from Germany. Marx, Engels,
+Lassalle, Rodbertus, and various other Germans are the fathers of
+modern scientific Socialism. "To German scholars is largely due the
+development of Socialism from the Utopian stage to the scientific.
+Universality is its distinguishing feature."<a name="FNanchor_264_264" id="FNanchor_264_264"></a><a href="#Footnote_264_264" class="fnanchor">[264]</a> "Karl Marx and
+Frederick Engels in 1847 laid, through the 'Communist Manifesto,' the
+scientific foundation of modern <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[88]</a></span>Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_265_265" id="FNanchor_265_265"></a><a href="#Footnote_265_265" class="fnanchor">[265]</a> "And 'Capital,' Karl
+Marx's great work, has become the loadstar of modern economic
+science."<a name="FNanchor_266_266" id="FNanchor_266_266"></a><a href="#Footnote_266_266" class="fnanchor">[266]</a> Karl Marx's "Manifesto" appeared in 1847; the first
+volume of his "Capital" was published in 1867. Since the appearance of
+the former sixty years, and since the publication of the latter forty
+years, have passed by. Much has changed in the world, but the Marxian
+doctrines have remained unchanged.</p>
+
+<p>The worst about speculative doctrines is that time is apt to disprove
+them.</p>
+
+<p>Whilst the German Socialists have thinkers in their ranks who have
+adapted the older Communist theories to present conditions, leaving
+out those theories which are palpably false, English Socialists have
+stood still and are satisfied to repeat those ancient doctrines which
+the Germans have abandoned long ago. English Socialists try to impose
+upon an uncritical public by parading the worn-out stage properties of
+the forties. Marx is to the vast majority of British Socialists still
+an oracle and the fountain head of all wisdom. "Marx is the Darwin of
+modern sociology."<a name="FNanchor_267_267" id="FNanchor_267_267"></a><a href="#Footnote_267_267" class="fnanchor">[267]</a> "All over the world his brain is put on pretty
+much the same level as Aristotle's."<a name="FNanchor_268_268" id="FNanchor_268_268"></a><a href="#Footnote_268_268" class="fnanchor">[268]</a> "Modern Socialism is based,
+nationally and internationally, theoretically and to a large extent
+practically, on the writings of Karl Marx. These writings have been
+expounded, and where necessary applied, extended, and amplified, to
+meet conditions which have developed since his death nearly a quarter
+of a century ago, in every civilised country. It is safe to say that
+no one who does not understand and accept in the main the views set
+forth by Marx, comprehends the real position of capitalist Society,
+nor, what is even more important, can <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[89]</a></span>fully master the problems of
+the coming time."<a name="FNanchor_269_269" id="FNanchor_269_269"></a><a href="#Footnote_269_269" class="fnanchor">[269]</a> "The Social-Democratic Federation, which is by
+far the oldest and still the most active Socialist organisation in
+this country, bases its teaching to-day, as it has always done, upon
+the words of Karl Marx."<a name="FNanchor_270_270" id="FNanchor_270_270"></a><a href="#Footnote_270_270" class="fnanchor">[270]</a></p>
+
+<p>Most active Socialists in Great Britain think Marx and Lassalle
+infallible. It is true that the Fabian Society has pointed out "the
+necessity of maintaining as critical an attitude towards Marx and
+Lassalle, some of whose views must by this time be discarded as
+erroneous or obsolete,"<a name="FNanchor_271_271" id="FNanchor_271_271"></a><a href="#Footnote_271_271" class="fnanchor">[271]</a> but that protest appears to have been
+left unheeded by most British Socialists. In fact, the abandonment of
+revolutionary Marxianism has caused the Fabians to be treated with
+open hostility by the other Socialist sections. The reasons for that
+hostility are obvious. The doctrines of Marx and Lassalle, though they
+are, to say the least, erroneous and obsolete, are admirably fitted to
+inflame the passions of the masses. Their doctrines may not be true,
+but they are useful to professional agitators. Independent Socialists
+in all countries have not disguised their opinion of Marx's "Capital,"
+which, in the words of an English Socialist, "is not a treatise on
+Socialism; it is a jeremiad against the bourgeoisie, supported by such
+a mass of evidence and such a relentless Jewish genius for
+denunciation as had never been brought to bear before."<a name="FNanchor_272_272" id="FNanchor_272_272"></a><a href="#Footnote_272_272" class="fnanchor">[272]</a></p>
+
+<p>British Socialism is neither scientific nor sincere. Its leaders know
+that the Iron Law of Wages (see p. 53), the Law of Increasing Misery
+(see p. 56), and other doctrines, which are exceedingly useful to the
+agitator who wishes to poison the mind of the masses, have been thrown
+into the lumber room in Germany and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[90]</a></span>most other countries (see the
+writings of Bernstein, Jaur&egrave;s, and others), but they do not abandon
+them. Apparently it is their policy rather to create strife and
+confusion than to alleviate existing misery. That attitude must have
+covered English Socialists with ignominy in the eyes of foreign
+Socialists. The very humiliating treatment which the English
+Socialists received at the International Socialist Congress in
+Stuttgart of 1907 from their Continental comrades suggests that the
+curious attitude and the not very estimable tactics of British
+Socialists have not found the approval of their Continental
+colleagues.</p>
+
+<p>The doctrines of the English Socialists with regard to property are
+identical with those of most Anarchists (see Eltzbacher, "Der
+Anarchismus"). For instance, Proudhon taught: "We rob (1) by murder on
+the highway; (2) alone, or in a band; (3) by breaking into buildings,
+or scaling walls; (4) by abstraction; (5) by fraudulent bankruptcy;
+(6) by forgery of the handwriting of public officials, or private
+individuals; (7) by manufacture of counterfeit money; (8) by cheating;
+(9) by swindling; (10) by abuse of trust; (11) by games and lotteries;
+(12) by usury; (13) by farm rent, house rent, and leases of all kinds;
+(14) by commerce, when the profit of the merchant exceeds his
+legitimate salary; (15) by making profit on our product, by accepting
+sinecures, and by exacting exorbitant wages."<a name="FNanchor_273_273" id="FNanchor_273_273"></a><a href="#Footnote_273_273" class="fnanchor">[273]</a> "What is property?
+It is robbery."<a name="FNanchor_274_274" id="FNanchor_274_274"></a><a href="#Footnote_274_274" class="fnanchor">[274]</a> "Property, after having robbed the labourer by
+usury, murders him slowly by starvation."<a name="FNanchor_275_275" id="FNanchor_275_275"></a><a href="#Footnote_275_275" class="fnanchor">[275]</a> Practically the
+identical doctrines are propounded by British Socialists. Further
+instances of the resemblance between Socialism and Anarchism will be
+found in Chapter XXX, "Socialism and Anarchism."</p>
+
+<p>Society is at present based upon individualism. In <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[91]</a></span>their anxiety to
+prove the failure of modern civilisation British Socialists deny that
+the world has progressed under individualism. "Not by individual
+selfishness, or national selfishness, has the progress of the human
+race been advanced."<a name="FNanchor_276_276" id="FNanchor_276_276"></a><a href="#Footnote_276_276" class="fnanchor">[276]</a> And they boldly declare that all history,
+having been written by men of the dominant class, is a deception. "Are
+we then to understand that the whole of history, so far, has been
+written from the point of view of the dominant class of every age?
+Most assuredly so; and this applies to well-nigh the whole of the
+sources of past history."<a name="FNanchor_277_277" id="FNanchor_277_277"></a><a href="#Footnote_277_277" class="fnanchor">[277]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing should suffice to make it clear that the Socialist
+agitation is not based on irrefutable scientific doctrines, as
+Socialists pretend, but on deception. It may be said that no agitation
+is free from deception, that the end justifies the means, that
+Socialism means for the best. We have been told "Socialism is a
+religion of humanity. Socialism is the only hope of the race.
+Socialism is the remedy&mdash;the only remedy&mdash;which Lord Salisbury could
+not find."<a name="FNanchor_278_278" id="FNanchor_278_278"></a><a href="#Footnote_278_278" class="fnanchor">[278]</a> We must look into the practical proposals of British
+Socialism in order to be able to judge its character.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_151_151" id="Footnote_151_151"></a><a href="#FNanchor_151_151"><span class="label">[151]</span></a> <i>Facts for Socialists</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_152_152" id="Footnote_152_152"></a><a href="#FNanchor_152_152"><span class="label">[152]</span></a> Hazell, <i>Summary of Marx's "Capital,"</i> p. 1; Macdonald,
+<i>Socialism</i>, p. 54.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_153_153" id="Footnote_153_153"></a><a href="#FNanchor_153_153"><span class="label">[153]</span></a> <i>Socialism made Plain</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_154_154" id="Footnote_154_154"></a><a href="#FNanchor_154_154"><span class="label">[154]</span></a> Hobart, <i>Social-Democracy</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_155_155" id="Footnote_155_155"></a><a href="#FNanchor_155_155"><span class="label">[155]</span></a> <i>Manifesto</i>, Socialist Party of Great Britain, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_156_156" id="Footnote_156_156"></a><a href="#FNanchor_156_156"><span class="label">[156]</span></a> <i>What Socialism Means</i>: Independent Labour Party
+Leaflet, No. 8, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_157_157" id="Footnote_157_157"></a><a href="#FNanchor_157_157"><span class="label">[157]</span></a> Debs, <i>Industrial Unionism</i>, p. 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_158_158" id="Footnote_158_158"></a><a href="#FNanchor_158_158"><span class="label">[158]</span></a> Bliss, <i>Encyclopedia of Social Reform</i>, 1368.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_159_159" id="Footnote_159_159"></a><a href="#FNanchor_159_159"><span class="label">[159]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> 807.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_160_160" id="Footnote_160_160"></a><a href="#FNanchor_160_160"><span class="label">[160]</span></a> <i>Manifesto of the Communist Party</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_161_161" id="Footnote_161_161"></a><a href="#FNanchor_161_161"><span class="label">[161]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_162_162" id="Footnote_162_162"></a><a href="#FNanchor_162_162"><span class="label">[162]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 163.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_163_163" id="Footnote_163_163"></a><a href="#FNanchor_163_163"><span class="label">[163]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Economics of Labour</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_164_164" id="Footnote_164_164"></a><a href="#FNanchor_164_164"><span class="label">[164]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 107.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_165_165" id="Footnote_165_165"></a><a href="#FNanchor_165_165"><span class="label">[165]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 99.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_166_166" id="Footnote_166_166"></a><a href="#FNanchor_166_166"><span class="label">[166]</span></a> <i>Socialist Standard</i>, December 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_167_167" id="Footnote_167_167"></a><a href="#FNanchor_167_167"><span class="label">[167]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 32.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_168_168" id="Footnote_168_168"></a><a href="#FNanchor_168_168"><span class="label">[168]</span></a> Stegman und Hugo, <i>Handbuch</i>, p. 473.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_169_169" id="Footnote_169_169"></a><a href="#FNanchor_169_169"><span class="label">[169]</span></a> <i>Christliche Arbeiterpflichten</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_170_170" id="Footnote_170_170"></a><a href="#FNanchor_170_170"><span class="label">[170]</span></a> Webb, <i>Industrial Democracy</i>, p. 548.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_171_171" id="Footnote_171_171"></a><a href="#FNanchor_171_171"><span class="label">[171]</span></a> Councillor Glyde, <i>A Peep behind the Scenes on a Board
+of Guardians</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_172_172" id="Footnote_172_172"></a><a href="#FNanchor_172_172"><span class="label">[172]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto of the Communist Party</i>, p.
+12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_173_173" id="Footnote_173_173"></a><a href="#FNanchor_173_173"><span class="label">[173]</span></a> Marx, <i>Wage, Labour, and Capital</i>, pp. 23, 24.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_174_174" id="Footnote_174_174"></a><a href="#FNanchor_174_174"><span class="label">[174]</span></a> Marx, <i>Wage, Labour, and Capital</i>, p. 22.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_175_175" id="Footnote_175_175"></a><a href="#FNanchor_175_175"><span class="label">[175]</span></a> <i>English Progress towards Social-Democracy</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_176_176" id="Footnote_176_176"></a><a href="#FNanchor_176_176"><span class="label">[176]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 99.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_177_177" id="Footnote_177_177"></a><a href="#FNanchor_177_177"><span class="label">[177]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto of the Communist Party</i>, p.
+8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_178_178" id="Footnote_178_178"></a><a href="#FNanchor_178_178"><span class="label">[178]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_179_179" id="Footnote_179_179"></a><a href="#FNanchor_179_179"><span class="label">[179]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Socialism and Slavery</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_180_180" id="Footnote_180_180"></a><a href="#FNanchor_180_180"><span class="label">[180]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p.
+9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_181_181" id="Footnote_181_181"></a><a href="#FNanchor_181_181"><span class="label">[181]</span></a> Ellis Barker, <i>Modern Germany</i>, p. 528.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_182_182" id="Footnote_182_182"></a><a href="#FNanchor_182_182"><span class="label">[182]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Economics of Labour</i>, p. 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_183_183" id="Footnote_183_183"></a><a href="#FNanchor_183_183"><span class="label">[183]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_184_184" id="Footnote_184_184"></a><a href="#FNanchor_184_184"><span class="label">[184]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_185_185" id="Footnote_185_185"></a><a href="#FNanchor_185_185"><span class="label">[185]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p.
+19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_186_186" id="Footnote_186_186"></a><a href="#FNanchor_186_186"><span class="label">[186]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, November 29, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_187_187" id="Footnote_187_187"></a><a href="#FNanchor_187_187"><span class="label">[187]</span></a> Hall, <i>The Old and New Unionism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_188_188" id="Footnote_188_188"></a><a href="#FNanchor_188_188"><span class="label">[188]</span></a> <i>Socialism and the Single Tax</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_189_189" id="Footnote_189_189"></a><a href="#FNanchor_189_189"><span class="label">[189]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 189.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_190_190" id="Footnote_190_190"></a><a href="#FNanchor_190_190"><span class="label">[190]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 86.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_191_191" id="Footnote_191_191"></a><a href="#FNanchor_191_191"><span class="label">[191]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, pp. 7, 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_192_192" id="Footnote_192_192"></a><a href="#FNanchor_192_192"><span class="label">[192]</span></a> See <i>ante</i> p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_193_193" id="Footnote_193_193"></a><a href="#FNanchor_193_193"><span class="label">[193]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_194_194" id="Footnote_194_194"></a><a href="#FNanchor_194_194"><span class="label">[194]</span></a> See Chapter XXXIII.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_195_195" id="Footnote_195_195"></a><a href="#FNanchor_195_195"><span class="label">[195]</span></a> Hall, <i>Land, Labour, and Liberty</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_196_196" id="Footnote_196_196"></a><a href="#FNanchor_196_196"><span class="label">[196]</span></a> Jowett, <i>The Socialist and the City</i>, p. 66.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_197_197" id="Footnote_197_197"></a><a href="#FNanchor_197_197"><span class="label">[197]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 86.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_198_198" id="Footnote_198_198"></a><a href="#FNanchor_198_198"><span class="label">[198]</span></a> <i>Rich and Poor</i>, Introd.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_199_199" id="Footnote_199_199"></a><a href="#FNanchor_199_199"><span class="label">[199]</span></a> Martyn, <i>Co-operation</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_200_200" id="Footnote_200_200"></a><a href="#FNanchor_200_200"><span class="label">[200]</span></a> Lister, <i>Riches and Poverty</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_201_201" id="Footnote_201_201"></a><a href="#FNanchor_201_201"><span class="label">[201]</span></a> Fisher, <i>The Babies' Tribute</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_202_202" id="Footnote_202_202"></a><a href="#FNanchor_202_202"><span class="label">[202]</span></a> <i>Socialism and the Single Tax</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_203_203" id="Footnote_203_203"></a><a href="#FNanchor_203_203"><span class="label">[203]</span></a> Kessack, <i>The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way Out</i>,
+p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_204_204" id="Footnote_204_204"></a><a href="#FNanchor_204_204"><span class="label">[204]</span></a> Lafargue, <i>Right to Leisure</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_205_205" id="Footnote_205_205"></a><a href="#FNanchor_205_205"><span class="label">[205]</span></a> Tillett, <i>Trades Unionism and Socialism</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_206_206" id="Footnote_206_206"></a><a href="#FNanchor_206_206"><span class="label">[206]</span></a> Fisher, <i>The Babies' Tribute</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_207_207" id="Footnote_207_207"></a><a href="#FNanchor_207_207"><span class="label">[207]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 67.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_208_208" id="Footnote_208_208"></a><a href="#FNanchor_208_208"><span class="label">[208]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, pp. 32, 33.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_209_209" id="Footnote_209_209"></a><a href="#FNanchor_209_209"><span class="label">[209]</span></a> Social-Democratic Federation, <i>The Unemployed</i>,
+leaflet.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_210_210" id="Footnote_210_210"></a><a href="#FNanchor_210_210"><span class="label">[210]</span></a> Smart, <i>The Right to Work</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_211_211" id="Footnote_211_211"></a><a href="#FNanchor_211_211"><span class="label">[211]</span></a> Washington, <i>A Corner in Flesh and Blood</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_212_212" id="Footnote_212_212"></a><a href="#FNanchor_212_212"><span class="label">[212]</span></a> <i>The Socialist Standard</i>, December 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_213_213" id="Footnote_213_213"></a><a href="#FNanchor_213_213"><span class="label">[213]</span></a> <i>Why Labour Men should be on Town Councils</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_214_214" id="Footnote_214_214"></a><a href="#FNanchor_214_214"><span class="label">[214]</span></a> Marx, <i>Wage-Labour and Capital</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_215_215" id="Footnote_215_215"></a><a href="#FNanchor_215_215"><span class="label">[215]</span></a> L'Auton, <i>The Nationalisation of Society</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_216_216" id="Footnote_216_216"></a><a href="#FNanchor_216_216"><span class="label">[216]</span></a> Jaur&egrave;s, <i>Studies in Socialism</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_217_217" id="Footnote_217_217"></a><a href="#FNanchor_217_217"><span class="label">[217]</span></a> <i>Handbuch f&uuml;r Sozialdemokratische W&auml;hler</i>, 1903, p.
+233.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_218_218" id="Footnote_218_218"></a><a href="#FNanchor_218_218"><span class="label">[218]</span></a> <i>Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain</i>, p.
+7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_219_219" id="Footnote_219_219"></a><a href="#FNanchor_219_219"><span class="label">[219]</span></a> <i>The Socialist Standard</i>, December 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_220_220" id="Footnote_220_220"></a><a href="#FNanchor_220_220"><span class="label">[220]</span></a> Debs, <i>Industrial Unionism</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_221_221" id="Footnote_221_221"></a><a href="#FNanchor_221_221"><span class="label">[221]</span></a> Morris, <i>Useful Work</i> versus <i>Useless Toil</i>, pp. 22,
+25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_222_222" id="Footnote_222_222"></a><a href="#FNanchor_222_222"><span class="label">[222]</span></a> <i>The Class War</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_223_223" id="Footnote_223_223"></a><a href="#FNanchor_223_223"><span class="label">[223]</span></a> <i>Programme and Rules, Social-Democratic Federation.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_224_224" id="Footnote_224_224"></a><a href="#FNanchor_224_224"><span class="label">[224]</span></a> <i>Socialist Standard</i>, October 1, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_225_225" id="Footnote_225_225"></a><a href="#FNanchor_225_225"><span class="label">[225]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The New Book of Kings</i>, p. 115.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_226_226" id="Footnote_226_226"></a><a href="#FNanchor_226_226"><span class="label">[226]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism and Society</i>, pp. 111, 112.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_227_227" id="Footnote_227_227"></a><a href="#FNanchor_227_227"><span class="label">[227]</span></a> <i>What Socialism Means</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_228_228" id="Footnote_228_228"></a><a href="#FNanchor_228_228"><span class="label">[228]</span></a> <i>Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_229_229" id="Footnote_229_229"></a><a href="#FNanchor_229_229"><span class="label">[229]</span></a> <i>After Bread, Education</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_230_230" id="Footnote_230_230"></a><a href="#FNanchor_230_230"><span class="label">[230]</span></a> <i>Capital and Land</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_231_231" id="Footnote_231_231"></a><a href="#FNanchor_231_231"><span class="label">[231]</span></a> Morris, <i>Useful Work versus Useless Toil</i>, p. 26.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_232_232" id="Footnote_232_232"></a><a href="#FNanchor_232_232"><span class="label">[232]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p.
+8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_233_233" id="Footnote_233_233"></a><a href="#FNanchor_233_233"><span class="label">[233]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_234_234" id="Footnote_234_234"></a><a href="#FNanchor_234_234"><span class="label">[234]</span></a> <i>The Socialist</i>, October 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_235_235" id="Footnote_235_235"></a><a href="#FNanchor_235_235"><span class="label">[235]</span></a> <i>The Socialist Annual</i>, 1907, p. 42.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_236_236" id="Footnote_236_236"></a><a href="#FNanchor_236_236"><span class="label">[236]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto</i>, pp. 30, 31.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_237_237" id="Footnote_237_237"></a><a href="#FNanchor_237_237"><span class="label">[237]</span></a> Quelch, <i>The Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_238_238" id="Footnote_238_238"></a><a href="#FNanchor_238_238"><span class="label">[238]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Class War</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_239_239" id="Footnote_239_239"></a><a href="#FNanchor_239_239"><span class="label">[239]</span></a> Hall, <i>The Old and the New Unionism</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_240_240" id="Footnote_240_240"></a><a href="#FNanchor_240_240"><span class="label">[240]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Class War</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_241_241" id="Footnote_241_241"></a><a href="#FNanchor_241_241"><span class="label">[241]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>The Pope's Socialism</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_242_242" id="Footnote_242_242"></a><a href="#FNanchor_242_242"><span class="label">[242]</span></a> <i>What Socialism Means</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_243_243" id="Footnote_243_243"></a><a href="#FNanchor_243_243"><span class="label">[243]</span></a> <i>Forward</i>, November 23, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_244_244" id="Footnote_244_244"></a><a href="#FNanchor_244_244"><span class="label">[244]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 58.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_245_245" id="Footnote_245_245"></a><a href="#FNanchor_245_245"><span class="label">[245]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 166.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_246_246" id="Footnote_246_246"></a><a href="#FNanchor_246_246"><span class="label">[246]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_247_247" id="Footnote_247_247"></a><a href="#FNanchor_247_247"><span class="label">[247]</span></a> McClure, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_248_248" id="Footnote_248_248"></a><a href="#FNanchor_248_248"><span class="label">[248]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 98.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_249_249" id="Footnote_249_249"></a><a href="#FNanchor_249_249"><span class="label">[249]</span></a> Williams, <i>The Difficulties of Socialism</i>, pp. 3, 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_250_250" id="Footnote_250_250"></a><a href="#FNanchor_250_250"><span class="label">[250]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_251_251" id="Footnote_251_251"></a><a href="#FNanchor_251_251"><span class="label">[251]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Social-Democracy</i>, p. 24.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_252_252" id="Footnote_252_252"></a><a href="#FNanchor_252_252"><span class="label">[252]</span></a> Joynes, <i>The Socialists' Catechism</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_253_253" id="Footnote_253_253"></a><a href="#FNanchor_253_253"><span class="label">[253]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Evolution of the Fourth Estate</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_254_254" id="Footnote_254_254"></a><a href="#FNanchor_254_254"><span class="label">[254]</span></a> <i>Fabianism and the Fiscal Question</i>, p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_255_255" id="Footnote_255_255"></a><a href="#FNanchor_255_255"><span class="label">[255]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 41.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_256_256" id="Footnote_256_256"></a><a href="#FNanchor_256_256"><span class="label">[256]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Evolution of the Fourth Estate</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_257_257" id="Footnote_257_257"></a><a href="#FNanchor_257_257"><span class="label">[257]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_258_258" id="Footnote_258_258"></a><a href="#FNanchor_258_258"><span class="label">[258]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Competition</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_259_259" id="Footnote_259_259"></a><a href="#FNanchor_259_259"><span class="label">[259]</span></a> See Chapters VII &amp; XXIII.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_260_260" id="Footnote_260_260"></a><a href="#FNanchor_260_260"><span class="label">[260]</span></a> <i>English Progress towards Social-Democracy</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_261_261" id="Footnote_261_261"></a><a href="#FNanchor_261_261"><span class="label">[261]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_262_262" id="Footnote_262_262"></a><a href="#FNanchor_262_262"><span class="label">[262]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_263_263" id="Footnote_263_263"></a><a href="#FNanchor_263_263"><span class="label">[263]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_264_264" id="Footnote_264_264"></a><a href="#FNanchor_264_264"><span class="label">[264]</span></a> McClure, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_265_265" id="Footnote_265_265"></a><a href="#FNanchor_265_265"><span class="label">[265]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Class Struggle</i>, p. 24.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_266_266" id="Footnote_266_266"></a><a href="#FNanchor_266_266"><span class="label">[266]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Socialist Republic</i>, p. 21.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_267_267" id="Footnote_267_267"></a><a href="#FNanchor_267_267"><span class="label">[267]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Historic Basis of Socialism</i>, p. 435.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_268_268" id="Footnote_268_268"></a><a href="#FNanchor_268_268"><span class="label">[268]</span></a> <i>Justice</i>, October 12, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_269_269" id="Footnote_269_269"></a><a href="#FNanchor_269_269"><span class="label">[269]</span></a> <i>Justice</i>, October 12, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_270_270" id="Footnote_270_270"></a><a href="#FNanchor_270_270"><span class="label">[270]</span></a> <i>The Social Democrat</i>, November 1907, p. 676.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_271_271" id="Footnote_271_271"></a><a href="#FNanchor_271_271"><span class="label">[271]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy</i>, 1896, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_272_272" id="Footnote_272_272"></a><a href="#FNanchor_272_272"><span class="label">[272]</span></a> G.B. Shaw, quoted in Jackson, <i>Bernard Shaw</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_273_273" id="Footnote_273_273"></a><a href="#FNanchor_273_273"><span class="label">[273]</span></a> Proudhon, <i>What is Property?</i> pp. 252-256.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_274_274" id="Footnote_274_274"></a><a href="#FNanchor_274_274"><span class="label">[274]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 37.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_275_275" id="Footnote_275_275"></a><a href="#FNanchor_275_275"><span class="label">[275]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 184.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_276_276" id="Footnote_276_276"></a><a href="#FNanchor_276_276"><span class="label">[276]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Christ that is to be</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_277_277" id="Footnote_277_277"></a><a href="#FNanchor_277_277"><span class="label">[277]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 32.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_278_278" id="Footnote_278_278"></a><a href="#FNanchor_278_278"><span class="label">[278]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>What is this Socialism?</i> p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_V" id="CHAPTER_V"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[92]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER V<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE AIMS AND POLICY OF THE SOCIALISTS</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Those people who formerly called themselves Communists now call
+themselves Socialists. Marx and Engels wrote in their celebrated
+"Manifesto": "The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the
+single sentence: Abolition of private property."<a name="FNanchor_279_279" id="FNanchor_279_279"></a><a href="#Footnote_279_279" class="fnanchor">[279]</a> The policy of
+modern British Socialism may be summed up in the identical words.
+Indeed, we are told by one of its most eager champions that "The
+programme of Socialism consists essentially of one demand&mdash;that the
+land and other instruments of production shall be the common property
+of the people, and shall be used and governed by the people for the
+people."<a name="FNanchor_280_280" id="FNanchor_280_280"></a><a href="#Footnote_280_280" class="fnanchor">[280]</a> "We suggest that the nation should own all the ships,
+all the railways, all the factories, all the buildings, all the land,
+and all the requisites of national life and defence."<a name="FNanchor_281_281" id="FNanchor_281_281"></a><a href="#Footnote_281_281" class="fnanchor">[281]</a></p>
+
+<p>According to the Socialist doctrines which have been given in Chapter
+IV, private property is the enemy of the workers. Therefore they quite
+logically demand that all private property must be abolished. "The
+problem has to be faced. Either we must submit for ever to hand over
+at least one-third of our annual product to those who do us the favour
+to own our country without the obligation of rendering any service to
+the community, and to see this tribute augment with every advance in
+our industry and numbers, or else we <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[93]</a></span>must take steps, as
+considerately as may be possible, to put an end to this state of
+things."<a name="FNanchor_282_282" id="FNanchor_282_282"></a><a href="#Footnote_282_282" class="fnanchor">[282]</a> "The modern form of private property is simply a legal
+claim to take a share of the produce of the national industry year by
+year without working for it. Socialism involves discontinuance of the
+payment of these incomes and addition of the wealth so saved to
+incomes derived from labour. The economic problem of Socialism is thus
+solved."<a name="FNanchor_283_283" id="FNanchor_283_283"></a><a href="#Footnote_283_283" class="fnanchor">[283]</a></p>
+
+<p>A general division of the existing private property among all the
+people is not intended, because it is considered to be impracticable.
+"Socialism does not consist in violently seizing upon the property of
+the rich and sharing it out amongst the poor."<a name="FNanchor_284_284" id="FNanchor_284_284"></a><a href="#Footnote_284_284" class="fnanchor">[284]</a> "Plans for a
+national 'dividing up' are not Socialism. They are nonsense. 'Dividing
+up' means individual ownership. Socialism means collective
+ownership."<a name="FNanchor_285_285" id="FNanchor_285_285"></a><a href="#Footnote_285_285" class="fnanchor">[285]</a> "It is obvious that, in the present stage of economic
+development, individual ownership is impossible. All the great means
+of production are collectively owned now. Individual liberty based
+upon individual property is therefore out of the question, and the
+emancipation of the working class can only be achieved in social
+freedom, based upon social property, through the transformation of
+privately owned collective property into publicly owned collective
+property."<a name="FNanchor_286_286" id="FNanchor_286_286"></a><a href="#Footnote_286_286" class="fnanchor">[286]</a></p>
+
+<p>Starting from these premisses, the Socialists arrive at the demand
+that "all the means of production and distribution, all the machinery,
+all the buildings, everything that is necessary to provide the
+fundamental necessaries of life, must be common property."<a name="FNanchor_287_287" id="FNanchor_287_287"></a><a href="#Footnote_287_287" class="fnanchor">[287]</a> "We
+want all the instruments for the purposes of trade to be the property
+of the State. With that will have come at the same <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[94]</a></span>time the abolition
+of power permitting any individual to exact rent or interest for the
+loan of land or of the implements of production. The abolition of all
+private property will mean the extinction of the parasite."<a name="FNanchor_288_288" id="FNanchor_288_288"></a><a href="#Footnote_288_288" class="fnanchor">[288]</a> "The
+overthrow of capitalism and the establishment of a system of society
+based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means
+and instruments for producing and distributing wealth, by and in the
+interest of the whole community: That is Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_289_289" id="FNanchor_289_289"></a><a href="#Footnote_289_289" class="fnanchor">[289]</a> "The Fabian
+Society aims at the reorganisation of society by the emancipation of
+land and industrial capital from individual and class ownership, and
+the vesting of them in the community for the general benefit. The
+Society accordingly works for the extinction of private property in
+land, and of the consequent individual appropriation, in the form of
+rent, of the price paid for permission to use the earth, as well as
+for the advantages of superior soils and sites. The Society, further,
+works for the transfer to the community of the administration of such
+industrial capital as can conveniently be managed socially."<a name="FNanchor_290_290" id="FNanchor_290_290"></a><a href="#Footnote_290_290" class="fnanchor">[290]</a>
+"Here in plain words is the principle, or root idea, on which all
+Socialists agree&mdash;that the country and everything in the country shall
+belong to the whole people (the nation), and shall be used by the
+people and for the people. That principle, the root idea of Socialism,
+means two things: (1) That the land, and all the machines, tools, and
+buildings used in making needful things, together with all the canals,
+rivers, roads, railways, ships, and trains used in moving, sharing
+(distributing) needful things, and all the shops, markets, scales,
+weights, and money used in selling or dividing needful things, shall
+be the property of (belong to) the whole people (the nation). (2) That
+the land, tools, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[95]</a></span>machines, trains, rivers, shops, scales, money, and
+all the other things belonging to the people, shall be worked,
+managed, divided, and used by the whole people, in such way as the
+greater number of the whole people shall deem best."<a name="FNanchor_291_291" id="FNanchor_291_291"></a><a href="#Footnote_291_291" class="fnanchor">[291]</a></p>
+
+<p>A perusal of the party programmes and other Socialist documents
+contained in the Appendix will show that the abolition of all private
+property, and its transference to the State, is the aim of all the
+Socialist organisations and parties, and no further extracts need be
+given in order to prove the unanimity of the Socialists on this point.</p>
+
+<p>The question now arises: How is this transference of all private
+property to the State to be effected? Will the present holders of
+property be fully compensated, partly compensated, or not compensated
+at all? Do the Socialists aim at purchase or at confiscation of
+existing private property. Will they respect existing rights, or are
+they bent upon open or more or less disguised spoliation?</p>
+
+<p>It is, unfortunately, very difficult to obtain a plain and
+straightforward answer upon this important point. Instead of giving
+this answer, British Socialists loudly protest that it is not their
+aim to destroy or abolish property. As nobody has suspected the
+Socialists to be foolish enough to abolish or destroy property&mdash;which
+means the instruments of production, such as factories, machines,
+railways, &amp;c., by the use of which the people live, and thus bring
+starvation upon themselves&mdash;their eagerness to explain that they do
+not intend to abolish or destroy property can only be explained by the
+surmise that they hope shallow simpletons will say, "The Socialists
+have no intention to take our capital away from us by force and
+without compensation, for they have declared that they do not intend
+to abolish property." A few of these declarations should here be
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[96]</a></span>given: "So far from abolishing property, Socialism desires to
+establish it upon the only basis which makes property secure&mdash;that of
+service, of creative service."<a name="FNanchor_292_292" id="FNanchor_292_292"></a><a href="#Footnote_292_292" class="fnanchor">[292]</a> "Socialism does not propose to
+abolish land or capital. Only a genius could have thought of this as
+an objection to Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_293_293" id="FNanchor_293_293"></a><a href="#Footnote_293_293" class="fnanchor">[293]</a> "Socialism is far from aiming at the
+destruction of private property. Its object is to increase private
+property amongst those whose property is so limited that they have a
+difficulty in keeping themselves alive."<a name="FNanchor_294_294" id="FNanchor_294_294"></a><a href="#Footnote_294_294" class="fnanchor">[294]</a> Another Socialist makes
+the very irrelevant and unnecessary observation: "It is a firm
+principle of Socialism never to interfere with personal property in
+order to investigate its origin or to arrange it in a different way.
+Never and nowhere! And whoever asserts to the contrary either does not
+know the principles of Socialism or willingly and knowingly asserts an
+untruth. The Socialists deem an investigation into the origin of an
+acknowledged personal property an unnecessary trouble. They consider
+the personal property an accomplished fact and respect it: so much so,
+that they consider stealing a crime."<a name="FNanchor_295_295" id="FNanchor_295_295"></a><a href="#Footnote_295_295" class="fnanchor">[295]</a> Mr. Blatchford informs us,
+"We do not propose to seize anything. We do propose to get some things
+and to make them the property of the whole nation by Act of Parliament
+or by purchase."<a name="FNanchor_296_296" id="FNanchor_296_296"></a><a href="#Footnote_296_296" class="fnanchor">[296]</a></p>
+
+<p>As regards the question whether compensation or no compensation will
+be given, our Socialist leaders give us very vague and unsatisfactory
+replies, which rather contain highly respectable but perfectly
+irrelevant commonplaces than definite proposals. Most Socialists will
+answer the plain question of confiscation or no confiscation with a
+quibble or a conundrum, as the following examples will show: "One view
+of Socialism is that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[97]</a></span>it is a scheme of confiscation of property from
+one class to give it to another class&mdash;that Socialists are Dick
+Turpins made respectable by using Acts of Parliament instead of
+pistols. Now the real fact is that the Socialist has come to put an
+end to Dick Turpin methods. Socialism is a rational criticism of our
+present methods of production and distribution. It desires to say to
+the possessors: Show us by what title you possess; and it proposes to
+pass its judgments upon the axiom that whoever renders service to
+society should be able to have some appropriate share in the national
+wealth."<a name="FNanchor_297_297" id="FNanchor_297_297"></a><a href="#Footnote_297_297" class="fnanchor">[297]</a> In other words, an inquisitorial tribunal with arbitrary
+powers would be empowered to confiscate at will. "Socialism is not a
+plan to despoil the rich: it is a plan to stop the rich from
+despoiling the poor. Socialism is not a thief; it is a
+policeman."<a name="FNanchor_298_298" id="FNanchor_298_298"></a><a href="#Footnote_298_298" class="fnanchor">[298]</a> "Do any say we attack private property? We deny it.
+We attack only that private property for a few thousand loiterers and
+slave-drivers which renders all property in the fruits of their own
+labour impossible for millions. We challenge that private property
+which renders poverty at once a necessity and a crime."<a name="FNanchor_299_299" id="FNanchor_299_299"></a><a href="#Footnote_299_299" class="fnanchor">[299]</a>
+"Socialism would not rob anyone. It would distinguish between the
+lawful possessor and the rightful possessor, and it would compel the
+'lawful' possessor to restore to the rightful possessor the property
+of which he had robbed him."<a name="FNanchor_300_300" id="FNanchor_300_300"></a><a href="#Footnote_300_300" class="fnanchor">[300]</a> "We do not propose to rob the rich
+man of his wealth; we deny that it is his wealth. Wealth is a social
+product, and therefore belongs to society. It is not an act of
+brigandage to demand that society shall own and use what society has
+created."<a name="FNanchor_301_301" id="FNanchor_301_301"></a><a href="#Footnote_301_301" class="fnanchor">[301]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists consider the question of compensation <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[98]</a></span>or no
+compensation as one of very minor importance. "The question of
+compensation need not greatly worry us. Socialists hold that
+plutocrats owe all their wealth to society; and therefore that society
+has the right at any moment to take it back."<a name="FNanchor_302_302" id="FNanchor_302_302"></a><a href="#Footnote_302_302" class="fnanchor">[302]</a> The more cautious
+and moderate French and German Socialists are apt to promise
+compensation in terms such as the following: "We declare expressly
+that it is the duty of the State to give to those whose interests will
+be damaged by the necessary abolition of laws which are detrimental to
+the common interest compensation as far as it is possible and
+consistent with the interests of all."<a name="FNanchor_303_303" id="FNanchor_303_303"></a><a href="#Footnote_303_303" class="fnanchor">[303]</a></p>
+
+<p>It will be observed that the plain word compensation is circumscribed
+by the phrase, "compensation as far as it is possible and consistent
+with the interests of all." In other and plainer words, compensation
+is to be arbitrarily given, and its proportion to the property
+acquired is apparently to be determined not by its value or by
+fairness and equity, but by the will of those who may be in power.</p>
+
+<p>English Socialists, on the other hand, are apt to recommend a far more
+drastic treatment of property-owners. "We claim that land in country
+and land in towns, mines, parks, mountains, moors, should be owned by
+the people for the people, to be held, used, built over, and
+cultivated upon such terms as the people themselves see fit to ordain.
+The handful of marauders who now hold possession have, and can have,
+no right save brute force against the tens of millions whom they
+wrong."<a name="FNanchor_304_304" id="FNanchor_304_304"></a><a href="#Footnote_304_304" class="fnanchor">[304]</a> The most moderate school of British Socialism, the Fabian
+Society, favours in its statement of policy given under the heading
+"Basis of the Fabian Society" the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[99]</a></span>expropriation of all private
+capital "without compensation, though not without such relief to
+expropriated individuals as may seem fit to the community." In other
+words, expropriated property-owners may, or may not, be given
+something to protect them from starvation, not as a matter of right,
+but of charity.</p>
+
+<p>Most Socialists who favour compensation recommend that it should be
+given only in the form of consumable articles such as food, clothes,
+&amp;c., or in bonds which are changeable only into consumable articles.
+"Rothschild will be paid in bread and meat and luxury and wine and
+theatre tickets."<a name="FNanchor_305_305" id="FNanchor_305_305"></a><a href="#Footnote_305_305" class="fnanchor">[305]</a> "When capitalistic property shall have been
+socialised, the holders of compensation deeds will not be able to
+purchase either fresh means of production or producers; they will only
+be able to buy products."<a name="FNanchor_306_306" id="FNanchor_306_306"></a><a href="#Footnote_306_306" class="fnanchor">[306]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists suggest that the bonds given in exchange for property
+acquired by the State might be cancelled later on. The property-owners
+could be deprived of their possessions without any difficulty, either
+gradually by taxation or at one blow by confiscation at the option of
+the men in power. "When the entire capitalistic property takes the
+form of State bonds, the property which it is impossible to ascertain
+to-day would then be known to everybody. It would only be necessary to
+decree that all bonds are to be registered in the name of the owner,
+and it would be possible to estimate exactly the capitalist income and
+the property of everyone. It would then also be possible to screw up
+the taxes to any extent without fear of their being evaded by any
+concealments. It would then be also impossible to escape them by
+emigration, since it is the public institutions of the country, and in
+the first place the State, from which all interest comes, and the
+latter can deduct the tax from <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[100]</a></span>the interest before it is paid out.
+Under these circumstances it would be possible to raise the
+progressive income and property tax as high as necessary&mdash;if necessary
+as high as would come very near, if not actually amount to,
+confiscation of the large property."<a name="FNanchor_307_307" id="FNanchor_307_307"></a><a href="#Footnote_307_307" class="fnanchor">[307]</a> The foregoing is a simple
+plan of swindling property-owners out of their holdings.</p>
+
+<p>Some of the more moderate Socialists argue: "There is much to be said
+in favour of the liberal treatment of the present generation of
+proprietors and even of their children. But against the permanent
+welfare of the community the unborn have no rights."<a name="FNanchor_308_308" id="FNanchor_308_308"></a><a href="#Footnote_308_308" class="fnanchor">[308]</a> On the other
+hand, Bax, the philosopher of British Socialism, quite logically and
+honestly states that the idea of compensation has no room in the
+Socialist code of ethics, that the bourgeois idea of compensation on
+grounds of justice is irreconcilable with the Socialist conception of
+justice. He says: "Between possession and confiscation is a great gulf
+fixed, the gulf between the bourgeois and the Socialist worlds.
+Well-meaning men seek to throw bridges over this gulf by schemes of
+compensation, abolition of inheritance, and the like. But the
+attempts, as we believe, even should they ever be carried out
+practically, must fall disastrously short of their mark and be
+speedily engulfed between the two positions they are intended to
+unite. Nowhere can the phrase 'He that is not for us is against us' be
+more aptly applied than to the moral standpoint of modern
+individualism and of modern Socialism. To the one, individual
+possession is right and justice, and social confiscation is wrong and
+injustice; to the other, individual possession is wrong and injustice,
+and confiscation is right and justice. This is the real issue. Unless
+a man accept the last-named standpoint unreservedly, he has no right
+to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[101]</a></span>call himself a Socialist. If he does accept it, he will seek the
+shortest and most direct road to the attainment of justice rather than
+any longer and more indirect ones, of which it is at best doubtful
+whether they will attain the end at all. For be it remembered the
+moment you tamper with the sacredness of private property, no matter
+how mildly, you surrender the conventional bourgeois principle of
+justice, while the moment you talk of compensation you surrender the
+Socialist principle of justice, for compensation can only be real if
+it is adequate, and can only be adequate if it counterbalances, and
+thereby annuls, the confiscation. It is just, says the individualist,
+for a man to be able to do what he likes with his own. Good; but what
+is his own?"<a name="FNanchor_309_309" id="FNanchor_309_309"></a><a href="#Footnote_309_309" class="fnanchor">[309]</a> "The great act of confiscation will be the seal of
+the new era; then and not till then will the knell of civilisation,
+with its rights of property and its class society, be sounded; then,
+and not till then, will justice&mdash;the justice not of civilisation but
+of Socialism&mdash;become the corner-stone of the social arch."<a name="FNanchor_310_310" id="FNanchor_310_310"></a><a href="#Footnote_310_310" class="fnanchor">[310]</a></p>
+
+<p>I think the straightforwardness of Bax is preferable to the crooked
+and insincere explanations and proposals of the British and foreign
+Socialist given in the foregoing. Bax's opinion is irrefutable.
+According to the doctrines of Socialism given in Chapter IV., labour
+is the source of all wealth; the greater part of the products of that
+labour is dishonestly abstracted from the labourer by the capitalist
+class, which has converted the result of that labour into property.
+Hence Socialists think with Proudhon, and they very often openly
+declare, that property is theft. Capitalist society will not
+compensate the thief when taking from him his booty. Socialism will
+not compensate property-owners when taking away their property.
+Besides, compensation would be utterly opposed to the root idea of
+Socialist justice. At present <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[102]</a></span>expropriation without indemnity is
+called theft, but it would not be called theft under a Socialist
+<i>r&eacute;gime</i>. The chapter on "Law and Justice under Socialism" will make
+that quite clear.</p>
+
+<p>Socialism teaches that no man is entitled to anything except that
+which he has made himself. "No man has a right to call anything his
+own but that which he himself has made. Now, no man makes the land.
+The land is not created by labour, but it is the gift of God to all.
+The earth belongs to the people. For the nonce please take the
+statement on the authority of Herbert Spencer, All men 'have equal
+rights to the use of the earth.' So that he who possesses land
+possesses that to which he has no right, and he who invests his
+savings in land becomes a purchaser of stolen property."<a name="FNanchor_311_311" id="FNanchor_311_311"></a><a href="#Footnote_311_311" class="fnanchor">[311]</a> "No man
+made the land, and laws and lawyers notwithstanding no man has any
+moral right before God to call a solitary strip of God's earth his
+than has the burglar to call his stolen goods his personal property.
+It is therefore evident that the bite named 'rent' given to landlords
+for permission to live upon and use God's free gift to man is as much
+the fruit of robbery, the spoil of plunder, as is the result of a
+burglar's night's marauding, a common pickpocket's day's
+'takings.'"<a name="FNanchor_312_312" id="FNanchor_312_312"></a><a href="#Footnote_312_312" class="fnanchor">[312]</a> Capital is in the same position as land, for "Land
+and capital are indistinguishable."<a name="FNanchor_313_313" id="FNanchor_313_313"></a><a href="#Footnote_313_313" class="fnanchor">[313]</a></p>
+
+<p>The more honest Socialists agree with Bax that compensation for
+property acquired would be inadvisable and impracticable. "In a
+pamphlet called 'Collectivism and Revolution' M. Jules Guesde said,
+'Expropriation with indemnity is a chimera. And whatever regret one
+may feel, however difficult may appear to peaceful natures the last
+method, we have no other way than to retake violently that which
+belongs to all, by&mdash;let us say the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[103]</a></span>word&mdash;the Revolution.' He added,
+'Capital which it is necessary to take from individuals, such as the
+land, is not of human creation; it is anterior to man, for whom it is
+a <i>sine qua non</i> of existence. It cannot therefore belong to some to
+the exclusion of others, without the others being robbed. And to make
+the robbers deliver up, to oblige them to restore in any and every way
+is not so much a right as a duty, the most sacred of duties."<a name="FNanchor_314_314" id="FNanchor_314_314"></a><a href="#Footnote_314_314" class="fnanchor">[314]</a> A
+respected English Socialist says bluntly, "How to secure the swag to
+the workers is the problem."<a name="FNanchor_315_315" id="FNanchor_315_315"></a><a href="#Footnote_315_315" class="fnanchor">[315]</a> A Christian Socialist clergyman
+sarcastically proposes: "If you are a Christian and love your rich
+neighbour as yourself, you will do all you can to help him to become
+poorer. For if you believe in the Gospel, you know that to be rich is
+the very worst thing that can happen to a man. That if a man is rich,
+it is with the greatest difficulty that he can be saved; for 'it is
+easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich
+man to enter into the Kingdom of God' (Mark x. 25). This is startling
+now, but it was not less strange and startling to the disciples who
+'were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can
+be saved?' But the needle's eye has not grown any larger since then,
+and the camels certainly have not grown smaller! All true Christians
+then must desire to relieve the rich man of his excess for his own
+sake, since the inequality that ruins the body of Lazarus ruins the
+soul of Dives; and Dives is the more miserable of the two, because the
+soul is more precious than the body."<a name="FNanchor_316_316" id="FNanchor_316_316"></a><a href="#Footnote_316_316" class="fnanchor">[316]</a></p>
+
+<p>The abolition of private property requires also the abolition of the
+right of inheritance, as otherwise capital might again be accumulated
+in the hands of the thrifty and the enterprising. Therefore the
+manifesto of Marx and Engels already demands the "abolition of all
+right of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[104]</a></span>inheritance."<a name="FNanchor_317_317" id="FNanchor_317_317"></a><a href="#Footnote_317_317" class="fnanchor">[317]</a> Other Socialists say that this right
+should not be abolished. "Socialists used to insist upon the abolition
+of the right of inheritance and bequest. But if what I gain by my own
+labour is rightfully my property&mdash;and the Co-operative Commonwealth
+will, as we have seen, declare it to be so&mdash;it will be inexpedient in
+that Commonwealth to destroy any of the essential qualities of
+propertyship; and I can hardly call that my property which I may not
+give to whom I please at my death. No man in a Co-operative
+Commonwealth could acquire so much more wealth than his fellows as to
+make him dangerous to them."<a name="FNanchor_318_318" id="FNanchor_318_318"></a><a href="#Footnote_318_318" class="fnanchor">[318]</a> "Socialists do not object to
+property; they are not opposed to private property. They are therefore
+not opposed to inheritance. The right to acquire and hold involves the
+right to dispose by will or by gift. We only object to such a use of
+property as enables classes for generation after generation to live on
+the proceeds of other people's labour without doing any useful service
+to society."<a name="FNanchor_319_319" id="FNanchor_319_319"></a><a href="#Footnote_319_319" class="fnanchor">[319]</a> This very diplomatic sentence may be explained in a
+variety of ways. Probably it means that holders of property of large
+size could summarily be deprived of their possessions by order of the
+Government, as has been indicated by that writer in another passage
+(see page 97). Such a power would make the right to hold and to
+bequeath property a farce. Property could be held then only on the
+same terms on which, I believe, it is held by Central African negroes.
+Another Socialist states, "If I am entitled to what I produce, then it
+follows that I am entitled to dispose of all that I produce;" and then
+denies the right to personal property by continuing: "The Socialists
+say, 'Not thine or mine, but ours.'"<a name="FNanchor_320_320" id="FNanchor_320_320"></a><a href="#Footnote_320_320" class="fnanchor">[320]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[105]</a></span>It would be only logical that the Socialist State, after abolishing
+private property by following the principle "not thine but ours,"
+should not allow its re-creation and re-accumulation. "This pernicious
+right (wrong) of inheritance must be abolished. It is the means by
+which the 'classes' perpetuate their robbery of the 'masses' from
+generation to generation and age to age. The disinherited would of
+course have the community to look to for sound education in youth,
+suitable employment in years of maturity, generous pension in old age,
+&amp;c., and to what else can any rational human being lay just
+claim?"<a name="FNanchor_321_321" id="FNanchor_321_321"></a><a href="#Footnote_321_321" class="fnanchor">[321]</a> Some Socialists argue that in the Socialist State "there
+will be nothing to bequeath, unless we choose to regard household
+furniture as a legacy of any importance. This settles the question of
+the right of inheritance, which Socialism will have no need to abolish
+formally."<a name="FNanchor_322_322" id="FNanchor_322_322"></a><a href="#Footnote_322_322" class="fnanchor">[322]</a> "Socialism condemns as reactionary and immoral all
+that tends to the debasement of humanity. It condemns our industrial
+and commercial system as a degrading system&mdash;degrading both to the few
+who amass wealth and to the many who by their labour enable the few to
+lay up riches. It is degrading to those who rob and to those who are
+robbed; to those who cheat and to those who are cheated; to those who
+swim and to those who sink; to those who revel in luxury and to those
+who, barely sustaining their own lives, are compelled by their toil to
+supply luxuries for others to enjoy."<a name="FNanchor_323_323" id="FNanchor_323_323"></a><a href="#Footnote_323_323" class="fnanchor">[323]</a> Therefore Socialism means
+to abolish the present system root and branch, and the most
+straightforward Socialists are frankly in favour of the most thorough
+measures for abolishing private property.</p>
+
+<p>Children and poets proverbially speak the truth. Let us see what the
+Socialist poets think of the expropriation of property-owners.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[106]</a></span>Some of the poets tell the workers that the labourers not only produce
+all the wealth, but are also all-powerful, and, if they wish to, they
+can do what they like with the country.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Shall you complain who feed the world&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Who clothe the world, who house the world?<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Shall you complain who are the world<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Of what the world may do?<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">As from this hour you use your power,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The world must follow you.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">As from this hour you use your power.<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The world must follow you.<a name="FNanchor_324_324" id="FNanchor_324_324"></a><a href="#Footnote_324_324" class="fnanchor">[324]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Others remind them of their grievances, and urge them to drive the
+rich man out of the country:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i4">Think on the wrongs ye bear,<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Think on the rags ye wear,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Think on the insults endured from your birth;<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Toiling in snow and rain,<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Bearing up heaps of gain,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">All for the tyrants who grind ye to earth.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Your brains are as keen as the brains of your masters.<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">In swiftness and strength ye surpass them by far,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Ye've brave hearts that teach ye to laugh at disasters,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Ye vastly outnumber your tyrants in war.<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Why, then, like cowards stand.<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Using not brain or hand,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Thankful, like dogs, when they throw ye a bone?<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">What right have they to take<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Things that ye toil to make?<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Know ye not, boobies, that all is your own?<a name="FNanchor_325_325" id="FNanchor_325_325"></a><a href="#Footnote_325_325" class="fnanchor">[325]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i4">Arise, unite each scattered band,<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">To sweep all masters from our land,<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Then shall each mine and loom and field<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Its produce to the workers yield.<a name="FNanchor_326_326" id="FNanchor_326_326"></a><a href="#Footnote_326_326" class="fnanchor">[326]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[107]</a></span>Others, again, urge the workers to seize all property and to make the
+rich man work for them.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i2">They're never done extolling<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">The nobility of work;<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">But the knaves! they always take good care<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">Their share of toil to shirk.<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Do they send their sons and daughters,<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">To the workshop or the mill?<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Oh! we'll turn things upside down, my lads;<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">It will change their tune, it will!<a name="FNanchor_327_327" id="FNanchor_327_327"></a><a href="#Footnote_327_327" class="fnanchor">[327]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">We'll drive the robbers from our lands, our meadows and our hills;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">We'll drive them from our warehouses, our workshops and our mills;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">We'll make them fare upon their bonds, their bankbooks and their bills,<br /></span>
+<span class="i4">As we go marching to liberty.<a name="FNanchor_328_328" id="FNanchor_328_328"></a><a href="#Footnote_328_328" class="fnanchor">[328]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Some Socialists believe that they will come to power suddenly and by
+violence, and abolish private capital at a stroke. Others are inclined
+to think that they will only gradually abolish it. Karl Marx was of
+the latter opinion. Therefore he wrote in his "Manifesto": "The first
+step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the
+proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of
+democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest,
+by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all
+instruments of production in the hands of the State&mdash;<i>i.e.</i> of the
+proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total
+of productive forces as rapidly as possible. Of course in the
+beginning this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads
+on the rights of property and on the conditions of bourgeois
+production: by means of measures therefore which appear economically
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[108]</a></span>insufficient and untenable, but which in the course of the movement
+outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social
+order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the
+mode of production. These measures will of course be different in
+different countries. Nevertheless in the most advanced countries the
+following will be pretty generally applicable:</p>
+
+<div class="block"><p>1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land
+to public purposes.</p>
+
+<p>2. A heavy progressive or graduated income-tax.</p>
+
+<p>3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.</p>
+
+<p>4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.</p>
+
+<p>5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State by means of a
+national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.</p>
+
+<p>6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the
+hands of the State.</p>
+
+<p>7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the
+State; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the
+improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.</p>
+
+<p>8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial
+armies, especially for agriculture.</p>
+
+<p>9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual
+abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more
+equable distribution of the population over the country.</p>
+
+<p>10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of
+children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of
+education with industrial production, &amp;c."<a name="FNanchor_329_329" id="FNanchor_329_329"></a><a href="#Footnote_329_329" class="fnanchor">[329]</a></p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Marx's programme has served as a model to the English Socialists, as
+the following demands of some of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[109]</a></span>our Socialists will show: "The
+things you will be working for will be something like this. Shorter
+hours is the first thing, then a tax on landlords, then abolition of
+the House of Lords and the Monarchy, then more Home-Rule and more
+Local Government, then extension of municipal operations, the
+socialisation of coal stores, dairy farms, bakeries, laundries,
+public-houses, cab-hiring, the slaughter of cattle and the sale of
+butcher meat, the building and letting of houses&mdash;in short, the taking
+over by the local bodies of as many departments of production and
+distribution as need be. By this time the Class War will be shaping
+for a last great engagement."<a name="FNanchor_330_330" id="FNanchor_330_330"></a><a href="#Footnote_330_330" class="fnanchor">[330]</a></p>
+
+<p>"As stepping stones to a happier period we urge for immediate
+adoption: The compulsory construction of healthy artisans' and
+agricultural labourers' dwellings in proportion to the population,
+such dwellings to be let at rents to cover the cost of construction
+and maintenance alone. Free compulsory education for all classes,
+together with the provision of at least one wholesome meal a day in
+each school. Eight hours or less to be the normal working day in all
+trades. Cumulative taxation upon all incomes above a fixed minimum not
+exceeding 500<i>l.</i> a year. State appropriation of railways with or
+without compensation. The establishment of national banks which shall
+absorb all private institutions that derive a profit from operations
+in money or credit. Rapid extinction of the National Debt.
+Nationalisation of the land and organisation of agricultural and
+industrial armies under State control on co-operative principles. By
+these measures a healthy, independent, and thoroughly educated people
+will steadily grow up around us, ready to abandon that baneful
+competition for starvation wages which ruins our present workers,
+ready to organise the labour of each for the benefit of all,
+determined, too, to take control finally of the entire social <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[110]</a></span>and
+political machinery of a State in which class distinctions and class
+privileges shall cease to be."<a name="FNanchor_331_331" id="FNanchor_331_331"></a><a href="#Footnote_331_331" class="fnanchor">[331]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Social-Democratic Federation demands the following immediate
+reforms: "The socialisation of the means of production, distribution,
+and exchange to be controlled by a democratic State in the interests
+of the entire community, and the complete emancipation of labour from
+the domination of capitalism and landlordism with the establishment of
+social and economic equality between the sexes. Abolition of the
+Monarchy. Democratisation of the governmental machinery, viz.
+abolition of the House of Lords, payment of members of legislative and
+administrative bodies, payment of official expenses of elections out
+of the public funds, adult suffrage, proportional representation,
+triennial Parliaments, second ballot, initiative and referendum.
+Foreigners to be granted rights of citizenship after two years'
+residence in the country, on the recommendation of four British-born
+citizens, without any fee. Canvassing to be made illegal. Legislation
+by the people in such wise that no legislative proposal shall become
+law until ratified by the majority of the people. Legislative and
+administrative independence for all parts of the empire.</p>
+
+<p>"Repudiation of the National Debt. Abolition of all indirect taxation
+and the institution of a cumulative tax on all incomes and
+inheritances exceeding 300<i>l.</i></p>
+
+<p>"Extension of the principle of local self-government. Systematisation
+and co-ordination of the local administrative bodies. Election of all
+administrators and administrative bodies by equal direct adult
+suffrage.</p>
+
+<p>"Elementary education to be free, secular, industrial, and compulsory
+for all classes. The age of obligatory school attendance to be raised
+to sixteen. Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher
+education, both general and technical, and all such education to be
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[111]</a></span>free. Free maintenance for all attending State schools. Abolition of
+school rates, the cost of education in all State schools to be borne
+by the National Exchequer.</p>
+
+<p>"Nationalisation of the land and the organisation of labour in
+agriculture and industry under public ownership and control on
+co-operative principles. Nationalisation of the trusts, of railways,
+docks, and canals, and all great means of transit. Public ownership
+and control of gas, electric light, and water-supplies, tramway,
+omnibus, and other locomotive services, and of the food and coal
+supply. The establishment of State and municipal banks and pawnshops
+and public restaurants. Public ownership and control of the lifeboat
+service, of hospitals, dispensaries, cemeteries and crematoria, and
+control of the drink traffic.</p>
+
+<p>"A legislative eight-hour working day or forty-eight hours per week to
+be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to be
+inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law. Absolute
+freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee against
+any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or infringe it.
+No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until sixteen years
+of age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law. Public provision of useful work at
+not less than trade-union rates of wages for the unemployed. Free
+State insurance against sickness and accident, and free and adequate
+State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers. Public
+assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights. The
+legislative enactment of a minimum wage of 30<i>s.</i> for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work.</p>
+
+<p>"Abolition of the present workhouse system, and reformed
+administration of the Poor Law on a basis of national co-operation.
+Compulsory construction by public <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[112]</a></span>bodies of healthy dwellings for the
+people, such dwellings to be let at rents to cover the cost of
+construction and maintenance alone, and not to cover the cost of the
+land. The administration of justice to be free to all; the
+establishment of public offices where legal advice can be obtained
+free of charge."<a name="FNanchor_332_332" id="FNanchor_332_332"></a><a href="#Footnote_332_332" class="fnanchor">[332]</a></p>
+
+<p>Mr. Blatchford suggests the following: "The public maintenance and the
+public education of children. The public provision of work for all.
+The taxation of the land and of all large incomes. The confiscation of
+unearned increment. Old-age pensions. The minimum wage. Compulsory
+land cultivation. Universal adult suffrage. The second ballot. The
+payment of election expenses. The nationalisation of the railways and
+of the land. The nationalisation or municipalisation of trams, gas,
+water, bread, liquor, milk, coal, and many other things. The abolition
+of hereditary titles and of the House of Lords."<a name="FNanchor_333_333" id="FNanchor_333_333"></a><a href="#Footnote_333_333" class="fnanchor">[333]</a></p>
+
+<p>The general policy which the Socialists should follow was summed up by
+Marx in the following way. "The Communists everywhere support every
+revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order
+of things."<a name="FNanchor_334_334" id="FNanchor_334_334"></a><a href="#Footnote_334_334" class="fnanchor">[334]</a> "Socialism is the only hope of the workers. All else
+is illusion. Workers of all lands, unite! You have nothing to lose but
+your chains. You have a world to win."<a name="FNanchor_335_335" id="FNanchor_335_335"></a><a href="#Footnote_335_335" class="fnanchor">[335]</a></p>
+
+<p>"This is the final struggle. The extinction of classes must follow the
+overthrow of the last form of class domination and the emancipation of
+the last class to be set free. Rally then, fellow workers, to the
+standard of the international class-conscious proletariat, the Red
+Flag of Social-Democracy. 'Workers of all countries, unite! You have
+nothing to lose but your chains, you have a <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[113]</a></span>world to win!'"<a name="FNanchor_336_336" id="FNanchor_336_336"></a><a href="#Footnote_336_336" class="fnanchor">[336]</a> "The
+land of England is no mean heritage."<a name="FNanchor_337_337" id="FNanchor_337_337"></a><a href="#Footnote_337_337" class="fnanchor">[337]</a></p>
+
+<p>"What has hitherto prevented the workers from combining for the
+overthrow of the capitalist system? <i>A.</i> Ignorance and
+disorganisation.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What has left them in ignorance? <i>A.</i> The
+system itself, by compelling them to spend all their lives upon
+monotonous toil and leaving them no time for education.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What
+account have they been given of the system which oppresses them? <i>A.</i>
+The priest has explained that the perpetual presence of the poor is
+necessitated by a law of God; the economist has proved its necessity
+by a law of Nature; and between them they have succeeded in convincing
+the labourers of the hopelessness of any opposition to the capitalist
+system.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> How is it that the labourers cannot see for themselves
+that they are legally robbed? <i>A.</i> Because the present method of
+extracting their surplus value is one of fraud rather than of force,
+and has grown gradually."<a name="FNanchor_338_338" id="FNanchor_338_338"></a><a href="#Footnote_338_338" class="fnanchor">[338]</a></p>
+
+<p>The philosopher of British Socialism well sums up the aims and policy
+of the Socialists. He says: "What is vital in Socialism? In the first
+line, I take it, come</p>
+
+<p>"1. The collectivisation of <i>all</i> the instruments of production by
+<i>any</i> effective means;</p>
+
+<p>"2. The doctrine of the Class War as the general historical method of
+realising the new form of society;</p>
+
+<p>"3. The principle of internationalism, the recognition, <i>i.e.</i> that
+distinction of nationality sinks into nothingness before the idea of
+the union of all progressive races in the effort to realise the ideal
+of true society as understood by the Social-Democratic Party;</p>
+
+<p>"4. The utmost freedom of physical, moral, and intellectual
+development for each and all consistent with the necessities of an
+organised social State.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[114]</a></span>"The Socialist's adhesion to the doctrine of the Class War involves
+his opposition to all measures subserving the interest of any section
+of capitalism. This coupled with his 'Internationalism' leaves him no
+choice but to be the enemy of 'his country' and the friend of his
+country's enemies whenever 'his country' (which means of course the
+dominant classes of his country, who always are for that matter his
+enemies) plays the game of the capitalist. Let us have no humbug! The
+man who cannot on occasion be (if needs be) the declared and active
+enemy of that doubtful entity, 'his country,' is no Social
+Democrat."<a name="FNanchor_339_339" id="FNanchor_339_339"></a><a href="#Footnote_339_339" class="fnanchor">[339]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Justice being henceforth identified with confiscation, and injustice
+with the right of property, there remains only the question of 'ways
+and means.' Our bourgeois apologist, admitting as he must that the
+present possessors of land and capital hold possession of them simply
+by right of superior force, can hardly refuse to admit the right of
+the proletariat organised to that end to take possession of them by
+right of superior force. The only question remaining is, How? And the
+only answer is, How you can."<a name="FNanchor_340_340" id="FNanchor_340_340"></a><a href="#Footnote_340_340" class="fnanchor">[340]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_279_279" id="Footnote_279_279"></a><a href="#FNanchor_279_279"><span class="label">[279]</span></a> Page 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_280_280" id="Footnote_280_280"></a><a href="#FNanchor_280_280"><span class="label">[280]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_281_281" id="Footnote_281_281"></a><a href="#FNanchor_281_281"><span class="label">[281]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, October 11, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_282_282" id="Footnote_282_282"></a><a href="#FNanchor_282_282"><span class="label">[282]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p.
+10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_283_283" id="Footnote_283_283"></a><a href="#FNanchor_283_283"><span class="label">[283]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 26, 27.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_284_284" id="Footnote_284_284"></a><a href="#FNanchor_284_284"><span class="label">[284]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 99.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_285_285" id="Footnote_285_285"></a><a href="#FNanchor_285_285"><span class="label">[285]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>What is this Socialism?</i> p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_286_286" id="Footnote_286_286"></a><a href="#FNanchor_286_286"><span class="label">[286]</span></a> <i>Socialist Annual</i>, 1907, p. 39.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_287_287" id="Footnote_287_287"></a><a href="#FNanchor_287_287"><span class="label">[287]</span></a> Kirtlan, <i>Socialism for Christians</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_288_288" id="Footnote_288_288"></a><a href="#FNanchor_288_288"><span class="label">[288]</span></a> Tillett, <i>Trades Unionism and Socialism</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_289_289" id="Footnote_289_289"></a><a href="#FNanchor_289_289"><span class="label">[289]</span></a> <i>Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain</i>, p.
+9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_290_290" id="Footnote_290_290"></a><a href="#FNanchor_290_290"><span class="label">[290]</span></a> <i>Basis of the Fabian Society.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_291_291" id="Footnote_291_291"></a><a href="#FNanchor_291_291"><span class="label">[291]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_292_292" id="Footnote_292_292"></a><a href="#FNanchor_292_292"><span class="label">[292]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 103.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_293_293" id="Footnote_293_293"></a><a href="#FNanchor_293_293"><span class="label">[293]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_294_294" id="Footnote_294_294"></a><a href="#FNanchor_294_294"><span class="label">[294]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_295_295" id="Footnote_295_295"></a><a href="#FNanchor_295_295"><span class="label">[295]</span></a> Sorge, <i>Socialism and the Worker</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_296_296" id="Footnote_296_296"></a><a href="#FNanchor_296_296"><span class="label">[296]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_297_297" id="Footnote_297_297"></a><a href="#FNanchor_297_297"><span class="label">[297]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 103.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_298_298" id="Footnote_298_298"></a><a href="#FNanchor_298_298"><span class="label">[298]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>What is this Socialism?</i> p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_299_299" id="Footnote_299_299"></a><a href="#FNanchor_299_299"><span class="label">[299]</span></a> <i>Socialism made Plain</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_300_300" id="Footnote_300_300"></a><a href="#FNanchor_300_300"><span class="label">[300]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>The Pope's Socialism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_301_301" id="Footnote_301_301"></a><a href="#FNanchor_301_301"><span class="label">[301]</span></a> Hobart, <i>Social-Democracy</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_302_302" id="Footnote_302_302"></a><a href="#FNanchor_302_302"><span class="label">[302]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 94.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_303_303" id="Footnote_303_303"></a><a href="#FNanchor_303_303"><span class="label">[303]</span></a> Jaur&egrave;s, <i>Practical Socialism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_304_304" id="Footnote_304_304"></a><a href="#FNanchor_304_304"><span class="label">[304]</span></a> <i>Socialism Made Plain</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_305_305" id="Footnote_305_305"></a><a href="#FNanchor_305_305"><span class="label">[305]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 105.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_306_306" id="Footnote_306_306"></a><a href="#FNanchor_306_306"><span class="label">[306]</span></a> Jaur&egrave;s, <i>Practical Socialism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_307_307" id="Footnote_307_307"></a><a href="#FNanchor_307_307"><span class="label">[307]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_308_308" id="Footnote_308_308"></a><a href="#FNanchor_308_308"><span class="label">[308]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The Difficulties of Individualism</i>, p.
+10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_309_309" id="Footnote_309_309"></a><a href="#FNanchor_309_309"><span class="label">[309]</span></a> Bax, <i>The Ethics of Socialism</i>, pp. 75, 76.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_310_310" id="Footnote_310_310"></a><a href="#FNanchor_310_310"><span class="label">[310]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 83.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_311_311" id="Footnote_311_311"></a><a href="#FNanchor_311_311"><span class="label">[311]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>The Pope's Socialism</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_312_312" id="Footnote_312_312"></a><a href="#FNanchor_312_312"><span class="label">[312]</span></a> Muse, <i>Poverty and Drunkenness</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_313_313" id="Footnote_313_313"></a><a href="#FNanchor_313_313"><span class="label">[313]</span></a> <i>Facts for Socialists</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_314_314" id="Footnote_314_314"></a><a href="#FNanchor_314_314"><span class="label">[314]</span></a> Guyot, <i>Pretensions of Socialism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_315_315" id="Footnote_315_315"></a><a href="#FNanchor_315_315"><span class="label">[315]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_316_316" id="Footnote_316_316"></a><a href="#FNanchor_316_316"><span class="label">[316]</span></a> Dearmer, <i>Socialism and Christianity</i>, pp. 17, 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_317_317" id="Footnote_317_317"></a><a href="#FNanchor_317_317"><span class="label">[317]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto</i>, p. 22.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_318_318" id="Footnote_318_318"></a><a href="#FNanchor_318_318"><span class="label">[318]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p 105.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_319_319" id="Footnote_319_319"></a><a href="#FNanchor_319_319"><span class="label">[319]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 105.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_320_320" id="Footnote_320_320"></a><a href="#FNanchor_320_320"><span class="label">[320]</span></a> <i>Socialism, For and Against</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_321_321" id="Footnote_321_321"></a><a href="#FNanchor_321_321"><span class="label">[321]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 158.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_322_322" id="Footnote_322_322"></a><a href="#FNanchor_322_322"><span class="label">[322]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, pp. 231, 232.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_323_323" id="Footnote_323_323"></a><a href="#FNanchor_323_323"><span class="label">[323]</span></a> "Veritas," <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_324_324" id="Footnote_324_324"></a><a href="#FNanchor_324_324"><span class="label">[324]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 56.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_325_325" id="Footnote_325_325"></a><a href="#FNanchor_325_325"><span class="label">[325]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_326_326" id="Footnote_326_326"></a><a href="#FNanchor_326_326"><span class="label">[326]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Song Book</i>, p. 33.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_327_327" id="Footnote_327_327"></a><a href="#FNanchor_327_327"><span class="label">[327]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 43</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_328_328" id="Footnote_328_328"></a><a href="#FNanchor_328_328"><span class="label">[328]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Song Book</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_329_329" id="Footnote_329_329"></a><a href="#FNanchor_329_329"><span class="label">[329]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto</i>, pp. 21, 22.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_330_330" id="Footnote_330_330"></a><a href="#FNanchor_330_330"><span class="label">[330]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Class War</i>, pp. 13, 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_331_331" id="Footnote_331_331"></a><a href="#FNanchor_331_331"><span class="label">[331]</span></a> <i>Socialism Made Plain</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_332_332" id="Footnote_332_332"></a><a href="#FNanchor_332_332"><span class="label">[332]</span></a> Programme, <i>Social-Democratic Federation</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_333_333" id="Footnote_333_333"></a><a href="#FNanchor_333_333"><span class="label">[333]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, October 18, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_334_334" id="Footnote_334_334"></a><a href="#FNanchor_334_334"><span class="label">[334]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_335_335" id="Footnote_335_335"></a><a href="#FNanchor_335_335"><span class="label">[335]</span></a> <i>Motto of The Socialist</i>, weekly, taken from Marx and
+Engels' <i>Manifesto</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_336_336" id="Footnote_336_336"></a><a href="#FNanchor_336_336"><span class="label">[336]</span></a> <i>The Class War</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_337_337" id="Footnote_337_337"></a><a href="#FNanchor_337_337"><span class="label">[337]</span></a> <i>Socialism Made Plain</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_338_338" id="Footnote_338_338"></a><a href="#FNanchor_338_338"><span class="label">[338]</span></a> Joynes, <i>The Socialist Catechism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_339_339" id="Footnote_339_339"></a><a href="#FNanchor_339_339"><span class="label">[339]</span></a> Bax, <i>Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 101, 102.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_340_340" id="Footnote_340_340"></a><a href="#FNanchor_340_340"><span class="label">[340]</span></a> Bax, <i>Ethics of Socialism</i>, p. 82.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_VI" id="CHAPTER_VI"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[115]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER VI<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE WORKING MASSES</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Before investigating the attitude of British Socialism towards the
+working masses, it is necessary to take note of its doctrines
+regarding work.</p>
+
+<p>Most thinkers, from the time of King Solomon, Socrates, and Confucius
+down to the present age, have seen in work conscientiously performed a
+blessing; many, probably most, British Socialists declare it to be a
+curse and a vice. The leading English philosopher of Socialism, for
+instance, tells us: "To the Socialist labour is an evil to be
+minimised to the utmost. The man who works at his trade or avocation
+more than necessity compels him, or who accumulates more than he can
+enjoy, is not a hero but a fool from the Socialists' standpoint."<a name="FNanchor_341_341" id="FNanchor_341_341"></a><a href="#Footnote_341_341" class="fnanchor">[341]</a>
+A leading French Socialist informs us: "Through listening to the
+fallacious utterances of the middle-class economists, the workers have
+delivered themselves body and soul to the vice of work."<a name="FNanchor_342_342" id="FNanchor_342_342"></a><a href="#Footnote_342_342" class="fnanchor">[342]</a> When Mr.
+Victor Grayson, M.P., a Socialist, in a speech ventured to refer to
+work as "one of the greatest blessings and privileges ever conferred
+on humanity," one of the Socialist papers wrote: "Victor Grayson is
+simply an agent of the capitalist class. Is Mr. Victor Grayson, M.P.,
+trying to allure the capitalist class by picturing work as a blessing,
+or is he trying to get the worker to look upon work through a rosy
+mist <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[116]</a></span>conjured from the brains of the capitalist's agent who is
+saturated with capitalist philosophy? It is time the Beatitudes were
+extended or revised. How would this do?&mdash;'Blessed is the worker who
+works (for the capitalist), for he shall inherit the kingdom (of
+starvation and misery under capitalism).' 'Blessed is work in itself,
+because it enables (the capitalist) to live in peace and happiness.'
+Since work is a blessing, it follows that whatever saves work is a
+curse. All the beautiful machinery which the working class have shed
+their life blood to produce, to develop which an army of them have
+been sacrificed under capitalism by the capitalists; this which the
+workers of ages and ages have contributed their mite towards; have
+laboured long and suffered silently to create; this is an
+evil!!!"<a name="FNanchor_343_343" id="FNanchor_343_343"></a><a href="#Footnote_343_343" class="fnanchor">[343]</a></p>
+
+<p>British Socialists do their utmost to convert the workers into
+shirkers by teaching them not only that work is an evil in itself, but
+by constantly admonishing them, "on scientific grounds," to work as
+little as possible during the time they are employed. "It is the
+interest of the employer to get as much work out of his hands as
+possible for as little wages as possible. It is the interest of the
+workers to get as high a wage as possible for as little labour as
+possible."<a name="FNanchor_344_344" id="FNanchor_344_344"></a><a href="#Footnote_344_344" class="fnanchor">[344]</a> "The workers have been taught by the practical
+economists of the trade-unions, and have learnt for themselves by
+bitter experience, that every time any of them in a moment of ambition
+or good will does one stroke of work not in his bond, he is increasing
+the future unpaid labour not only of himself, but of his
+fellows."<a name="FNanchor_345_345" id="FNanchor_345_345"></a><a href="#Footnote_345_345" class="fnanchor">[345]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Independent Labour Party has issued a leaflet entitled "Are you a
+Socialist?" in which the question occurs, "Do you believe that every
+individual should have <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[117]</a></span>sufficient leisure to cultivate his higher
+faculties and enjoy life to the fullest extent?" and the answer is,
+"If you say 'Yes,' join the Independent Labour Party and help to carry
+its principles into effect."<a name="FNanchor_346_346" id="FNanchor_346_346"></a><a href="#Footnote_346_346" class="fnanchor">[346]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists promise the workers that the Socialist State of the
+future will abolish the curse of work by greatly diminishing the hours
+of labour. A leading English Socialist writer says: "It is as plainly
+demonstrable as that twice four make eight that a due system of
+organised effort would enable your 43,000,000 of people to win from
+Nature an overflowing superfluity of all that man desires, without
+one-fourth the effort put forth now to win a beggarly subsistence so
+far short of what your community requires that 13,000,000 of your
+people live continually upon the very verge of starvation."<a name="FNanchor_347_347" id="FNanchor_347_347"></a><a href="#Footnote_347_347" class="fnanchor">[347]</a> A
+leading American Socialist promises somewhat vaguely, "A few hours of
+work will secure to everybody all necessaries, decencies, and comforts
+of life."<a name="FNanchor_348_348" id="FNanchor_348_348"></a><a href="#Footnote_348_348" class="fnanchor">[348]</a> William Morris tells us that four hours' work will
+suffice, and that it will not all be "mere machine-tending."<a name="FNanchor_349_349" id="FNanchor_349_349"></a><a href="#Footnote_349_349" class="fnanchor">[349]</a>
+Morrison-Davidson prophesies that the "hours of labour will probably
+not exceed a minimum of two and a maximum of five daily."<a name="FNanchor_350_350" id="FNanchor_350_350"></a><a href="#Footnote_350_350" class="fnanchor">[350]</a> Hyndman
+feels quite certain that "two or three hours' labour out of the
+twenty-four by all adult males would be enough to give the whole
+community all the wholesome necessaries and comforts of life,"<a name="FNanchor_351_351" id="FNanchor_351_351"></a><a href="#Footnote_351_351" class="fnanchor">[351]</a>
+and Bax thinks that "In a perfectly organised Socialist State men
+never worked more than two or three hours a day."<a name="FNanchor_352_352" id="FNanchor_352_352"></a><a href="#Footnote_352_352" class="fnanchor">[352]</a> Yves Guyot
+wittily says: "There is no reason why their demands <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[118]</a></span>should not go
+further. Zero alone can bid them defiance."<a name="FNanchor_353_353" id="FNanchor_353_353"></a><a href="#Footnote_353_353" class="fnanchor">[353]</a> It is worth noting
+that many Anarchists also promise a great lessening of the hours of
+labour when the State has been destroyed. Kropotkin, for instance,
+requires only from four to five hours' work.<a name="FNanchor_354_354" id="FNanchor_354_354"></a><a href="#Footnote_354_354" class="fnanchor">[354]</a> Agitators desirous
+to secure the support of the workers cannot be too lavish in their
+promises.</p>
+
+<p>In the Socialist State of the future a few hours' work every day will
+give boundless prosperity to all, for "Wealth may easily be made as
+plentiful as water at the expense of trifling toil."<a name="FNanchor_355_355" id="FNanchor_355_355"></a><a href="#Footnote_355_355" class="fnanchor">[355]</a> "Under
+Socialism, nineteen-twentieths of the people will be better off
+materially than they are to-day, for they will be equal partners in
+all the productive and distributive wealth of the community."<a name="FNanchor_356_356" id="FNanchor_356_356"></a><a href="#Footnote_356_356" class="fnanchor">[356]</a>
+"Comparative affluence would be enjoyed by each member of the
+community."<a name="FNanchor_357_357" id="FNanchor_357_357"></a><a href="#Footnote_357_357" class="fnanchor">[357]</a></p>
+
+<p>In the Socialist commonwealth of the future "all wages will be
+immediately increased," for "the social community will apply itself to
+raise all salaries of workers and peasants."<a name="FNanchor_358_358" id="FNanchor_358_358"></a><a href="#Footnote_358_358" class="fnanchor">[358]</a> "In a Socialist
+State you will have everyone paid a living wage. The surplus will be
+dispensed by the State, bringing happiness to the whole
+community."<a name="FNanchor_359_359" id="FNanchor_359_359"></a><a href="#Footnote_359_359" class="fnanchor">[359]</a></p>
+
+<p>The British national revenue amounts at present only to a little more
+than 140,000,000<i>l.</i> By the abolition of the private capitalists and
+landowners the Socialist Government of Great Britain "would at once
+find themselves in possession of a revenue amounting to some
+900,000,000<i>l.</i> per annum, and would probably be puzzled for a time
+how to dispose of it and prevent themselves <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[119]</a></span>being buried under its
+accumulation."<a name="FNanchor_360_360" id="FNanchor_360_360"></a><a href="#Footnote_360_360" class="fnanchor">[360]</a> This is neither a joke nor a misprint, for the
+well-known writer, author of countless Socialist pamphlets, continues:
+"After a variety of attempts to dispose of it by dividing into good
+fat salaries among those of your community who had had least to do
+with its production, after the usual custom, I believe means would be
+employed ultimately for inducing them to keep it under by increasing
+the wages of the workers, which is another way of saying that those
+whose labour had produced the wealth would be allowed to enjoy it,
+which would be something quite novel."<a name="FNanchor_361_361" id="FNanchor_361_361"></a><a href="#Footnote_361_361" class="fnanchor">[361]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Socialist Government would not only diminish the working hours
+making them from three to five hours a day, but would also double and
+treble wages, partly in order to get rid of the glut of money flowing
+into the National Exchequer, partly because the workers would
+presumably receive the whole produce of their labour (see Chapter IV.)
+in the form of wages as soon as the private capitalists were
+eliminated. Repairs, renewals, replacement of capital losses, and the
+extension of national industry, which are at present effected out of
+the savings of private capitalists, would, under the Socialist
+<i>r&eacute;gime</i>, apparently no longer be required, and direction,
+supervision, and distribution would apparently no longer cost
+anything. The workers are quite seriously told by the philosopher of
+British Socialism, collaborating with the editor of "Justice": "Under
+present conditions the total wealth produced would, if equitably
+divided, amount to a value equal to more than 200<i>l.</i> per year per
+family. But to suppose that any mere distributive readjustment is what
+is meant by Socialism is to entirely misunderstand what Socialism
+really involves. Socialism means the complete reorganisation of
+production as well as distribution. With production scientifically and
+socially organised, the productivity of labour would be quintupled,
+and the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[120]</a></span>amount of wealth would be increased in proportion."<a name="FNanchor_362_362" id="FNanchor_362_362"></a><a href="#Footnote_362_362" class="fnanchor">[362]</a> In
+other words, there would be 1,000<i>l.</i> a year for each family. Another
+Socialist more plainly states: "At the present hour it is calculated
+that the wealth of the United Kingdom exceeds 2,000 millions per year.
+This divided among forty millions gives 250<i>l.</i> per family. It is said
+that the abolition of waste labour and the absorption of the idle
+classes would quadruple the production. One thousand pounds per year
+per family is a very good standard of comfort under a co-operative
+system of living."<a name="FNanchor_363_363" id="FNanchor_363_363"></a><a href="#Footnote_363_363" class="fnanchor">[363]</a></p>
+
+<p>The two estimates agree in this, that the Socialist family of five
+should receive in wages 1,000<i>l.</i> per annum, or about 3<i>l.</i> 10<i>s.</i> per
+working day. In another chapter we shall learn that in the Socialist
+State only the young and strong would work, and they would work, as we
+have seen in the foregoing pages, between three and four hours a day.
+In other words, the worker who earns now, say, 10<i>d.</i> an hour, would,
+under the Socialist commonwealth, receive 1<i>l.</i> per hour. Who would
+not be a Socialist?</p>
+
+<p>A leading German Socialist has endeavoured to gauge the effect of
+Socialism upon the working classes. In making his calculations he has
+borne in mind the necessity of providing for the wear and tear of
+capital, and for other expenditure, and he has arrived at the
+conclusion: "A generous sick insurance will have to be set up, as well
+as an invalid and old-age insurance for all incapacitated workers, &amp;c.
+Thus we see that not much will remain for the raising of the wages
+from the present income of the capitalists, even if capital were
+confiscated at a stroke, still less if we were to compensate the
+capitalists. It will consequently be necessary, in order to be able to
+raise the wages, to raise at the same time the production far above
+its present level."<a name="FNanchor_364_364" id="FNanchor_364_364"></a><a href="#Footnote_364_364" class="fnanchor">[364]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[121]</a></span>The value of high wages lies in the produce they buy. It is of course
+quite clear that a nation, in order to consume more, must also produce
+more. It would be interesting to know whether leading Socialists, such
+as Messrs. Bax, Quelch, and Hazell, who must be acquainted with the
+sober estimates of the German Socialists, honestly believe that under
+a Socialist <i>r&eacute;gime</i> 1,000<i>l.</i> per annum will be available per family,
+or whether these statements have only been made to obtain supporters
+on the not very honourable principle, <i>Vulgus vult decipi,
+decipiatur</i>.</p>
+
+<p>Let us now look into the practical proposals of the Socialists to the
+workers.</p>
+
+<p>In the official programme of the Social-Democratic Federation<a name="FNanchor_365_365" id="FNanchor_365_365"></a><a href="#Footnote_365_365" class="fnanchor">[365]</a> the
+following "Immediate Reforms" concerning the workers are demanded:</p>
+
+<p>"A legislative eight hours' working day, or forty-eight hours per
+week, to be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to
+be inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law. Absolute
+freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee against
+any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or infringe it.
+No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until sixteen years
+of age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law. Public provision of useful work at
+not less than trade-union rates of wages for the unemployed. Free
+State insurance against sickness and accident, and free and adequate
+State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers. Public
+assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights. The
+legislative enactment of a minimum wage of 30<i>s.</i> for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work."</p>
+
+<p>It will be noticed that imprisonment is to be inflicted upon employers
+who allow their men to work overtime. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[122]</a></span>Would there also be
+imprisonment for workers working undertime? Similar demands have been
+made by other Socialist bodies. Let us look more closely into some of
+those demands which are to be fulfilled forthwith.</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">Old-age Pensions</h4>
+
+<p>With the same recklessness with which the Socialist leaders promise to
+the working man a large income in return for three or four hours'
+daily work in the golden age of Socialism, they try to dazzle him with
+promises of wonderful old-age pension schemes which are to be carried
+out in the immediate future. Mr. Smart thinks "The smallest sum upon
+which an old man can exist, even when his lodging is provided by his
+friends, is 7<i>s.</i> a week. The pension, therefore, should not be less
+than this amount, and should be obtainable at sixty years of age. The
+annual cost for a universal system would be, with the necessary
+administrative expenses, about 60,000,000<i>l.</i>"<a name="FNanchor_366_366" id="FNanchor_366_366"></a><a href="#Footnote_366_366" class="fnanchor">[366]</a> To Councillor
+Glyde the pensionable age of sixty seems to be too high, and the
+pension too low. Therefore he proposes that "Old-age pensions of at
+least 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> per week should be provided for all aged workers
+over fifty-five years of age."<a name="FNanchor_367_367" id="FNanchor_367_367"></a><a href="#Footnote_367_367" class="fnanchor">[367]</a> But why should a working man have
+to wait till he is fifty-five before receiving a pension? In another
+pamphlet, Mr. Glyde amends his scheme and tells us, "To give a pension
+of 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> per week to all who wished to give up work at fifty
+years of age would have very satisfactory results. In the first place,
+it would make the aged workers happy and comfortable. In the second
+place, it would help to solve the unemployed question by the steady
+withdrawal of the aged workmen from the labour market, give them
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[123]</a></span>purchasing power, and thus find a home market for the productivity of
+the younger, able-bodied workers. Thirdly, it would prevent the
+competition for jobs, and the playing off against the younger workmen
+by the employers of the cheaper-paid labour of those who cannot as
+they formerly could, so that there would be less strikes, reduction in
+wages, and petty tyranny practised upon the younger generation of
+workers. Fourthly, it would cause the abolition of workhouses, with
+their great army of expensive, well-paid officials. There would be no
+need for workhouses, because cottage homes would be provided for those
+who were infirm and feeble, on the lines of the present homes for
+children; an infirmary for those who were sick and invalids, and
+asylums for the imbecile. Thousands would be cared for by relatives
+and friends. Fifthly, by Imperial funds being used for old-age
+pensions, the Poor rate could be reduced from 6<i>d.</i> to 1<i>s.</i> in the
+pound. These reforms could be carried out without a single farthing
+extra taxation, nor anyone being any worse off than formerly, by the
+practice of economy."<a name="FNanchor_368_368" id="FNanchor_368_368"></a><a href="#Footnote_368_368" class="fnanchor">[368]</a> To pension all workers at fifty would cost
+about 100,000,000<i>l.</i> a year, and I think it would be very difficult
+to save that amount on a budget of 140,000,000<i>l.</i> unless army, navy,
+and civil service were abolished. Mr. Morrison Davidson is neither
+satisfied with a pension of 7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> a week nor with the
+pensionable ages of sixty, fifty-five, or even of fifty. He proposes,
+therefore, that "Superannuation <i>on full pay</i> will take place at, say,
+forty-five or, at the most, fifty."<a name="FNanchor_369_369" id="FNanchor_369_369"></a><a href="#Footnote_369_369" class="fnanchor">[369]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">Unemployment</h4>
+
+<p>In the Socialist State of the future there would be no unemployed
+workers. Many Socialist writers make <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[124]</a></span>forecasts such as the following:
+"Under Socialism all the work of the nation would be organised&mdash;that
+is to say, it would be 'ordered,' or 'arranged,' so that no one need
+be out of work and so that no useless work need be done, and so that
+no work need be done twice where once would serve."<a name="FNanchor_370_370" id="FNanchor_370_370"></a><a href="#Footnote_370_370" class="fnanchor">[370]</a> "There would
+be a mathematical ordering of production determined by the demands of
+the consumer."<a name="FNanchor_371_371" id="FNanchor_371_371"></a><a href="#Footnote_371_371" class="fnanchor">[371]</a> "Periods of glut and want of work will be
+impossible in the new community."<a name="FNanchor_372_372" id="FNanchor_372_372"></a><a href="#Footnote_372_372" class="fnanchor">[372]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is already difficult enough even for the ablest manager to secure
+constant employment to workers in a moderate-sized manufactory, shop,
+or office. A Socialist Administration composed of fallible men would
+have to control and satisfy the whole national demand and supply. It
+would have to sow and to reap, to dig for coal and ore, to fish, to
+manufacture and to distribute everything wanted and made by all the
+people. At the same time it would have to control the vast
+international trade on the regular flow of which constant employment
+in Great Britain necessarily depends. To satisfy every demand by an
+adequate supply, it would therefore have to direct and control not
+only all British industries, but also the fashions and the seasons in
+Great Britain and in all the countries which stand in commercial
+relations with the United Kingdom. The British Socialist
+Administration would not only have to provide a sufficient cotton crop
+in the United States, a sufficient wool crop in Australia, a
+sufficient wheat crop in Canada, but it would also have to provide an
+adequate demand for British cotton goods in India and China, for
+British coal on the continent of Europe, &amp;c. It would have to provide
+sufficient sun in America to produce an adequate cotton crop and
+sufficient rain in India to enable the natives to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[125]</a></span>buy part of that
+cotton crop in the shape of manufactured articles made in Lancashire.
+Unless the Socialist Administration controls not only all foreign
+tariffs but also Nature the world over, there might be unemployment in
+a socialised Great Britain&mdash;and worse.</p>
+
+<p>The doctrines of English Socialism may be summed up in a single
+phrase. Every existing evil is due solely to the capitalistic system,
+and every existing evil can be abolished only by Socialism.
+Unemployment is no exception to the rule. Our Socialists have, for
+reasons which will presently be given, concentrated much energy upon
+convincing the working masses that unemployment is due solely to
+private property in land and capital. The Social-Democratic Federation
+has shown that "The existence of an unemployed class is an essential
+characteristic of the capitalist system."<a name="FNanchor_373_373" id="FNanchor_373_373"></a><a href="#Footnote_373_373" class="fnanchor">[373]</a> The Fabian Society in
+congress assembled has registered the declaration: "That the existence
+of a class of unemployed willing but unable to find work is a
+necessary result of the present industrial system, in which every
+improvement in machinery throws fresh masses of men out of work"
+[would improved machinery not have the same effect in the Socialist
+commonwealth?] "and the competition of capitalists for the market
+produces recurring commercial crises; that, consequently, unemployment
+can only be abolished with the complete abolition of the competitive
+system, and can only be limited in proportion as order and regulation
+are introduced into the present competitive confusion."<a name="FNanchor_374_374" id="FNanchor_374_374"></a><a href="#Footnote_374_374" class="fnanchor">[374]</a> Yet the
+same Fabian Society frankly admits in another pamphlet that "No plan
+has yet been devised by which the fluctuations of work could be
+entirely prevented, or safe and profitable employment found for those
+rendered idle by no fault of their own. It is easy enough to demand
+something should be done, and I entirely agree with <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[126]</a></span>agitating the
+subject; but something more than agitation is required. It is of no
+use urging remedies which can be demonstrably proved to be worse for
+the patient than the disease itself. I fear that if we were given full
+power to-morrow to deal with the unemployed all over England, we
+should find ourselves hard put to it how to solve the problem."<a name="FNanchor_375_375" id="FNanchor_375_375"></a><a href="#Footnote_375_375" class="fnanchor">[375]</a>
+At the last Conference (1907) of the Social-Democratic Federation the
+resolution was moved, "That this Conference reasserts its statement
+that unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and
+capital."<a name="FNanchor_376_376" id="FNanchor_376_376"></a><a href="#Footnote_376_376" class="fnanchor">[376]</a></p>
+
+<p>The emphatic statements contained in the foregoing declarations that
+unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and capital are
+absurd. If the private ownership of land and capital were the cause of
+unemployment, unemployment should be almost equally great in all
+civilised countries, because in all civilised countries land and
+capital are in private hands. Whilst in Great Britain unemployment is
+a fearful and permanent evil, it has been practically unknown during a
+long time in Germany, where there has been for many years so great a
+scarcity of labour that immigration is greater than emigration.<a name="FNanchor_377_377" id="FNanchor_377_377"></a><a href="#Footnote_377_377" class="fnanchor">[377]</a>
+Whilst in capitalist Great Britain employment is so bad that from
+200,000 to 300,000 people have to emigrate every year, employment in
+capitalist Germany has been excellent, and in the capitalist United
+States it has been so good that they have absorbed during a number of
+years almost 1,000,000 immigrants per year. These facts prove that
+private ownership of land and capital and over-production have nothing
+to do with unemployment, which is, as a rule, due not to
+over-production but to ill-balanced production, as has been <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[127]</a></span>proved on
+page 70 of this book. In the case of a country such as Great Britain,
+unemployment is due principally to the insufficiency and insecurity of
+her markets for her manufactured goods and to the decay of her
+agriculture.</p>
+
+<p>The various Socialist organisations have so constantly preached the
+doctrine that unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and
+capital that the Trade Unions have at last come to believe it. Owing
+to Socialist inspiration, the Trade Union Congresses have passed
+resolutions in favour of the nationalisation of land and of the other
+means of production at most of the meetings since 1888, and a
+Socialist weekly has been able to assert that "Every member of the
+Socialist Labour Party, either by Trade Union Congresses or by
+Independent Labour Party programme, is committed to the
+nationalisation of land and the instruments of production."<a name="FNanchor_378_378" id="FNanchor_378_378"></a><a href="#Footnote_378_378" class="fnanchor">[378]</a> To
+the delight of the Socialists, resolutions of the Trade Unions urging
+the nationalisation of all land and capital are becoming more and more
+emphatic. In the "Social Democrat" for October 1907 we read, under the
+heading "Trade Unionists and Unemployment," the following: "The
+resolution on unemployment passed at the Bath Trade Union Congress
+shows that the Trade Unionists are falling into line with Social
+Democrats on this question, and that they are beginning to see that
+Trade Unionism alone is no solution for this evil. After referring to
+the failure of the Unemployed Workmen Act, and the niggardly manner of
+doling out the grant of 200,000<i>l.</i>, the resolution goes on to say
+that 'This Congress, recognising that unemployment is now permanent in
+character in busy as in slack seasons, in summer and in winter, and is
+common to all trades and industries; also that this is due to industry
+being unorganised and carried on for private profit and is <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[128]</a></span>bound to
+continue, and indeed become more accentuated as the development of
+machinery and other wage-saving methods proceeds, calls the attention
+of the Government to its neglect of the interests of the people in not
+grappling with this social evil, and urges it to at once embark upon
+work of public utility with the object of (a) absorbing the present
+unemployed labour, (b) laying the foundation for a permanent
+reorganisation of industry upon a co-operative basis.'"<a name="FNanchor_379_379" id="FNanchor_379_379"></a><a href="#Footnote_379_379" class="fnanchor">[379]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Socialists have been anxious to convince the workers that
+unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and capital, and
+that all unemployed should be relieved by the State because "A really
+adequate system of helping the unemployed will completely alter the
+relation of power between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. It will
+make the proletariat masters in the factory. If the workers sell
+themselves to-day to the employer, if they allow themselves to be
+exploited and oppressed, it is the ghost of unemployment, the whip of
+hunger, which compels them to it. If, on the other hand, the worker is
+secure in his existence, even when not in work, then nothing is easier
+to him than to disable the capitalist. He no longer requires the
+capitalist, while the latter cannot conduct his business without him.
+When the matter has gone so far as that every employer, whenever a
+dispute breaks out, will get the worst of it and be forced to yield,
+the capitalists may certainly continue to be managers of the
+factories, but they will cease to be their masters and exploiters. But
+in that case the capitalists will recognise that they only carry the
+burdens and risks of the undertakings without receiving any advantage,
+and will be the first to give up capitalist production and insist on
+being bought out."<a name="FNanchor_380_380" id="FNanchor_380_380"></a><a href="#Footnote_380_380" class="fnanchor">[380]</a> "The right to work is a charter of industrial
+freedom, the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[129]</a></span>emancipation of labour from capitalist tyranny. Till it
+is obtained there can be neither social nor moral progress. When it is
+obtained all other things become possible."<a name="FNanchor_381_381" id="FNanchor_381_381"></a><a href="#Footnote_381_381" class="fnanchor">[381]</a></p>
+
+<p>The British Labour Party has drafted a Bill which, asserting the right
+to work, makes provision of work for the unemployed compulsory and
+enables the local authorities compulsorily to acquire land with a view
+of setting the unemployed to work.<a name="FNanchor_382_382" id="FNanchor_382_382"></a><a href="#Footnote_382_382" class="fnanchor">[382]</a> The Annual Conference of the
+Independent Labour Party of 1907, going a step further, demanded the
+erection of a national department for creating work and giving a
+living wage to the unemployed. It resolved:</p>
+
+<p>"This Conference welcomes the news that a Bill to secure the right to
+work is to be introduced into Parliament by the Labour party,
+expresses the hope that every effort will be made to secure its
+passing into law, and declares in favour of the establishment of a
+properly equipped and financed national department for dealing with
+the whole problem of unemployment on the basis of putting useful work
+at a living wage within the reach of every worker, and of training
+such as require to be taught in husbandry, and other forms of work
+upon the land."<a name="FNanchor_383_383" id="FNanchor_383_383"></a><a href="#Footnote_383_383" class="fnanchor">[383]</a></p>
+
+<p>There is a great danger in these proposals.<a name="FNanchor_384_384" id="FNanchor_384_384"></a><a href="#Footnote_384_384" class="fnanchor">[384]</a> Creating work for the
+unemployed may not cure, but may aggravate, the disease which springs
+not from private property in land and capital, but from an
+insufficient outlet for British manufactures. If the disease is
+wrongly treated, the unemployed may become an incubus which will
+cripple both workers and capitalists.</p>
+
+<p>A champion of the policy of <i>laisser faire</i> argues: <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[130]</a></span>"The State cannot
+make work, if by work is meant the doing of something that somebody
+wants done. It is of course true that the State can take on new
+functions, and do more of the work that is now left to private
+enterprise. But that would not make additional employment; it would
+only transfer employment from one set of men to another. When the
+State or the municipality, instead of seeking to do the thing that is
+wanted in the most economical and most efficient manner, deliberately
+picks out the least competent workmen and sets them to work on things
+that are not wanted, no new wealth is created, and the previous
+creation of wealth is diminished, because the taxpayer has been
+deprived of the means of employing as many persons as he would have
+employed. Artificial jobs may be created for the unemployed, who will
+be perfectly conscious that these jobs are artificial, and thus the
+independent and self-respecting workman will be arbitrarily deprived
+of his job. It cannot be too often repeated that the so-called 'right
+to work,' on which Socialists are fond of insisting, means in practice
+the right to deprive another man of his job."<a name="FNanchor_385_385" id="FNanchor_385_385"></a><a href="#Footnote_385_385" class="fnanchor">[385]</a> These arguments are
+fallacious. There is work such as the reclamation of the foreshore,
+draining of bogs, constructing canals, planting of forests, &amp;c., which
+are, as general experience shows, rather the province of the community
+than of the private individual. Unemployment may be relieved by the
+State and the local authorities if discretion be used. Proposals to
+create work of this kind for the genuine unemployed, and to provide
+compulsory labour for idlers and loafers, have been advanced by many
+Socialists and non-Socialists, and these proposals are worth
+considering and adopting.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_341_341" id="Footnote_341_341"></a><a href="#FNanchor_341_341"><span class="label">[341]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 94.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_342_342" id="Footnote_342_342"></a><a href="#FNanchor_342_342"><span class="label">[342]</span></a> Lafargue, <i>Right to Leisure</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_343_343" id="Footnote_343_343"></a><a href="#FNanchor_343_343"><span class="label">[343]</span></a> <i>The Socialist</i>, October 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_344_344" id="Footnote_344_344"></a><a href="#FNanchor_344_344"><span class="label">[344]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Evolution of the Fourth Estate</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_345_345" id="Footnote_345_345"></a><a href="#FNanchor_345_345"><span class="label">[345]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 145,</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_346_346" id="Footnote_346_346"></a><a href="#FNanchor_346_346"><span class="label">[346]</span></a> <i>Are you a Socialist?</i> p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_347_347" id="Footnote_347_347"></a><a href="#FNanchor_347_347"><span class="label">[347]</span></a> Washington, <i>A Nation of Slaves</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_348_348" id="Footnote_348_348"></a><a href="#FNanchor_348_348"><span class="label">[348]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 170.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_349_349" id="Footnote_349_349"></a><a href="#FNanchor_349_349"><span class="label">[349]</span></a> Morris, <i>A Factory as it Might Be</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_350_350" id="Footnote_350_350"></a><a href="#FNanchor_350_350"><span class="label">[350]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 170.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_351_351" id="Footnote_351_351"></a><a href="#FNanchor_351_351"><span class="label">[351]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Socialism and Slavery</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_352_352" id="Footnote_352_352"></a><a href="#FNanchor_352_352"><span class="label">[352]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 58.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_353_353" id="Footnote_353_353"></a><a href="#FNanchor_353_353"><span class="label">[353]</span></a> Guyot, <i>Pretensions of Socialism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_354_354" id="Footnote_354_354"></a><a href="#FNanchor_354_354"><span class="label">[354]</span></a> Kropotkin, <i>Conqu&ecirc;te du Pain</i>, p. 239.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_355_355" id="Footnote_355_355"></a><a href="#FNanchor_355_355"><span class="label">[355]</span></a> <i>Socialism Made Plain</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_356_356" id="Footnote_356_356"></a><a href="#FNanchor_356_356"><span class="label">[356]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_357_357" id="Footnote_357_357"></a><a href="#FNanchor_357_357"><span class="label">[357]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 159.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_358_358" id="Footnote_358_358"></a><a href="#FNanchor_358_358"><span class="label">[358]</span></a> Jaur&egrave;s, <i>Practical Socialism</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_359_359" id="Footnote_359_359"></a><a href="#FNanchor_359_359"><span class="label">[359]</span></a> <i>Socialism, For and Against</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_360_360" id="Footnote_360_360"></a><a href="#FNanchor_360_360"><span class="label">[360]</span></a> Washington, <i>Milk and Postage Stamps</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_361_361" id="Footnote_361_361"></a><a href="#FNanchor_361_361"><span class="label">[361]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_362_362" id="Footnote_362_362"></a><a href="#FNanchor_362_362"><span class="label">[362]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_363_363" id="Footnote_363_363"></a><a href="#FNanchor_363_363"><span class="label">[363]</span></a> A.P. Hazell, <i>Summary of Marx's "Capital,"</i> p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_364_364" id="Footnote_364_364"></a><a href="#FNanchor_364_364"><span class="label">[364]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_365_365" id="Footnote_365_365"></a><a href="#FNanchor_365_365"><span class="label">[365]</span></a> See Appendix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_366_366" id="Footnote_366_366"></a><a href="#FNanchor_366_366"><span class="label">[366]</span></a> Smart, <i>Socialism and the Budget</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_367_367" id="Footnote_367_367"></a><a href="#FNanchor_367_367"><span class="label">[367]</span></a> Councillor Glyde, <i>A Peep Behind the Scenes on a Board
+of Guardians</i>, p. 27.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_368_368" id="Footnote_368_368"></a><a href="#FNanchor_368_368"><span class="label">[368]</span></a> Councillor Glyde, <i>Britain's Disgrace</i>, pp. 31, 32.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_369_369" id="Footnote_369_369"></a><a href="#FNanchor_369_369"><span class="label">[369]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 170.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_370_370" id="Footnote_370_370"></a><a href="#FNanchor_370_370"><span class="label">[370]</span></a> Robert Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_371_371" id="Footnote_371_371"></a><a href="#FNanchor_371_371"><span class="label">[371]</span></a> Ben Tillett, <i>Trades Unionism and Socialism</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_372_372" id="Footnote_372_372"></a><a href="#FNanchor_372_372"><span class="label">[372]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 192.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_373_373" id="Footnote_373_373"></a><a href="#FNanchor_373_373"><span class="label">[373]</span></a> Quelch, <i>The Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_374_374" id="Footnote_374_374"></a><a href="#FNanchor_374_374"><span class="label">[374]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_375_375" id="Footnote_375_375"></a><a href="#FNanchor_375_375"><span class="label">[375]</span></a> Webb, <i>Socialism True and False</i>, pp. 8, 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_376_376" id="Footnote_376_376"></a><a href="#FNanchor_376_376"><span class="label">[376]</span></a> <i>Report of 21th Annual Conference, 1907,
+Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_377_377" id="Footnote_377_377"></a><a href="#FNanchor_377_377"><span class="label">[377]</span></a> Ellis Barker, <i>Modern Germany</i>, p. 546.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_378_378" id="Footnote_378_378"></a><a href="#FNanchor_378_378"><span class="label">[378]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, November 30, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_379_379" id="Footnote_379_379"></a><a href="#FNanchor_379_379"><span class="label">[379]</span></a> <i>Social Democrat</i>, October 1907, p. 580.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_380_380" id="Footnote_380_380"></a><a href="#FNanchor_380_380"><span class="label">[380]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_381_381" id="Footnote_381_381"></a><a href="#FNanchor_381_381"><span class="label">[381]</span></a> Russell Smart, <i>The Right to Work</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_382_382" id="Footnote_382_382"></a><a href="#FNanchor_382_382"><span class="label">[382]</span></a> A Bill to Provide Work through Public Authorities for
+Unemployed Persons.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_383_383" id="Footnote_383_383"></a><a href="#FNanchor_383_383"><span class="label">[383]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference,
+1907</i>, p. 54.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_384_384" id="Footnote_384_384"></a><a href="#FNanchor_384_384"><span class="label">[384]</span></a> See Thorold Rogers, <i>Work and Wages</i>, p. 557.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_385_385" id="Footnote_385_385"></a><a href="#FNanchor_385_385"><span class="label">[385]</span></a> Cox, <i>Socialism</i>, pp. 37, 39, 40.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_VII" id="CHAPTER_VII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[131]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER VII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS TRADE UNIONISTS AND CO-OPERATORS</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The British Socialists have during many years attacked and denounced
+the Trade Unionists and the Co-operators, firstly, because the trade
+unionists and co-operators are "capitalists," and therefore traitors
+to the Socialist cause; secondly, because Socialism unconditionally
+condemns providence and thrift among the working men, as will be seen
+in Chapter XXIII.</p>
+
+<p>Although the Socialists pretend that they denounce co-operation and
+thrift, and even abstinence from alcoholic drink, on economic and
+scientific grounds, their real reasons are political. Socialism can
+flourish only if the masses are dissatisfied. The Socialists are
+therefore little interested in improving the position of the worker,
+but very greatly in increasing his poverty, unhappiness, and
+discontent. Socialism is revolutionary, and the Socialists know that
+people who are well off are not revolutionists. For tactical reasons,
+therefore, the Socialists oppose and denounce thrift, co-operation,
+and abstinence, qualities which are found pre-eminently in
+co-operators and trade unionists.</p>
+
+<p>The trade unionists, the aristocracy of British labour, are too
+conservative, too temperate, too cautious, too prosperous, and too
+little revolutionary for the taste of Socialists. The Socialists
+complain: "The British trade union suffers from three fatal defects:
+(1) It is anti-revolutionary. It disavows the fact of the class
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[132]</a></span>struggle. It accepts the capitalist system as a permanency. The rules
+and constitutions of many unions explicitly refer to the 'just rights
+of the employer,' and those who do not set forth any such statement
+openly, admit it in actual practice. The capitalist class, as voiced
+by the capitalist press, recognise in these unions the bulwark of
+present-day society against the advance of Socialism. (2) The British
+trade union method of organisation is a complete negation of the
+solidarity of labour. Each trade or section of a trade has its own
+particular and autonomous organisation. Even trades which are most
+closely connected are divided into separate unions, each union
+ignoring the interest of the rest, making its own special contracts
+with the capitalists, and assisting them by remaining at work when
+their fellow-workers in a kindred trade are on strike. The most
+noteworthy example of this form of inter-trade treachery was offered
+in the case of the engineers' strike of 1897-8, when the Boilermakers'
+Society by remaining at work were the means of defeating the
+Amalgamated Society of Engineers and of forcing them to return to work
+on the masters' terms. (3) The British trade union refuses to admit to
+its ranks those teeming millions of workers whom it terms
+'unskilled.'"<a name="FNanchor_386_386" id="FNanchor_386_386"></a><a href="#Footnote_386_386" class="fnanchor">[386]</a></p>
+
+<p>Other Socialists complain: "Trade unionism recognises the present
+system of society, justifies capitalism, and defends wage-slavery, and
+only seeks to soften the tyranny of the one and assuage the evils of
+the other. Social Democracy aims at destroying the whole system."<a name="FNanchor_387_387" id="FNanchor_387_387"></a><a href="#Footnote_387_387" class="fnanchor">[387]</a>
+"We are never allowed to forget the splendid incomes earned by these
+aristocrats of labour, a mere tenth of the whole labour class. The
+trade unionist can usually only raise himself on the bodies of his
+less fortunate comrades."<a name="FNanchor_388_388" id="FNanchor_388_388"></a><a href="#Footnote_388_388" class="fnanchor">[388]</a> "The old-fashioned policy of the
+English trade unions <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[133]</a></span>has made them <i>guilds of privileged</i>, rather
+than fighting representatives of their class."<a name="FNanchor_389_389" id="FNanchor_389_389"></a><a href="#Footnote_389_389" class="fnanchor">[389]</a></p>
+
+<p>Similar complaints are raised against the co-operators. "Co-operation,
+though regarded by the individual trader as an enemy, does not
+necessarily enter into conflict with the capitalist at all. Indeed, so
+far as it transforms workmen into shareholders, it forms a bulwark for
+capitalism, the same as the creation of small landholders or any other
+class of small proprietors would do."<a name="FNanchor_390_390" id="FNanchor_390_390"></a><a href="#Footnote_390_390" class="fnanchor">[390]</a> "At present the
+co-operative societies in England are very apathetic with regard to
+political affairs."<a name="FNanchor_391_391" id="FNanchor_391_391"></a><a href="#Footnote_391_391" class="fnanchor">[391]</a> "In spite of abstract resolutions, our trade
+unionists are devoted to the wages system; still our co-operators
+yearn after dividends; still the mass of our producers admire the men
+who rise upon their shoulders to place and pay. The twin curses of
+democracy, slavishness and jealousy, are curiously blended in their
+views of social and political life. They envy capacity; they bow down
+before successful blackguardism."<a name="FNanchor_392_392" id="FNanchor_392_392"></a><a href="#Footnote_392_392" class="fnanchor">[392]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists have called for the unification of all the trades
+unions, arguing "Union has failed to adapt itself to changed
+conditions. Just as budding industrial development called into being
+the shop union, and further industrial expansion meant development of
+the union to the local and then the national organisation, so the
+exigencies of our time demand a working-class union&mdash;one union, not
+eleven hundred, as now."<a name="FNanchor_393_393" id="FNanchor_393_393"></a><a href="#Footnote_393_393" class="fnanchor">[393]</a> Others have bespattered the unions with
+insults, and some do so still. A very violent Socialist organ recently
+wrote: "Our trade union leaders are not so corrupt as those of
+America? Are they not? As a matter of fact, the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[134]</a></span>corruption is tenfold
+greater. The difference is that here it is legalised and respectable.
+In America the corruption takes the form of a wad of dollar notes
+pushed into the fakir's hands in a dark corner. In this country our
+trade union leaders are openly corrupted in the face of day by
+positions on conciliation boards, Justiceships of the Peace, Cabinet
+positions" [this is a hit at Mr. John Burns], "and well-paid jobs in
+the Labour Department of the Board of Trade. Are Shackleton, Bell, and
+Barnes honester men than Gompers, Mitchell, and Tobin? As Dr. Johnson
+very coarsely expressed it: 'It is difficult to settle the question of
+precedence between a bug and a louse.'"<a name="FNanchor_394_394" id="FNanchor_394_394"></a><a href="#Footnote_394_394" class="fnanchor">[394]</a></p>
+
+<p>To the more far-sighted Socialists the folly of attacking the powerful
+trade unions, with their 2,000,000 members, was perfectly clear. One
+of the Socialist leaders wrote: "Of all the blind, fatuous policies in
+the world, that of decrying trades unionism by professing Socialists
+is about the worst; and the next worst thing is the trades unionist
+abusing Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_395_395" id="FNanchor_395_395"></a><a href="#Footnote_395_395" class="fnanchor">[395]</a> Some Socialists recommended changing the
+policy of denunciation for a wiser one: "We have to <i>convert</i> the
+trade unions, not to <i>antagonise</i> them"<a name="FNanchor_396_396" id="FNanchor_396_396"></a><a href="#Footnote_396_396" class="fnanchor">[396]</a>; and their conversion was
+thought to be all the more easy because, to quote Ben Tillett, "The
+whole of the trades union movement has been tinged with Socialism;
+unconsciously the guides of the working classes have always marched
+towards the goal of Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_397_397" id="FNanchor_397_397"></a><a href="#Footnote_397_397" class="fnanchor">[397]</a></p>
+
+<p>With this object in view the trade unionists were urged to reform
+their tactics, to abandon the economic struggle in the form of
+strikes, and to enter upon the more efficacious political struggle
+with the employers of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[135]</a></span>labour in the House of Commons. "To go on
+following the old beaten paths of trade unionism is simply to go on
+exhausting the possibilities of error for an indefinite period. If the
+new unions are simply to play the part of regulators of wages, as
+trade and prices rise and fall, they will be of very slight advantage
+to the workers compared with what they might accomplish if they took a
+broader view of their opportunities and their duties. What they have
+to do, and that now, is to use the power which organisation gives them
+to get control of the political machinery of the country and use it
+for the advancement of their class. By this means they could, if they
+chose, achieve as much in a year or two as would be gained in a
+century by the old methods of trade agitation and strikes."<a name="FNanchor_398_398" id="FNanchor_398_398"></a><a href="#Footnote_398_398" class="fnanchor">[398]</a> "If
+the Labour party had a tithe of the money that the unions have spent
+upon getting thrashed and starved and defrauded, it would be a party
+to wonder at and be proud of. The miners of Yorkshire have spent
+212,000<i>l.</i> on six strikes&mdash;all of which have been lost. Do you call
+this industrial warfare? Insanity and suicide&mdash;that is what it is. The
+engineers spent three-quarters of a million on the great lock-out.
+That is a sum in itself, the ransom of all the workers from the bonds
+of wage-slavery. What can the engineers show for their money to-day?
+Ask them! We could capture the British Parliament with that sum <i>plus</i>
+a little brains and courage."<a name="FNanchor_399_399" id="FNanchor_399_399"></a><a href="#Footnote_399_399" class="fnanchor">[399]</a> The Fabian Society has issued
+numerous pamphlets in which it has shown how the position of the
+workers might be improved, and in these it has at every opportunity
+urged upon every worker to join a union, and has urged upon the trade
+unions to better the position of the workers by relying upon political
+action.<a name="FNanchor_400_400" id="FNanchor_400_400"></a><a href="#Footnote_400_400" class="fnanchor">[400]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[136]</a></span>In pursuance of this policy the railway employees were told by the
+Socialists, when the difference between the British railway companies
+and their workers had been arranged: "You men must cling tight to the
+union and keep fostering the discontent of your fellows, not only with
+the sectional wrongs which affect you personally, but with the brutal
+system of competition of which your own wrongs are but one fractional
+consequence. Stick to the Labour party. You have two representatives
+in Parliament. Run some more. You need not bother now to build up a
+strike fund. Spend the money in politics. The more men you get in the
+House, the better chance you will have of convincing a Government
+arbitrator of the justice of your claims."<a name="FNanchor_401_401" id="FNanchor_401_401"></a><a href="#Footnote_401_401" class="fnanchor">[401]</a></p>
+
+<p>Wishing to secure the support of the trade unionists and the
+co-operators, the Socialists began to preach that there was no
+antagonism between Socialists, trade unionists, and co-operators, and
+to stretch out a hand towards them. "Socialist influence makes its way
+in the union. The trade unions generally must sooner or later
+become&mdash;they already in some instances are to-day&mdash;part and parcel of
+the working-class Socialist movement, or must cease to exist as class
+organisations. Co-operation is in its inception Socialist. That is to
+say, that all co-operation implies co-operative effort and social
+union."<a name="FNanchor_402_402" id="FNanchor_402_402"></a><a href="#Footnote_402_402" class="fnanchor">[402]</a> Another Socialist writer said: "I am sorry that some
+Socialists used to cry down the co-operative movement. I know it has
+some serious defects, but it has taught the workers of this country
+what they can do when they choose. If any power could induce trade
+unionists, co-operators, and Socialists to unite, a co-operative
+commonwealth would <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[137]</a></span>be flourishing in this country before the rich and
+educated classes had rubbed open their drowsy eyes."<a name="FNanchor_403_403" id="FNanchor_403_403"></a><a href="#Footnote_403_403" class="fnanchor">[403]</a></p>
+
+<p>The recommendations which the Socialists addressed to the trade
+unionists to increase their political power, and to improve their
+economic position by the use of their political power, became louder
+and louder. They were told that the capitalists were the enemies of
+both trade unionists and Socialists, and that co-operation would be of
+the greatest benefit to both bodies. The Socialist group of the London
+Society of Compositors, for instance, argued:</p>
+
+<p>"It is unfortunate that after some dozen years or more of Socialist
+propaganda there should still be considerable bitterness existing
+between trade unionists and Socialists. The cause of the unpopularity
+of the Socialists was not due to any desire on their part to irritate
+trade unionists, but arose out of the stupid prejudices of the
+spokesmen and leaders of the trade unionists themselves. Socialists
+are staunch trade unionists. The New trade unionism is evidence of
+this, for Socialists are responsible for calling it into existence.
+The movement which is now gaining ground in favour of federation among
+trade unionists generally, is one of Socialist origin. Trade unionists
+look solely to unionism to maintain their miserable standard of
+living, ignorant of the economic laws working against them. Socialists
+accept unionism as only one method to maintain their present standard
+of comfort.</p>
+
+<p>"Both Socialists and trade unionists have a common enemy, a common
+want, and a common economic force which continually and relentlessly
+drives them in one direction. Both are driven to defend attacks
+against their standard of living by the capitalist, and the one point
+of agreement between Socialists and trade unionists, therefore, is
+that they both desire to maintain and increase their present standard
+of living. Trade unionists enter a union <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[138]</a></span>to resist the exactions of
+the capitalists, and to baulk attempts on their part to reduce wages.
+Socialists enter a union for precisely the same reason. If they would
+view Parliamentary action from the standpoint of the collective
+welfare of the people, they would soon realise its far-reaching
+effects. A legal forty-eight hour working week, for instance, would
+bring benefit to all and raise the standard of all by giving more
+leisure; thereby affording workers an opportunity of obtaining fresh
+air and following artistic and intellectual pursuits.</p>
+
+<p>"One of the strongest agents which work in favour of the capitalists
+is the necessity of the workers to find food and clothing for their
+families. This evil can be met by the State proposal which is now
+making such headway in England&mdash;namely, Free Maintenance for Children.
+The old-fashioned prejudices, fostered by the capitalists and their
+hangers-on, that it is degrading to accept anything from the State, is
+fast dying out in the face of free education, free libraries, free
+maintenance for all sickened with infectious fevers. Free maintenance
+for children would be a tax on that surplus wealth which the
+capitalists and the aristocracy share between them. To the worker,
+free maintenance for his children would be equivalent to an additional
+income. His standard of living would rise. No doubt the capitalist
+would reduce his wages as much as possible, but the worker would then
+be able to fight him on more equal terms. His children being well
+cared for, he would be able to hold out against the capitalist for an
+indefinite period.</p>
+
+<p>"The Housing Question is also worthy of attention. Trade unionism
+should require the State to erect buildings to be let at a sum which
+would cover cost of construction and maintenance alone. This would
+give them a stationary rent, and when locked out by their employers,
+they, as unemployed workers, would not be so liable to be turned into
+the street.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[139]</a></span>"The workers, unconscious of economic development, unfortunately side
+with one political party or the other, not seeing that the one must
+inevitably be as antagonistic to their interests as the other. Tory
+and Liberal politically represent two classes, who divide the spoils
+between them. One is connected by tradition with the soil, the other
+with commerce. When they have a quarrel, it is as between kites and
+crows for the possession of prey. To assert that a Tory is better than
+a Liberal, or a Liberal better than a Tory, is like affirming that one
+exploiter is less a thief than another. Until trade unionists form
+themselves into an independent party, there can politically be no
+common agreement between them and Socialists, because, while they
+support the capitalist class they are placing power into the hands of
+the exploiting class, who is the common enemy. Co-operation between
+Socialists and trade unionists should be adopted whenever possible,
+and, when occasion offers, an alliance should be entered into for
+common purposes. In America a large section of trade unionists have
+already recognised that the class war is inevitable under the present
+system of exploitation, and they have entered into an active alliance
+with the Socialist party. It is to be hoped that the trade unions of
+Great Britain will ere long see their way to follow the example set by
+their American brethren in the United States."<a name="FNanchor_404_404" id="FNanchor_404_404"></a><a href="#Footnote_404_404" class="fnanchor">[404]</a></p>
+
+<p>Another writer urged: "Is it not time that we combined and strove for
+something higher, wider, and more far-reaching? Let the trade
+unionists unite, combine, federate; not for constantly squabbling with
+the capitalist over the spoil which the workers alone create, but to
+secure for the latter, organised, the control of their own tools and
+raw materials&mdash;of the mines, the railways, the factories, the
+shipping, the land&mdash;of all those things <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[140]</a></span>which only have value through
+their labour. Let the co-operators co-operate with each other, with
+trade unionists, and Social Democrats for the same object. Let us all
+agitate, educate, and organise to form the workers of the world into a
+gigantic Trade Union, an International Co-operation, a
+Social-Democratic Commonwealth."<a name="FNanchor_405_405" id="FNanchor_405_405"></a><a href="#Footnote_405_405" class="fnanchor">[405]</a></p>
+
+<p>Since the time when these words were written attempts have constantly
+been made by the Socialists to co-operate with the unionists, and, at
+least outwardly, their relations have become intimate. Many Socialists
+have high hopes for a united Socialist Labour party. At a recent
+conference of the Social-Democratic Federation the chairman declared,
+in his opening address: "There can be but one Independent Labour
+Party, and there ought to be a united Socialist party. Not many years
+will pass before the new Labour party will join the Socialist
+movement, but in the meantime everything seems ripening for a united
+Socialist party, consolidating both forces and funds, preventing
+overlapping and removing friction. Never were the times so favourable
+to Socialism. In spite of the boycott, the misrepresentation, the
+influence of the temporal powers against us, the word Socialism is no
+longer unknown or feared. In the workshop, the mine, the train, or the
+tram, men are eagerly discussing Socialism. The workers need grumble
+of their chains no longer; they can fling them off at will; for they,
+and they alone, hold the keys of freedom. This poor blind Samson is
+waking up and groping his way; Socialists must be ready to lead
+him."<a name="FNanchor_406_406" id="FNanchor_406_406"></a><a href="#Footnote_406_406" class="fnanchor">[406]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialism has of late years strongly permeated the unions. Will it
+succeed in capturing them? The Socialists are very optimistic on that
+point. "The <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[141]</a></span>outlook is full of promise for the political Labour
+movement. It only requires the adoption of a candidate by the united
+local societies to turn every trade union institute or office, miners'
+lodge and branch meeting-room into a committee-room, and when the call
+is made by the Parliamentary group there will be plenty of voluntary
+workers. The great fact stands out prominently: Labour is moving; and
+that fact points to stirring times and a new phase in the history of
+the nation."<a name="FNanchor_407_407" id="FNanchor_407_407"></a><a href="#Footnote_407_407" class="fnanchor">[407]</a></p>
+
+<p>The character of the trade unions has undoubtedly been greatly changed
+through Socialist agitation. The trade unionist has almost ceased to
+be an individualist. "The modern trade unionist is out for a political
+revolution. He has dismissed, as an obsolete absurdity, the idea of
+paying for his benefits, pensions, sick-pay, unemployed relief, out of
+his union subscriptions. He intends to combine with his fellows of all
+trades in a demand for Parliamentary legislation which will provide
+these benefits out of national funds, mainly by way of a graduated
+income-tax. So he demands old-age pensions and an Unemployed Act. He
+has given up the tedious task of bargaining with his master for higher
+wages and shorter hours; he intends to compel him by the more drastic
+method of an eight-hour day and a minimum wage and State Arbitration
+Act."<a name="FNanchor_408_408" id="FNanchor_408_408"></a><a href="#Footnote_408_408" class="fnanchor">[408]</a> There is much truth in this description. As the real nature
+of the relations between the trades unions and the Socialists is known
+to only a few, the following documents should be of great interest:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="block">
+<p>"In consequence of a decision of the International Socialist Bureau
+(June 9, 1907), its secretary sent a circular to the affiliated
+parties in order to obtain from them official notes on the relations
+between the political Parties and trade unions of their country, and
+he received <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[142]</a></span>the following replies from the Social-Democratic
+Federation, the Labour party, and the Independent Labour Party:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>"'Although from its formation in March 1881 the Social-Democratic
+Federation has strongly opposed the abstention of the older trade
+unions from politics, and has still more strongly objected to the very
+close alliance which some of its leading members have made with the
+capitalist Liberal party, resulting in high office and even Cabinet
+rank'" [another hit at Mr. John Burns] "'for those who have thus
+deliberately betrayed the interests of their fellows and supporters of
+the working class; nevertheless, we have never at any time failed to
+help in every way possible, personally and pecuniarily, every strike
+which has taken place since 1881 (even in spite of our doubting the
+value of the mere strike as a weapon against organised capitalism),
+and our organisation has invariably agitated in favour of every
+Parliamentary measure accepted by the trade unions which could at all
+help the trade unionists and the workers at large. Our relations with
+the trade unions may therefore be described as friendly whenever they
+take action against capitalism, and appreciative of their increasing
+tendency towards Socialism. We always recommend all workers to join
+the trade union of their trade. No Socialist propaganda is officially
+carried on by the trade unions, but as quite 75 per cent. of the
+members of the Social-Democratic Federation are also trade unionists
+in their respective trades, by their agency Socialist thought is
+steadily permeating the ranks of trade unionism. As also the older
+leaders, brought up entirely in the bourgeois school of thought and
+action, die or are superannuated, there can be no doubt whatever that
+they will be succeeded by Socialists, and in fact they are being so
+replaced at the present time. Trade union Socialist leaders, of
+course, will then use the trade union organisation <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[143]</a></span>to spread
+Socialism. So far as they have been elected to executive office, they
+do this even now.&mdash;<span class="sc">H.W. Lee</span>, Secretary.'</p>
+
+<p>"'The Labour party is a federation of Socialist societies and trade
+union organisations. Trade unions are directly affiliated, their
+membership forming, together with the membership of the Socialist
+organisations, the membership of the Labour party. In some cases
+Socialist propaganda is conducted by the trade unions, several of them
+embracing the Socialist basis in their rules.&mdash;<span class="sc">J.S.
+Middleton</span>, for <span class="sc">J. Ramsay Macdonald</span>.'</p>
+
+<p>"'The Independent Labour Party is affiliated to the Labour party,
+which is a federation of trade unions, co-operative societies, and
+Socialist societies, for political action. The Independent Labour
+Party consists of individual members, and not of federated
+organisations. Our membership is only open to Socialists individually.
+Our association with the trade unions comes through the Labour party,
+with which both we and they are affiliated. The trade unions of Great
+Britain do not carry on any specific Socialist propaganda among their
+members, although several of the unions state in their constitution
+that they believe in Socialism. Many Socialist speeches are made from
+trade union platforms and demonstrations held under the auspices of
+trade unions.&mdash;<span class="sc">Francis Johnson</span>, Secretary.'"<a name="FNanchor_409_409" id="FNanchor_409_409"></a><a href="#Footnote_409_409" class="fnanchor">[409]</a></p>
+</div>
+
+<p>The foregoing three letters are most interesting and most important,
+and they should be carefully read because they prove that the forces
+of trade unionism and Socialism are commingling, and that the trade
+unionists may reckon upon the support of the Socialists whenever they
+come into conflict with capitalists. Although in constructive policy
+Socialism and trade unionism are as yet things apart, they possess a
+common working basis as soon as trouble occurs between capital and
+labour.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[144]</a></span>To increase the intimacy between them and the representatives of
+labour pure and simple, and to accustom them to co-operation, the
+Socialist cannot do anything better than to cause conflicts to arise
+between capital and labour. Therefore it is only natural that the
+Socialists will urge the trade unionists to make great, and ever
+greater, demands upon capital; that every concession will only be
+considered as a stepping-stone to a further concession. Every conflict
+between capital and labour, everything that will increase the
+dissatisfaction of the workers, will serve the Socialists, because it
+will cause the workers to believe in the doctrine of the Iron Law of
+Wages, in the Law of Increasing Misery, and in the promised Socialist
+paradise. Therefore the Socialists will do all they can to embitter
+the relations between capital and labour, and to bring about strikes.
+For instance, at the time when, in the autumn of 1907, the differences
+between the British railway companies and the men were acute,
+practically the whole Socialist press urged the railway servants to
+declare a strike, and the settlement of the difficulty by Mr. Lloyd
+George was greeted with derision and regret. Mr. Bell, who had
+accepted the settlement, was treated with contempt, and the result of
+the Railway Conference was declared to be the Sedan of the British
+trade union movement.<a name="FNanchor_410_410" id="FNanchor_410_410"></a><a href="#Footnote_410_410" class="fnanchor">[410]</a></p>
+
+<p>Owing to the persistent agitation of the Socialists, the trade unions
+are becoming permeated with Socialism. Of late years there have been
+few great strikes in Great Britain, but, unless the relations between
+Socialists and trade unionists alter, it seems likely that great and
+violent industrial disputes will occur in the near future.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_386_386" id="Footnote_386_386"></a><a href="#FNanchor_386_386"><span class="label">[386]</span></a> <i>S.L.P. Bulletin No. 2, 1907.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_387_387" id="Footnote_387_387"></a><a href="#FNanchor_387_387"><span class="label">[387]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Trade Unionism</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_388_388" id="Footnote_388_388"></a><a href="#FNanchor_388_388"><span class="label">[388]</span></a> <i>English Progress towards Social Democracy</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_389_389" id="Footnote_389_389"></a><a href="#FNanchor_389_389"><span class="label">[389]</span></a> <i>S.L.P. Bulletin No. 1, May 1907.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_390_390" id="Footnote_390_390"></a><a href="#FNanchor_390_390"><span class="label">[390]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Trade Unionism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_391_391" id="Footnote_391_391"></a><a href="#FNanchor_391_391"><span class="label">[391]</span></a> John Penny, <i>The Political Labour Movement</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_392_392" id="Footnote_392_392"></a><a href="#FNanchor_392_392"><span class="label">[392]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Darkness and Dawn of May Day, 1907</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_393_393" id="Footnote_393_393"></a><a href="#FNanchor_393_393"><span class="label">[393]</span></a> J. O'Connor Kessack, <i>The Capitalist Wilderness and the
+Way Out</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_394_394" id="Footnote_394_394"></a><a href="#FNanchor_394_394"><span class="label">[394]</span></a> <i>S.L.P. Bulletin No. 2.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_395_395" id="Footnote_395_395"></a><a href="#FNanchor_395_395"><span class="label">[395]</span></a> Ben Tillett, <i>Trades Unionism and Socialism</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_396_396" id="Footnote_396_396"></a><a href="#FNanchor_396_396"><span class="label">[396]</span></a> Quelch in <i>The Socialist</i>, November 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_397_397" id="Footnote_397_397"></a><a href="#FNanchor_397_397"><span class="label">[397]</span></a> Ben Tillett, <i>Trades Unionism and Socialism</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_398_398" id="Footnote_398_398"></a><a href="#FNanchor_398_398"><span class="label">[398]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Trade Unionism</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_399_399" id="Footnote_399_399"></a><a href="#FNanchor_399_399"><span class="label">[399]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, November 29, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_400_400" id="Footnote_400_400"></a><a href="#FNanchor_400_400"><span class="label">[400]</span></a> <i>The Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, What it Means
+and How to Make Use of it</i>; <i>How Trade Unions Benefit Workmen</i>; <i>Eight
+Hours by Law: A Practical Solution</i>; <i>Cottage Plans and Common Sense</i>;
+<i>Houses for the People</i>; <i>The Case for a Legal Minimum Wage</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_401_401" id="Footnote_401_401"></a><a href="#FNanchor_401_401"><span class="label">[401]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, November 15, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_402_402" id="Footnote_402_402"></a><a href="#FNanchor_402_402"><span class="label">[402]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 40.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_403_403" id="Footnote_403_403"></a><a href="#FNanchor_403_403"><span class="label">[403]</span></a> Dennis Hird, <i>From Brute to Brother</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_404_404" id="Footnote_404_404"></a><a href="#FNanchor_404_404"><span class="label">[404]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Trade Unionism: Wherein do they Differ?</i>
+pp. 2-8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_405_405" id="Footnote_405_405"></a><a href="#FNanchor_405_405"><span class="label">[405]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Trade Unionism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_406_406" id="Footnote_406_406"></a><a href="#FNanchor_406_406"><span class="label">[406]</span></a> Opening Address, Chairman Hartley at Annual Conference,
+<i>Social-Democratic Federation Annual Report, 1906</i>, pp. 3, 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_407_407" id="Footnote_407_407"></a><a href="#FNanchor_407_407"><span class="label">[407]</span></a> John Penny, <i>The Political Labour Movement</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_408_408" id="Footnote_408_408"></a><a href="#FNanchor_408_408"><span class="label">[408]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, November 30, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_409_409" id="Footnote_409_409"></a><a href="#FNanchor_409_409"><span class="label">[409]</span></a> <i>Social Democrat</i>, September 1907, pp. 548, 549.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_410_410" id="Footnote_410_410"></a><a href="#FNanchor_410_410"><span class="label">[410]</span></a> See the <i>Labour Leader</i>, <i>Clarion</i>, <i>Justice</i>,
+<i>Socialist Standard</i>, <i>Socialist</i>, &amp;c., for November 1907.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_VIII" id="CHAPTER_VIII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[145]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER VIII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING LAND AND THE LANDLORDS</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">British Socialists, as we have learned in Chapter IV.,<a name="FNanchor_411_411" id="FNanchor_411_411"></a><a href="#Footnote_411_411" class="fnanchor">[411]</a> adopting
+the celebrated formula of Proudhon, have proclaimed "Property is
+theft," and they are of opinion that property in land is a
+particularly heinous form of theft. Therefore they demand the
+restitution of the land to the people, not as a matter of expediency
+but as a matter of right. "Man has a right only to what his labour
+makes. No man 'makes' the land."<a name="FNanchor_412_412" id="FNanchor_412_412"></a><a href="#Footnote_412_412" class="fnanchor">[412]</a> "Land is the gift of Nature. It
+is not made by man. Now, if a man has a right to nothing but that
+which he has himself made, no man can have a right to the land, for no
+man made it."<a name="FNanchor_413_413" id="FNanchor_413_413"></a><a href="#Footnote_413_413" class="fnanchor">[413]</a> "The land belongs by inalienable right not to any
+body of individuals but to all."<a name="FNanchor_414_414" id="FNanchor_414_414"></a><a href="#Footnote_414_414" class="fnanchor">[414]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">O high cliffs looking heavenward,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">O valleys green and fair.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Sea cliffs that seem to gird and guard<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Our island once so dear,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">In vain your beauty now ye spread,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">For we are numbered with the dead;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">A robber band has seized the land,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And we are exiles here.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">The ploughman ploughs, the sower sows.<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The reaper reaps the ear;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The woodman to the forest goes<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Before the day grows clear,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">But of our toil no fruit we see;<br /></span><span class='pn'><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[146]</a></span>
+<span class="i0">The harvest's not for you and me:<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">A robber band has seized the land,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And we are exiles here.<a name="FNanchor_415_415" id="FNanchor_415_415"></a><a href="#Footnote_415_415" class="fnanchor">[415]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Appealing to the passions, hatred, and greed of their followers, and
+relying on their credulity, Socialist leaders proclaim not only that
+the landlords are useless, but also that the people will have the land
+rent free as soon as the present owners have been expropriated. "The
+landlord, <i>qua</i> landlord, performs no function in the economy of
+industry or of food production. He is a rent-receiver; that, and
+nothing more. Were the landlord to be abolished, the soil and the
+people who till it would still remain, and the disappearance of the
+landowner would pass almost unnoticed."<a name="FNanchor_416_416" id="FNanchor_416_416"></a><a href="#Footnote_416_416" class="fnanchor">[416]</a> "Rent is brigandage
+reduced to a system. So long as the English people are content to be
+tenants-at-will on their own soil, and to pay for the privilege, they
+will remain virtually slaves."<a name="FNanchor_417_417" id="FNanchor_417_417"></a><a href="#Footnote_417_417" class="fnanchor">[417]</a> "The tenant earns the rent. The
+landlord spends it. If the tenant had not to pay the rent he could
+spend it himself, and so it would get spent, and get spent by the man
+who earns it and has the best right to spend it."<a name="FNanchor_418_418" id="FNanchor_418_418"></a><a href="#Footnote_418_418" class="fnanchor">[418]</a></p>
+
+<p>Whilst some Socialist agitators are unscrupulous enough to make their
+followers believe that in the Socialist State they may have land for
+the asking, others are so unkind as to destroy that pleasing illusion.
+For instance, we learn from a Fabian pamphlet, "A Socialist State or
+municipality will charge the full economic rent for the use of its
+land and dwellings, and apply that rent to the common purposes of the
+community."<a name="FNanchor_419_419" id="FNanchor_419_419"></a><a href="#Footnote_419_419" class="fnanchor">[419]</a> Another Socialist authority very pertinently remarks:
+"It is of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[147]</a></span>not the least consequence to the person who rents the land
+whether he pays the rent for it to an individual or whether he Pays it
+to the State,"<a name="FNanchor_420_420" id="FNanchor_420_420"></a><a href="#Footnote_420_420" class="fnanchor">[420]</a> and therefore it is clear that statements such as
+"If the tenant had not to pay the rent he could spend it himself," are
+merely meant to deceive the simple. Tenants, instead of paying their
+rent to a human landlord, would have to pay it to an impersonal State
+or municipality, and the latter might prove as grasping and as
+heartless as rating committees are now.</p>
+
+<p>Others base their demand for the spoliation of landlords upon the
+Bible and upon the ideal of a "Divine brotherhood," forgetting that
+the Bible contains a commandment "Thou shalt not steal," as well as
+many warnings against lying, deceit, cant, and covetousness. One of
+the champion Bible-Socialists, for instance, writes: "If all men are
+brothers, as Christ undoubtedly taught, then the land, the source of
+wealth, the means by which men can earn their livelihood, should not
+be the property of any set of individuals, but should belong to the
+whole community. The fact of a man being born into the world gives him
+the divine right to the opportunity of earning his living, and that
+right cannot be enjoyed so long as there is a single man on earth
+deprived of access to the land from which to earn his bread. When the
+spirit of brotherhood prevails, it will be a simple and a natural
+thing to arrange that these things shall be used not in the interests
+of the few, but for the common good. There are innumerable signs that
+the hearts and minds of men are now turning in this direction, and
+that they are coming to see that the only just and permanent
+arrangement is the divine solution of working on the basis of
+universal brotherhood."<a name="FNanchor_421_421" id="FNanchor_421_421"></a><a href="#Footnote_421_421" class="fnanchor">[421]</a> There is a fraternity among Sicilian
+bandits. The "Divine <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[148]</a></span>brotherhood" of the writer would be based on
+robbery, and have robbery as its object.</p>
+
+<p>Others demand the confiscation of all land by relying upon
+misrepresentation: "If the injustice of the land monopoly is great in
+the country, by robbing the grower of his improvements or scaring him
+from making any, by robbing the nation of its own legitimate
+independent food supply, and by laying waste vast tracts of the
+surface, the injustice is even greater in the towns, if only by reason
+of the greater numbers whose interests are now involved: (1) by
+flooding the town labour markets with surplus labourers, and so&mdash;by
+their competition between each other for jobs of any sort at any
+terms, rather than starve&mdash;keeping wages down at the privation point;
+(2) by robbing the town workers of that proper and legitimate home
+market which a flourishing and proportionately numerous agricultural
+population would afford; (3) by the bloated rentals in cities, only
+made possible by driving and crowding the people into our unnaturally
+swollen centres; and (4) by the continuous re-investment of those
+enormous rent extortions in all those secondary monopolies of transit,
+finance, and business generally, which can only arise from the primary
+monopoly of the soil, and which complete this devil's chain of the
+subjection of labour and the dependence of the community."<a name="FNanchor_422_422" id="FNanchor_422_422"></a><a href="#Footnote_422_422" class="fnanchor">[422]</a></p>
+
+<p>The complaints that land is going out of cultivation, that the British
+home market has been spoiled, and that towns are overgrown and
+overcrowded are unfortunately only too well justified, but these
+phenomena are not due to private property in land. Private property in
+land is universal, but the desertion of the country and overcrowding
+in towns are not universal. These evils are to be found chiefly in
+Great Britain, because British economic policy, whilst fostering trade
+and the manufacturing industries, has deliberately sacrificed to them
+the rural industries. That <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[149]</a></span>fact is acknowledged by many Socialists,
+as will be seen in Chapter XXL., "Some Socialist's Views on Free Trade
+and Protection."</p>
+
+<p>The question now arises: How do the Socialists propose to deal with
+the land and the owners of land? Mr. Blatchford informs us: "The
+titled robbers of England have always done their robberies in a legal
+manner. We propose to enforce their cessation in a legal manner. We
+respect the law, and mean to use it. We are not mere brigands. We are
+the new police; our duty is to 'arrest the rogues and dastards'; our
+motto is, 'The law giveth and the law taketh away, blessed be the name
+of the law.'"<a name="FNanchor_423_423" id="FNanchor_423_423"></a><a href="#Footnote_423_423" class="fnanchor">[423]</a> A leading Christian-Socialist clergyman tells us
+"As for compensation, from the point of view of the highest Christian
+morality, it is the landlords who should compensate the people, not
+the people the landlords. But practically if you carry out this reform
+by taxation, no compensation would be necessary or even
+possible."<a name="FNanchor_424_424" id="FNanchor_424_424"></a><a href="#Footnote_424_424" class="fnanchor">[424]</a> Mines and mine-owners are to be treated in the same
+way as land and land-owners. "The minerals should be at once taken
+over without compensation; the present owners should think themselves
+well off if they escape paying compensation for previous robbery of
+the people."<a name="FNanchor_425_425" id="FNanchor_425_425"></a><a href="#Footnote_425_425" class="fnanchor">[425]</a> Views such as those expressed in the foregoing are
+held not only by some unscrupulous agitators. At the last Annual
+Conference of the Independent Labour Party the following resolution
+was carried: "This Conference, being of opinion that the high price of
+coal is a serious menace to the nation, and bears extremely hard upon
+householders and especially upon the working classes of the country,
+declares in favour of the nationalisation of the mines and
+municipalisation of the coal-supply."<a name="FNanchor_426_426" id="FNanchor_426_426"></a><a href="#Footnote_426_426" class="fnanchor">[426]</a> At the last Annual
+Conference of the Miners' Federation of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[150]</a></span>Great Britain, various
+resolutions urging the nationalisation of all mines were proposed and
+carried. Mr. W.E. Harvey, M.P., for instance, moved "That the members
+of Parliament supported by this federation be instructed to direct the
+attention of the Government to bring in a Bill for the nationalisation
+of land, mines, and mining royalties, as we believe that it is only by
+such reforms that the workers can obtain full value for their
+labours."<a name="FNanchor_427_427" id="FNanchor_427_427"></a><a href="#Footnote_427_427" class="fnanchor">[427]</a> It will be observed that nothing is said about
+compensation in this resolution, which was passed unanimously.</p>
+
+<p>How is the nationalisation of the land to be effected? "The land of
+every country belongs of natural and inalienable right to the whole
+body of the people in each generation. We say therefore, 'You need not
+kick the landlords out; you must not buy them out; you had better tax
+them out.'"<a name="FNanchor_428_428" id="FNanchor_428_428"></a><a href="#Footnote_428_428" class="fnanchor">[428]</a> "If the people rose in revolt, took up arms,
+confiscated the lands of the nobles, and handed them over to the
+control of a Parliament, that would not be brigandage; it would be
+revolution. But if the people by the exercise of constitutional means,
+passed an Act through Parliament making the estates of the nobles the
+property of the nation, with or without compensation, that would be
+neither brigandage nor revolution; it would be a legal, righteous, and
+constitutional reform. We propose to be neither revolutionaries nor
+brigands, but legal, righteous, and constitutional reformers."<a name="FNanchor_429_429" id="FNanchor_429_429"></a><a href="#Footnote_429_429" class="fnanchor">[429]</a>
+Legality implies and presupposes justice, but Socialist law and
+justice are different from that conception of law and justice which
+has been held hitherto. Chapter XXIV. will make that point clear.</p>
+
+<p>The foregoing should suffice to show that the Socialists intend to
+abolish private property in land by "taxing landowners out of
+existence."</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[151]</a></span>They apparently forget that not all the owners of land are rich; that
+many small farmers, shopkeepers, artisans, &amp;c., own freehold land and
+freehold houses; and that the insurance companies have a very large
+proportion of their funds invested in land and on the security of
+land. A confiscation of land would therefore ruin a vast number of
+hard-working people. It would cripple some insurance companies and
+ruin others. Hence the savings of thrifty workers would be confiscated
+or destroyed by the State together with those of the larger
+capitalists.</p>
+
+<p>The Socialists are not entirely agreed as to the way by which the
+abolition of private ownership in land should be effected, but some
+interesting proposals will be found in Chapter X., "Socialist Views
+and Proposals regarding Taxation and the National Budget." The purely
+agricultural aspect of the land question is treated in Chapter XVIII.,
+"Socialism and Agriculture," and in Chapter XXI., "Some Socialist
+Views on Free Trade and Protection."</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_411_411" id="Footnote_411_411"></a><a href="#FNanchor_411_411"><span class="label">[411]</span></a> Page 81.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_412_412" id="Footnote_412_412"></a><a href="#FNanchor_412_412"><span class="label">[412]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 61.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_413_413" id="Footnote_413_413"></a><a href="#FNanchor_413_413"><span class="label">[413]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 60.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_414_414" id="Footnote_414_414"></a><a href="#FNanchor_414_414"><span class="label">[414]</span></a> Washington, <i>A Corner in Flesh and Blood</i>, p. 60.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_415_415" id="Footnote_415_415"></a><a href="#FNanchor_415_415"><span class="label">[415]</span></a> <i>Clarion Song Book</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_416_416" id="Footnote_416_416"></a><a href="#FNanchor_416_416"><span class="label">[416]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_417_417" id="Footnote_417_417"></a><a href="#FNanchor_417_417"><span class="label">[417]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Book of Lords</i>, p. 25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_418_418" id="Footnote_418_418"></a><a href="#FNanchor_418_418"><span class="label">[418]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Land Nationalisation</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_419_419" id="Footnote_419_419"></a><a href="#FNanchor_419_419"><span class="label">[419]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>Socialism, True and False</i>, p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_420_420" id="Footnote_420_420"></a><a href="#FNanchor_420_420"><span class="label">[420]</span></a> <i>Socialism and the Single Tax</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_421_421" id="Footnote_421_421"></a><a href="#FNanchor_421_421"><span class="label">[421]</span></a> Ward, <i>Are All Men Brothers?</i> pp. 14, 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_422_422" id="Footnote_422_422"></a><a href="#FNanchor_422_422"><span class="label">[422]</span></a> Hall, <i>Land, Labour, and Liberty</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_423_423" id="Footnote_423_423"></a><a href="#FNanchor_423_423"><span class="label">[423]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Some Tory Socialisms</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_424_424" id="Footnote_424_424"></a><a href="#FNanchor_424_424"><span class="label">[424]</span></a> Headlam, <i>Christian Socialism</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_425_425" id="Footnote_425_425"></a><a href="#FNanchor_425_425"><span class="label">[425]</span></a> <i>Forward</i>, October 12, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_426_426" id="Footnote_426_426"></a><a href="#FNanchor_426_426"><span class="label">[426]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference,
+1907</i>, p. 59.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_427_427" id="Footnote_427_427"></a><a href="#FNanchor_427_427"><span class="label">[427]</span></a> <i>Times</i>, October 12, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_428_428" id="Footnote_428_428"></a><a href="#FNanchor_428_428"><span class="label">[428]</span></a> Headlam, <i>Christian Socialism</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_429_429" id="Footnote_429_429"></a><a href="#FNanchor_429_429"><span class="label">[429]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Some Tory Socialisms</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_IX" id="CHAPTER_IX"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[152]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER IX<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING CAPITAL AND THE CAPITALISTS</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">We have seen in Chapter VIII. that Socialists claim that "Man has a
+right to nothing but that which he has himself made," that therefore,
+"No man can have a right to the land, for no man made it." May, then,
+owners of property keep at least that part of their property which is
+not invested in land?</p>
+
+<p>The reply is, of course, in the negative. "As land must in future be a
+national possession, so must the other means of producing and
+distributing wealth."<a name="FNanchor_430_430" id="FNanchor_430_430"></a><a href="#Footnote_430_430" class="fnanchor">[430]</a> "Supposing we assume it true that land is
+not the product of labour and that capital is; it is not by any means
+true that the rent of land is not the product of labour and that the
+interest on capital is. Since private ownership, whether of land or
+capital, simply means the right to draw and dispose of a revenue from
+the property, why should the landowner be forbidden to do that which
+is allowed to the capitalist, in a society in which land and capital
+are commercially equivalent? Yet land nationalisers seem to be
+prepared to treat as sacred the landlords' claim to private property
+in capital acquired by thefts of this kind, although they will not
+hear of their claim to property in land. Capital serves as an
+instrument for robbing in a precisely identical manner. In England
+industrial capital is mainly created by wage workers&mdash;who get nothing
+for it but permission to create in addition enough subsistence <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[153]</a></span>to
+keep each other alive in a poor way. Its immediate appropriation by
+idle proprietors and shareholders, whose economic relation to the
+workers is exactly the same in principle as that of the landlords,
+goes on every day under our eyes. The landlord compels the worker to
+convert his land into a railway, his fen into a drained level, his
+barren seaside waste into a fashionable watering-place, his mountain
+into a tunnel, his manor park into a suburb full of houses let on
+repairing leases; and lo! he has escaped the land nationalisers; his
+land is now become capital and is sacred. The position is so glaringly
+absurd and the proposed attempt to discriminate between the capital
+value and the land value of estates is so futile, that it seems almost
+certain that the land nationalisers will go as far as the Socialists.
+Whatever the origin of land and capital, the source of the revenues
+drawn from them is contemporary labour."<a name="FNanchor_431_431" id="FNanchor_431_431"></a><a href="#Footnote_431_431" class="fnanchor">[431]</a></p>
+
+<p>Most Socialists think it wiser to tax capital gradually out of
+existence than to confiscate it at one stroke. "The direct
+confiscation of capital affects all, the small and the great, those
+unable to work and the able-bodied, everybody in an equal way. It is
+difficult by this method, often quite impossible, to separate the
+large property from the small invested in the same undertakings. The
+direct confiscation would also proceed too quickly, often at one
+stroke, while confiscation through taxation would permit the abolition
+of capitalist property being made a long-drawn process, working itself
+out further and further in the measure as the new order gets
+consolidated and makes its beneficent influence felt."<a name="FNanchor_432_432" id="FNanchor_432_432"></a><a href="#Footnote_432_432" class="fnanchor">[432]</a></p>
+
+<p>The argument that excessive taxation would drive capital out of the
+country is laughed at by Socialists. A Socialist pamphlet says: "It is
+true that the land-sweaters and labour-skinners whom the people keep
+on <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[154]</a></span>electing to rule and rob them can still frighten noodles by
+threatening that they will run away from the country and take their
+capital with them; that</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">They'll ship the mines and farms to Amsterdam,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The houses and the railways to Peru,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The canals and docks to Russia,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The woods and workshops off to Prussia,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And all the enterprise and brains to Timbuctoo.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"We calmly reply that there is not one single service that all the
+landlords, financiers, and their lesser parasites pretend to perform
+for society that could not be performed far more efficiently and
+infinitely more cheaply without them."</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Straightway those rich men started<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">To move their capitals.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">On board of ships they carted<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Their railways and canals;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">With mines mine-owners scurried.<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The bankers bore their books.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">With mills mill-owners hurried.<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The bishops took their crooks.<a name="FNanchor_433_433" id="FNanchor_433_433"></a><a href="#Footnote_433_433" class="fnanchor">[433]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The despoiled capitalists might leave the country, but they would have
+to leave in the country all their property except perhaps a few
+valuables which they might remove.</p>
+
+<p>Property being theft, capitalists as well as landowners are thieves
+who possess no claim whatever to consideration or even to mercy. "To
+talk about 'the respective claims of capital and labour' is as
+inaccurate as to talk about the 'respective claims' of coals and
+colliers, or of ploughs and ploughmen. Capital has no claims. This is
+not a quibble. The distinction between capital and the capitalists is
+one of vital importance. Capital is a necessary thing. The capitalist
+is as unnecessary as any other kind of thief or interloper. The
+capitalist, though as loud as greedy in his 'claims,' has no rights at
+all."<a name="FNanchor_434_434" id="FNanchor_434_434"></a><a href="#Footnote_434_434" class="fnanchor">[434]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[155]</a></span>"Do you mean to say, then, that the capitalist does not perform a
+useful function in running a risk for the profit he receives?&mdash;No. In
+so far as he exercises the function of management and receives
+remuneration for this, his remuneration is not profit at all, but
+wages of superintendence, and the functions of management would be
+undertaken by the organised society of the future through its
+appointed representatives. As to any necessary risks, all individuals
+would be relieved from this under Socialism, as it would be borne by
+the whole of society."<a name="FNanchor_435_435" id="FNanchor_435_435"></a><a href="#Footnote_435_435" class="fnanchor">[435]</a> "If capitalists attempt to justify their
+way of making profit by saying that they have to run risks sometimes,
+that a part of their property might occasionally be lost, we answer
+that labour has nothing to do with that."<a name="FNanchor_436_436" id="FNanchor_436_436"></a><a href="#Footnote_436_436" class="fnanchor">[436]</a></p>
+
+<p>Capital large and small is the result of thrift. If capital is theft,
+then thrift also is theft. The thrifty investor, being an immoral
+person, has no right to protest against the confiscation of his
+property. "By capitalist I mean the investor who puts his money into a
+concern and draws profits therefrom without participating in the
+organisation or management of the business. Were all these to
+disappear in the night, leaving no trace behind, nothing would be
+changed."<a name="FNanchor_437_437" id="FNanchor_437_437"></a><a href="#Footnote_437_437" class="fnanchor">[437]</a> Nothing would be changed for the Socialist agitator,
+the loafer, and the tramp. On the contrary, they would profit from the
+ruin of the industrious and the thrifty. The fact that honest and
+hardworking men who do their duty to their family and who wish to
+leave their children provided for should have the result of the
+economy of a lifetime confiscated matters little to the Socialist
+leaders. According to the Socialist doctrines the industrious and the
+thrifty are thieves and exploiters of those workers who have never
+saved a penny. On the other hand, those men who live <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[156]</a></span>from hand to
+mouth, who work only a few days each week and loaf on the remaining
+days, who waste all their earnings in drink, gambling, and
+music-halls, and who possess nothing they can call their own, are
+honest and excellent citizens. They are entitled to the savings of the
+thrifty.</p>
+
+<p>In accordance with the Socialist principles stated in the foregoing,
+all shareholders, being merely exploiters of labour, would be
+expropriated. "Are shareholders in companies useful in organising
+labour?&mdash;As a rule they employ others to organise labour, and the work
+done by the company would go on just as well if the shareholders
+disappeared."<a name="FNanchor_438_438" id="FNanchor_438_438"></a><a href="#Footnote_438_438" class="fnanchor">[438]</a> Besides, "Stocks when analysed, in nine cases out
+of ten simply mean the right to squeeze tribute out of workers who are
+nominally free. By far the greatest part of what is set down as
+national 'capital' is merely slave flesh-and-blood."<a name="FNanchor_439_439" id="FNanchor_439_439"></a><a href="#Footnote_439_439" class="fnanchor">[439]</a></p>
+
+<p>Holders of Government stocks would be treated no better than
+landowners and shareholders. Foremost among the "immediate reforms"
+demanded in the programme of the Social-Democratic Federation<a name="FNanchor_440_440" id="FNanchor_440_440"></a><a href="#Footnote_440_440" class="fnanchor">[440]</a>
+ranges the "Repudiation of the National Debt." The repudiation of the
+National Debt has during many years been demanded, and is still
+demanded, by the Social-Democratic Federation, as may be seen from a
+recent issue of "Justice," its weekly publication, in which we find
+the following statement: "The National Debt is simply a means of
+extracting unearned incomes from the people of this country. It is
+idle to nationalise or municipalise industries by means of loans on
+which interest is paid. Such interest would be only another form of
+rent and profit. When capitalism is abolished, every one of its many
+forms will necessarily have to go."<a name="FNanchor_441_441" id="FNanchor_441_441"></a><a href="#Footnote_441_441" class="fnanchor">[441]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[157]</a></span>The repudiation of the National Debt is demanded by many Socialist
+leaders and leading writers. "The National Debt (falsely so-called)
+has already been paid thrice over in usury. All future
+interest-payments should be held as part of the principal."<a name="FNanchor_442_442" id="FNanchor_442_442"></a><a href="#Footnote_442_442" class="fnanchor">[442]</a> "The
+few thousand persons who own the National Debt, saddled upon the
+community by a landlord Parliament, exact 28,000,000<i>l.</i> yearly from
+the labour of their countrymen for nothing."<a name="FNanchor_443_443" id="FNanchor_443_443"></a><a href="#Footnote_443_443" class="fnanchor">[443]</a> "Outside the land
+monopoly, the most infamous source of usury is unquestionably the
+so-called 'National Debt.' There the whole of the capital is
+absolutely spurious. The real capital consisted of the gunpowder and
+the lead which Sovereigns and statesmen expended so liberally about a
+century ago in attempting to murder liberty on the Continents of
+Europe and America. Our war debt is the most stupendous monument of
+human crime and folly in existence; and worst of all, the 'butcher's
+bill' has already been paid by the unhappy toilers thrice over in
+usury."<a name="FNanchor_444_444" id="FNanchor_444_444"></a><a href="#Footnote_444_444" class="fnanchor">[444]</a> "The entire national liability has been discharged to the
+moneylenders by the people once during the last thirty-seven years. We
+repay public debts once every thirty-seven years without wiping out a
+penny of the said debts. We pay away in blank usury 20,000,000<i>l.</i> per
+year on this one head, or enough to provide old-age pensions for
+three-fourths of our aged poor in the United Kingdom on the basis of
+7<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> per head per week."<a name="FNanchor_445_445" id="FNanchor_445_445"></a><a href="#Footnote_445_445" class="fnanchor">[445]</a> "236,514 blackmailers suck the
+udder of industry through the convenient teat of what, with audacious
+cynicism, is called the 'National Debt.'"<a name="FNanchor_446_446" id="FNanchor_446_446"></a><a href="#Footnote_446_446" class="fnanchor">[446]</a></p>
+
+<p>The largest part of the National Debt was not created <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[158]</a></span>by "murdering
+liberty" but by fighting the armies of the French Revolution and of
+Napoleon I. Besides, the defence against the French Revolution and
+Napoleon was not a "crime," but a necessary duty. Furthermore, the
+holders of the National Debt are not "blackmailers" but industrious,
+useful, and thrifty citizens, or the children and descendants of
+industrious, useful, and thrifty citizens.</p>
+
+<p>About one-half of the National Debt is held by thrifty wage-earners,
+as all the money deposited in the savings banks, and most of the
+savings deposited with friendly societies, &amp;c., is invested in
+Consols, and as a very large part of the assets of the industrial and
+other insurance societies consists of Government Stocks. Property
+being theft, and thrift being akin to it, the thrifty workman whose
+savings are invested in Consols has apparently no right to complain of
+being robbed of his savings by the Socialists.</p>
+
+<p>Some Socialist agitators have the audacity to tell the thrifty worker
+that he will not suffer, but benefit, by the confiscation of his
+savings. "Opponents try to scare this man against Socialism by the
+fear of losing his interest. Granting for a moment he would do so,
+would he not gain by the general abolition of interest, &amp;c., which
+would double his wage in common with that of all workers?"<a name="FNanchor_447_447" id="FNanchor_447_447"></a><a href="#Footnote_447_447" class="fnanchor">[447]</a>&mdash;The
+worker is to be indemnified for his positive and certain loss in
+property through the confiscation of his savings, or at the least of
+the interest paid on them, by a problematical rise in general wages
+which would benefit the unthrifty quite as much as the thrifty. But if
+the promised doubling of wages should not take place, what will
+happen? The Socialist agitators will explain that they are sorry to
+have made a mistake, whilst the thriftless are squandering the
+property of the thrifty.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[159]</a></span>According to the Socialist teachings, the capitalist is a perfectly
+useless being in the national household. "Does he himself want to
+work: to do something useful? Far from it. His money works for him;
+his money makes money, as the saying is."<a name="FNanchor_448_448" id="FNanchor_448_448"></a><a href="#Footnote_448_448" class="fnanchor">[448]</a> Most capitalists&mdash;and I
+think the large majority of wage-earners are capitalists to some
+extent&mdash;are engaged in useful productive work of hand or brain.
+However, the capitalist of the Socialist imagination, the wealthy man
+who lives without any work, who studies the money market and Stock
+Exchange quotations, and who is occupied solely in investing and
+reinvesting his money to the best advantage, is an extremely useful
+member of society. It is of the utmost consequence to all workers, and
+to the whole nation, that the national capital should grow, that
+mines, railways, ships, machinery, houses, &amp;c., should multiply and be
+constantly improved. Now the thrifty, not the wasteful, preserve and
+increase the national capital. Wise and cautious capitalists in
+enriching themselves will enrich the nation. Careless ones will lose
+their money and impoverish the nation. The wealth of France has, to a
+very large extent, been created by cautious and far-seeing <i>rentiers</i>,
+and thus France has become the banker among nations.</p>
+
+<p>Socialists teach that the wealth of the few causes the poverty of the
+many; that therefore the private capitalist should be destroyed. Why,
+then, are the workers most prosperous in those countries which possess
+the wealthiest capitalists, such as France and the United States, and
+why are they poorest in countries, such as Turkey and Servia, where
+wealthy capitalists do not exist? And may not the destruction of the
+capitalists reduce Great Britain to the level of Turkey and Servia?</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_430_430" id="Footnote_430_430"></a><a href="#FNanchor_430_430"><span class="label">[430]</span></a> <i>Socialism Made Plain</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_431_431" id="Footnote_431_431"></a><a href="#FNanchor_431_431"><span class="label">[431]</span></a> <i>Capital and Land</i>, pp. 5, 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_432_432" id="Footnote_432_432"></a><a href="#FNanchor_432_432"><span class="label">[432]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_433_433" id="Footnote_433_433"></a><a href="#FNanchor_433_433"><span class="label">[433]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>The Clarion Ballads</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_434_434" id="Footnote_434_434"></a><a href="#FNanchor_434_434"><span class="label">[434]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>The Pope's Socialism</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_435_435" id="Footnote_435_435"></a><a href="#FNanchor_435_435"><span class="label">[435]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_436_436" id="Footnote_436_436"></a><a href="#FNanchor_436_436"><span class="label">[436]</span></a> Sorge, <i>Socialism and the Worker</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_437_437" id="Footnote_437_437"></a><a href="#FNanchor_437_437"><span class="label">[437]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_438_438" id="Footnote_438_438"></a><a href="#FNanchor_438_438"><span class="label">[438]</span></a> Joynes, <i>The Socialist Catechism</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_439_439" id="Footnote_439_439"></a><a href="#FNanchor_439_439"><span class="label">[439]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Gospel of the Poor</i>, p. 54.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_440_440" id="Footnote_440_440"></a><a href="#FNanchor_440_440"><span class="label">[440]</span></a> See Appendix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_441_441" id="Footnote_441_441"></a><a href="#FNanchor_441_441"><span class="label">[441]</span></a> <i>Justice</i>, October 19, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_442_442" id="Footnote_442_442"></a><a href="#FNanchor_442_442"><span class="label">[442]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Democrat's Address</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_443_443" id="Footnote_443_443"></a><a href="#FNanchor_443_443"><span class="label">[443]</span></a> <i>Socialism Made Plain</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_444_444" id="Footnote_444_444"></a><a href="#FNanchor_444_444"><span class="label">[444]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Gospel of the Poor</i>, p. 49.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_445_445" id="Footnote_445_445"></a><a href="#FNanchor_445_445"><span class="label">[445]</span></a> McLachlan, <i>Tyranny of Usury</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_446_446" id="Footnote_446_446"></a><a href="#FNanchor_446_446"><span class="label">[446]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 76.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_447_447" id="Footnote_447_447"></a><a href="#FNanchor_447_447"><span class="label">[447]</span></a> <i>Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_448_448" id="Footnote_448_448"></a><a href="#FNanchor_448_448"><span class="label">[448]</span></a> Sorge, <i>Socialism and the Worker</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_X" id="CHAPTER_X"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[160]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER X<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING TAXATION AND THE NATIONAL BUDGET</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">To Socialists taxation is chiefly a means for impoverishing the rich
+and the well-to-do. It is their object to transfer by taxation the
+wealth from the few to the many, as they believe that the
+impoverishment of the rich will mean the enrichment of the poor.
+Therefore they do not aim at economy in national and local
+expenditure. On the contrary, they wish to spend as much as possible.
+As money is to be obtained solely from the rich, "An increase in
+national taxation has no terrors for Socialists."<a name="FNanchor_449_449" id="FNanchor_449_449"></a><a href="#Footnote_449_449" class="fnanchor">[449]</a> Every increase
+in expenditure is greeted by them with joy, and wastefulness in
+national and local undertakings is rather encouraged than condemned.
+"Socialists look to the Budget as a means not only of raising revenue
+to meet unavoidable expenditure, but as an instrument for redressing
+inequalities in the distribution of wealth."<a name="FNanchor_450_450" id="FNanchor_450_450"></a><a href="#Footnote_450_450" class="fnanchor">[450]</a> Let us first look
+into the financial views of the Socialists, and then into their
+positive proposals.</p>
+
+<p>"The purpose of Socialism is to transfer land and industrial capital
+to the people. There are two ways in which, simultaneously, this
+object may be carried out. The one way is by the municipal and
+national appropriation&mdash;with such compensation to the existing owners
+as the community may think fit to give&mdash;of the land and industrial
+concerns. The second method is by taxation. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[161]</a></span>Taxation has its special
+sphere of usefulness in helping the community to secure some part of
+its own by diverting into the national purse portions of the rent,
+interest, and profit which now go to keep an idle class in luxury at
+the expense of the industrious poor."<a name="FNanchor_451_451" id="FNanchor_451_451"></a><a href="#Footnote_451_451" class="fnanchor">[451]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The existence of a rich class, whose riches are the cause of the
+poverty of the masses, is the justification for the Socialist demand
+that the cost of bettering the condition of the people must be met by
+the taxation of the rich. The Socialist's ideas of taxation may be
+briefly summarised as follows: (1) Both local and national taxation
+should aim primarily at securing for the communal benefit all
+'unearned' or 'social' increment of wealth. (2) Taxation should aim
+deliberately at preventing the retention of large incomes and great
+fortunes in private hands, recognising that the few cannot be rich
+without making the many poor. (3) Taxation should be in proportion to
+ability to pay and to protection and benefit conferred by the State.
+(4) No taxation should be imposed which encroaches upon the
+individual's means to satisfy his physical needs."<a name="FNanchor_452_452" id="FNanchor_452_452"></a><a href="#Footnote_452_452" class="fnanchor">[452]</a></p>
+
+<p>"To the Socialist taxation is the chief means by which he may recover
+from the propertied classes some portion of the plunder which their
+economic strength and social position have enabled them to extract
+from the workers; to him, national and municipal expenditure is the
+spending for common purposes of an ever-increasing proportion of the
+national income. The degree of civilisation which a State has reached
+may almost be measured by the proportion of the national income which
+is spent collectively instead of individually. To the Socialist the
+best of Governments is that which spends the most. The only possible
+policy is deliberately to tax the rich, especially those who live on
+wealth which <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[162]</a></span>they do not earn; for thus, and thus only, can we reduce
+the burthen upon the poor."<a name="FNanchor_453_453" id="FNanchor_453_453"></a><a href="#Footnote_453_453" class="fnanchor">[453]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Fabian Society suggests the following reform of national taxation:
+"In English politics successful ends must have moderate beginnings.
+Such a beginning might be an income-tax of 2<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> in the pound.
+Unearned incomes above 5,000<i>l.</i> a year would pay 2<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> in the
+pound, below 5,000<i>l.</i> a year 1<i>s.</i> 8<i>d.</i> in the pound. The estate
+duty might be handled upon similar principles. Estates between
+500,000<i>l.</i> and 1,000,000<i>l.</i> would be charged twelve and a half per
+cent, instead of seven and a half, and estates exceeding 1,000,000<i>l.</i>
+fifteen per cent, instead of eight."<a name="FNanchor_454_454" id="FNanchor_454_454"></a><a href="#Footnote_454_454" class="fnanchor">[454]</a> The Fabian Society does not
+disguise its aim in proposing the foregoing: "These suggestions are
+doubtless confiscatory, and that is why they should recommend
+themselves to a Labour party. But even so, the confiscation is of a
+timorous and a slow-footed sort. The average British millionaire dies
+worth about 2,770,000<i>l.</i>, on which the death duty would be
+415,500<i>l.</i>, leaving the agreeable nest-egg of 2,254,500<i>l.</i> to the
+heirs. Even if we assume that the inheritance passes to one person
+only, so as to be subject to the highest rate of duty, it would not be
+until five more lives had passed that it would be reduced to a pitiful
+million. The most patient Labour party might not unreasonably demand
+something a trifle more revolutionary than this."<a name="FNanchor_455_455" id="FNanchor_455_455"></a><a href="#Footnote_455_455" class="fnanchor">[455]</a></p>
+
+<p>According to the above proposals the income-tax would return
+47,600,000<i>l.</i> per annum. This sum seems far too moderate to most
+Socialist writers. Councillor Glyde, for instance, gives in a widely
+read pamphlet elaborate tables in which the produce of a graduated
+income-tax is carefully calculated. The Fabian Society would make "a
+moderate beginning" by taxing large incomes 2<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> in the pound.
+Councillor Glyde would begin <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[163]</a></span>by levying a 3<i>s.</i> income-tax on them.
+Taxation of incomes in accordance with his proposals would bring in
+70,281,839<i>l.</i> per annum.<a name="FNanchor_456_456" id="FNanchor_456_456"></a><a href="#Footnote_456_456" class="fnanchor">[456]</a></p>
+
+<p>Mr. Smart, of the Independent Labour Party, gives lengthy details of a
+taxation reform scheme in which figure a foundation-tax, a special
+property-tax, and a super-tax. Large incomes would have to pay 17-1/2
+per cent., or 3<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> in the pound, and his property and income
+tax would bring in 78,000,000<i>l.</i> per annum.<a name="FNanchor_457_457" id="FNanchor_457_457"></a><a href="#Footnote_457_457" class="fnanchor">[457]</a></p>
+
+<p>Mr. Philip Snowden, M.P., submits a different scheme of taxation.
+There is to be an income-tax of 1<i>s.</i> in the pound and a graduated
+super-tax up to 6<i>s.</i> in the pound. Whilst the three authorities
+mentioned so far propose to take from the large incomes 2<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i>,
+3<i>s.</i>, and 3<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> in the pound as a "moderate beginning," Mr.
+Snowden would, presumably also as a "moderate beginning," take 7<i>s.</i>
+in the pound from them. He is quite touched with his own generosity
+and magnanimity, for might he not demand at once 17<i>s.</i> or 20<i>s.</i> in
+the pound? "To console the possessors of incomes in the higher grade,
+say 50,000<i>l.</i> a year, to the payment of an income-tax of 1<i>s.</i> in the
+pound, we may remind them that they still retain 33,500<i>l.</i> a year,
+which is a very generous payment by labour to them for the privilege
+of seeing them exist in gorgeous splendour and sumptuous
+idleness."<a name="FNanchor_458_458" id="FNanchor_458_458"></a><a href="#Footnote_458_458" class="fnanchor">[458]</a></p>
+
+<p>The proposals regarding the estate duty to be charged also vary. The
+Fabian Society proposes a maximum of 15 per cent. Mr. Smart would be
+satisfied with a graduated estate duty with a maximum of 25 per cent,
+instead of the present maximum of 8 per cent.<a name="FNanchor_459_459" id="FNanchor_459_459"></a><a href="#Footnote_459_459" class="fnanchor">[459]</a> <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[164]</a></span>Mr. Snowden
+proposes a scale of duties which ranges from 1 per cent, up to 50 per
+cent.<a name="FNanchor_460_460" id="FNanchor_460_460"></a><a href="#Footnote_460_460" class="fnanchor">[460]</a></p>
+
+<p>Besides the very greatly increased income-tax and estate duty, there
+would be, according to Mr. Snowden, a land value tax of a penny in the
+pound of its capital value, which is equal to 10 per cent. annual
+value. It is to be the small beginning of the policy of taxing
+landowners out of existence, to be speedily followed by confiscation.
+"The annual value of land being 250,000,000<i>l.</i>, the produce of the
+land value tax would be 25,000,000<i>l.</i> a year."<a name="FNanchor_461_461" id="FNanchor_461_461"></a><a href="#Footnote_461_461" class="fnanchor">[461]</a> The author
+justifies the creation of that tax as follows: "Liverpool, London,
+Glasgow owe their existence and their prosperity to their respective
+situations, which are natural advantages and which ought not in
+justice to be enjoyed solely by those who live upon the sites. Every
+town and village in the country contributes to the prosperity of every
+other part. The nation is a unit; its resources and its obligations
+should be mutually shared."</p>
+
+<p>"Land values are so obviously not created by individual effort that
+the justice of taking the increment for the use of the community
+appeals to those who may have some difficulty in grasping the working
+of the 'unearned increment' in commercial concerns, where, however, it
+operates just as truly though not so obviously. The imposition of an
+Imperial tax of one penny in the pound on the capital value of the
+site would be a beginning, but by no means the end, of the process of
+diverting socially-created rent of land into the public exchequer.
+Taxation will do something towards that end; but taxation would be a
+long, irritating, and untrustworthy way of trying to secure the whole
+annual value of the land for the community."<a name="FNanchor_462_462" id="FNanchor_462_462"></a><a href="#Footnote_462_462" class="fnanchor">[462]</a> "The taxation of
+land values is not a land reform. To get the full <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[165]</a></span>usefulness and the
+full value of the land for the community there is no way but for the
+State to own the land."<a name="FNanchor_463_463" id="FNanchor_463_463"></a><a href="#Footnote_463_463" class="fnanchor">[463]</a></p>
+
+<p>The contemplated reform of taxation will not be limited to taxing the
+rich and the well-to-do out of existence. Relief will be afforded to
+the masses by the repeal of all duties on food, and, indeed, of all
+indirect taxation. "The reforms which the Labour party will endeavour
+to obtain from the Government, in which it believes it will be
+expressing the democratic sentiment of the country, are:</p>
+
+<p>1. Repeal of the duties on foods.</p>
+
+<p>2. A minimum wage of 30<i>s.</i> to all workers in Government employ or
+working under a contractor for the Government.</p>
+
+<p>3. Old-age pensions of 7<i>s.</i> a week for persons over sixty."<a name="FNanchor_464_464" id="FNanchor_464_464"></a><a href="#Footnote_464_464" class="fnanchor">[464]</a></p>
+
+<p>Practically all Socialists agree that all indirect taxation should be
+abolished. "Indirect taxation has nothing whatever to recommend it to
+an intelligent people, however advantageous it may be to the
+well-to-do. Indirect taxation violates every principle of sound
+economy."<a name="FNanchor_465_465" id="FNanchor_465_465"></a><a href="#Footnote_465_465" class="fnanchor">[465]</a> "Its maintenance is excused on the ground that indirect
+taxation is the only means by which the working class can be made to
+contribute to the cost of national government at ah. The poorer
+working classes should not be taxed by the Government at all."<a name="FNanchor_466_466" id="FNanchor_466_466"></a><a href="#Footnote_466_466" class="fnanchor">[466]</a>
+"Under a just system of taxation all indirect taxation for revenue
+purposes would be abolished."<a name="FNanchor_467_467" id="FNanchor_467_467"></a><a href="#Footnote_467_467" class="fnanchor">[467]</a> "With 43 per cent, of the working
+classes living in poverty, with an average wage over the whole working
+class not sufficient to provide themselves with the standard of
+workhouse comfort, it becomes a crime to tax them for the protection
+of their property and the enjoyment of their <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[166]</a></span>privileges"<a name="FNanchor_468_468" id="FNanchor_468_468"></a><a href="#Footnote_468_468" class="fnanchor">[468]</a>&mdash;Is it
+true that, as Mr. Snowden, M.P., writes, the whole working class of
+Great Britain is so badly paid that it cannot provide for itself the
+standard of workhouse comfort? How then can he reconcile with that
+assertion the following statement which he gives in the same book a
+few pages further on: "Experts assign the proportion of the total
+annual drink bill of the United Kingdom contributed by the
+wage-earning classes at 100,000,000<i>l.</i> A committee of the British
+Association, reporting on the 'appropriation of wages,' in 1882 said
+that 75 per cent, of the total consumption of beer and spirits, and 10
+per cent. of the wine bill, might be assigned as the shares of the
+working class."<a name="FNanchor_469_469" id="FNanchor_469_469"></a><a href="#Footnote_469_469" class="fnanchor">[469]</a></p>
+
+<p>As a matter of fact experts estimate that the British working men
+spend even more than 100,000,000<i>l.</i> per year on drink, and that they
+spend about 50,000,000<i>l.</i> on betting. It is really very inartistic
+for a professional agitator to tell us that the British workers are
+too poor to pay any taxes, that it is a "crime" to tax them at all,
+and then to remind us that the same starving ill-used workers can
+afford to spend more than the amount of the whole nation's Budget in
+drink and betting, that about one-sixth of the workman's wages are
+spent at the public-house, that many workmen spend the larger half of
+their income in drink, and that the British nation is the most drunken
+in the world, although drink is far more expensive in Great Britain
+than in any other country.</p>
+
+<p>With part of the money taken by means of extortionate taxation from
+the rich, whole sections of the population are to be bribed into
+supporting Socialism. "Two objectionable heads of revenue would find
+no place in a Socialist national balance-sheet&mdash;the profit from the
+Post Office and the stamp duties. Improvements in the wages and
+conditions of labour in the lower grades of the postal service would
+absorb a considerable <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[167]</a></span>part of the present annual profit of
+5,000,000<i>l.</i> and the rest might, with benefit, be utilised for
+cheapening the cost to the public of postal rates and services."<a name="FNanchor_470_470" id="FNanchor_470_470"></a><a href="#Footnote_470_470" class="fnanchor">[470]</a></p>
+
+<p>Mr. Snowden, in promising in one phrase the repeal of stamp duties and
+cheapening of postage, very likely thought that that step would
+relieve the poor. He apparently imagined that duty stamps were
+identical with postage stamps. If he had known that stamp duties are
+largely derived from Stock Exchange transactions and the sale of every
+kind of property on a large scale, from legal documents, &amp;c., he would
+probably have proposed that they should be increased tenfold in order
+to strike another blow at private property, not that they should be
+abolished. Even the policy of confiscation requires an elementary
+knowledge of facts.</p>
+
+<p>Furthermore, "The Socialist Budget would provide for a very
+considerable increase of the grants-in-aid, retaining for the central
+Government just sufficient control or inspection over the expenditure
+as would not interfere with the reasonable freedom of the local
+authority."<a name="FNanchor_471_471" id="FNanchor_471_471"></a><a href="#Footnote_471_471" class="fnanchor">[471]</a> "Control which would not interfere" is at present
+illogical and impossible, because the one excludes the other. It may
+be possible in the Socialist State of the future, because logic will
+have to be abolished in it. At all events it seems clear that Mr.
+Snowden wishes to secure the support of the local authorities by the
+same curious means by which he strives to secure the support of the
+Post Office servants.</p>
+
+<p>The foregoing extracts should suffice to show that the Socialists mean
+to ruin the owners of property of every kind by indirect confiscation
+in the form of extortionate taxation, which is to be constantly
+increased and which may be followed by direct confiscation, and that
+they rely upon force for achieving their aim. Capitalists may leave
+the country, but they must leave their capital <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[168]</a></span>behind, and their
+disappearance, Socialists assert, will be no loss. "The vast majority
+of our employers are routineers, who could no more contribute an
+intelligent statement of their industrial function to this paper than
+a bee could write the works of Lord Avebury. Routineers can always be
+replaced, and replaced with profit, by educated functionaries.
+Consequently when the employers threaten us with emigration, our only
+regret as to the majority of them is that it is too good to be
+true."<a name="FNanchor_472_472" id="FNanchor_472_472"></a><a href="#Footnote_472_472" class="fnanchor">[472]</a> "Supposing those who have the money were to threaten to
+leave the country and to take their money with them, would not that
+upset your plans? Money is not wealth. You would have cause to
+rejoice. So would the country which was fortunate enough to see its
+capitalists emigrate."<a name="FNanchor_473_473" id="FNanchor_473_473"></a><a href="#Footnote_473_473" class="fnanchor">[473]</a></p>
+
+<p>According to the Socialist teaching, the workers maintain the
+capitalists. The brain is mightier than the hand, though the brain
+requires the hand. In reality it rather seems that the capitalists
+maintain the workers. It cannot too often be pointed out that those
+countries which have many wealthy capitalists are highly civilised and
+prosperous, and their workers are well off. On the other hand, those
+countries which have few or no wealthy capitalists are little
+civilised and poor, and their workers are exceedingly badly off. The
+masses may conceivably rob the capitalists of their property, and try
+to manage the national capital themselves, but whether they will
+benefit by spoliation remains to be seen. Lacking direction,
+foresight, unity, organisation, discipline, and thrift, the masses
+will probably quickly waste the national capital, and national ruin
+and distress and starvation will be the consequences of wholesale
+robbery.</p>
+
+<p>The confiscation experiment has often been tried in the past, and it
+has always failed. The last time it has <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[169]</a></span>been tried was at the time of
+the French Revolution. The money secured by robbery was recklessly
+squandered. Production was neglected, and the people became poorer
+than ever. In the country agriculture came to a standstill, weeds grew
+where corn had been growing, gardens became a natural wilderness, and
+wolves roamed in thousands.<a name="FNanchor_474_474" id="FNanchor_474_474"></a><a href="#Footnote_474_474" class="fnanchor">[474]</a> The great manufacturing towns were
+dead, manufacturers in Paris who had employed sixty or eighty men
+employed but ten.<a name="FNanchor_475_475" id="FNanchor_475_475"></a><a href="#Footnote_475_475" class="fnanchor">[475]</a> The people in town and country were starving.
+Many lived on roots and bark. Many of the poor in Paris waited outside
+the slaughter-houses and lapped the blood from the gutters like dogs.</p>
+
+<p>Private capital has existed in all countries and at all times, because
+it is a plant of natural growth. One can destroy it, but it will ever
+grow again.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_449_449" id="Footnote_449_449"></a><a href="#FNanchor_449_449"><span class="label">[449]</span></a> Snowden, <i>Socialist Budget</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_450_450" id="Footnote_450_450"></a><a href="#FNanchor_450_450"><span class="label">[450]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_451_451" id="Footnote_451_451"></a><a href="#FNanchor_451_451"><span class="label">[451]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_452_452" id="Footnote_452_452"></a><a href="#FNanchor_452_452"><span class="label">[452]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 7, 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_453_453" id="Footnote_453_453"></a><a href="#FNanchor_453_453"><span class="label">[453]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Labour Policy</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_454_454" id="Footnote_454_454"></a><a href="#FNanchor_454_454"><span class="label">[454]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 4, 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_455_455" id="Footnote_455_455"></a><a href="#FNanchor_455_455"><span class="label">[455]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_456_456" id="Footnote_456_456"></a><a href="#FNanchor_456_456"><span class="label">[456]</span></a> Glyde, <i>A Peep Behind the Scenes on a Board of
+Guardians</i>, pp. 28,29.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_457_457" id="Footnote_457_457"></a><a href="#FNanchor_457_457"><span class="label">[457]</span></a> Smart, <i>Socialism and the Budget</i>, pp. 14,15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_458_458" id="Footnote_458_458"></a><a href="#FNanchor_458_458"><span class="label">[458]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, pp. 78, 79.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_459_459" id="Footnote_459_459"></a><a href="#FNanchor_459_459"><span class="label">[459]</span></a> Smart, <i>Socialism and the Budget</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_460_460" id="Footnote_460_460"></a><a href="#FNanchor_460_460"><span class="label">[460]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, p. 81.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_461_461" id="Footnote_461_461"></a><a href="#FNanchor_461_461"><span class="label">[461]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 82.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_462_462" id="Footnote_462_462"></a><a href="#FNanchor_462_462"><span class="label">[462]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 82, 83.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_463_463" id="Footnote_463_463"></a><a href="#FNanchor_463_463"><span class="label">[463]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, p. 84.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_464_464" id="Footnote_464_464"></a><a href="#FNanchor_464_464"><span class="label">[464]</span></a> Smart, <i>Socialism and the Budget</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_465_465" id="Footnote_465_465"></a><a href="#FNanchor_465_465"><span class="label">[465]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_466_466" id="Footnote_466_466"></a><a href="#FNanchor_466_466"><span class="label">[466]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 31.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_467_467" id="Footnote_467_467"></a><a href="#FNanchor_467_467"><span class="label">[467]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_468_468" id="Footnote_468_468"></a><a href="#FNanchor_468_468"><span class="label">[468]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_469_469" id="Footnote_469_469"></a><a href="#FNanchor_469_469"><span class="label">[469]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 21, 22.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_470_470" id="Footnote_470_470"></a><a href="#FNanchor_470_470"><span class="label">[470]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, p. 71.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_471_471" id="Footnote_471_471"></a><a href="#FNanchor_471_471"><span class="label">[471]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 59.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_472_472" id="Footnote_472_472"></a><a href="#FNanchor_472_472"><span class="label">[472]</span></a> G.B. Shaw in the <i>New Age</i>, November 30, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_473_473" id="Footnote_473_473"></a><a href="#FNanchor_473_473"><span class="label">[473]</span></a> Wheatley, <i>How the Miners are Robbed</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_474_474" id="Footnote_474_474"></a><a href="#FNanchor_474_474"><span class="label">[474]</span></a> Vandal, <i>Av&egrave;nement de Bonaparte</i>, 1903, vol. i. p. 25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_475_475" id="Footnote_475_475"></a><a href="#FNanchor_475_475"><span class="label">[475]</span></a> Schmidt, <i>Tableaux de la R&eacute;volution</i>, vol. iv. p.
+383.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XI" id="CHAPTER_XI"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[170]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XI<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND THE EMPIRE</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Most British Socialists object to the Empire on various grounds, and
+desire its downfall and dissolution. According to their views Great
+Britain should, in the first place, give up her non-self-governing
+colonies. Let us take note of some Socialistic pronouncements to that
+effect:</p>
+
+<p>"Governments have no right to exist except with the consent of the
+governed, and the British have no more right to dominate other peoples
+than other peoples have to dominate us. What we can only hold by
+maintaining an alien garrison had better be given up. The people of
+these islands would not be losers, but the gainers by such a
+course."<a name="FNanchor_476_476" id="FNanchor_476_476"></a><a href="#Footnote_476_476" class="fnanchor">[476]</a> "Is it possible for a self-governing people to rule a
+subject race, and yet keep its own love for liberty? Neither the
+Greeks nor the Romans could do it, and we are not doing it very well
+ourselves. The reason is obvious. No nation can play the part of the
+despot (even the benevolent despot) abroad and that of the democrat at
+home."<a name="FNanchor_477_477" id="FNanchor_477_477"></a><a href="#Footnote_477_477" class="fnanchor">[477]</a> "Socialists should oppose the creation of empires on this
+simple ground&mdash;that empire-building is accompanied by terrible misery
+and suffering for those subject races, as they are called, which are
+the chosen victims sacrificed on the altar of cupidity and
+pride."<a name="FNanchor_478_478" id="FNanchor_478_478"></a><a href="#Footnote_478_478" class="fnanchor">[478]</a> "A people gain power and influence in the world in
+proportion as they solve for themselves the great <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[171]</a></span>problems of
+democratic self-government. We shall do more to civilise Africa by
+civilising the East End of London than by governing from Cape to
+Cairo."<a name="FNanchor_479_479" id="FNanchor_479_479"></a><a href="#Footnote_479_479" class="fnanchor">[479]</a> "It is not only impossible for one nation to civilise
+another by governing it; it is wrong that it should attempt to do so.
+Conquest may have opened up one civilisation to another in times long
+antecedent to the steam engine and a world commerce, but to-day its
+only effect is to crush out and level down all national life to the
+dead uniformity of an alien political routine."<a name="FNanchor_480_480" id="FNanchor_480_480"></a><a href="#Footnote_480_480" class="fnanchor">[480]</a></p>
+
+<p>"What is the attitude of Socialism towards backward races, savage and
+barbaric peoples who are to-day outside the civilised world? The
+position of Socialism towards these races is one of absolute
+non-interference. We hold that they should be left entirely alone to
+develop themselves in the natural order of things; which they must
+inevitably do or die out. It is the duty of Socialists to support the
+barbaric races in their resistance to aggression."<a name="FNanchor_481_481" id="FNanchor_481_481"></a><a href="#Footnote_481_481" class="fnanchor">[481]</a> "It is the
+duty of International Socialists, the only international
+non-capitalist party, to denounce, and wherever possible to prevent,
+the extension of colonisation and conquest, leaving to each race and
+creed and colour the full opportunity to develop itself until complete
+economic and social emancipation is secured by all."<a name="FNanchor_482_482" id="FNanchor_482_482"></a><a href="#Footnote_482_482" class="fnanchor">[482]</a> "Duty, like
+charity, begins at home, and if the civilisation of the blacks is to
+be purchased only by the destruction of our own democratic spirit, the
+balance to the world is of evil, not of good. There is another view of
+Imperialism expressed with brutal candour by Mr. Rhodes when he said
+that the flag was our best commercial asset, that trade follows the
+flag. Trade does no such thing. Trade follows business enterprise.
+Imperialism is, indeed, a policy of industrial deterioration, and by
+impoverishing <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[172]</a></span>the skill of the country and encouraging the worst
+forms of financial capitalism, must crush out every budding hope that
+labour has of becoming economically and politically free."<a name="FNanchor_483_483" id="FNanchor_483_483"></a><a href="#Footnote_483_483" class="fnanchor">[483]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing extracts should suffice to show that there is among
+British Socialists a strong desire to abandon the non-self-governing
+colonies.</p>
+
+<p>The attitude of the British Socialists towards the great
+self-governing dominions is not much more favourable than it is
+towards tropical colonies. Their attitude is one of hardly disguised
+hostility, which appears to spring partly from jealousy of the
+colonists, partly from hatred of the British capitalists who have
+invested money in the colonies. The loss of British capital invested
+in the colonies would probably be greeted with jubilation by the
+Socialists. "The well-to-do sections of society in Great Britain have
+found a secure and profitable outlet for their capital in loans and
+advances to the colonists alike as organised communities and as
+individual property-owners. But the drain for interest and dividends
+to England on this account is heavy, and is severely felt at times of
+depression, such as that which Australia as a whole has been suffering
+from during the recent seven years of almost continuous drought. It
+seems tolerably certain, therefore, that this comparative handful of
+colonists, eleven millions in all, of which only four millions in
+Australia, will in time to come, and as the Labour party and
+Socialists gain strength, repudiate, or at any rate reduce, these
+onerous obligations. It is also probable that with regard to
+Australia, as the white population does not increase and England's day
+as a colonising power proper is practically over (having no longer any
+agricultural population to send out as emigrants), this huge territory
+will not be permanently left at the sole dog-in-the-manger control of
+its present <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[173]</a></span>handful of inhabitants. We may expect, at least, that
+Australia will not be permanently able to retain its position without
+an infusion of entirely fresh blood, and should other peoples require
+an outlet in that direction, the present preposterous policy will have
+to be abandoned."<a name="FNanchor_484_484" id="FNanchor_484_484"></a><a href="#Footnote_484_484" class="fnanchor">[484]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists seem, on the whole, to be opposed to the federation of the
+British Empire. "The Labour party approaches Imperial problems with
+the politics of the industrious classes as guide on the one hand, and
+the internationalism of its nature as guide on the other."<a name="FNanchor_485_485" id="FNanchor_485_485"></a><a href="#Footnote_485_485" class="fnanchor">[485]</a> Its
+"internationalism" apparently prevents it from approving of any
+practical scheme of Imperial Federation. Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P.,
+of the Labour party, has not expressed actual hostility to the Empire.
+In fact, he has even declared: "Socialism did not intend to re-write
+history. It accepted the facts of life, and one of these facts was
+that we were responsible for the Empire, and, whether we liked it or
+not, we had to rule that Empire. He was overjoyed the other day to
+find that at Stuttgart their Dutch and German and French friends were
+fully aware of the fact that, if Socialism was to play the proper part
+that belonged to it, it must devise a colonial policy."<a name="FNanchor_486_486" id="FNanchor_486_486"></a><a href="#Footnote_486_486" class="fnanchor">[486]</a>
+Nevertheless, Mr. Macdonald's views do not appear to be very
+practical, as will be seen in the following pages.</p>
+
+<p>"These free colonies, though of enormous extent, count for little in
+the matter of population. Their wealth is out of all proportion to
+their numbers, as their pretensions are out of all proportion to their
+power. That they will play any very great part in the future of the
+world, either federated to the mother country or in any other way,
+seems exceedingly improbable."<a name="FNanchor_487_487" id="FNanchor_487_487"></a><a href="#Footnote_487_487" class="fnanchor">[487]</a> <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[174]</a></span>"Imperialism is crudely
+ineffective. Imperial Federation would give the colonies a fuller
+sense of independence and liberty, and thus far would benefit them.
+But Imperial Federation is not approved on this account, but because
+it is supposed to be a way of uniting the Empire. That, it will not
+do: it will very likely do the opposite. In whatever form it comes, it
+will give to the independent interests of the colonies new importance.
+We shall then hear less of the Empire and more of Canada, or New
+Zealand, or South Africa, and a great danger will arise that a purely
+sectional view of Imperial interests may secure the support of the
+might and the arrogance of the whole Empire."<a name="FNanchor_488_488" id="FNanchor_488_488"></a><a href="#Footnote_488_488" class="fnanchor">[488]</a> "Canada has almost
+claimed that it is a right of self-governing States to be allowed to
+make treaties for themselves. When that happens, the colonies might as
+well sever themselves from the mother country altogether. For under
+present circumstances the authority which makes treaties is the
+authority which ultimately controls armies. To give any of our
+colonies the power to embroil us in war, or to determine our relations
+with European Powers, is to give the first shattering blow to Imperial
+solidarity."<a name="FNanchor_489_489" id="FNanchor_489_489"></a><a href="#Footnote_489_489" class="fnanchor">[489]</a></p>
+
+<p>Nearly all British Socialists passionately oppose the retention of
+India. They never tire of condemning British rule in India, and of
+endeavouring to incite the native races to rebellion. According to the
+assertions of Socialists, the British Government has "manufactured"
+famine and plague in India, and its rule is the worst, the most cruel,
+and the most pernicious form of despotism which the world has seen.</p>
+
+<p>Mr. Hyndman says: "India is the greatest and most awful instance of
+the cruelty, greed, and short-sightedness of the capitalist class of
+which history gives any record. Even the horrors of Spanish rule in
+South America are <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[175]</a></span>dwarfed into insignificance in comparison with the
+cold, calculating, economic infamy which has starved, and is still
+deliberately starving, millions of people to death in British
+India."<a name="FNanchor_490_490" id="FNanchor_490_490"></a><a href="#Footnote_490_490" class="fnanchor">[490]</a> "I charge it against the British Government, at this
+moment, that the economic condition of India is much more horrible
+than ever it was. I declare that the despotism of Russia is more
+apparently cruel, but the actual economic effect of the British
+Government's rule in India is more desperate than anything in the
+situation in Russia."<a name="FNanchor_491_491" id="FNanchor_491_491"></a><a href="#Footnote_491_491" class="fnanchor">[491]</a></p>
+
+<p>Mr. Hare also speaks of "famine made by Government"<a name="FNanchor_492_492" id="FNanchor_492_492"></a><a href="#Footnote_492_492" class="fnanchor">[492]</a>&mdash;India
+suffers from two great evils: famine and the plague. India is very
+densely populated. The natives live chiefly upon rice, and rice
+requires an enormous quantity of moisture. If rain fails, there is
+famine, and no Government can prevent it, though it may alleviate it.
+Therefore all rice countries&mdash;China, India, Japan&mdash;are periodically
+stricken by famine. It is difficult enough, and taxes the resources of
+a country to the utmost, to feed in a barren country an army of
+500,000 men who are closely assembled. It is impossible to feed a
+population of 60,000,000, even if funds and stores of food are
+unlimited. With the most perfect system of harbours, canals, railways,
+&amp;c., the distribution of food for 60,000,000 people offers
+insurmountable obstacles. Plague is caused by infection, and may be
+stamped out by the observance of those sanitary rules which Indians
+refuse to observe. Cases of plague are not reported to the
+authorities, but are hidden from them, so that the sanctity of the
+home may not be defiled by the entrance of a medical man.
+Nevertheless, Socialists never tire of preaching: "If there is one
+disease which is more directly the outcome of poverty than any other,
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[176]</a></span>it is the plague."<a name="FNanchor_493_493" id="FNanchor_493_493"></a><a href="#Footnote_493_493" class="fnanchor">[493]</a> "Just think of 250,000 people dying of
+manufactured black plague in one month. It is not the people of
+England who benefit by our murderous despotism in India. It is not the
+working classes who would suffer if India were relieved from its
+present frightful oppression. If the present trade is beneficial, it
+is beneficial to the wealthy rather than to the workers."<a name="FNanchor_494_494" id="FNanchor_494_494"></a><a href="#Footnote_494_494" class="fnanchor">[494]</a> "If
+ever there was a population in the history of the world possessed of a
+remarkable climate, with a fruitful soil, with all the opportunities
+for making wealth, and having been the source of wealth to the peoples
+who have traded with them for centuries, the population of India is
+that people and Hindostan is that country which ought to be supremely
+wealthy."<a name="FNanchor_495_495" id="FNanchor_495_495"></a><a href="#Footnote_495_495" class="fnanchor">[495]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists have done all in their power to arouse the hostility of
+Europe and America against Great Britain by denouncing British
+misrule, cruelty, and tyranny in India. "I rejoice, as an Englishman,
+that I have done my share for nearly thirty years to expose in Europe,
+America, and Asia the systematic rascality of my aristocratic and
+plutocratic countrymen."<a name="FNanchor_496_496" id="FNanchor_496_496"></a><a href="#Footnote_496_496" class="fnanchor">[496]</a> "I appeal to this International
+Socialist Congress to denounce the statesmen and the nation guilty of
+this infamy before the entire civilised world, and to convey to the
+natives of India the heartfelt wish of the delegates of the workers of
+all nations here assembled that they may shortly, no matter in what
+manner, free themselves finally from the horrors of the most criminal
+misrule that has ever afflicted humanity."<a name="FNanchor_497_497" id="FNanchor_497_497"></a><a href="#Footnote_497_497" class="fnanchor">[497]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists unceasingly work for the overthrow of British rule in
+India. Theirs is a larger humanity. They wish to bring about a rising
+of the Indian population, and they seem to care little if the 250,000
+British people residing in that country are incidentally
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[177]</a></span>exterminated. Their hatred of the "capitalist" Empire is apparently
+greater than their sense of humanity and duty towards their own
+countrymen.</p>
+
+<p>At a recent Socialist meeting in connection with the unrest in India,
+Mr. Hyndman submitted the following motion: "This meeting of the
+citizens of London expresses its deepest sympathy and admiration for
+Lajpat Kai, Adjit Singh, and the Sikh leaders at Rawal Pindi,
+Amritsar, and Lahore, now undergoing imprisonment without trial, at
+the command of Mr. John Morley and the Liberal Government, and sends
+its cordial greetings to the agitators all over India who are doing
+their utmost to awaken their countrymen of every race and creed to the
+ruinous effect of our rule, which, by draining away 35,000,000<i>l.</i>
+worth of produce yearly from India without return, has manufactured
+poverty upon a scale unprecedented in history and is converting the
+greatest Empire the world has ever seen into a vast pauper warren and
+human plague farm. This meeting further records its fervent hope that
+this infamous British system which crushes all economic, social, and
+political life out of 230 millions of people will ere long be
+peaceably or forcibly swept away for ever."<a name="FNanchor_498_498" id="FNanchor_498_498"></a><a href="#Footnote_498_498" class="fnanchor">[498]</a> Proceeding, Mr.
+Hyndman said: "I may mention I have just finished a pamphlet on India
+I have written for the International Socialist Congress at Stuttgart,
+which is going to be translated by the International Socialist Bureau
+into German and French, and I will take care it is translated into
+some other languages&mdash;Eastern languages&mdash;including the Japanese
+language."<a name="FNanchor_499_499" id="FNanchor_499_499"></a><a href="#Footnote_499_499" class="fnanchor">[499]</a></p>
+
+<p>Attempts to incite the native Indians to rise in rebellion and to
+massacre the British garrison and the British people residing in India
+are not restricted to Mr. Hyndman. We read in the leading Socialist
+monthly: "The maintenance of British rule in India means that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[178]</a></span>the
+working people of Great Britain are engaged in helping their
+masters&mdash;the class which robs them&mdash;to plunder the unfortunate people
+of India of over thirty millions sterling every year. We desire to see
+the people of India, as of every other country, not only possessed of
+national independence and political rights, but of social and
+economical liberty and equality. We assert the right of the Indian
+people to manage their own affairs, and ardently desire the
+destruction of British rule there."<a name="FNanchor_500_500" id="FNanchor_500_500"></a><a href="#Footnote_500_500" class="fnanchor">[500]</a> From the official organ of
+the Independent Labour Party we learn that that party also "has
+declared itself wholly in favour of constitutional government in India
+and the social emancipation of the poverty-stricken Indian people. We
+believe that Mr. Hardie has had that purpose solely in view, and the
+party will stand solidly with him in conveying to the Indian people
+the strongest expression of the sympathy and support of British
+Socialists in their struggle against social and political
+oppression."<a name="FNanchor_501_501" id="FNanchor_501_501"></a><a href="#Footnote_501_501" class="fnanchor">[501]</a> If British subjects are murdered in India by the ten
+thousand, we may thank our revolutionary Socialists.</p>
+
+<p>Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., of the Labour party very sensibly
+recommends with regard to India: "The Government should win the
+confidence and assent of the people."<a name="FNanchor_502_502" id="FNanchor_502_502"></a><a href="#Footnote_502_502" class="fnanchor">[502]</a> He then continues: "The
+immediate reforms necessary are a lightening of India's financial load
+by relieving it of the Imperial burdens which it now unjustly bears,
+and a readjustment of taxes; the extension of local and State
+self-government and further opportunities for natives to be employed
+in public offices; the freeing of the press."<a name="FNanchor_503_503" id="FNanchor_503_503"></a><a href="#Footnote_503_503" class="fnanchor">[503]</a> It is easy to
+formulate a policy by expressing generous abstract sentiments. Is Mr.
+Macdonald aware that "the lightening of India's financial load" would
+mean its transference to English shoulders, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[179]</a></span>that the granting of
+self-government and the freeing of the press might lead to a position
+which would put before this country the alternative of a war of
+repression in India or of its abandonment, and that the abandonment of
+India would ruin Lancashire?</p>
+
+<p>We have taken note of the destructive part of the policy which
+Socialists wish to pursue towards the Empire. Now let us take note of
+their constructive proposals, though these are not nearly as numerous
+as their destructive ones.</p>
+
+<p>Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., of the Labour party, is dissatisfied with
+Imperial administration in its present form. He would democratise it
+and replace the present Imperial Governors by labour men and Socialist
+agitators and orators. "The Crown cannot be the custodian of an
+Imperial policy, though it may be an Imperial link&mdash;and even in this
+respect its influence is greatly exaggerated at home."<a name="FNanchor_504_504" id="FNanchor_504_504"></a><a href="#Footnote_504_504" class="fnanchor">[504]</a> "The real
+difficulty lies in securing the confidence of the Imperial States for
+whatever authority is to be custodian of the Imperial standard.
+Downing Street is ignorant of colonial opinion and needs. Above all,
+Downing Street is the surviving symbol of the era of the British
+'dominions' and the real 'colonies.' The Imperial States will not
+repose confidence in Downing Street, therefore Downing Street cannot
+remain the custodian of Imperial standards. What is to take its
+place?"<a name="FNanchor_505_505" id="FNanchor_505_505"></a><a href="#Footnote_505_505" class="fnanchor">[505]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The failure of our Empire, except to produce mechanical results, such
+as keeping warring tribes at peace, is largely owing to the fact that
+the Empire is governed by the most narrow-visioned of our social
+classes. National pride may be a valuable possession, but when it
+becomes a consciousness of racial superiority it ceases to be an
+Imperial virtue. Thus it is not only in its origin, but also in its
+present administration, that the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[180]</a></span>Empire in a special sense is a
+perquisite of the rich classes, and the influence of the Labour party
+on Imperial politics must be to democratise the <i>personnel</i> of the
+Imperial machine. A trade union secretary could govern a province
+<i>prima facie</i> better than the son of an ancient county family or
+someone who was a friend of the Colonial Secretary when he was passing
+time at Balliol. We honestly think that the colonies appreciate our
+aristocracy, but the colonies laugh at our amiable illusions."<a name="FNanchor_506_506" id="FNanchor_506_506"></a><a href="#Footnote_506_506" class="fnanchor">[506]</a></p>
+
+<p>Is Mr. Macdonald sure that the dominions and colonies would welcome a
+change, and that "trade union secretaries" in their very narrow circle
+of activity might not become even more "narrow-visioned" than our
+present pro-consuls? At the same time it cannot be doubted that all
+labour leaders and Socialist agitators will highly approve of his
+proposals to make all vice-royalties and governorships their
+"perquisites." Apart from a few not very practical proposals,
+Socialists follow not a constructive, but a purely destructive, policy
+with regard to the Empire, which in their eyes is merely a capitalist
+institution. Pursuing consciously or unconsciously a policy of
+revolutionary anarchism, they would break up the Empire and even Great
+Britain herself. Therefore many Socialists advocate the legislative
+independence of both Ireland and Scotland, although some preach,
+"'Home Rule' <i>per se</i> will not rid Ireland of Lord Deliverus and the
+gang he represents; the remedy for Ireland's distress, as the early
+leaders of Irish discontent perceived, is release from the grip of the
+brigands who stole the nation's heritage. In other words, the real
+object of the Irish movement is Socialism; their cause is ours, and
+our paths lie side by side. But they too have been tricked and led
+astray by the old political will-o'-the-wisp, the seeming angel of
+'Liberty' translated in their case to 'Home Rule.' For many years now
+they <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[181]</a></span>have pursued this shifty light through the arid desert of
+politics, and unless they can come to a clear understanding of their
+own original purpose again, and join with their English Socialist
+comrades to find a way out of our common difficulties, they are like
+to abide in that dreary desert for ever."<a name="FNanchor_507_507" id="FNanchor_507_507"></a><a href="#Footnote_507_507" class="fnanchor">[507]</a></p>
+
+<p>Whilst the vast majority of British Socialists are unpatriotic,
+anti-national, and anti-Imperial, and would act as traitors to their
+country, the powerful Socialist party of Germany is strongly, one
+might almost say passionately, national and Imperial. Many German
+Socialists are enthusiastic supporters of the German Navy League, and
+they would not hesitate in depriving, if possible, and if need be by
+force, Great Britain of those colonies which her Socialists desire to
+get rid of.</p>
+
+<p>The attitude of German Socialists towards their Fatherland, Empire,
+colonial possessions, and native races, may be gauged from the words
+of Herr Bernstein, one of her most prominent Socialist leaders: "The
+national quality is developing more and more. Socialism can and must
+be national. Even when we sing <i>Ubi bene, ibi patria</i> we still
+acknowledge a <i>patria</i>, and therefore, in accordance with the motto
+'No rights without duties,' also duties towards her. To-day the
+Social-Democratic party is, and that unanimously, the most decided
+Imperial party that Germany knows. No other party is so keen to make
+over more and more legislative authority to the Empire and to widen
+its competence as the Social-Democratic party. The idea that in a
+country there exists a powerful party which is only waiting for war in
+order to make difficulties for its own Government, to set on foot a
+military strike and such-like, this idea may become the greatest
+menace to peace by being a spur to adventurous politicians to work
+towards a war with that country. But the home Government knows very
+well that the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[182]</a></span>declaration that the Social-Democrats would, in case of
+need, give their lives for the independence of Germany against a
+foreign Power is by no means a free pass for them to take war
+easily."<a name="FNanchor_508_508" id="FNanchor_508_508"></a><a href="#Footnote_508_508" class="fnanchor">[508]</a></p>
+
+<p>In another periodical Herr Bernstein wrote: "The advantages of
+colonial possessions are always conditional. At a given period a
+nation can only sustain a certain quantity of such possessions. As
+long as she was ahead of all other nations in productive power,
+England could support a much larger amount than any other modern
+nation. But the time of her industrial supremacy has passed away, or
+at least is nearing its end. Protectionism on the Continent and in the
+United States may protract the advent of the inevitable in some
+degree. But its hour will strike one day, and when the advantages
+which free trade secures her to-day disappear, she would either have,
+I believe, to free herself of part of her colonial burdens or lose
+more and more of her trade, and with it her regenerative force. So
+much for England. With Germany the question is quite different.
+Although her rural population is now decreasing, she could, with a
+yearly increase of about 800,000, well stand more colonial possessions
+than she actually holds, nor would the costs and outlays for her
+colonies press very hard on her finances. Where two civilisations
+clash, the lower must give way to the higher. This law of evolution we
+cannot overthrow, we can only humanise its action. To counteract it
+would mean to postpone social progress."<a name="FNanchor_509_509" id="FNanchor_509_509"></a><a href="#Footnote_509_509" class="fnanchor">[509]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is sad to compare the sane, manly, national, and patriotic attitude
+of German Socialists with the foolish, anti-national cosmopolitanism
+of British Socialists, who, parading beautiful motives of the largest
+humanity, would not hesitate to sacrifice their country and their
+countrymen, their Empire and their colonies.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_476_476" id="Footnote_476_476"></a><a href="#FNanchor_476_476"><span class="label">[476]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Social Democracy and the Armed Nation</i>, p.
+14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_477_477" id="Footnote_477_477"></a><a href="#FNanchor_477_477"><span class="label">[477]</span></a> <i>Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_478_478" id="Footnote_478_478"></a><a href="#FNanchor_478_478"><span class="label">[478]</span></a> Norman, <i>Empire and Murder</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_479_479" id="Footnote_479_479"></a><a href="#FNanchor_479_479"><span class="label">[479]</span></a> <i>Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_480_480" id="Footnote_480_480"></a><a href="#FNanchor_480_480"><span class="label">[480]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_481_481" id="Footnote_481_481"></a><a href="#FNanchor_481_481"><span class="label">[481]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 36.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_482_482" id="Footnote_482_482"></a><a href="#FNanchor_482_482"><span class="label">[482]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Colonies and Dependencies</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_483_483" id="Footnote_483_483"></a><a href="#FNanchor_483_483"><span class="label">[483]</span></a> <i>Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency</i>, pp. 12,
+13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_484_484" id="Footnote_484_484"></a><a href="#FNanchor_484_484"><span class="label">[484]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Colonies and Dependencies</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_485_485" id="Footnote_485_485"></a><a href="#FNanchor_485_485"><span class="label">[485]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Labour and the Empire</i>, p. 108.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_486_486" id="Footnote_486_486"></a><a href="#FNanchor_486_486"><span class="label">[486]</span></a> <i>Labour Leader</i>, October 10, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_487_487" id="Footnote_487_487"></a><a href="#FNanchor_487_487"><span class="label">[487]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Colonies and Dependencies</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_488_488" id="Footnote_488_488"></a><a href="#FNanchor_488_488"><span class="label">[488]</span></a> <i>Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_489_489" id="Footnote_489_489"></a><a href="#FNanchor_489_489"><span class="label">[489]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Labour and the Empire</i>, pp. 76, 77.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_490_490" id="Footnote_490_490"></a><a href="#FNanchor_490_490"><span class="label">[490]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Colonies and Dependencies</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_491_491" id="Footnote_491_491"></a><a href="#FNanchor_491_491"><span class="label">[491]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>The Unrest in India</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_492_492" id="Footnote_492_492"></a><a href="#FNanchor_492_492"><span class="label">[492]</span></a> Hare, <i>Famine in India</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_493_493" id="Footnote_493_493"></a><a href="#FNanchor_493_493"><span class="label">[493]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>The Unrest in India</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_494_494" id="Footnote_494_494"></a><a href="#FNanchor_494_494"><span class="label">[494]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_495_495" id="Footnote_495_495"></a><a href="#FNanchor_495_495"><span class="label">[495]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_496_496" id="Footnote_496_496"></a><a href="#FNanchor_496_496"><span class="label">[496]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Colonies and Dependencies</i>, pp. 11, 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_497_497" id="Footnote_497_497"></a><a href="#FNanchor_497_497"><span class="label">[497]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_498_498" id="Footnote_498_498"></a><a href="#FNanchor_498_498"><span class="label">[498]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>The Unrest in India</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_499_499" id="Footnote_499_499"></a><a href="#FNanchor_499_499"><span class="label">[499]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_500_500" id="Footnote_500_500"></a><a href="#FNanchor_500_500"><span class="label">[500]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, July 1907, pp. 393, 394.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_501_501" id="Footnote_501_501"></a><a href="#FNanchor_501_501"><span class="label">[501]</span></a> <i>Labour Leader</i>, October 11, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_502_502" id="Footnote_502_502"></a><a href="#FNanchor_502_502"><span class="label">[502]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Labour and the Empire</i>, p. 104.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_503_503" id="Footnote_503_503"></a><a href="#FNanchor_503_503"><span class="label">[503]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 105.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_504_504" id="Footnote_504_504"></a><a href="#FNanchor_504_504"><span class="label">[504]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Labour and the Empire</i>, p. 70.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_505_505" id="Footnote_505_505"></a><a href="#FNanchor_505_505"><span class="label">[505]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 67, 68.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_506_506" id="Footnote_506_506"></a><a href="#FNanchor_506_506"><span class="label">[506]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Labour and the Empire</i>, pp. 27, 28.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_507_507" id="Footnote_507_507"></a><a href="#FNanchor_507_507"><span class="label">[507]</span></a> Thompson, <i>That Blessed Word Liberty</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_508_508" id="Footnote_508_508"></a><a href="#FNanchor_508_508"><span class="label">[508]</span></a> Ed. Bernstein in the <i>Sozialistische Monatshefte</i>,
+translated in the <i>Social-Democrat</i>, July 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_509_509" id="Footnote_509_509"></a><a href="#FNanchor_509_509"><span class="label">[509]</span></a> <i>Nation</i>, October 12, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XII" id="CHAPTER_XII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[183]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALIST VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND FOREIGN POLICY</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">"Socialism," Mr. Ramsay Macdonald writes, "has a great part to play
+immediately in international politics. It alone can banish national
+jealousies from the Foreign Offices; it alone offers the guarantees of
+peace which are a necessary preliminary to disarmament. Socialism has
+a world policy as well as a national one&mdash;a corollary to its belief in
+the brotherhood of man."<a name="FNanchor_510_510" id="FNanchor_510_510"></a><a href="#Footnote_510_510" class="fnanchor">[510]</a> These words contain assurances, not a
+plan, and therefore we must inquire, What is the foreign policy of
+Socialism?</p>
+
+<p>As regards foreign policy one may divide the Socialists into two
+classes: revolutionaries and visionaries. It will be seen in the
+following pages that the aims of both are similar.</p>
+
+<p>The foreign policy of the revolutionary Socialists of Great Britain is
+based on the celebrated "Communist Manifesto" of Marx and Engels,
+which contains the following programme regarding foreign policy: "The
+Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by
+this only: in the national struggles of the proletarians of the
+different countries they point out and bring to the front the common
+interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all
+nationality."<a name="FNanchor_511_511" id="FNanchor_511_511"></a><a href="#Footnote_511_511" class="fnanchor">[511]</a> "The Communists everywhere support every
+revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order
+of things. In all these movements they bring to the front, as the
+leading question of each, the property <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[184]</a></span>question, no matter what its
+degree of development at the time. Finally, they labour everywhere for
+the union and agreement of the democratic parties of all countries.
+The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly
+declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow
+of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a
+Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but
+their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries,
+unite!"<a name="FNanchor_512_512" id="FNanchor_512_512"></a><a href="#Footnote_512_512" class="fnanchor">[512]</a></p>
+
+<p>In accordance with the foregoing proclamation of Marx and Engels, the
+philosopher of British Socialism teaches: "For the Socialist the word
+'frontier' does not exist; for him love of country, as such, is no
+nobler sentiment than love of class. Race pride and class pride are,
+from the standpoint of Socialism, involved in the same condemnation.
+The establishment of Socialism, therefore, on any national or race
+basis is out of the question. The foreign policy of the great
+international Socialist party must be to break up these hideous race
+monopolies called empires, beginning in each case at home. Hence
+everything which makes for the disruption and disintegration of the
+empire to which he belongs must be welcomed by the Socialist as an
+ally. It is his duty to urge on any movement tending in any way to
+dislocate the commercial relations of the world, knowing that every
+shock the modern complex commercial system suffers weakens it and
+brings its destruction nearer. This is the negative side of the
+foreign policy of Socialism. The positive is embraced in a single
+sentence; to consolidate the union of the several national sections on
+the basis of firm and equal friendship, steadfast adherence to
+definite principles, and determination to present a solid front to the
+enemy."<a name="FNanchor_513_513" id="FNanchor_513_513"></a><a href="#Footnote_513_513" class="fnanchor">[513]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[185]</a></span>The head of the Social-Democratic Federation informs us: "We have
+never failed to hold up before the people the high ideal of a complete
+social revolution, which shall replace the capitalist sweating system
+and its terrible class war by the happiness, contentment, and glory of
+a great co-operative commonwealth for all mankind."<a name="FNanchor_514_514" id="FNanchor_514_514"></a><a href="#Footnote_514_514" class="fnanchor">[514]</a></p>
+
+<p>Faithful to the teaching of Karl Marx, Mr. Tom Mann proclaims: "We do
+not want any walls built round cities or nations for fear of invasion;
+what we do now stand in urgent need of is an international working
+alliance among the workers of the whole world. The only position of
+safety will be found in international action among the organised
+workers of the world."<a name="FNanchor_515_515" id="FNanchor_515_515"></a><a href="#Footnote_515_515" class="fnanchor">[515]</a></p>
+
+<p>These being the doctrines of revolutionary Socialism, it is only
+natural that many British Socialists take the enemy's part in case of
+war.<a name="FNanchor_516_516" id="FNanchor_516_516"></a><a href="#Footnote_516_516" class="fnanchor">[516]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foreign policy of the visionary Socialists is based on the idea of
+human brotherhood and the equality of men of all races, creeds, and
+colours. "Socialism is brotherhood; and brotherhood is as wide as the
+heavens and as broad as humanity. The growth of international
+Socialism is the promise of the realisation of the angels' natal song:
+On earth, peace; Good will toward men. Socialism will remove the
+causes of international antagonism and make the interests of all
+nations the same."<a name="FNanchor_517_517" id="FNanchor_517_517"></a><a href="#Footnote_517_517" class="fnanchor">[517]</a> "Socialism implies the inherent equality of
+all human beings. It does not assume that all are alike, but only that
+all are equal. Holding this to be true of individuals, the Socialist
+applies it also to races. Only by a full and unqualified recognition
+of this claim can peace be restored to the world. Socialism implies
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[186]</a></span>brotherhood, brotherhood implies a living recognition of the fact that
+the duty of the strong is not to hold the weak in subjection but to
+assist them to rise higher and ever higher in the scale of humanity,
+and that this cannot be done by trampling upon and exploiting their
+weakness, but by caring for them and showing them the better
+way."<a name="FNanchor_518_518" id="FNanchor_518_518"></a><a href="#Footnote_518_518" class="fnanchor">[518]</a> Thus Socialism will bring to the world eternal peace. In
+the words of the poet:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">There's a good time coming, boys,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">A good time coming;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And war in all men's eyes shall be<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">A monster of iniquity,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">In the good time coming.<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Nations shall not quarrel then,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">To prove which is the stronger;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Nor slaughter men for glory's sake&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Wait a little longer.<a name="FNanchor_519_519" id="FNanchor_519_519"></a><a href="#Footnote_519_519" class="fnanchor">[519]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The ideas expressed in the above are very noble, but they seem to be
+hardly in accordance with historical experience or with human nature
+as we know it. The race war on the Pacific coast, and the murderous
+attacks by strikers on free labourers who have taken their place which
+are of frequent occurrence in all countries, show that even Socialists
+are apt to rely rather on threats, violence, and superior force than
+on brotherliness and reason, although the Chinaman and the Japanese
+have, according to the Socialist doctrines given in the foregoing, as
+much right to earn a living as any white man.</p>
+
+<p>"Socialism is essentially international. It recognises no distinction
+between the various nations comprising the modern civilised world. 'My
+country, right or wrong,' the expression of modern patriotism, is the
+very antithesis of Socialism.... This internationalism means liberty
+and equality between nations as between <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[187]</a></span>individuals, and amalgamation
+as soon as feasible, and as close as possible, under the red flag of
+Social Democracy, which does not recognise national distinctions or
+the division of progressive humanity into nations and races."<a name="FNanchor_520_520" id="FNanchor_520_520"></a><a href="#Footnote_520_520" class="fnanchor">[520]</a>
+"The new community will be built up on an international basis. The
+nations will fraternise together, will shake hands over old quarrels,
+and unite in gradually extending the new State over all peoples of the
+earth."<a name="FNanchor_521_521" id="FNanchor_521_521"></a><a href="#Footnote_521_521" class="fnanchor">[521]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Nationalisation is only the beginning of Socialism. Once let any
+nation be thoroughly imbued with the Socialist spirit, it will become
+a missionary nation. It will preach the glad tidings of salvation to
+people of other tongues, and that which was national shall become
+universal: East and West, North and South, all shall realise, all
+shall rejoice in, the glorious brotherhood of man."<a name="FNanchor_522_522" id="FNanchor_522_522"></a><a href="#Footnote_522_522" class="fnanchor">[522]</a></p>
+
+<p>The "brotherhood of man" reminds one of the French Revolution. Like
+the French Revolution, Socialism has imposed upon itself the mission
+to convert the world to its doctrine, and people may again be placed
+before the alternative "La Fraternit&eacute; ou la Mort."</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Let despots frown and tyrants sneer,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The red flag is unfurled;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">We'll to our principles adhere<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And socialise the world.<a name="FNanchor_523_523" id="FNanchor_523_523"></a><a href="#Footnote_523_523" class="fnanchor">[523]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Being anxious to "socialise the world," Socialists eagerly note every
+progress of Socialism in foreign countries from Paris to Pekin. For
+instance, we read in the "Reformers' Year Book": "The belief that the
+quick-witted Japanese would, at the beginning of their new
+civilisation, avoid the evils of European capitalism <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[188]</a></span>by accepting a
+scheme of Socialism is not being fulfilled. The dividend-hunter, who
+has been to Europe and received a business training, is fastening the
+chains of monopoly upon the people. To meet this growing danger there
+is already a thriving Socialist-Labour party, which has a daily
+newspaper, the 'Hikari' ('Light')."<a name="FNanchor_524_524" id="FNanchor_524_524"></a><a href="#Footnote_524_524" class="fnanchor">[524]</a> To facilitate the
+"socialisation of the world" and the introduction of "the brotherhood
+of man" by making Socialism truly international, Socialists are urged
+to study Esperanto, which apparently is to be the international
+Socialist language of the future. The "Clarion" and other Socialist
+papers regularly contain articles written in Esperanto, and the
+anti-patriotic writings of Herv&eacute; and Gohier&mdash;an extract from the
+writings of the former will be found in Chapter XIII.&mdash;have been
+translated into Esperanto, apparently in the hope that these
+incendiary pamphlets may help in bringing about the great Socialist
+revolution.</p>
+
+<p>Among the 'immediate reforms' demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation (see Appendix) are to be found the
+demands: "The people to decide on peace and war. The establishment of
+international courts of arbitration." In view of these demands, which
+are made by most Socialist organisations, it is quite natural that
+Socialists condemn the secret action of diplomacy. For instance, a
+Socialist writer remarks on the Anglo-French agreements: "Are we the
+masters of our destinies, when a Delcass&eacute; may at any moment immerse us
+in international troubles of the first magnitude? Lord Lansdowne, as
+the accomplice of Delcass&eacute;, was equally guilty, and Sir Edward Grey,
+by now securing this triple alliance without the consent or the
+knowledge of the 150 millions of people whom it most vitally concerns,
+completes a trio of international plotters and murderers."<a name="FNanchor_525_525" id="FNanchor_525_525"></a><a href="#Footnote_525_525" class="fnanchor">[525]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[189]</a></span>Many Socialists believe that wars may soon be abolished by
+international agreement, either among the nations or among the working
+masses, who will force their views upon the governments. According to
+a very prolific Socialist writer, "There are many signs and portents
+to-day that the evil of war, which is not more deeply rooted than was
+slavery a hundred years ago, will, ere long, meet a similar
+fate."<a name="FNanchor_526_526" id="FNanchor_526_526"></a><a href="#Footnote_526_526" class="fnanchor">[526]</a> And what are the "signs and portents" upon which the
+belief is based that war will be abolished? "It is a significant fact
+that whenever the working classes meet to discuss this question of
+war, they invariably express themselves in favour of its speedy end. A
+few days ago, when the Trades Union Congress met at Liverpool, when
+delegates were present representing some two millions of the organised
+workers of the country, the representative of the Navvies' Union
+declared, amid the resounding cheers of the Congress, that it was
+impossible for a man to be a Christian and in favour of war at the
+same time."<a name="FNanchor_527_527" id="FNanchor_527_527"></a><a href="#Footnote_527_527" class="fnanchor">[527]</a> The Navvies' Union will no doubt play a great part in
+the foreign policy of the Socialist commonwealth, but is the
+importance of their declaration not exaggerated? Wars begin, as a
+rule, by an act of aggression. What would the Navvies' Union and the
+Trades Union Congress have said if the secretary had read a telegram
+stating that British ships had been fired upon and sunk by an enemy,
+or that British territory had been invaded and British blood had been
+spilt? I fear that eternal peace is not yet in sight, notwithstanding
+the "sign and portent" of the statement made by the representative of
+the Navvies' Union. Indeed, clear-headed foreign Socialists are aware
+of the very limited usefulness of Peace Conferences, and they deride
+disarmament proposals, such as that submitted to the last Hague
+Conference by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[190]</a></span>An exceedingly able article in the foremost Socialist organ of Germany
+gave, early in the spring of 1907, the following views on the probable
+result of The Hague Conference and on the British proposals regarding
+the limitation of armaments, views which are particularly interesting
+because they show the sound good sense of the German Socialists and
+the difference between the political views of German and British
+Socialists. The article stated:</p>
+
+<p>"Just as the first Hague Conference of 1898 in reality achieved
+nothing more than a few secondary amendments to the law of nations,
+conformity with which was left completely to the fancy of the
+individual Powers, so the second Hague Conference will, it is highly
+probable, result in nothing further than a few general peace
+assertions and international arrangements which, when it comes to a
+war, will not outlive the first interchange of shots. Certainly the
+English Premier is right. There does exist among the thoughtful
+persons in all European States an intellectual tendency towards the
+peaceful settlement of differences between the nations and the
+diminution of the gigantic military and naval armaments. But this body
+of thoughtful people is&mdash;as the last elections in Germany have again
+proved&mdash;on the whole rather small; and above all, these thoughtful
+people do not belong to the economically powerful class who determine
+the policy of Governments.</p>
+
+<p>"The old ideologic conception of the English free trade doctrine, that
+the free exchange of goods between the nations leads to the abolition
+of war, to the brotherhood of humanity, that conception which found
+its most original expression in Dr. Bowring's exclamation 'Free trade
+is Jesus Christ,' still haunts some people's minds. With the greatest
+number of the liberal advocates of disarmament, their point of view
+originates simply in the consideration that the strong naval and
+military <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[191]</a></span>armaments demand more and more, not only from England's
+purse, but from her human material, while, on the other hand, England
+possesses all that she can expect, and has, on that account, not much
+more to gain. All over the earth's surface she has the most valuable
+colonies, and is, since the alliances with Japan and France, in a
+perfectly secure position, which awakens in her the wish to
+consolidate her position and to economise her finances for the
+upholding of her supremacy. It is that satisfied state of mind which
+makes the fortunate winner of the game say, 'Let us leave off; I am
+tired of playing now.' English capitalists feel themselves in a safe
+position. Nothing can easily go wrong at present. The thing is,
+therefore, to secure what they have got and to diminish the heavy
+burdens. This desire is comprehensible&mdash;only the other Powers will
+probably not respect it.</p>
+
+<p>"The working-class party is very much in sympathy with the disarmament
+idea in itself. For this party is the most consistent opponent of
+militarism, and demands in its programme not only the formation of a
+citizen army in place of the standing army, but also that questions of
+peace and war should be determined by the people themselves, and that
+all international differences should be settled by arbitration. But no
+amount of sympathy can get over the fact that in the present
+capitalist world there is very little chance of a general disarmament
+of the Powers. The conception that war is only a product of human
+unreason is on the same level as the idea that revolutions are only
+mental aberrations of the masses. War is rooted in the opposing
+interests of the nations, as are revolutions in the opposing interests
+of the classes."<a name="FNanchor_528_528" id="FNanchor_528_528"></a><a href="#Footnote_528_528" class="fnanchor">[528]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_510_510" id="Footnote_510_510"></a><a href="#FNanchor_510_510"><span class="label">[510]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 120.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_511_511" id="Footnote_511_511"></a><a href="#FNanchor_511_511"><span class="label">[511]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto</i>, p. 1</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_512_512" id="Footnote_512_512"></a><a href="#FNanchor_512_512"><span class="label">[512]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto</i>, p. 31.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_513_513" id="Footnote_513_513"></a><a href="#FNanchor_513_513"><span class="label">[513]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, pp. 126, 127.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_514_514" id="Footnote_514_514"></a><a href="#FNanchor_514_514"><span class="label">[514]</span></a> Debate, Hyndman, <i>Will Socialism Benefit the English
+People?</i> Introduction.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_515_515" id="Footnote_515_515"></a><a href="#FNanchor_515_515"><span class="label">[515]</span></a> Mann, <i>International Labour Movement</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_516_516" id="Footnote_516_516"></a><a href="#FNanchor_516_516"><span class="label">[516]</span></a> See, for instance, Hyndman in <i>The Transvaal War and
+the Degradation of England</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_517_517" id="Footnote_517_517"></a><a href="#FNanchor_517_517"><span class="label">[517]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_518_518" id="Footnote_518_518"></a><a href="#FNanchor_518_518"><span class="label">[518]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_519_519" id="Footnote_519_519"></a><a href="#FNanchor_519_519"><span class="label">[519]</span></a> <i>Clarion Song Book</i>, p. 25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_520_520" id="Footnote_520_520"></a><a href="#FNanchor_520_520"><span class="label">[520]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 31.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_521_521" id="Footnote_521_521"></a><a href="#FNanchor_521_521"><span class="label">[521]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman in the Past, Present, and Future</i>, p.
+235.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_522_522" id="Footnote_522_522"></a><a href="#FNanchor_522_522"><span class="label">[522]</span></a> "Veritas," <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_523_523" id="Footnote_523_523"></a><a href="#FNanchor_523_523"><span class="label">[523]</span></a> Neil, <i>Songs of the Social Revolution</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_524_524" id="Footnote_524_524"></a><a href="#FNanchor_524_524"><span class="label">[524]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book, 1907</i>, p. 195.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_525_525" id="Footnote_525_525"></a><a href="#FNanchor_525_525"><span class="label">[525]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, September 1907, p. 534.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_526_526" id="Footnote_526_526"></a><a href="#FNanchor_526_526"><span class="label">[526]</span></a> Ward, <i>The War Drum shall Throb no Longer</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_527_527" id="Footnote_527_527"></a><a href="#FNanchor_527_527"><span class="label">[527]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_528_528" id="Footnote_528_528"></a><a href="#FNanchor_528_528"><span class="label">[528]</span></a> <i>Vorw&auml;rts</i>, March 10, 1907, translated in the
+<i>Social-Democrat</i>, April 1907, pp. 220-224.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XIII" id="CHAPTER_XIII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[192]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XIII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND THE ARMY</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Most Socialists, British and foreign, are opposed to the existing
+armies, for two reasons:</p>
+
+<p>(1) Because they wish to overturn practically all existing
+institutions from the Monarchy downwards, and they fear that the
+military may defend the <i>status quo</i>;</p>
+
+<p>(2) Because they aim at the abolition of States and of nationality and
+at the disappearance of frontiers, as the ideal Socialist State of the
+future would, for economic and political reasons, have to embrace the
+world.</p>
+
+<p>The Socialist State of the future, embracing the whole universe, can
+be created only after the existing States have been overturned.
+Therefore the more immediate aim of Socialists is to seize upon the
+political power in accordance with the advice given by Karl Marx in
+his celebrated "Manifesto."<a name="FNanchor_529_529" id="FNanchor_529_529"></a><a href="#Footnote_529_529" class="fnanchor">[529]</a></p>
+
+<p>Most Socialists apparently believe that not by Parliamentary means but
+only by violence will they succeed in making themselves supreme, for
+we are told: "The ballot-box is no doubt a safer weapon than the
+rifle; but even when there will be a sufficient number of people in
+these islands convinced of the necessity and possibility of the
+co-operative commonwealth, the end will not yet be certain. There are
+the classes in possession to be considered. Are they going to allow
+themselves to be voted out? Will they respect a franchise and
+ballot-box which will vote that they shall get off the backs of the
+workers? Franchise 'Reform' <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[193]</a></span>Bills&mdash;and it is astonishing to what use
+'reform' can now be put&mdash;can be rushed through Parliament, like Crimes
+Acts, in twenty-four hours; and there is the 'voluntary' professional
+army, under military law, to overawe the recalcitrants who may resent
+the suffrage and the ballot-box being jerrymandered against the
+popular interest. But none are so likely to be overawed by threatened
+displays of armed force&mdash;whether voluntary or conscript&mdash;as those who
+have a difficulty in distinguishing the butt end of a rifle from its
+muzzle."<a name="FNanchor_530_530" id="FNanchor_530_530"></a><a href="#Footnote_530_530" class="fnanchor">[530]</a></p>
+
+<p>Under the heading "Will it come to barricades?" we read: "The
+barricade is to-day, all will agree, in this country at any rate, an
+impossible weapon. Armed insurrection on the part of the workers in
+this country would to-day be the height of folly, and will continue to
+be so, so long as our standing army of hired mercenaries exists.
+Standing armies are the instruments of capitalist oppression at home
+and aggression abroad. But so long as even one great Power maintains
+the present form of military organisation, so long as war is possible,
+so long will it be necessary that some form of military organisation
+exist in all countries. We dare not preach peace when we know there
+can be no peace. This is why the Socialists of all countries are
+to-day in favour of an educational policy which will make every
+citizen fit for military service within the ranks of a citizen army,
+organised and maintained for purposes of defence only. The advantages
+of such a force, from the Socialist standpoint, are so obvious that
+they need hardly be stated. And it would at least put the working
+class in a position to understand what a barricade means, and how, if
+need be, to act in their own defence. There are, I am well aware, a
+handful of individual Socialists with us who are against universal
+military training, but they are a diminishing quantity, and will in
+due season find their <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[194]</a></span>natural vocation within the ranks of the
+Liberty and Property Defence League."<a name="FNanchor_531_531" id="FNanchor_531_531"></a><a href="#Footnote_531_531" class="fnanchor">[531]</a></p>
+
+<p>Mr. Quelch, the editor of "Justice," shares the foregoing opinion, for
+he tells us: "Revolutions, it is said, can no longer be accomplished
+by force, but only by peaceful means&mdash;the vote, Parliamentary action,
+and legislation. It may be so, but it will be unprecedented if the
+present ruling class surrender without a struggle. And if they had the
+armed force of the nation at their command, they would struggle
+successfully no matter what the Legislature may have done. The ruling
+class will not be made to submit to law and order which is not their
+law and order, except by overwhelmingly superior force. Nobody
+supposes that in such a contest the people could win against the
+ruling class unless they had been able first to win over the army.
+With a professional 'voluntary' army, well paid and well affected to
+its paymasters, such winning over would be practically impossible. But
+with the armed nation there would be no winning over required. An
+armed nation&mdash;whatever it may do or submit to&mdash;is essentially a free
+nation, and whatever such a nation determines upon, that it can do and
+have, in spite of any ruling class."<a name="FNanchor_532_532" id="FNanchor_532_532"></a><a href="#Footnote_532_532" class="fnanchor">[532]</a></p>
+
+<p>Similar opinions have frequently been expressed by leading Continental
+Socialists. Herr Kautsky, for instance, wrote under the heading
+"Expropriation of the Expropriators," as follows: "The arming of the
+people is a political measure. It can, under certain circumstances,
+cost just as much as a standing army, but it is needed for the safety
+of the democracy in order to deprive the Government of its most
+important weapon against the people."<a name="FNanchor_533_533" id="FNanchor_533_533"></a><a href="#Footnote_533_533" class="fnanchor">[533]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[195]</a></span>Those who are of opinion that only the extreme section of British
+Socialists, the revolutionary wing, is hostile to the army, are
+mistaken. This may be seen from the following resolution of the Fabian
+Society, which is the most moderate exponent of British Socialism:
+"Armies act as a standing menace not to neighbouring States, but to
+the working populations of their own countries. A study of the
+strategical disposition of many of the great railway stations and
+barracks of the Continent will prove that the most important function
+of the modern army is to suppress the resistance of labour to capital
+in the war of classes."<a name="FNanchor_534_534" id="FNanchor_534_534"></a><a href="#Footnote_534_534" class="fnanchor">[534]</a></p>
+
+<p>Among the "immediate reforms" demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation<a name="FNanchor_535_535" id="FNanchor_535_535"></a><a href="#Footnote_535_535" class="fnanchor">[535]</a> we find a demand for "the abolition
+of standing armies and the establishment of national citizen forces."
+Army and police are to most Socialists very objectionable because it
+is their function to protect the national order and national property
+against predatory, anarchistic, and revolutionary attempts. Therefore
+it is only natural that "No Social Democrat regards the present police
+system as a satisfactory one, or a professional police as other than a
+dubious expedient."<a name="FNanchor_536_536" id="FNanchor_536_536"></a><a href="#Footnote_536_536" class="fnanchor">[536]</a> According to the opinion held by many
+Socialists, "The soldier's primary function is to come to the rescue
+of the policeman when the latter is overpowered."<a name="FNanchor_537_537" id="FNanchor_537_537"></a><a href="#Footnote_537_537" class="fnanchor">[537]</a></p>
+
+<p>Voluntary armies of the British type are quite as objectionable to
+Socialists as are the national armies of the compulsory type raised on
+the Continent of Europe. "We are told that the advantage of our
+present military system is that it is not compulsory, that people are
+free to join the service or not as they please. The freedom of the
+average recruit to join the army is about on a par with <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[196]</a></span>the freedom
+of an unemployed workman to work for lower wages than the recognised
+rate of wages, or the freedom of the prostitute."<a name="FNanchor_538_538" id="FNanchor_538_538"></a><a href="#Footnote_538_538" class="fnanchor">[538]</a> "Your soldier,
+ostensibly a heroic and patriotic defender of his country, is really
+an unfortunate man driven by destitution to offer himself as food for
+powder for the sake of regular rations, shelter, and clothing."<a name="FNanchor_539_539" id="FNanchor_539_539"></a><a href="#Footnote_539_539" class="fnanchor">[539]</a>
+"A standing army of professional soldiers is the most effective
+instrument in the hands of the dominant class, the greatest menace to
+democracy and popular liberty, and the most effective barrier to
+revolutionary change that could possibly be devised. And surely, too,
+the antithesis to that is the Armed Nation&mdash;every citizen a soldier
+and every soldier a citizen."<a name="FNanchor_540_540" id="FNanchor_540_540"></a><a href="#Footnote_540_540" class="fnanchor">[540]</a></p>
+
+<p>The ideal army from the Socialist point of view is the armed nation.
+It is, as we shall see in the following, an army composed of Socialist
+workmen and commanded by Socialist leaders. It is not an army for
+national defence, but one for attack on the existing order; it is a
+revolutionary army, an army of plunder. The very natural desire of
+Socialists to create such a force is, as a rule, disguised under the
+demand for a democratic army and universal military training. "We
+Socialists advocate the military training of all citizens and the
+abolition of professional armies, as ensuring the maximum of military
+efficiency and the minimum of menace to democratic principles and
+popular rights. We propose that every man should undergo a thorough
+military training so as to be equal to any other man. A professional
+army is maintained in the main for the defence and maintenance of the
+master class. A professional army is a specialised class or caste,
+divorced from civil life, hostile to the general body of the
+community, and maintained as an instrument to serve the purpose of the
+master class. That <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[197]</a></span>purpose is as often the suppression of popular
+movements at home as aggression abroad. If it were possible to abolish
+all military organisations, the remedy would be simple. But we have
+seen that that is, under present conditions, impossible. Therefore we
+urge that all citizens should be armed and trained to the use of arms,
+so that all reasonable military requirements may be met and
+professional soldiering be entirely dispensed with."<a name="FNanchor_541_541" id="FNanchor_541_541"></a><a href="#Footnote_541_541" class="fnanchor">[541]</a> The fact
+that the abolition of the professional army would involve the loss of
+India and of other possessions to Great Britain is a matter of no
+importance to the Socialists. In fact the Socialists wish Great
+Britain to lose not only India but all her colonies, as will be seen
+by reference to Chapter XI., "Socialism and the Empire."<a name="FNanchor_542_542" id="FNanchor_542_542"></a><a href="#Footnote_542_542" class="fnanchor">[542]</a></p>
+
+<p>Every attempt at improving the voluntary army of Great Britain is
+considered a blow at Socialism, and is therefore vigorously resisted
+by the Socialists. Hence the scheme of army reform of Mr. Haldane,
+Secretary of State for War, has been loudly condemned by them as
+reactionary and likely to strengthen the capitalists, and they entreat
+the workers not to oppose universal military training. "The capitalist
+class would be perfectly delighted that all the rest of the people
+outside themselves and their mercenaries should be peaceful unarmed
+non-resisters. Nothing could suit them better. We have Mr. Haldane's
+territorial army&mdash;on paper; and a more reactionary, militarist (in the
+worst sense), and anti-democratic system than that to which the
+present War Minister has had the effrontery to apply our term of the
+'Armed Nation' could scarcely be devised."<a name="FNanchor_543_543" id="FNanchor_543_543"></a><a href="#Footnote_543_543" class="fnanchor">[543]</a></p>
+
+<p>Whether Mr. Haldane's proposals give Great Britain a better army for
+national and Imperial defence, is apparently immaterial to the
+Socialists, for they criticise it merely from the point of view of
+intending rioters and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[198]</a></span>revolutionaries. They complain: "The position
+of the Volunteers now is this, that they are not under military law,
+and cannot be called out as soldiers to shoot down workmen at the
+bidding of the capitalists. Mr. Haldane's scheme, however, destroys
+the civilian character of the Volunteers, and converts them into
+professional soldiers."<a name="FNanchor_544_544" id="FNanchor_544_544"></a><a href="#Footnote_544_544" class="fnanchor">[544]</a></p>
+
+<p>Although most Socialists are in favour of a national militia, a
+considerable number oppose even a national militia of the Swiss type,
+fearing that it would refuse to aid the Socialists in overturning
+society as at present constituted. "We have been told of the readiness
+with which the Swiss militia have donned their uniforms and seized
+their rifles when called upon to act against strikers."<a name="FNanchor_545_545" id="FNanchor_545_545"></a><a href="#Footnote_545_545" class="fnanchor">[545]</a> The
+Socialist delegates who accompanied the committee of inquiry which the
+National Service League sent to Switzerland in the autumn of 1907 were
+apparently less interested in the efficiency of the Swiss army for
+national defence than in its attitude during conflicts between labour
+and capital.<a name="FNanchor_546_546" id="FNanchor_546_546"></a><a href="#Footnote_546_546" class="fnanchor">[546]</a></p>
+
+<p>Fearing that a national militia might not be willing to lend itself to
+revolutionary purposes, that it might become a patriotic force as is
+the Swiss militia, many Socialists condemn every kind of military
+service, and are quite ready to disarm the nation in the name of
+humanity and civil freedom. For instance, at the annual conference of
+the Socialist Independent Labour Party of 1907 the following was moved
+by a well-known revolutionary Socialist, Mr. Bruce Glasier:</p>
+
+<p>"That this Conference believes that the time has come when militarism
+in every form should be denounced and resisted as alien to civil
+freedom and social progress, and expresses itself emphatically against
+compulsory military service, and the attempts which are being made <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[199]</a></span>to
+introduce military training in public schools or other public
+institutions, and views with alarm the purposes of Mr. Haldane's Army
+Territorial Bill, which, if passed, will make military service
+practically compulsory under officers drawn wholly from, the upper
+classes, will make industrial employment dependent upon military
+service, and, instead of promoting international unity, will foster
+and increase the spirit of militarism and aggression."<a name="FNanchor_547_547" id="FNanchor_547_547"></a><a href="#Footnote_547_547" class="fnanchor">[547]</a></p>
+
+<p>In moving this resolution Mr. Glasier said that "he denounced
+militarism root and branch," and Mr. Keir Hardie, a Communist
+Socialist, in seconding, said: "The resolution was not only a
+declaration against militarism, but a special and specific
+condemnation of the Territorial Army Scheme now before the House of
+Commons. The Socialist party was bound to protest against a system of
+that kind. The particular feature which emphasised the danger was that
+there were to be county associations formed to have charge of the new
+territorial forces, and to have a majority of military men upon them
+with landlords and possibly employers of labour. A citizen army was as
+great a menace to an industrial population as a professional army. The
+new army would be recruited from the people, and officered by the
+enemies of the people, just as the professional army was. Children
+were to be taught that the flag was the great thing to value in life.
+They would find that a citizen army, officered by the rich and
+recruited from their own ranks, would be taught to regard the flag as
+something holy, while they shot down strikers and Socialists just as
+freely as the most exclusive professional army in the world could do.
+Patriotism was one of the weapons used by the enemies of the people to
+blind them to facts."<a name="FNanchor_548_548" id="FNanchor_548_548"></a><a href="#Footnote_548_548" class="fnanchor">[548]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Trade Union Congress of 1907, disregarding the security of the
+country and the Empire from foreign <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[200]</a></span>aggression, also condemned
+military training of every kind. Commenting hereon, the
+"Social-Democrat," the organ of the Social-Democratic Federation,
+which favours a national democratic army, wrote: "The Trades Union
+Congress declares against conscription and also condemns military
+training, which is a totally different matter. To condemn conscription
+is purely negative. It would be very much more to the point if the
+representatives of the organised working class would formulate an
+expression of opinion on the actual military problem. Conscription, at
+the worst, is in the air; but the present-day military problem is not
+in the air; it is on the earth, practical and urgent. What have the
+trade unionists to say to it? Do they approve of the present system of
+a nominally voluntary professional soldiery, maintained as an
+instrument at the service of the capitalist class for suppression at
+home and aggression abroad?"<a name="FNanchor_549_549" id="FNanchor_549_549"></a><a href="#Footnote_549_549" class="fnanchor">[549]</a> The trade unionists were urged to
+abolish the voluntary army and to create a national citizen army,
+which will assist the Socialist in overturning society.</p>
+
+<p>A national citizen army, composed of Socialists and commanded by
+Socialists, is the ideal, and until such an army be created it is in
+the interest of Socialists to weaken the existing army and to
+undermine its discipline to such an extent that, in the event of a
+rising or a revolution, it will side with the revolutionaries. With
+this object in view, Socialists are trying to create dissatisfaction
+in the army by means of emissaries and literature. For instance, in a
+leaflet entitled "An Appeal to Soldiers," the Social-Democratic
+Federation says: "If you are to fight for patriotism and country, then
+let it be a national duty for all, wealthy as well as poor, to bear
+arms. Let not those who are called upon to fight remain a pariah class
+apart, bereft of the rights of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[201]</a></span>citizenship&mdash;regarded by the upper
+classes as something to be avoided."<a name="FNanchor_550_550" id="FNanchor_550_550"></a><a href="#Footnote_550_550" class="fnanchor">[550]</a></p>
+
+<p>In its official programme the Social-Democratic Federation demands,
+under the heading "Immediate Reforms," "the abolition of
+courts-martial: all offences against discipline to be transferred to
+the jurisdiction of civil courts."<a name="FNanchor_551_551" id="FNanchor_551_551"></a><a href="#Footnote_551_551" class="fnanchor">[551]</a> Why do the Socialists demand
+the abolition of military law? Because, in their own words, "With the
+abolition of military law, upon which we have always laid the greatest
+possible stress, militarism falls to the ground."<a name="FNanchor_552_552" id="FNanchor_552_552"></a><a href="#Footnote_552_552" class="fnanchor">[552]</a> Therefore the
+"Appeal to Soldiers" admonishes the military: "You are and will remain
+a class apart from the rest of the nation so long as you are compelled
+to serve under a barbarous military code called 'military law.' The
+system of trial by court-martial is a mere farce and a mockery. We of
+the Social-Democratic Federation intend to do our utmost to abolish it
+root and branch. Give us your support. Remember that the late War
+Minister, Mr. St. John Brodrick, compared the soldier to the Chinese
+coolie in South Africa. This is how you are looked upon by the very
+people who use you as food for powder in the interest of their class.
+Now is the time for all who wish you well to demand the abolition of
+military law, the civilising of military service, and the
+establishment of a national citizen force."<a name="FNanchor_553_553" id="FNanchor_553_553"></a><a href="#Footnote_553_553" class="fnanchor">[553]</a></p>
+
+<p>In the autumn of 1907 a letter to the editor was published by the
+"Daily Telegraph" which contained the following statement:</p>
+
+<div class="block">
+<p>"I do not think that many people, least of all the authorities,
+realise what a vigorous campaign is now being waged amongst the rank
+and file by the Social-Democratic Federation. Herewith I forward a
+leaflet which, I believe, is being distributed in thousands to the
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[202]</a></span>military stations in all the corners of our Empire. The one I enclose
+I found attached to a tree by the roadside during the recent
+man&oelig;uvres near Aylesbury. Copies of the same leaflet have reached
+me from India and Belfast, where they were distributed during the
+recent strike trouble. It is no exaggeration to say that this leaflet
+is dangerous; the men of our army are peculiarly susceptible to the
+tenets of the Social-Democratic Federation. Officers and N.C.O.s will
+tell you what a serious effect such propaganda must have upon
+discipline.</p>
+
+<p class="right"><span style="padding-right: 10%;">"Yours faithfully,</span><br />
+<span class="sc" style="padding-right: 5%;">"H.C. Smart,</span><br />
+<span style="padding-right: 2%;">Editor, 'Army Graphic'"</span></p>
+<p>"<i>October 7, 1907.</i>"</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Socialism is carrying on a vigorous propaganda for destroying
+discipline in the army and also in the navy. Herv&eacute;ism has been
+imported into Great Britain, and is making rapid progress. "The
+Socialist," the organ of the Socialist Labour party, a party which at
+present is small in number, but which is most violent in attitude, in
+an article entitled "The Socialist Labour Party and the Citizen Army,"
+quotes with approval Herv&eacute;'s saying: "The present countries are cruel
+step-mothers to the proletariat. There is at present no country so
+superior to any other that its working class should get themselves
+killed in its defence. In case of mobilisation the proletariat should
+respond to the call to arms by an insurrection against their rulers to
+establish the Socialist or Communist <i>r&eacute;gime</i>. Rebellion sooner than
+war! In case of an order to mobilise, we would seize the moment to
+attempt the revolution, to place our hands on the social wealth to-day
+usurped by a minority." The foregoing is printed in very large type.
+The article then continues, commenting upon Herv&eacute;'s advice as follows:
+"The soldier has been fed and clothed by the working <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[203]</a></span>class. His
+continued efficiency as a military automaton depends upon regular
+supply of food, clothing, and the necessaries of life from the same
+source. He has been transported to the field of conflict by the labour
+of a whole army of railwaymen. Let us suppose that the day of the
+final struggle has been reached. Suppose the capitalist attempts to
+stifle the revolution in blood; suppose he calls upon the army to
+crush the revolutionary working class by brute force. Let us suppose,
+too, that the revolutionary agitation has not penetrated the Chinese
+walls of military discipline (a most improbable hypothesis) and that
+the soldiers, instead of turning their guns against the capitalist
+murderers, cheerfully and willingly serve their masters in the attempt
+to crush the people&mdash;what then? We shall put the army in quarantine.
+We shall isolate it from the rest of the community. We shall cut off
+supplies of food, clothing, and fuel. The railway and telegraph
+service will no longer be at its disposal&mdash;and in this respect we are
+in a more advantageous position than our French and German
+fellow-workers, inasmuch as the Government ownership of the railways
+in these countries is used to deny the workers connected with them the
+right of organisation. The army would be in a state of siege,
+surrounded on all sides by implacable foes. That, coupled with
+whatever may be possible and necessary in the way of armed
+insurrection within and outside of the army, is the policy proposed by
+the Socialist Labour party and Industrial Unionism. Circumstances may,
+and probably will, modify it in many important details, but there is
+the main outline. Is it not more logical, more coherent, more likely
+to succeed than any 'citizen army scheme'?"<a name="FNanchor_554_554" id="FNanchor_554_554"></a><a href="#Footnote_554_554" class="fnanchor">[554]</a></p>
+
+<p>Love of country has apparently no room in the Socialist's ethics. Its
+defence does not trouble him, since <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[204]</a></span>he is taught that his worst
+enemies are those Englishmen who happen to be better off.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i2">Waste not your ready blows,<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Strike not at foreign foes,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Your bitterest enemies tread your own soil;<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">The preachers who blind ye,<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">The landlords who grind ye,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The gluttons who revel whilst ye are at toil.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Rise in your might, brothers, bear it no longer,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Assemble in masses throughout the whole land;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Teach the vile bloodsuckers who are the stronger<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">When workers and robbers confronted shall stand.<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Through Castle, Court, and Hall,<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Over their acres all,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Onward we'll press like the waves of the sea.<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Seizing the wealth we've made.<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Ending the spoilers' trade;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Till Labour has triumphed, and England is free.<a name="FNanchor_555_555" id="FNanchor_555_555"></a><a href="#Footnote_555_555" class="fnanchor">[555]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>In their desire to abolish the army, some Socialists argue that "The
+whole of your military system is entirely unnecessary."<a name="FNanchor_556_556" id="FNanchor_556_556"></a><a href="#Footnote_556_556" class="fnanchor">[556]</a> Others
+falsify history and boldly assert that British wars, "in nearly every
+case have been waged for the suppression of liberty abroad, or from
+the irritating desire on the part of British statesmen to interfere
+with the internal affairs of other nations."<a name="FNanchor_557_557" id="FNanchor_557_557"></a><a href="#Footnote_557_557" class="fnanchor">[557]</a> On the other hand,
+Mr. Quelch very sensibly argues: "Militarism is an evil against which
+we have to fight with all the means in our power, but to talk of
+universal disarmament at the present stage is mere Utopianism, a
+crying of peace where there is no peace, and where existing
+antagonisms make peace impossible. We have at first to eradicate the
+causes of conflict. To-day the unarmed nation offers itself as a
+temptation and a prey to some mighty brigand <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[205]</a></span>Power. War is the last
+argument of kings, and all Governments rest on force. So long as that
+is the case, it is only the people which is armed that can maintain
+its freedom, or can indeed lay claim to be a free people. An unarmed
+nation cannot be free. An armed nation, on the contrary, is a
+guarantee of individual liberty, of social freedom, and of national
+independence."<a name="FNanchor_558_558" id="FNanchor_558_558"></a><a href="#Footnote_558_558" class="fnanchor">[558]</a> Mr. Quelch would have the same ideals as the
+National Service League, did not later utterances of his contradict
+sensible statements such as the above.</p>
+
+<p>It is a curious and most interesting phenomenon that in France and
+Great Britain, two eminently non-aggressive countries, the Socialists
+do all in their power to disarm the nation, whilst in Germany, which
+can hardly be described as non-aggressive, the Socialists are
+patriotic and are ready to go to war, not only for the defence but
+also for the aggrandisement of their country. Numerous declarations to
+that effect made by the leading German Socialists are on record, and
+the following extract is characteristic of their attitude:</p>
+
+<p>"That Germany be armed to the teeth, possessing a strong fleet, is of
+the utmost importance to the working men. What damages our exports
+damages them also, and working men have the most pressing interest in
+securing prosperity for our export trade, be it even by force of arms.
+Owing to her development, Germany may perhaps be obliged to maintain
+her position sword in hand. Only he who is under the protection of his
+guns can dominate the markets, and in the fight for markets German
+working men may come before the alternative either of perishing or of
+forcing their entrance into markets sword in hand."<a name="FNanchor_559_559" id="FNanchor_559_559"></a><a href="#Footnote_559_559" class="fnanchor">[559]</a></p>
+
+<p>In the spring of 1907 the leading German Socialist paper wrote in a
+weighty article on the Peace Conference <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[206]</a></span>at The Hague: "The conception
+that war is only a product of human unreason is on the same level as
+the idea that revolutions are only mental aberrations of the masses.
+War is rooted in the opposing interests of the nations, as are
+revolutions in the opposing interests of the classes."<a name="FNanchor_560_560" id="FNanchor_560_560"></a><a href="#Footnote_560_560" class="fnanchor">[560]</a></p>
+
+<p>A comparison of German Socialism with English Socialism shows that
+English Socialism is more violent and far less patriotic than German
+Socialism. German Socialists love their country. Most British
+Socialists apparently love only themselves.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_529_529" id="Footnote_529_529"></a><a href="#FNanchor_529_529"><span class="label">[529]</span></a> See p. 107.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_530_530" id="Footnote_530_530"></a><a href="#FNanchor_530_530"><span class="label">[530]</span></a> H.W. Lee in the <i>Social-Democrat</i>, June 1, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_531_531" id="Footnote_531_531"></a><a href="#FNanchor_531_531"><span class="label">[531]</span></a> Thomas Kennedy in <i>Forward</i> of May 25, 1907, reprinted
+in the <i>Social-Democrat</i>, June 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_532_532" id="Footnote_532_532"></a><a href="#FNanchor_532_532"><span class="label">[532]</span></a> Quelch in the <i>Social-Democrat</i> for October 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_533_533" id="Footnote_533_533"></a><a href="#FNanchor_533_533"><span class="label">[533]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>Social Revolution</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_534_534" id="Footnote_534_534"></a><a href="#FNanchor_534_534"><span class="label">[534]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_535_535" id="Footnote_535_535"></a><a href="#FNanchor_535_535"><span class="label">[535]</span></a> See Appendix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_536_536" id="Footnote_536_536"></a><a href="#FNanchor_536_536"><span class="label">[536]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, October 1907, p. 588.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_537_537" id="Footnote_537_537"></a><a href="#FNanchor_537_537"><span class="label">[537]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Impossibilities of Anarchism</i>, p. 25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_538_538" id="Footnote_538_538"></a><a href="#FNanchor_538_538"><span class="label">[538]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, June 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_539_539" id="Footnote_539_539"></a><a href="#FNanchor_539_539"><span class="label">[539]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Impossibilities of Anarchism</i>, p. 25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_540_540" id="Footnote_540_540"></a><a href="#FNanchor_540_540"><span class="label">[540]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, October 1907, p. 586.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_541_541" id="Footnote_541_541"></a><a href="#FNanchor_541_541"><span class="label">[541]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, April 1907, p. 204.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_542_542" id="Footnote_542_542"></a><a href="#FNanchor_542_542"><span class="label">[542]</span></a> See p. 170.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_543_543" id="Footnote_543_543"></a><a href="#FNanchor_543_543"><span class="label">[543]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, October 1907, p. 586.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_544_544" id="Footnote_544_544"></a><a href="#FNanchor_544_544"><span class="label">[544]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, October 1907, p. 589.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_545_545" id="Footnote_545_545"></a><a href="#FNanchor_545_545"><span class="label">[545]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_546_546" id="Footnote_546_546"></a><a href="#FNanchor_546_546"><span class="label">[546]</span></a> See <i>The Nation in Arms</i>, October 1907, and <i>Journal de
+Neuchatel</i>, September 22, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_547_547" id="Footnote_547_547"></a><a href="#FNanchor_547_547"><span class="label">[547]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Report</i>, 1907, p. 64.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_548_548" id="Footnote_548_548"></a><a href="#FNanchor_548_548"><span class="label">[548]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 64, 65.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_549_549" id="Footnote_549_549"></a><a href="#FNanchor_549_549"><span class="label">[549]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, November 1907, p. 516.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_550_550" id="Footnote_550_550"></a><a href="#FNanchor_550_550"><span class="label">[550]</span></a> <i>An Appeal to Soldiers.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_551_551" id="Footnote_551_551"></a><a href="#FNanchor_551_551"><span class="label">[551]</span></a> See Appendix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_552_552" id="Footnote_552_552"></a><a href="#FNanchor_552_552"><span class="label">[552]</span></a> H.W. Lee in <i>Social-Democrat</i>, June 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_553_553" id="Footnote_553_553"></a><a href="#FNanchor_553_553"><span class="label">[553]</span></a> <i>An Appeal to Soldiers.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_554_554" id="Footnote_554_554"></a><a href="#FNanchor_554_554"><span class="label">[554]</span></a> <i>Socialist</i>, October 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_555_555" id="Footnote_555_555"></a><a href="#FNanchor_555_555"><span class="label">[555]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, No. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_556_556" id="Footnote_556_556"></a><a href="#FNanchor_556_556"><span class="label">[556]</span></a> Kirtlan, <i>Socialism for Christians</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_557_557" id="Footnote_557_557"></a><a href="#FNanchor_557_557"><span class="label">[557]</span></a> Smart, <i>Socialism and the Budget</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_558_558" id="Footnote_558_558"></a><a href="#FNanchor_558_558"><span class="label">[558]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Social Democracy and the Armed Nation</i>, p. 3
+f.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_559_559" id="Footnote_559_559"></a><a href="#FNanchor_559_559"><span class="label">[559]</span></a> <i>Sozialistische Monatshefte</i>, December 1899.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_560_560" id="Footnote_560_560"></a><a href="#FNanchor_560_560"><span class="label">[560]</span></a> <i>Vorw&auml;rts</i>, March 10, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XIV" id="CHAPTER_XIV"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[207]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XIV<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND THE MONARCHY</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The first of the "Immediate Reforms" demanded in the official
+programme of the Social-Democratic Federation<a name="FNanchor_561_561" id="FNanchor_561_561"></a><a href="#Footnote_561_561" class="fnanchor">[561]</a> is the "Abolition
+of the Monarchy." That that demand has been made so crudely and that
+it has been given so prominent a position cannot surprise anybody who
+is acquainted with British Socialism. "Socialists are essentially
+thorough-going Republicans. Socialism, which aims at political and
+economic equality, is radically inconsistent with any other political
+form whatever than that of Republicanism, Monarchy and Socialism, or
+Empire and Socialism, are incompatible and inconceivable. Socialism
+involves political and economic equality, while Monarchy or Empire
+essentially imply domination and inequality."<a name="FNanchor_562_562" id="FNanchor_562_562"></a><a href="#Footnote_562_562" class="fnanchor">[562]</a></p>
+
+<p>"As in the political history of the race the logical development of
+progress was found in the abolition of the institution of monarchy and
+not in its mere restriction, so in industrial history the culminating
+point to which all efforts must at last converge lies in the abolition
+of the capitalist class, and not in the mere restriction of its
+powers. The Socialist Labour Party, recognising these two phases of
+human development, unites them in its programme, and seeks to give
+them a concrete embodiment by its demand for a Socialist
+Republic."<a name="FNanchor_563_563" id="FNanchor_563_563"></a><a href="#Footnote_563_563" class="fnanchor">[563]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[208]</a></span>Most Socialists describe all monarchs as the drones of society, and
+habitually refer to crowned heads either as "loafers" or as "Royal
+paupers, able-bodied and outdoor."<a name="FNanchor_564_564" id="FNanchor_564_564"></a><a href="#Footnote_564_564" class="fnanchor">[564]</a> "If the people were of my mind
+they would not tolerate for twelve months that the Royal paupers
+should wear robes and have every luxury, and the honest, industrious
+aged poor should wear rags and eat a crust or be imprisoned for being
+hungry."<a name="FNanchor_565_565" id="FNanchor_565_565"></a><a href="#Footnote_565_565" class="fnanchor">[565]</a> (Has ever anybody in Great Britain, or in any other
+country, been imprisoned "for being hungry"?)</p>
+
+<p>"Is it possible that this degrading monarchical superstition can
+survive in England much longer? Has the schoolmaster now been abroad
+so long in vain? Will the English people never take their destinies
+into their own hands and close the long era of monarchical and
+aristocratic robbery? Are we never to have a Government that can hear
+the bitter cry of the outcast, and, hearing, act? We know the goal.
+The goal is the Democratic Republic."<a name="FNanchor_566_566" id="FNanchor_566_566"></a><a href="#Footnote_566_566" class="fnanchor">[566]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many further extracts regarding English and foreign monarchs might be
+given, but they are so indescribably coarse and so offensive&mdash;even the
+late Queen is most shamelessly slandered, abused, and
+calumniated&mdash;that they are hardly fit for publication, and their
+authors shall be nameless.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_561_561" id="Footnote_561_561"></a><a href="#FNanchor_561_561"><span class="label">[561]</span></a> See Appendix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_562_562" id="Footnote_562_562"></a><a href="#FNanchor_562_562"><span class="label">[562]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 37.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_563_563" id="Footnote_563_563"></a><a href="#FNanchor_563_563"><span class="label">[563]</span></a> <i>Platform, Constitutions, Rules, and Standing Orders,
+Socialist Labour Party</i>, pp. 2, 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_564_564" id="Footnote_564_564"></a><a href="#FNanchor_564_564"><span class="label">[564]</span></a> See <i>The Socialist Annual</i>, 1907, p. 25.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_565_565" id="Footnote_565_565"></a><a href="#FNanchor_565_565"><span class="label">[565]</span></a> Glyde, <i>Britain's Disgrace</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_566_566" id="Footnote_566_566"></a><a href="#FNanchor_566_566"><span class="label">[566]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The New Book of Kings</i>, p. 107.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XV" id="CHAPTER_XV"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[209]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XV<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALIST VIEWS ON PARLIAMENT AND THE NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The opinion of most Socialists with regard to the British Parliament
+is well summed up in the phrase "Parliament a way to the Democracy?
+Why, 'tis not a road at all, but only a barricade across our
+road."<a name="FNanchor_567_567" id="FNanchor_567_567"></a><a href="#Footnote_567_567" class="fnanchor">[567]</a> It will be seen in this and the following Chapter that
+Socialism means either to capture and hold that barricade or to pull
+it down.</p>
+
+<p>Let us take note of some representative Socialist opinions on the
+British Parliament. "The House of Commons is a machine elaborately
+contrived by the exploiting classes to serve their own ends. In the
+race for Parliamentary seats the wisest and the best are nowhere. They
+are rarely even permitted to start. The prizes are for the richest,
+the most unscrupulous, cunning, and pushing. And without a complete
+revolution in our ideas regarding the objects as well as the methods
+of legislation, it must always remain so."<a name="FNanchor_568_568" id="FNanchor_568_568"></a><a href="#Footnote_568_568" class="fnanchor">[568]</a> "Parliament is
+appointed, we are told, to fulfil the will of the nation. Then why
+doesn't it do it? If it has a job to do, why does it stand day after
+day, week after week, year after year, cackling, cackling, cackling
+about it? Can the mind of man conceive anything more intensely
+ridiculous than this <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[210]</a></span>spectacle solemnly presented for our admiration
+by the champions of the system, of six hundred garrulous old gentlemen
+making a set and formal business of cackling&mdash;cackling, cackling,
+cackling, with infinite pride in their own preposterous squeaking and
+nagging, and then filing out one by one at intervals, like a stately
+Lord Mayor's procession in the kingdom of the black and white
+penguins? What is to be done with such a museum?"<a name="FNanchor_569_569" id="FNanchor_569_569"></a><a href="#Footnote_569_569" class="fnanchor">[569]</a> "Government by
+Parliament is a preposterous pretence&mdash;a delusion and a snare to the
+people. It is a gag imposed by the classes on the aspirations of the
+masses. Our Parliamentary representation is a fraud. If we could
+appeal directly to the whole people as to whether willing workers
+should starve, or little children suffer hunger, then something might
+be done. But how can the electors express their desires on this vital
+matter under our present electoral system?"<a name="FNanchor_570_570" id="FNanchor_570_570"></a><a href="#Footnote_570_570" class="fnanchor">[570]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists complain that Parliament is run by a class. "It is colossal
+impudence for a party paper to talk against 'class representation.'
+Every class is over-represented&mdash;except the great working class. The
+mines, the railways, the drink trade, the land, finance, the army
+(officers), the navy (officers), the Church, the law, and most of the
+big industries (employers) are represented largely in the House of
+Commons. And nearly thirty millions of the working classes are
+represented by about a dozen men, most of whom are palsied by their
+allegiance to the Liberal party."<a name="FNanchor_571_571" id="FNanchor_571_571"></a><a href="#Footnote_571_571" class="fnanchor">[571]</a> "The rich man's club at St.
+Stephen's is merely a committee of plutocrats&mdash;rentmongers,
+interestmongers, and profitmongers&mdash;assembled for the purpose of
+safeguarding the spoils which the 'classes' have theftuously contrived
+to heap up."<a name="FNanchor_572_572" id="FNanchor_572_572"></a><a href="#Footnote_572_572" class="fnanchor">[572]</a> "The inequality of representation of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[211]</a></span>classes in
+Parliament at present is somewhat startling. It stands as follows:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" width="40%" summary="Parlimentary Classes">
+  <tr>
+  <td colspan="2" class="tdc"><i>House of Lords</i></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="90%">Capitalist members</td>
+  <td class="tdr" width="10%">614</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Labour members</td>
+  <td class="tdr bb">0</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 10%;">Total</td>
+  <td class="tdr bt">614</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdc" colspan="2"><i>House of Commons</i></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Capitalist members</td>
+  <td class="tdr">640</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Labour members</td>
+  <td class="tdr bb">30</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" style="padding-left: 10%;">Total</td>
+  <td class="tdr bt">670</td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p>"That is, we have 640 members representing the interests of, say,
+6,000,000 of persons, and 30 members representing the interests of
+37,000,000."<a name="FNanchor_573_573" id="FNanchor_573_573"></a><a href="#Footnote_573_573" class="fnanchor">[573]</a> "As recipients of rents, royalties, interests, and
+dividends, some 600 of the representatives of the people in the House
+of Commons are parasites upon the people's backs. The railway
+shareholders have 78 representatives; the railway workers, nearly
+400,000 strong, have one. One hundred and eighty thousand landed
+proprietors have 155 members; 1,000,000 agricultural labourers have
+one. Coal-mine owners have 21; and 655,000 miners have seven members.
+The shipowners and builders have 22 representatives; the 200,000
+sailors have none."<a name="FNanchor_574_574" id="FNanchor_574_574"></a><a href="#Footnote_574_574" class="fnanchor">[574]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The social composition of the House of Commons is as follows: 124
+lawyers, 108 manufacturers (including brewers, colliery-owners, &amp;c.),
+85 landowners, 64 merchants and shopkeepers, 37 army and navy men, 33
+journalists and authors, 28 financiers, 23 professors, teachers, &amp;c.,
+18 Civil servants, 18 newspaper proprietors and publishers, 16 heirs
+to the peerage, 67 of miscellaneous <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[212]</a></span>occupations and professions, and
+50 working men. Thus the bulk of the present House of Commons consists
+of rent, profit, and interest mongers and their hirelings and
+hangers-on. The exploited masses of the people are only represented by
+fifty men."<a name="FNanchor_575_575" id="FNanchor_575_575"></a><a href="#Footnote_575_575" class="fnanchor">[575]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">See your masters, how unceasingly they strive to keep you down,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">How they manage all your business up in Parliament and town;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Well, it is not quite your business, for it really is their own.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And that is why the millions of the toilers slave and groan.<a name="FNanchor_576_576" id="FNanchor_576_576"></a><a href="#Footnote_576_576" class="fnanchor">[576]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"On the top of all this political chicanery and impudent pretence of
+popular representation, there sits an autocratic, irresponsible,
+hereditary legislative body, consisting exclusively of idlers and
+parasites who reserve to themselves the right of rejecting all laws
+which do not clearly further their own exactions and monopolies! Then
+ask yourselves: Of what use is Parliament? Of what use can it ever be
+to the mass of the common people?"<a name="FNanchor_577_577" id="FNanchor_577_577"></a><a href="#Footnote_577_577" class="fnanchor">[577]</a></p>
+
+<p>Parliament is not only useless to the worker, but is also, according
+to the Socialists, utterly corrupt and callous to the sufferings of
+the people. "Whenever an American is met abroad with the assertion
+that government in the Republic is corrupt, he can safely say that for
+one ounce of corruption in America there is a full pound avoirdupois
+in Britain."<a name="FNanchor_578_578" id="FNanchor_578_578"></a><a href="#Footnote_578_578" class="fnanchor">[578]</a> "It is extremely doubtful, indeed, whether either
+slavery or the slave-trade would be abandoned in the British Empire if
+they still existed to-day, and their abrogation and suppression
+depended upon the English House of Commons. The hideous corruption in
+that assembly and the utter indifference of the majority of its
+plutocratic members and their retainers to the welfare of any people,
+at home or abroad, where money is to be <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[213]</a></span>made by neglecting the
+commonest rules of ethics, have never been so clearly manifested as
+they are to-day."<a name="FNanchor_579_579" id="FNanchor_579_579"></a><a href="#Footnote_579_579" class="fnanchor">[579]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The suffrage in Great Britain is very unsatisfactory, as the
+following table shows:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" width="40%" summary="Suffrage in Great Britain">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="70%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="30%">Per cent. of the population having a vote.</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">France</td>
+  <td class="tdc">27.9</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Switzerland</td>
+  <td class="tdc">23.5</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Greece</td>
+  <td class="tdc">23.0</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Spain</td>
+  <td class="tdc">22.4</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Belgium</td>
+  <td class="tdc">21.5</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Germany</td>
+  <td class="tdc">21.2</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Bulgaria</td>
+  <td class="tdc">21.2</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Norway</td>
+  <td class="tdc">19.9</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Austria</td>
+  <td class="tdc">19.9</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Portugal</td>
+  <td class="tdc">19.0</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Great Britain</td>
+  <td class="tdc">16.5</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Denmark</td>
+  <td class="tdc">16.4</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Servia</td>
+  <td class="tdc">16.0</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Holland</td>
+  <td class="tdc">16.0</td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">As to England, she occupies a very low place in the scale. But then
+the people here have not even got universal suffrage! And this is a
+'democratic,' 'self-governing' community."<a name="FNanchor_580_580" id="FNanchor_580_580"></a><a href="#Footnote_580_580" class="fnanchor">[580]</a></p>
+
+<p>Furthermore, "The time has come when members of Parliament will have
+to receive payment for their services in the House of Commons, because
+the people have realised that they cannot be adequately represented
+only by men of wealth and position who are able to pay their own
+expenses."<a name="FNanchor_581_581" id="FNanchor_581_581"></a><a href="#Footnote_581_581" class="fnanchor">[581]</a></p>
+
+<p>The national Administration is quite as unsatisfactory to Socialists
+as is the national Parliament. "To-day honesty wears rags, and
+rascality and idleness wear robes. Every pint of beer, and every drop
+of wine or spirits the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[214]</a></span>workers drink, every pipe of tobacco or cigar
+they smoke, every cup of tea, coffee, or cocoa they drink, every
+patent medicine they purchase, every dog they keep, every pound of
+sugar they use, even their playing cards and their insurance policies,
+are taxed to help to pay big salaries and pensions to the younger sons
+of the aristocracy, &amp;c. The eldest sons live on the family estate; the
+younger live on the State. One becomes a lawyer, and will lie for
+anyone who will pay him well; another becomes an officer in the army
+or navy, and he will cut the throat of anyone in return for a good
+salary; another becomes a parson, and in return for a good stipend he
+will pray for anyone; the others are quartered on the consular or the
+diplomatic service, or are placed as clerks at 1,000<i>l.</i> per year in
+the Colonial, Foreign, or Home Office, &amp;c."<a name="FNanchor_582_582" id="FNanchor_582_582"></a><a href="#Footnote_582_582" class="fnanchor">[582]</a> The official
+Parliamentary Report of the Independent Labour Party for 1907 states:
+"Our short experience has been sufficient to teach us that it is as
+important to democratise our administrative departments as it is to
+democratise our Statute Book. We have found that the doors to the
+higher offices in Whitehall are closed to everyone who has not had a
+middle-class or aristocratic education, and recent changes have placed
+our Civil service more completely in the hands of the wealthy
+classes."<a name="FNanchor_583_583" id="FNanchor_583_583"></a><a href="#Footnote_583_583" class="fnanchor">[583]</a></p>
+
+<p>In the foregoing statements we find some of the principal complaints
+of the Socialists regarding the national Parliament and
+Administration. Let us now take note of their wishes and proposals.</p>
+
+<p>Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation we find the following regarding
+Parliament and the Administration:</p>
+
+<p>"Abolition of the Monarchy. Democratisation of the Government
+machinery, viz. Abolition of the House <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[215]</a></span>of Lords, Payment of members
+of legislative and administrative bodies, Payment of official expenses
+of elections out of the public funds, Adult suffrage, Proportional
+representation, Triennial parliaments, Second ballot, initiative and
+referendum. Foreigners to be granted rights of citizenship after two
+years' residence in the country, on the recommendation of four
+British-born citizens, without any fees. Canvassing to be made
+illegal. Legislation by the people in such wise that no legislative
+proposal shall become law until ratified by the majority of the
+people. Legislative and administrative independence for all parts of
+the Empire."</p>
+
+<p>As the above demands are somewhat vague, it is worth while to take
+note of another and clearer statement of the political demands made by
+the Social-Democratic Federation. "We of the Democratic Federation
+demand complete adult suffrage for every man and woman in these
+islands, because in this way alone can the whole people give free
+expression to their will; we are in favour of paid delegates and
+annual conventions, because by this means alone can the people control
+their representatives; we stand up for the direct references of all
+grave issues to the country at large and for the punishment as felony
+of every species of corruption, because thus only can tyranny be
+checked and bribery be uprooted; we call for the abolition of all
+hereditary authority, because such authority is necessarily
+independent of the mass of the people. But all these reforms, when
+secured, mean only that the men and women of these islands will at
+length be masters in their own house. Mere political machinery is
+worthless unless used to produce good social conditions."<a name="FNanchor_584_584" id="FNanchor_584_584"></a><a href="#Footnote_584_584" class="fnanchor">[584]</a></p>
+
+<p>A widely read Socialist writer formulates the Socialistic demands
+regarding Parliamentary reform as follows: "(1) The suffrage should
+not be given to a man's house or his lodgings, but to the man
+himself. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[216]</a></span>I believe in adult suffrage, male and female. (2)
+Constituencies should be numerically equal, each having three members,
+one retiring annually by rotation. (3) Cabinets should be chosen
+annually by the members of the House of Commons, to whom alone they
+should be responsible. (4) Payment of members and election expenses.
+Members should receive reasonable 'wages' according to the ancient
+practice of the Constitution, while all election expenses (not
+strictly personal to the candidate) should be defrayed out of the
+rates. (5) The Monarchy. If we are to have more kings or queens, their
+cost ought not to exceed that of the President of the United States,
+viz. 10,000<i>l.</i> a year. 'The office of a king in this nation is
+useless, burdensome, and dangerous, and ought to be abolished'
+(Resolution of the Long Parliament, 1649). (6) The House of Lords. 'A
+House of Peers in Parliament is useless and dangerous and ought to be
+abolished.'"<a name="FNanchor_585_585" id="FNanchor_585_585"></a><a href="#Footnote_585_585" class="fnanchor">[585]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Fabian Society proclaims: "To complete the foundation of the
+democratic State, we need manhood suffrage, abolition of all poverty
+disqualifications, abolition of the House of Lords, public payment of
+candidature expenses, public payment of representatives, and annual
+elections."<a name="FNanchor_586_586" id="FNanchor_586_586"></a><a href="#Footnote_586_586" class="fnanchor">[586]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The problem how the Lords are to be abolished is of easy solution.
+They cannot present themselves at the Gilded Chamber without writs,
+and these a democratic Ministry could and would peremptorily stop.
+Should they come without writs, Inspector Denning could be instructed
+to take charge of them. Or the House of Commons could simply revive
+its resolution of January 6, 1649, decreeing their abolition."<a name="FNanchor_587_587" id="FNanchor_587_587"></a><a href="#Footnote_587_587" class="fnanchor">[587]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists are opposed not only to the House <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[217]</a></span>of Lords but to all
+second chambers. "When the hereditary House is abolished, the demand
+which will be made by reactionaries for a representative second
+chamber must be sternly resisted. True, most nations have second
+chambers in imitation of our pernicious example; but there is not one
+of them, however constituted, whose history is not a conclusive
+argument against such institutions. The second chambers of Europe and
+America are nothing more than standing monuments of the gregarious
+folly of mankind. Nations can no more have two wills than individuals.
+A second chamber at one with the first is superfluous, in opposition
+it is noxious."<a name="FNanchor_588_588" id="FNanchor_588_588"></a><a href="#Footnote_588_588" class="fnanchor">[588]</a></p>
+
+<p>A large number of Socialists do not think that the democratisation of
+the House of Commons and the abolition of the House of Lords will
+suffice. They fear that party politics and party intrigues may become
+more pernicious in a Labour Parliament than they have proved to be in
+a middle-class Parliament. They fear that adult suffrage may not
+improve matters, and that impecunious professional politicians may
+prove worse than the class of politicians who up till now have sat in
+Parliament. "We stand in England at the parting of the ways. One leads
+to the payment of members and the creation of a class of professional
+political adventurers; the other leads to the referendum and
+initiative."<a name="FNanchor_589_589" id="FNanchor_589_589"></a><a href="#Footnote_589_589" class="fnanchor">[589]</a></p>
+
+<p>"In the Republics of France and the United States the electors are
+virtually endowed with male adult suffrage, and Labour representation
+is facilitated by State payment of members and of their election
+expenses. Yet the French Chamber, with its Panama and Southern Railway
+scandals, in which the patriots have gorged their servile lusts, has
+stood for many years before the nations as a monument of infamy. The
+United States Congress <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[218]</a></span>has not a single Labour representative within
+its walls, and the Government of the country is become a vile synonym
+for corruption."<a name="FNanchor_590_590" id="FNanchor_590_590"></a><a href="#Footnote_590_590" class="fnanchor">[590]</a> "In America the compensation of each Senator and
+each Representative is fixed at five thousand dollars, or one thousand
+pounds per year. In addition to this the members have special fares on
+the railways, and many other perquisites. Yet the American
+'Encyclopedia of Social Reform,' edited by W.D.P. Bliss, says, on page
+325, 'Congressmen, notoriously, do not represent the people, but
+special interests and great moneyed corporations. The Congress is
+almost the only great national legislative body owned wholly by the
+well-to-do. In the British Parliament, even after the Conservative
+victories of the last election, there are thirteen Labour men. In
+Congress there is not one."<a name="FNanchor_591_591" id="FNanchor_591_591"></a><a href="#Footnote_591_591" class="fnanchor">[591]</a> "Better the stupid British hereditary
+gentleman than the cunning politician-for-a-living. Better a Cabinet
+of Chamberlains and Gladstones than a circus of conflicting
+unscrupulous demagogues on the make."</p>
+
+<p>"The Parliamentary system tends, not to the summoning of thoughtful
+patriots to their country's service, but to the exaltation and
+glorification of plausible windbags."<a name="FNanchor_592_592" id="FNanchor_592_592"></a><a href="#Footnote_592_592" class="fnanchor">[592]</a> "The panacea of Labour
+representation will not remedy those defects. It is in the eternal
+nature of things that in the electoral competition of rival
+personalities the scum must rise to the top. So long as self-seeking
+is rewarded by the highest honours self-seeking will flourish."<a name="FNanchor_593_593" id="FNanchor_593_593"></a><a href="#Footnote_593_593" class="fnanchor">[593]</a>
+"A Parliament of Labour members would develop just the same tendency
+as any other to division into parties commanded by rival ambitions,
+between which the democratic vote would, as always, annul
+itself."<a name="FNanchor_594_594" id="FNanchor_594_594"></a><a href="#Footnote_594_594" class="fnanchor">[594]</a> "If there were five hundred delegates of Labour, if the
+whole of the Cardiff Trade Unions Congress could be suddenly
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[219]</a></span>translated to Parliament and power, there might still be some envious,
+spiteful braggarts subterraneously scheming and gnawing to undermine
+and engulf a rival, though a people's cause were wrecked in the
+catastrophe. Leaders are always dangerous. The workmen have too many
+leaders. Their first political necessity is to get rid of the
+politicians. Therefore I would like to see abolished all Legislative
+Chambers, Senates, and Councils of State."<a name="FNanchor_595_595" id="FNanchor_595_595"></a><a href="#Footnote_595_595" class="fnanchor">[595]</a></p>
+
+<p>Views identical with the foregoing are held by many Socialists, and
+therefore a Socialist writer has asked: "Why cannot the people, even
+of a populous and extensive country, vote upon all laws?"<a name="FNanchor_596_596" id="FNanchor_596_596"></a><a href="#Footnote_596_596" class="fnanchor">[596]</a>
+"Instead of representation we shall have what is technically called
+the referendum, or submission of all proposed measures to the people,
+who must signify their approval by vote before the measures can pass
+into law. This has been practised already to some extent in
+Switzerland, both in national and cantonal affairs. It was first
+proposed by Robespierre when he advised the king of France to say: 'My
+people, here are the laws I have made for you. Will you accept
+them?'"<a name="FNanchor_597_597" id="FNanchor_597_597"></a><a href="#Footnote_597_597" class="fnanchor">[597]</a></p>
+
+<p>Another Socialist says: "It is impossible that any delegate should
+completely represent the desires of ten or twenty thousand electors.
+No two human beings are agreed about everything; and, in every
+election, electors, in order to express approval of one cherished
+principle, are driven to adopt half-a-dozen others which they bitterly
+disapprove."<a name="FNanchor_598_598" id="FNanchor_598_598"></a><a href="#Footnote_598_598" class="fnanchor">[598]</a> "The way to true democracy will never be found
+through delegacy. The only safe way is through direct
+legislation&mdash;through the referendum and initiative. The referendum and
+initiative does not mean more laws, but fewer, shorter, simpler, and
+more understandable ones."<a name="FNanchor_599_599" id="FNanchor_599_599"></a><a href="#Footnote_599_599" class="fnanchor">[599]</a> "What is wanted is neither
+aristocracy, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220">[220]</a></span>plutocracy, nor demagoguecracy, but democracy&mdash;the one
+governing system which never has been tried. The people must learn
+that the game of politics is not an unfathomable science, but a
+struggle of rival interests in which no delegate can so well represent
+their needs as themselves."<a name="FNanchor_600_600" id="FNanchor_600_600"></a><a href="#Footnote_600_600" class="fnanchor">[600]</a> "The referendum quite changes the
+character of the Federal Assembly. It ceases to be a Parliament, and
+becomes merely a drafting committee. In other countries the initiative
+comes from above; the Parliament and the King are together the legal
+sovereign. In Switzerland it comes from below, for the legal sovereign
+is the electorate."<a name="FNanchor_601_601" id="FNanchor_601_601"></a><a href="#Footnote_601_601" class="fnanchor">[601]</a></p>
+
+<p>Other Socialists are strongly opposed to the referendum: "Democracy,
+as understood by the Fabian Society, means simply the control of the
+Administration by freely elected representatives of the people. The
+Fabian Society energetically repudiates all conceptions of democracy
+as a system by which the technical work of Government administration,
+and the appointment of public officials, shall be carried on by
+referendum or any other form of direct popular decision. Such
+arrangements may be practical in a village community, but not in the
+complicated industrial civilisations which are ripening for
+Social-Democracy."<a name="FNanchor_602_602" id="FNanchor_602_602"></a><a href="#Footnote_602_602" class="fnanchor">[602]</a> "The people can only judge political measures
+by their effect when they have come into operation; they cannot plan
+measures themselves, or foresee what their effect will be, or give
+precise instructions to their representatives; nor can any honest
+representative tell, until he has heard a measure thoroughly discussed
+by representatives of all other sections of the working class, what
+form the measure should take so as to keep the interests of his
+constituents in due subordination to those of the community. It is to
+be considered, further, that intelligent reformers, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221">[221]</a></span>especially
+workmen who have grasped the principles of Socialism, are always in
+the minority; they may address themselves with success to the
+sympathies of the masses and gain their confidence; but the dry
+details of the legislative and administrative steps by which they,
+move towards their goal can never be made interesting or intelligible
+to the ordinary voter. For these reasons the referendum, in theory the
+most democratic of popular institutions, is in practice the most
+reactionary."<a name="FNanchor_603_603" id="FNanchor_603_603"></a><a href="#Footnote_603_603" class="fnanchor">[603]</a></p>
+
+<p>Other Socialists are in favour of a reformed Parliament which is to be
+a glorified trade union congress. "Each industry would have adequate
+representation in the Parliament of Industry, and this Parliament
+would connect and harmonise the affairs of the whole. In the future
+society the descendant of the union of to-day will be the centre of
+social life and the administration of things. Let 'workers of all
+trades unite.'"<a name="FNanchor_604_604" id="FNanchor_604_604"></a><a href="#Footnote_604_604" class="fnanchor">[604]</a> Others, again, call for a Parliament of a frankly
+revolutionary type which is characteristically called a "National
+Convention." "What is the use of the suffrage? It has but one use&mdash;to
+enable the workers, as a class, to take peaceful possession of the
+power of the State, so as to use that power for social purposes. But
+to do this you must have paid delegates from your own class, not
+timeserving unpaid representatives from the classes which rob you; you
+must put your servants, not your masters, at Westminster; you must
+have a National Convention of the People, not a House of the
+Confiscating Classes."<a name="FNanchor_605_605" id="FNanchor_605_605"></a><a href="#Footnote_605_605" class="fnanchor">[605]</a> Readers will no doubt remember the French
+National Convention and its reign of terror and crime which culminated
+in the execution of Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette.</p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists, like most Anarchists, are utterly <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222">[222]</a></span>opposed to
+Parliamentary government and majority rule, preferring rule by
+violence to rule by argument. "What has hitherto been called the will
+of the people, or the will of the majority as manifested in the modern
+constitutional State, does not express any act of will at all, but the
+absence of will. It is not the will but the apathy of the majority
+that is represented."<a name="FNanchor_606_606" id="FNanchor_606_606"></a><a href="#Footnote_606_606" class="fnanchor">[606]</a> "The preaching of the <i>cultus</i> of the
+majority in the modern State is an absurdity which can only for a
+moment go down with the Parliamentary Radical who is wallowing in the
+superstitions of exploded Whiggery."<a name="FNanchor_607_607" id="FNanchor_607_607"></a><a href="#Footnote_607_607" class="fnanchor">[607]</a> "The Socialist has a
+distinct aim in view. If he can carry the initial stages towards its
+realisation by means of the count-of-heads majority, by all means let
+him do so. If, on the other hand, he sees the possibility of carrying
+a salient portion of his programme by trampling on this majority, by
+all means let him do this also."<a name="FNanchor_608_608" id="FNanchor_608_608"></a><a href="#Footnote_608_608" class="fnanchor">[608]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Women's Suffrage problem has lately come to the front, and it is
+characteristic and noteworthy that it has been taken up with the
+greatest energy, we might almost say with hysterical energy, by
+Socialist women. They tell us, "We desire the stain removed from our
+womanhood. Remove the hateful stigma from your mothers, your wives,
+and your daughters, which places the noblest and the best of them in a
+lower position than the most uncultured and immoral specimen of the
+male sex who pays his rates and taxes."<a name="FNanchor_609_609" id="FNanchor_609_609"></a><a href="#Footnote_609_609" class="fnanchor">[609]</a> According to a woman
+Socialist, the Votes-for-Women problem is "the greatest moral and
+spiritual problem that has torn asunder the souls of men since the
+fall of Adam and the coming of Christ."<a name="FNanchor_610_610" id="FNanchor_610_610"></a><a href="#Footnote_610_610" class="fnanchor">[610]</a> "Society has no brighter
+hope, humanity no larger promise than her coming, radiant with health
+and happiness, love and liberty shining from <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223">[223]</a></span>her eyes, the beautiful,
+high-souled, sister-mother of the men that are going to be."<a name="FNanchor_611_611" id="FNanchor_611_611"></a><a href="#Footnote_611_611" class="fnanchor">[611]</a> "The
+State cannot spare from its high councils the deep wisdom of its
+mothers and the comradeship of its wives."<a name="FNanchor_612_612" id="FNanchor_612_612"></a><a href="#Footnote_612_612" class="fnanchor">[612]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is obvious why Socialist women demand the vote with almost frenzied
+fervour, and why the various Socialist societies and parties support
+their agitation. Socialists believe that their wives, and the women
+workers in general, will vote for Socialism, and that most other women
+will be indifferent and abstain from voting. Therefore we learn:
+"Socialism in the only true sense of that term, in the only wise
+conception of that state, can never be brought into the fulness of its
+being until women have been made equal with men as citizens."<a name="FNanchor_613_613" id="FNanchor_613_613"></a><a href="#Footnote_613_613" class="fnanchor">[613]</a>
+"The benches of the National Chamber may yet be seen accommodating
+three hundred and thirty-five intelligent women."<a name="FNanchor_614_614" id="FNanchor_614_614"></a><a href="#Footnote_614_614" class="fnanchor">[614]</a> In referring to
+the elections in Finland, Mrs. Snowden writes: "To Socialists, an
+interesting point is the fact that, in spite of the women voters, who
+are supposed to be retrograde in politics, by far the largest number
+of party votes recorded were for the Socialist party."<a name="FNanchor_615_615" id="FNanchor_615_615"></a><a href="#Footnote_615_615" class="fnanchor">[615]</a></p>
+
+<p>The claims of women for the franchise have been supported by large
+majorities at important meetings of Socialists. The resolution of the
+Independent Labour Party, "That this Conference declares in favour of
+adult suffrage and the political equality of the sexes, and considers
+that the right of suffrage should immediately be extended to women on
+the same conditions as men," was carried by 236 votes to 24.<a name="FNanchor_616_616" id="FNanchor_616_616"></a><a href="#Footnote_616_616" class="fnanchor">[616]</a> The
+Social-Democratic Federation resolved: "That this Conference declares
+that the time has arrived when equal rights of citizenship be extended
+to all women and men of full age; urges all <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224">[224]</a></span>members to take advantage
+of the present suffrage agitation to focus public opinion upon the
+only logical solution of the question, viz. the abolition of existing
+franchise qualifications and the establishment of universal adult
+suffrage; and calls upon them actively to work for this practical
+measure of reform." This resolution was carried by 42 votes to 9.<a name="FNanchor_617_617" id="FNanchor_617_617"></a><a href="#Footnote_617_617" class="fnanchor">[617]</a></p>
+
+<p>The recent clamour of "Votes for Women" emanated not so much from
+philosophic Radicals who had read John Stuart Mill as from Socialists,
+and many non-Socialist women have become their dupes. Socialist women
+hope that they will have the voting all to themselves. Therefore they,
+and most men Socialists also, would very likely resist to the utmost
+all proposals which would make voting compulsory for <i>all</i> women.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_567_567" id="Footnote_567_567"></a><a href="#FNanchor_567_567"><span class="label">[567]</span></a> Thompson, <i>Hail Referendum</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_568_568" id="Footnote_568_568"></a><a href="#FNanchor_568_568"><span class="label">[568]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 99.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_569_569" id="Footnote_569_569"></a><a href="#FNanchor_569_569"><span class="label">[569]</span></a> Thompson, <i>Hail Referendum</i>, pp. 4, 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_570_570" id="Footnote_570_570"></a><a href="#FNanchor_570_570"><span class="label">[570]</span></a> Thompson, <i>The Referendum and Initiative in Practice</i>,
+p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_571_571" id="Footnote_571_571"></a><a href="#FNanchor_571_571"><span class="label">[571]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 152.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_572_572" id="Footnote_572_572"></a><a href="#FNanchor_572_572"><span class="label">[572]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Gospel of the Poor</i>, p. 59.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_573_573" id="Footnote_573_573"></a><a href="#FNanchor_573_573"><span class="label">[573]</span></a> Washington, <i>Whose Dog art Thou?</i> p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_574_574" id="Footnote_574_574"></a><a href="#FNanchor_574_574"><span class="label">[574]</span></a> Thompson, <i>The Only Way to Democracy</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_575_575" id="Footnote_575_575"></a><a href="#FNanchor_575_575"><span class="label">[575]</span></a> <i>The Socialist Annual</i>, 1907, p. 43.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_576_576" id="Footnote_576_576"></a><a href="#FNanchor_576_576"><span class="label">[576]</span></a> Neil, <i>Songs of the Social Revolution</i>, p. 21.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_577_577" id="Footnote_577_577"></a><a href="#FNanchor_577_577"><span class="label">[577]</span></a> Thompson, <i>Hail Referendum</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_578_578" id="Footnote_578_578"></a><a href="#FNanchor_578_578"><span class="label">[578]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The New Book of Kings</i>, p. 118.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_579_579" id="Footnote_579_579"></a><a href="#FNanchor_579_579"><span class="label">[579]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Colonies and Dependencies</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_580_580" id="Footnote_580_580"></a><a href="#FNanchor_580_580"><span class="label">[580]</span></a> <i>The Socialist Annual</i>, 1907, p. 58.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_581_581" id="Footnote_581_581"></a><a href="#FNanchor_581_581"><span class="label">[581]</span></a> <i>The Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1907, p. 121.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_582_582" id="Footnote_582_582"></a><a href="#FNanchor_582_582"><span class="label">[582]</span></a> Councillor Glyde, <i>Britain's Disgrace</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_583_583" id="Footnote_583_583"></a><a href="#FNanchor_583_583"><span class="label">[583]</span></a> <i>Report Annual Conference of Independent Labour Party</i>,
+1907, p. 52.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_584_584" id="Footnote_584_584"></a><a href="#FNanchor_584_584"><span class="label">[584]</span></a> <i>Socialism Made Plain</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_585_585" id="Footnote_585_585"></a><a href="#FNanchor_585_585"><span class="label">[585]</span></a> Davidson, <i>A Democrat's Address</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_586_586" id="Footnote_586_586"></a><a href="#FNanchor_586_586"><span class="label">[586]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 187.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_587_587" id="Footnote_587_587"></a><a href="#FNanchor_587_587"><span class="label">[587]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Book of Lords</i>, p. 78.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_588_588" id="Footnote_588_588"></a><a href="#FNanchor_588_588"><span class="label">[588]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The House of Lords, Useless, Dangerous,
+&amp;c.</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_589_589" id="Footnote_589_589"></a><a href="#FNanchor_589_589"><span class="label">[589]</span></a> Thompson, <i>The Only Way to Democracy</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_590_590" id="Footnote_590_590"></a><a href="#FNanchor_590_590"><span class="label">[590]</span></a> Thompson, <i>Hail Referendum</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_591_591" id="Footnote_591_591"></a><a href="#FNanchor_591_591"><span class="label">[591]</span></a> Thompson, <i>The Only Way to Democracy</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_592_592" id="Footnote_592_592"></a><a href="#FNanchor_592_592"><span class="label">[592]</span></a> Thompson, <i>The Referendum, &amp;c.</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_593_593" id="Footnote_593_593"></a><a href="#FNanchor_593_593"><span class="label">[593]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_594_594" id="Footnote_594_594"></a><a href="#FNanchor_594_594"><span class="label">[594]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_595_595" id="Footnote_595_595"></a><a href="#FNanchor_595_595"><span class="label">[595]</span></a> Thompson, <i>Hail Referendum</i>, pp. 8, 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_596_596" id="Footnote_596_596"></a><a href="#FNanchor_596_596"><span class="label">[596]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 130.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_597_597" id="Footnote_597_597"></a><a href="#FNanchor_597_597"><span class="label">[597]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 129.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_598_598" id="Footnote_598_598"></a><a href="#FNanchor_598_598"><span class="label">[598]</span></a> Thompson, <i>The Only Way to Democracy</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_599_599" id="Footnote_599_599"></a><a href="#FNanchor_599_599"><span class="label">[599]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_600_600" id="Footnote_600_600"></a><a href="#FNanchor_600_600"><span class="label">[600]</span></a> Thompson, <i>The Referendum, &amp;c.</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_601_601" id="Footnote_601_601"></a><a href="#FNanchor_601_601"><span class="label">[601]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_602_602" id="Footnote_602_602"></a><a href="#FNanchor_602_602"><span class="label">[602]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy</i>, p. 5</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_603_603" id="Footnote_603_603"></a><a href="#FNanchor_603_603"><span class="label">[603]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_604_604" id="Footnote_604_604"></a><a href="#FNanchor_604_604"><span class="label">[604]</span></a> Kessack, <i>The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way Out</i>,
+p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_605_605" id="Footnote_605_605"></a><a href="#FNanchor_605_605"><span class="label">[605]</span></a> <i>What Use is a Vote?</i> p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_606_606" id="Footnote_606_606"></a><a href="#FNanchor_606_606"><span class="label">[606]</span></a> Bax, <i>The Ethics of Socialism</i>, p. 120.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_607_607" id="Footnote_607_607"></a><a href="#FNanchor_607_607"><span class="label">[607]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 128.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_608_608" id="Footnote_608_608"></a><a href="#FNanchor_608_608"><span class="label">[608]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 127, 128.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_609_609" id="Footnote_609_609"></a><a href="#FNanchor_609_609"><span class="label">[609]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_610_610" id="Footnote_610_610"></a><a href="#FNanchor_610_610"><span class="label">[610]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_611_611" id="Footnote_611_611"></a><a href="#FNanchor_611_611"><span class="label">[611]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, Introd.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_612_612" id="Footnote_612_612"></a><a href="#FNanchor_612_612"><span class="label">[612]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 93.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_613_613" id="Footnote_613_613"></a><a href="#FNanchor_613_613"><span class="label">[613]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 97.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_614_614" id="Footnote_614_614"></a><a href="#FNanchor_614_614"><span class="label">[614]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 92.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_615_615" id="Footnote_615_615"></a><a href="#FNanchor_615_615"><span class="label">[615]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 98.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_616_616" id="Footnote_616_616"></a><a href="#FNanchor_616_616"><span class="label">[616]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference</i>,
+1907, p. 45.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_617_617" id="Footnote_617_617"></a><a href="#FNanchor_617_617"><span class="label">[617]</span></a> <i>Report of 27th Annual Conference, 1907,
+Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 26.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XVI" id="CHAPTER_XVI"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225">[225]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XVI<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE ATTITUDE OF THE SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE TWO PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">From the Socialist point of view there is for all practical purposes
+no difference between the two great parties. Both are representative,
+not of the people, but of capitalism. Both are hostile to labour.</p>
+
+<p>"The difference between Liberalism and Toryism is merely a question of
+phraseology; there is no fundamental clashing of principle. Both stand
+for the private ownership of the means of life. They both support a
+competitive state of society with its inevitable exploitation of the
+wealth-producers."<a name="FNanchor_618_618" id="FNanchor_618_618"></a><a href="#Footnote_618_618" class="fnanchor">[618]</a> "Both the Conservative and Liberal parties are
+agreed in supporting private ownership in the instruments of
+production for the purposes of profit-making. Their differences are
+merely superficial and their programmes admittedly offer no solution
+of the problems of poverty. The Independent Labour Party regards them
+both as equally the enemies of labour, and in fact merely as two
+sections of the entrenched forces of plutocracy."<a name="FNanchor_619_619" id="FNanchor_619_619"></a><a href="#Footnote_619_619" class="fnanchor">[619]</a> "There are not
+really two parties in the State. There is but one great party, that of
+privilege, divided into two factions, labelled Whig and Tory, or
+Liberal and Conservative. Both do much the same things in office. The
+mimic warfare which they wage with each other, no shrewd observer
+takes seriously. It is merely a pleasant game of which the stakes are
+the spoils <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226">[226]</a></span>of office and patronage. An 'organised hypocrisy' is but a
+mild description of an English Government, whether Liberal or
+Conservative. The Liberal and the Conservative are the two thieves
+between whom the people are evermore crucified."<a name="FNanchor_620_620" id="FNanchor_620_620"></a><a href="#Footnote_620_620" class="fnanchor">[620]</a> "Neither of the
+political parties is of any use to the workers, because both the
+political parties are paid, officered, and led by capitalists whose
+interests are opposed to the interests of the workers. The Socialist
+laughs at the pretended friendship of Liberal and Tory leaders for the
+workers."<a name="FNanchor_621_621" id="FNanchor_621_621"></a><a href="#Footnote_621_621" class="fnanchor">[621]</a> "There's no difference whatever between Bannerman, the
+Scottish landowner, and Balfour, whose uncle made 200,000<i>l.</i> out of
+army contracts in India in four years. These people are entirely
+antagonistic to the worker."<a name="FNanchor_622_622" id="FNanchor_622_622"></a><a href="#Footnote_622_622" class="fnanchor">[622]</a></p>
+
+<p>The assertions of the Liberals that they are the true friends of the
+people, that they have always fought for liberty and democracy, that
+they have given the vote to the people, and that they trust the
+people, are treated with derision and contempt. "Liberalism has
+historically opposed itself alike to Toryism, landed interest, and
+democracy, working-class interest whenever that interest appeared as a
+distinct political party."<a name="FNanchor_623_623" id="FNanchor_623_623"></a><a href="#Footnote_623_623" class="fnanchor">[623]</a> "Since 1832 the Liberals had eight
+opportunities to give justice to the voteless multitude. In every
+election from 1832 to 1865 solemn pledges were made by the Liberals
+that a Reform Bill should be introduced as soon as they were elected,
+and each time these pledges were ignored after they had secured power
+and position."<a name="FNanchor_624_624" id="FNanchor_624_624"></a><a href="#Footnote_624_624" class="fnanchor">[624]</a> As regards the giving of the franchise, the
+Conservatives have not been much better than the Liberals. "Neither
+party can claim much credit for its Reform Bills, extorted as they
+have been, not by belief in democracy, but by fear of the opposing
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227">[227]</a></span>faction. Even now the citizen is tricked out of his vote by every
+possible legal and administrative technicality; so that more than
+one-third of our adult men are unenfranchised, together with the whole
+of the other sex. Neither the Conservative party nor the self-styled
+'Party of the Masses,' gives proof of any real desire to give the vote
+to this not inconsiderable remnant; but both sides pay lip-homage to
+democracy."<a name="FNanchor_625_625" id="FNanchor_625_625"></a><a href="#Footnote_625_625" class="fnanchor">[625]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists say that the claims of the Liberals to the gratitude of the
+masses are hypocritical. Their policy has not been based on
+philanthropy, but on a sordid selfishness. They attacked the landed
+interest not in order to benefit the people, but in order to make
+themselves supreme in the State and to fill their own purses.
+Liberalism, with talk of liberty of the individual and of freedom of
+trade on its lips, is in reality the representative of capitalism of
+the most heartless kind. "The political power of the landed classes
+was to be broken; the capitalists were to be allowed to do as they
+liked with their own; a state of individualism was to be established;
+it was to be a fair field for all and devil take the hindmost. So far
+as politics and the law are concerned, this ideal of Liberalism has
+been realised. Land is no longer supreme. Money ranks with it.
+Everyone has a chance of obtaining money. <i>Ergo</i>, we are a democratic
+nation."<a name="FNanchor_626_626" id="FNanchor_626_626"></a><a href="#Footnote_626_626" class="fnanchor">[626]</a> "With the change in economic conditions, with the growth
+of manufacture, the rise of the bourgeoisie meant the downfall of
+feudalism. The plutocrat supplanted the baron, capitalism became king.
+The 'old nobility' of England to-day are successful brewers, bankers,
+and traders, and the Nonconformist Conscience dominates in the place
+of Holy Mother Church."<a name="FNanchor_627_627" id="FNanchor_627_627"></a><a href="#Footnote_627_627" class="fnanchor">[627]</a> "The representatives of this class in
+Parliament repealed the Corn Laws, securing <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228">[228]</a></span>cheap bread for their
+workers at the expense of the landlords and the farmers. The new
+masters opposed the Factory Acts, championed by Tories such as Lord
+Ashley, Thomas Sadler, and 'King Richard' Oastler, They fostered
+railway development, at the public expense, so that they might have
+quick and cheap transit for their manufactures."<a name="FNanchor_628_628" id="FNanchor_628_628"></a><a href="#Footnote_628_628" class="fnanchor">[628]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Liberals have shown their selfishness, heartlessness, and greed by
+opposing the greatest boon to workers, the Factory Acts. "Was it the
+Liberal party which initiated the Factory Acts, which were certainly
+the greatest step towards the elevation of the working class that was
+ever taken in the course of the last century? Oh, no! So far from the
+Liberal party initiating the Factory Acts, we know perfectly well that
+the Liberal party&mdash;leading members of the Liberal party, like Mr. John
+Bright and Mr. Richard Cobden&mdash;fiercely and bitterly opposed the
+Factory Acts. We know that no one fought more strenuously against the
+ten-hour day than Mr. John Bright. We know that all these canting
+Liberal hypocrites&mdash;I can call them nothing else&mdash;said with regard to
+the ten-hour day, just what they say now about the proposal for an
+eight-hour day&mdash;one of the proposals we put forward in order to get
+rid of this hideous difficulty of the unemployed. The argument was put
+forward then, that the restriction of the hours of labour would ruin
+our industries. Precisely the same argument was put forward when it
+was proposed to put a stop to the terrible over-work of the children
+deep down in the bowels of the earth. Women and children were
+mercilessly driven by brutal overseers at their task, and this was
+maintained by your Liberal party in order that they might obtain large
+profits out of their white slaves. Only let the Liberal party appeal
+to history in its claim for working-class support, and then the
+working class will arrive at the conclusion to which many <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229">[229]</a></span>of us have
+already come&mdash;that the Liberal party, so far from being entitled to
+our support, is entitled to our greatest loathing and hatred."<a name="FNanchor_629_629" id="FNanchor_629_629"></a><a href="#Footnote_629_629" class="fnanchor">[629]</a>
+"As to the Factory Acts, it was not a question of Messrs. Bright and
+Cobden alone, but of the whole organised body of the Liberal party,
+which opposed the Factory Acts, and they were only carried by the
+hostility of the Tory party to the Liberals for having dared to
+interfere with the Corn Laws. The Factory Acts were passed in
+retaliation by the landlord party against the capitalist party."<a name="FNanchor_630_630" id="FNanchor_630_630"></a><a href="#Footnote_630_630" class="fnanchor">[630]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Mr. Gladstone was the only member who endeavoured to delay the Bill
+which delivered women and children from mines and pits; and never did
+he say a word on behalf of the factory children until, when defending
+slavery in the West Indies, he taunted Buxton with indifference to the
+slavery in England."<a name="FNanchor_631_631" id="FNanchor_631_631"></a><a href="#Footnote_631_631" class="fnanchor">[631]</a> "If I were to draw a comparison between the
+Liberal and the Tory parties, I should say that the Tory party has
+done more in that direction than the Liberal party has done."<a name="FNanchor_632_632" id="FNanchor_632_632"></a><a href="#Footnote_632_632" class="fnanchor">[632]</a> Mr.
+Blatchford wrote in the "Clarion" that "the Liberal party has never
+helped the trade unions," and proved this assertion by giving a
+detailed statement of the trade union legislation, which showed that
+modern trade unionism was constantly opposed by the Liberals and was
+created by the Conservatives.<a name="FNanchor_633_633" id="FNanchor_633_633"></a><a href="#Footnote_633_633" class="fnanchor">[633]</a></p>
+
+<p>In consequence of its record, Socialists see in Liberalism not a
+friend, but an enemy. "Liberalism stands for individualism, and the
+Liberal capitalist and trader are bitterly opposed to the trade union
+and co-operative society. They found that these bodies, however, were
+beginning to exercise an important, if indirect, influence upon their
+party. Liberal leaders, alive to the importance <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230">[230]</a></span>of vote-catching,
+began to angle for the support of the working-class
+organisations."<a name="FNanchor_634_634" id="FNanchor_634_634"></a><a href="#Footnote_634_634" class="fnanchor">[634]</a> "We have no reason for supporting the Liberal
+party any more than the Tory party. Men do not gather grapes from
+thorns, nor figs from thistles. The Liberal party is to-day what it
+has always been&mdash;an organisation of capitalists formed to serve the
+interests of the capitalist class."<a name="FNanchor_635_635" id="FNanchor_635_635"></a><a href="#Footnote_635_635" class="fnanchor">[635]</a></p>
+
+<p>Liberalism, with its championship of exaggerated individualism, stands
+not for liberty, but for administrative anarchy. "The trouble with
+nineteenth century Liberalism is that, by instinct, by tradition, and
+by the positive precepts of its past exponents, it 'thinks in
+individuals.' It visualises the world as a world of independent
+Roundheads, with separate ends, and abstract rights to pursue those
+ends. Nineteenth century Liberalism is, in fact, axiomatically hostile
+to the State. It is not 'little Englandism' that is the matter with
+those who still cling to such views; it is, as Huxley and Matthew
+Arnold correctly diagnosed, administrative Nihilism. So far as
+political action is concerned, they tend to be inveterately negative.
+They have hung up temperance reform and educational reform for a
+quarter of a century, because, instead of seeking to enable the
+citizen to refresh himself without being poisoned or inebriated and to
+get the children thoroughly taught, they have wanted primarily to
+revenge their outraged temperance principles on the publican and their
+outraged Nonconformist principles on the Church. Of such Liberals it
+may be said that the destructive revolutionary tradition is in their
+bones; they will reform nothing unless it can be done at the expense
+of their enemies."<a name="FNanchor_636_636" id="FNanchor_636_636"></a><a href="#Footnote_636_636" class="fnanchor">[636]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The question is frequently put: 'Why are Socialists so much opposed
+to Liberalism?' But a little serious <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231">[231]</a></span>reflection will explain the
+circumstance. Liberalism is really more conservative than Toryism.
+This is not a paradox, it is a fact. Toryism stands for government,
+and it does not necessarily follow that it stands for bad government.
+Liberalism, on the other hand, admittedly seeks an unrestrained
+operation of the individual will. It is opposed to government. It does
+not consciously subscribe to the recognition of our social being. It
+regards individuals as self-contained units operating in separate
+spheres. The less government we have the better, is the keynote of
+Liberalism. This was Emerson's theory, and Emerson was an
+anarchist."<a name="FNanchor_637_637" id="FNanchor_637_637"></a><a href="#Footnote_637_637" class="fnanchor">[637]</a> "The modern Conservative candidate is politically a
+man without prejudices. No abstract principle forbids him to listen
+sympathetically to any proposal for reform. Hence he seems on the
+platform less belated than the nineteenth century Liberal with his
+stock of shop-soiled principles at full price."<a name="FNanchor_638_638" id="FNanchor_638_638"></a><a href="#Footnote_638_638" class="fnanchor">[638]</a> "In many people's
+minds the terms 'Liberalism' and 'insincerity' are held to be
+synonymous. Lacking a central idea of its own, and necessarily failing
+to nourish on borrowed ones, there is nothing before the Liberal party
+but decay. For progress in the future we must look to a party which
+has an ideal and is prepared to stand by it."<a name="FNanchor_639_639" id="FNanchor_639_639"></a><a href="#Footnote_639_639" class="fnanchor">[639]</a></p>
+
+<p>Before the general election of 1906 Socialists wrote: "The political
+force of Liberalism is spent. During the last twenty years its
+aspirations and its watchwords, its ideas of daily life, and its
+conceptions of the universe, have become increasingly distasteful to
+the ordinary citizen as he renews his youth from generation to
+generation. Its worship of individual liberty evokes no enthusiasm.
+Its reliance on 'freedom of contract' and 'supply and demand,' with
+its corresponding <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232">[232]</a></span>'voluntaryism' in religion and philanthropy, now
+seems to work out disastrously for the masses who are too poor to have
+what the economists call an 'effective demand' for even the minimum
+conditions of physical and mental health necessary to national
+well-being."<a name="FNanchor_640_640" id="FNanchor_640_640"></a><a href="#Footnote_640_640" class="fnanchor">[640]</a> "For the last twenty years the Liberal party has
+been trying to fit itself with a new programme. It took up Home Rule
+for Ireland, but found that split the party; it took up temperance
+reform, quite a deviation from its old policy of individual liberty,
+and again found itself divided; it avowed friendliness to Labour, and
+frightened off still another batch of supporters. The Party of
+Progress finds itself now in the unhappy position that its basic idea
+is old-fashioned, and when it tries to assimilate a new one it becomes
+a case of putting new wine into old bottles. That is the sad plight of
+the Liberal party. The party is merely living from hand to mouth as an
+anti-Tory party, hoping to profit by the mistakes of its rival. The
+party has split up on temperance, on labour, on the war, on
+Imperialism, on education, simply because there is no central
+vivifying ideal to bind together and shape the policy. Can the party
+adopt a new ideal? is the great question. Can it drop its fundamental
+idea of individualism and take up the idea of co-operation? and the
+answer is emphatically 'No.'"<a name="FNanchor_641_641" id="FNanchor_641_641"></a><a href="#Footnote_641_641" class="fnanchor">[641]</a></p>
+
+<p>The philosopher of British Socialism thinks that, owing to the
+principles and attitude of the Liberal party, Liberalism and Socialism
+are deadly enemies. "Liberalism, in so far as it aims at maintaining
+the liberty of private property, is reactionary and false to the
+principle which it has always implicitly or explicitly maintained, of
+the right of each and every individual to a full and free development.
+In so far as Liberalism does this, in so far as it assumes as
+axiomatic a state <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233">[233]</a></span>of society based on unrestricted freedom of private
+property, and proceeds to adjust social arrangements solely or
+primarily in the interests of the owners of private property, in so
+far Liberalism and Socialism are death enemies."<a name="FNanchor_642_642" id="FNanchor_642_642"></a><a href="#Footnote_642_642" class="fnanchor">[642]</a> The leading
+Fabian organ stated: "A party subsisting on illusions, concealments,
+and hypocrisies, could hardly survive in the atmosphere engendered by
+a real fight like that between plutocracy and Socialism. For some time
+it may contrive to subsist by telling the electorate that the only
+true way of resisting Socialism is by means of Liberal reforms, while
+at the same time (with doubtful consistency) asking for Socialist
+support on the ground that it goes 'part of the way.' But its best
+chance is probably to divert public attention from Socialism to other
+matters, and this the Prime Minister evidently feels. The existence of
+the Liberal party is incompatible with the existence of intellectual
+honesty in its leaders. And with all his faults Sir Henry is too
+fundamentally honest a man to lead it effectively at the present
+juncture. The reins had better be handed over to Mr. Winston
+Churchill, against whom no such objection can be urged."<a name="FNanchor_643_643" id="FNanchor_643_643"></a><a href="#Footnote_643_643" class="fnanchor">[643]</a></p>
+
+<p>Before the Liberals set to work in 1906, Mr. Philip Snowden wrote: "It
+might be said that in the next Parliament the Liberal party is on its
+last trial."<a name="FNanchor_644_644" id="FNanchor_644_644"></a><a href="#Footnote_644_644" class="fnanchor">[644]</a> That trial has had, as far as the Socialists and the
+Labour party are concerned, an unsatisfactory result. Before the
+general election Socialists asked themselves: "Will the Liberal party
+come into power with a clear mandate for reform which even the House
+of Lords will not dare entirely to obstruct, or will it shuffle into
+power on the misdoings of its predecessors and carry out a halfhearted
+policy in the hope of not estranging any of its moderate followers? If
+it takes the latter course, it will <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234">[234]</a></span>win the undying contempt of all
+real reformers; it will be the last time that a Liberal Administration
+holds sway, and Labour will be left the only really progressive force
+in the country."<a name="FNanchor_645_645" id="FNanchor_645_645"></a><a href="#Footnote_645_645" class="fnanchor">[645]</a> Twelve months later, in a review of the activity
+of the Liberal Government, "The Reformers' Year Book" stated: "The
+story of Chinese labour in the Transvaal during the year 1906 has been
+one of continuous perfidy on the part of the Liberal Government at
+home. Returned to power largely on account of the opposition of the
+people of this country to Chinese slavery in any shape or form, they
+have burked the main issue at every point, and only carried out a few
+minor changes which have been totally ineffective, retaining all the
+while a hypocritical devotion to the popular ideal."<a name="FNanchor_646_646" id="FNanchor_646_646"></a><a href="#Footnote_646_646" class="fnanchor">[646]</a> "The Liberal
+Government has failed entirely to justify the confidence reposed in it
+by the electorate, not only upon the newer questions as they have
+arisen&mdash;such as the war in Natal&mdash;but on the very matters upon which
+it was returned to power, of which the chief was the continuance of
+Chinese labour in the Transvaal."<a name="FNanchor_647_647" id="FNanchor_647_647"></a><a href="#Footnote_647_647" class="fnanchor">[647]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists think that the Liberal agitation against the House of Lords
+is insincere and hypocritical. "Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's brave
+talk about fighting the House of Lords sounds very much like blarney
+when we call to mind the fact that he has beaten all records in the
+creation of peers. He has not yet been two years in office, but he has
+managed to make no less than twenty new peers. They include a tobacco
+man, a whisky man, a newspaper man who sold his journal to the Tories,
+several usurers and company promoters."<a name="FNanchor_648_648" id="FNanchor_648_648"></a><a href="#Footnote_648_648" class="fnanchor">[648]</a></p>
+
+<p>The assurance of the Liberals that they are the friends of Labour is
+doubted in view of the attitude of the party towards Labour
+candidates. "Liberals are continually saying that there is no quarrel
+between Liberalism and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235">[235]</a></span>Labour. Why, then, do we have the constantly
+recurring spectacle of a middle-class Liberal being run against a
+popular and capable man who can claim to directly represent the people
+who live by the work of their hands and heads as distinguished from
+those who live upon rent, dividends, or interest? Are there not even
+upon the Liberal side plenty of landlords, railway directors, bankers,
+stockbrokers, and employers of labour, that a seat cannot be spared to
+a workman till he wins it in despite of Liberal and Tory opposition
+alike?"<a name="FNanchor_649_649" id="FNanchor_649_649"></a><a href="#Footnote_649_649" class="fnanchor">[649]</a></p>
+
+<p>An amalgamation of the Liberals and the Socialist-Labour members is
+impossible. "Liberal-Labourism" is a delusion. "Labour men and
+capitalist Liberals are beginning to see that individualism and
+co-operation will not mix. If Liberalism to-day swallows Labourism, it
+will have a severe attack of indigestion. Mr. Keir Hardie in the
+Liberal ranks would do more to disrupt and destroy the Liberal party
+than he can possibly do from the outside. Labour, it is true, might
+capture the Liberal party, and this is advocated by some, but if this
+took place the party would wither away. The capitalist element would
+drop out and Labour would be left alone. Labour might just as well
+build up a new party outside. It is no use capturing a weapon which
+crumbles to pieces as soon as you grasp it. Better make a new
+weapon."<a name="FNanchor_650_650" id="FNanchor_650_650"></a><a href="#Footnote_650_650" class="fnanchor">[650]</a> "The Labour party in the House of Commons is as yet not
+disliked only because as yet it is not feared. Until it has made
+itself both disliked and feared, it will be far short of having
+fulfilled the objects of its very existence. It is not saying too much
+to say that in the very near future the measure of the Labour party's
+effectiveness will be its unpopularity in the House of Commons.
+Acrimonious as are the feelings often evoked by political
+controversies, they are urbanity itself as compared with the passions
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236">[236]</a></span>aroused over economic issues. The limits of Liberal concession must
+needs soon be reached. The Liberal-Labour candidate is but a transient
+phenomenon of our time, and with his disappearance the storm will
+break."<a name="FNanchor_651_651" id="FNanchor_651_651"></a><a href="#Footnote_651_651" class="fnanchor">[651]</a></p>
+
+<p>The great Liberal majority was created by accident and it is rapidly
+dissolving. "The Liberals succeeded to power through no merit of their
+own, but merely through the errors of their opponents. Liberalism is
+shedding its supporters at both ends, and is rapidly on the way to
+becoming a mere <i>caput mortuum</i>."<a name="FNanchor_652_652" id="FNanchor_652_652"></a><a href="#Footnote_652_652" class="fnanchor">[652]</a> It is true that "at the general
+election many Socialists climbed into Parliament on the backs of the
+Liberals,"<a name="FNanchor_653_653" id="FNanchor_653_653"></a><a href="#Footnote_653_653" class="fnanchor">[653]</a> but Liberal-Socialist co-operation is not possible.</p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists believe that Liberalism and Socialism are
+fundamentally antagonistic, and that therefore Socialism must fight
+its battles unaided. "In Great Britain, as in France, Belgium,
+Germany, and Italy, the cleavage has now been definitely marked
+between capitalist Liberalism and Socialist Democracy."<a name="FNanchor_654_654" id="FNanchor_654_654"></a><a href="#Footnote_654_654" class="fnanchor">[654]</a>
+"Political power, properly so-called, is merely the organised power of
+one class for oppressing another."<a name="FNanchor_655_655" id="FNanchor_655_655"></a><a href="#Footnote_655_655" class="fnanchor">[655]</a> "All political parties are but
+the expression of class interests, and as the interest of the working
+class is diametrically opposed to the interests of all sections of the
+master class, the party seeking working class emancipation must be
+hostile to every other party."<a name="FNanchor_656_656" id="FNanchor_656_656"></a><a href="#Footnote_656_656" class="fnanchor">[656]</a> "We shall see Liberals and Tories
+working together in cordial agreement, as they do in Germany, to
+prevent the election of the only politicians who can really profess to
+go to the poll on the broad ground of citizenship&mdash;labour done by hand
+or <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237">[237]</a></span>brain for the community, as apart from idleness and
+pleasure-seeking supported by rents, dividends, and interest taken
+from the community."<a name="FNanchor_657_657" id="FNanchor_657_657"></a><a href="#Footnote_657_657" class="fnanchor">[657]</a></p>
+
+<p>"As the machinery of government, including the armed forces of the
+nation, exists only to conserve the monopoly by the capitalist class
+of the wealth taken from the workers, the working class must organise
+consciously and politically for the conquest of the powers of
+government, national and local, in order that this machinery,
+including these forces, may be converted from an instrument of
+oppression into the agent of emancipation and the overthrow of
+privilege, aristocratic and plutocratic."<a name="FNanchor_658_658" id="FNanchor_658_658"></a><a href="#Footnote_658_658" class="fnanchor">[658]</a> "The property question
+is the issue which is creating a new political cleavage in the State.
+Somewhat dimly at present, but with growing clearness of vision, the
+worker begins to see that he will remain a menial, outcast and
+forlorn, until he has made himself master of the machine he tends, and
+the soil he tills."<a name="FNanchor_659_659" id="FNanchor_659_659"></a><a href="#Footnote_659_659" class="fnanchor">[659]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The only true position for a genuine working-class party is that of
+open hostility to all who support capitalism in any shape or form.
+This is the safe, sure, and scientific position."<a name="FNanchor_660_660" id="FNanchor_660_660"></a><a href="#Footnote_660_660" class="fnanchor">[660]</a> "Liberals will
+declare and do declare in most pathetic tones that they have done
+more, and will do more, for the workers than the Tories have done or
+will do. And Liberals will assure you that they are really more
+anxious to help the workers than we Socialists believe. But those are
+side issues. The main thing to remember is, that even if the Liberals
+are all they claim to be, they will never do as much for Labour as
+Labour could do for itself."<a name="FNanchor_661_661" id="FNanchor_661_661"></a><a href="#Footnote_661_661" class="fnanchor">[661]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Oh heed not the talk of those fat agitators.<br /></span><span class='pn'><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238">[238]</a></span>
+<span class="i1">Who prattle of Gladstone, or Churchill, or worse;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Expect not your rights from professional praters,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">But manfully trust in your courage and force.<a name="FNanchor_662_662" id="FNanchor_662_662"></a><a href="#Footnote_662_662" class="fnanchor">[662]</a><br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Onward! Sons of Labour! nerve ye for the fray;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Soon shall beam the dawning of a brighter day.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Keep the red flag flying, herald of the free&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">On yourselves relying, on to liberty.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">See! the coming glory streams across the plains.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Soon the Sons of Labour shall take up the reins.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Then in every nation shall our Cause increase<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Till it reigns triumphant&mdash;pledge of joy and peace.<a name="FNanchor_663_663" id="FNanchor_663_663"></a><a href="#Footnote_663_663" class="fnanchor">[663]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>On the other hand, there are Socialists who think that Socialism
+cannot succeed if it cuts itself adrift from the great national
+parties and pursues a purely Socialistic Labour policy. "A member of
+an Imperial Parliament is an Imperialist in spite of himself. A party
+which concerns itself with sectional interests only will soon cease to
+be a party; it will degenerate into a group, and as such it cannot
+hope to receive serious backing in the country."<a name="FNanchor_664_664" id="FNanchor_664_664"></a><a href="#Footnote_664_664" class="fnanchor">[664]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists feel confident that they will conquer power by
+conquering Parliament. "Parliament has always governed the country in
+the interest of the class to which the majority of its members
+belonged. It governed in the interest of the country gentlemen in the
+old days when they were in a majority in the House of Commons; it has
+governed in the interests of the capitalists and employers since they
+won a majority by the Reform Bill of 1832; and it will govern in the
+interest of the people when the majority is selected from <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239">[239]</a></span>the
+wage-earning class."<a name="FNanchor_665_665" id="FNanchor_665_665"></a><a href="#Footnote_665_665" class="fnanchor">[665]</a> "No sooner shall two hundred Labour members
+be firmly seated upon the cross-benches of the House, than both
+parties will approach them with bended knee, bringing gold and
+frankincense and programmes."<a name="FNanchor_666_666" id="FNanchor_666_666"></a><a href="#Footnote_666_666" class="fnanchor">[666]</a> "There is a fine impartiality about
+the policeman and the soldier, who are the cutting edge of the State
+power. They take their wages and obey their orders without asking
+questions. If those orders are to demolish the homestead of every
+peasant who refuses to take the bread out of his children's mouths in
+order that his landlord may have money to spend as an idle gentleman
+in London, the soldier obeys. But if his orders were to help the
+police to pitch his lordship into Holloway Gaol until he had paid an
+income-tax of twenty shillings on every pound of his unearned income,
+the soldier would do that with equal devotion to duty, and perhaps
+with a certain private zest that might be lacking in the other case.
+Now these orders come ultimately from the State, meaning in this
+country the House of Commons. A House of Commons consisting of 660
+gentlemen and 10 workmen will order the soldier to take money from the
+people for the landlords. A House of Commons consisting of 660 workmen
+and 10 gentlemen will probably, unless the 660 are fools, order the
+soldier to take money from the landlords for the people."<a name="FNanchor_667_667" id="FNanchor_667_667"></a><a href="#Footnote_667_667" class="fnanchor">[667]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_618_618" id="Footnote_618_618"></a><a href="#FNanchor_618_618"><span class="label">[618]</span></a> <i>John Burns and the Unemployed</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_619_619" id="Footnote_619_619"></a><a href="#FNanchor_619_619"><span class="label">[619]</span></a> Independent Labour Party, <i>A Statement of Principles</i>,
+p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_620_620" id="Footnote_620_620"></a><a href="#FNanchor_620_620"><span class="label">[620]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The New Book of Kings</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_621_621" id="Footnote_621_621"></a><a href="#FNanchor_621_621"><span class="label">[621]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 151.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_622_622" id="Footnote_622_622"></a><a href="#FNanchor_622_622"><span class="label">[622]</span></a> Casey, <i>Who are the Bloodsuckers?</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_623_623" id="Footnote_623_623"></a><a href="#FNanchor_623_623"><span class="label">[623]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 70.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_624_624" id="Footnote_624_624"></a><a href="#FNanchor_624_624"><span class="label">[624]</span></a> Councillor Glyde, <i>Liberal and Tory Hypocrisy</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_625_625" id="Footnote_625_625"></a><a href="#FNanchor_625_625"><span class="label">[625]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 39, 40.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_626_626" id="Footnote_626_626"></a><a href="#FNanchor_626_626"><span class="label">[626]</span></a> Penny, <i>The Political Labour Movement</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_627_627" id="Footnote_627_627"></a><a href="#FNanchor_627_627"><span class="label">[627]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Economics of Labour</i>, pp. 9, 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_628_628" id="Footnote_628_628"></a><a href="#FNanchor_628_628"><span class="label">[628]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Evolution of the Fourth Estate</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_629_629" id="Footnote_629_629"></a><a href="#FNanchor_629_629"><span class="label">[629]</span></a> <i>Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?</i>
+p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_630_630" id="Footnote_630_630"></a><a href="#FNanchor_630_630"><span class="label">[630]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_631_631" id="Footnote_631_631"></a><a href="#FNanchor_631_631"><span class="label">[631]</span></a> Diack, <i>Socialism and Current Politics</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_632_632" id="Footnote_632_632"></a><a href="#FNanchor_632_632"><span class="label">[632]</span></a> <i>Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?</i>
+p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_633_633" id="Footnote_633_633"></a><a href="#FNanchor_633_633"><span class="label">[633]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, February 16, 1906.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_634_634" id="Footnote_634_634"></a><a href="#FNanchor_634_634"><span class="label">[634]</span></a> Penny, <i>The Political Labour Movement</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_635_635" id="Footnote_635_635"></a><a href="#FNanchor_635_635"><span class="label">[635]</span></a> <i>Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?</i>
+p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_636_636" id="Footnote_636_636"></a><a href="#FNanchor_636_636"><span class="label">[636]</span></a> <i>Twentieth Century Politics</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_637_637" id="Footnote_637_637"></a><a href="#FNanchor_637_637"><span class="label">[637]</span></a> Russell Williams, <i>The Difficulties of Socialism</i>, pp.
+3, 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_638_638" id="Footnote_638_638"></a><a href="#FNanchor_638_638"><span class="label">[638]</span></a> <i>Twentieth Century Politics</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_639_639" id="Footnote_639_639"></a><a href="#FNanchor_639_639"><span class="label">[639]</span></a> Penny, <i>The Political Labour Movement</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_640_640" id="Footnote_640_640"></a><a href="#FNanchor_640_640"><span class="label">[640]</span></a> <i>Twentieth Century Politics</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_641_641" id="Footnote_641_641"></a><a href="#FNanchor_641_641"><span class="label">[641]</span></a> Penny, <i>The Political Labour Movement</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_642_642" id="Footnote_642_642"></a><a href="#FNanchor_642_642"><span class="label">[642]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, pp. 69, 70.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_643_643" id="Footnote_643_643"></a><a href="#FNanchor_643_643"><span class="label">[643]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, October 10, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_644_644" id="Footnote_644_644"></a><a href="#FNanchor_644_644"><span class="label">[644]</span></a> <i>Daily News</i>, January 20, 1906.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_645_645" id="Footnote_645_645"></a><a href="#FNanchor_645_645"><span class="label">[645]</span></a> <i>The Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1906, Preface p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_646_646" id="Footnote_646_646"></a><a href="#FNanchor_646_646"><span class="label">[646]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> 1907, p. 104.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_647_647" id="Footnote_647_647"></a><a href="#FNanchor_647_647"><span class="label">[647]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> Preface.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_648_648" id="Footnote_648_648"></a><a href="#FNanchor_648_648"><span class="label">[648]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, November 1, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_649_649" id="Footnote_649_649"></a><a href="#FNanchor_649_649"><span class="label">[649]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Evolution of the Fourth Estate</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_650_650" id="Footnote_650_650"></a><a href="#FNanchor_650_650"><span class="label">[650]</span></a> Penny, <i>The Political Labour Movement</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_651_651" id="Footnote_651_651"></a><a href="#FNanchor_651_651"><span class="label">[651]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Labour Policy</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_652_652" id="Footnote_652_652"></a><a href="#FNanchor_652_652"><span class="label">[652]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, November 7, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_653_653" id="Footnote_653_653"></a><a href="#FNanchor_653_653"><span class="label">[653]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_654_654" id="Footnote_654_654"></a><a href="#FNanchor_654_654"><span class="label">[654]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, January 19, 1906.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_655_655" id="Footnote_655_655"></a><a href="#FNanchor_655_655"><span class="label">[655]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto</i>, p. 22.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_656_656" id="Footnote_656_656"></a><a href="#FNanchor_656_656"><span class="label">[656]</span></a> <i>Declaration of Socialist Party of Great Britain</i>, see
+Appendix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_657_657" id="Footnote_657_657"></a><a href="#FNanchor_657_657"><span class="label">[657]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Evolution of the Fourth Estate</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_658_658" id="Footnote_658_658"></a><a href="#FNanchor_658_658"><span class="label">[658]</span></a> <i>Declaration of Principles of Socialist Party of Great
+Britain.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_659_659" id="Footnote_659_659"></a><a href="#FNanchor_659_659"><span class="label">[659]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_660_660" id="Footnote_660_660"></a><a href="#FNanchor_660_660"><span class="label">[660]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto of the Communist Party</i>, p.
+16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_661_661" id="Footnote_661_661"></a><a href="#FNanchor_661_661"><span class="label">[661]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, pp. 148, 149.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_662_662" id="Footnote_662_662"></a><a href="#FNanchor_662_662"><span class="label">[662]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_663_663" id="Footnote_663_663"></a><a href="#FNanchor_663_663"><span class="label">[663]</span></a> <i>Clarion Song Book</i>, p. 21.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_664_664" id="Footnote_664_664"></a><a href="#FNanchor_664_664"><span class="label">[664]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Labour Policy</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_665_665" id="Footnote_665_665"></a><a href="#FNanchor_665_665"><span class="label">[665]</span></a> <i>What Socialism Is</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_666_666" id="Footnote_666_666"></a><a href="#FNanchor_666_666"><span class="label">[666]</span></a> Leakey, <i>Co-operators and Labour Platform</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_667_667" id="Footnote_667_667"></a><a href="#FNanchor_667_667"><span class="label">[667]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Impossibilities of Anarchism</i>, p. 26.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XVII" id="CHAPTER_XVII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240">[240]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XVII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Many Socialists, especially the Fabians, hope to introduce Socialistic
+principles and Socialistic rule into Great Britain rather through the
+local than through the national authorities. They are strenuously
+exerting themselves to bring about that result, and so far their
+exertions have been by no means unsuccessful.</p>
+
+<p>"Socialists to-day are working in the towns with a twofold object. (1)
+To level up their districts. If Glasgow has municipal telephones,
+there is a very good precedent for Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford,
+Leeds, &amp;c., doing likewise. If Liverpool owns a municipal milk-supply,
+London, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds, must be brought into line. Each
+town must adopt the good points from every other town. (2) To urge
+their districts to launch out into something new."<a name="FNanchor_668_668" id="FNanchor_668_668"></a><a href="#Footnote_668_668" class="fnanchor">[668]</a> "The property
+held and worked and controlled by municipalities already exceeds
+500,000,000<i>l.</i> sterling in value, and is being added to yearly. This
+process has but to continue long enough to ensure that every industry
+will pass under public control, and thus State Socialism will become
+an accomplished fact by a gradual process of easy transition."<a name="FNanchor_669_669" id="FNanchor_669_669"></a><a href="#Footnote_669_669" class="fnanchor">[669]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The proper sphere of municipal activity includes everything a
+municipality can do better than a private company."<a name="FNanchor_670_670" id="FNanchor_670_670"></a><a href="#Footnote_670_670" class="fnanchor">[670]</a> "The
+immediate object should be to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241">[241]</a></span>municipalise all those services which
+are necessary to a healthy life. Food, fuel, clothing, shelter&mdash;these
+are required by all&mdash;and no man should have the right to deny them to
+any worker. We must not stop at municipal trams. We must not stop at
+municipal gas. We must not stop at municipal electricity. These are
+only stepping-stones. Not until we can say that poverty and disease
+and unemployment are abolished out of the land shall we have the right
+to discuss the limits of municipal trading."<a name="FNanchor_671_671" id="FNanchor_671_671"></a><a href="#Footnote_671_671" class="fnanchor">[671]</a> "The economic forces
+which replaced the workshop by the factory will replace the private
+shop by the municipal store, and the private factory by the municipal
+one."<a name="FNanchor_672_672" id="FNanchor_672_672"></a><a href="#Footnote_672_672" class="fnanchor">[672]</a></p>
+
+<p>According to Socialist teaching the destruction of private enterprise
+by municipal undertakings will be a blessing to all citizens. "Where a
+city supplies its own gas there is no 'middle-man.' The corporation
+stands in the place of the 'middle-man,' and as the corporation is
+elected by the citizens the people are thus in the position of getting
+their own gas made and paying for it in their own way. Some of the
+citizens are makers of gas, or workmen; most of the citizens are users
+of gas, or consumers; and all of the citizens are owners and managers
+of the gasworks and of the gas supply."<a name="FNanchor_673_673" id="FNanchor_673_673"></a><a href="#Footnote_673_673" class="fnanchor">[673]</a></p>
+
+<p>The suppression of the "unnecessary middleman" sounds so very
+plausible that it is certain to prove an excellent election cry. But
+has the middleman really disappeared when a city corporation takes his
+place? Does the corporation-middleman supply gas gratis? Are the
+private middleman's profits not distributed to a host of corporation
+officials in the shape of substantial salaries? The transfer of
+gasworks, &amp;c., from private hands to a city corporation is no doubt
+very beneficial <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242">[242]</a></span>to those who draw the corporation salaries. It may be
+very profitable to the local politicians and their hangers-on. Jobs
+may be had as a reward for political support. But the citizens may
+find the gas to be no cheaper and the rates to be considerably higher
+after the suppression of the "unnecessary middleman." And will it then
+console him that he is the "owner and manager of the gasworks and of
+the gas supply"?</p>
+
+<p>Under the heading "The Justice of Abolishing the Private Trader" one
+of the leading champions of municipal Socialism writes: "Is it unfair
+to take away the living of the private trader? Then it is unfair to
+take away the living of the unemployed, the twelve millions on the
+verge of starvation, and the thousands slain annually by poverty and
+preventable disease. I say that the welfare of the nation must be
+considered before the profits of the monopolists and the wasteful
+freedom of the small trader. Under the present system a large
+proportion of the population have so deteriorated in health and
+stamina as to endanger the existence of the nation. Private enterprise
+and competition are responsible for nine-tenths of the misery and
+suffering of our twenty million poor. But we must not attempt to alter
+the conditions because the small private trader would be ruined.
+Nevertheless the system is going to be altered, whether the small
+trader likes it or not."<a name="FNanchor_674_674" id="FNanchor_674_674"></a><a href="#Footnote_674_674" class="fnanchor">[674]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing are typical Socialist arguments. In the first place, the
+writer grossly exaggerates existing poverty by speaking of "twenty
+million poor." Then he boldly asserts that all poverty is due to
+private enterprise and that municipal enterprise will abolish it. So
+far municipal enterprise has not even succeeded in diminishing
+poverty. On the contrary, with the phenomenal growth of municipal
+enterprise in Great Britain pauperism, actual and percentual, has also
+grown at an alarming <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_243" id="Page_243">[243]</a></span>rate. It is significant that poverty and
+distress have increased most rapidly, and have become most acute, in
+those localities in which municipal enterprise has been most active
+and in which Socialist councils have held undisputed sway, as, for
+instance, in East and West Ham and Poplar. Municipal enterprise, by
+increasing the rates&mdash;and, with the rates, the rents&mdash;has increased
+the general cost of living without at the same time increasing
+production. On the contrary, it has driven factories away through high
+rates. Therefore municipal enterprise has increased the expenditure of
+the general body of workers without increasing their earnings, and
+consequently has directly increased the existing poverty which it has
+promised to abolish. Municipal enterprise has succeeded chiefly in
+giving from the rates high wages to municipal employees at the cost of
+all other workers.</p>
+
+<p>Municipal Socialists rather rely on force than on justice in dealing
+with private business men. "For private traders to fight against
+municipalisation is a short-sighted policy. One thing is certain&mdash;they
+have to go. 'What! Compete with us with the ratepayers' money? Our own
+money? What injustice!' says the small trader."<a name="FNanchor_675_675" id="FNanchor_675_675"></a><a href="#Footnote_675_675" class="fnanchor">[675]</a> This just
+objection of the ratepayers is answered with a contemptible quibble.
+"The small trader is mistaken. The municipality does not use their
+money, and would not use their money, under the supposed
+circumstances. If the London County Council decided to open 1,000
+bread-shops, how would they raise the capital required? Not by taking
+the ratepayers' money, or the private traders' money, but by going
+into the money market and borrowing on the credit of all the citizens.
+Suppose 100,000<i>l.</i> were required? Not a penny would come out of the
+rates. The credit of all the citizens of London is so good that they
+can borrow <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_244" id="Page_244">[244]</a></span>all the money they want without any difficulty."<a name="FNanchor_676_676" id="FNanchor_676_676"></a><a href="#Footnote_676_676" class="fnanchor">[676]</a> In
+other words, the Social-"Democratic" politician claims for himself the
+right of arbitrarily depriving citizens who possess property of that
+property and to ruin them by underselling them. They borrow the money
+they require for these undertakings on the credit of the very
+property-owners whom they wish to ruin, not on the credit of "all the
+citizens," as Mr. Suthers pretends, and then they have the impudence
+to assert that the corporations do not ruin the citizens with their
+own money but only with money borrowed on their credit&mdash;as if the one
+were not identical with the other.</p>
+
+<p>The objections to municipal enterprise on a Socialist basis are
+twofold:</p>
+
+<p>(1) That it increases the rates and the municipal debt, and therefore
+the rent of houses and lodgings;</p>
+
+<p>(2) That it is, on the whole, unprofitable, being undertaken without
+due regard to sound finance, efficiency, and economy.</p>
+
+<p>Socialists intend to "tax the rich out of existence." Therefore they
+endeavour to increase as much as possible not only the Imperial
+taxation but also the rates. Owners of house property are used to a
+certain income. If the rates are put up, they put up the rent.
+Therefore every increase in the rates leads, as a rule, automatically
+to an equivalent increase in the rent. The fact that a rise in the
+rates leads to a rise in the rent of houses and lodgings, and that the
+Socialist policy of waste and squander falls therefore most heavily
+not on the capitalist but on the working man, is boldly denied.
+"Generally speaking, the reduction of rates is of no benefit whatever
+to the working class. Rates are levied upon property.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Do not the
+working class pay the rates and taxes? <i>A.</i> No. Rates and taxes are
+paid out of the surplus value taken from the workers by <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_245" id="Page_245">[245]</a></span>their
+exploiters. As already explained, the return to the workers, their
+wages, is determined by their cost of subsistence, regulated by
+competition in the labour market; consequently they have nothing
+wherewith to pay taxes, and whether these be high or low, or whoever
+has to pay them directly, the position of the worker remains the same.
+He gets, on the average, his subsistence, that is all."<a name="FNanchor_677_677" id="FNanchor_677_677"></a><a href="#Footnote_677_677" class="fnanchor">[677]</a></p>
+
+<p>Unfortunately, many working men know to their cost that the arguments
+given above are absolutely untrue. Whilst their wages have remained
+stationary, their expenditure for rent has greatly increased owing to
+municipal enterprise carried on by Socialists regardless of expense,
+which has greatly increased rates. At West Ham "Local government was
+to be carried on in a way regardless of expense, and under the
+compounding system the vast majority of the electors were not to
+realise that there were such things as rates at all. One member of the
+Socialist party publicly declared that it did not matter to the
+working men of the borough how high the rates were. But the 'people'
+got to see in course of time that there were drawbacks, even for them,
+in unrestricted Socialism. They found that, because of the increased
+rates, house rents were going up twelve and a half to twenty per
+cent., notwithstanding the threats of the Socialists that every
+landlord who raised his rents should have his assessments
+increased."<a name="FNanchor_678_678" id="FNanchor_678_678"></a><a href="#Footnote_678_678" class="fnanchor">[678]</a></p>
+
+<p>Owing to municipal enterprise directed by Socialists, "The sum-total
+of the rates, which stood at 6<i>s.</i> in the pound in 1890 and at 8<i>s.</i>
+1<i>d.</i> in 1896, rose to 8<i>s.</i> 10-1/2<i>d.</i> in the pound in 1900 and 9<i>s.</i>
+5-1/2<i>d.</i> in the pound in 1901. From that figure it advanced to 9<i>s.</i>
+8<i>d.</i> in the pound,"<a name="FNanchor_679_679" id="FNanchor_679_679"></a><a href="#Footnote_679_679" class="fnanchor">[679]</a> and to 10<i>s.</i> 8<i>d.</i> a little later. It is an
+impudent misstatement of fact when Socialist leaders tell the workers,
+"We <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_246" id="Page_246">[246]</a></span>are not killed by rates, we are killed by rent."<a name="FNanchor_680_680" id="FNanchor_680_680"></a><a href="#Footnote_680_680" class="fnanchor">[680]</a> "The whole
+of our municipal expenditure is only a paltry 110 millions a year.
+What do we pay in rent? Two hundred and seventy-five millions!"<a name="FNanchor_681_681" id="FNanchor_681_681"></a><a href="#Footnote_681_681" class="fnanchor">[681]</a>
+After all, people in other countries, where the blessings of Socialist
+local government are unknown, and where poverty is much rarer than in
+Great Britain, also pay rent. On an average the rates are 150 per
+cent. higher in Great Britain than in Germany.<a name="FNanchor_682_682" id="FNanchor_682_682"></a><a href="#Footnote_682_682" class="fnanchor">[682]</a></p>
+
+<p>Whilst the national Government endeavours to diminish the dead weight
+and the heavy yearly charge of national indebtedness, Socialist local
+authorities vie with each other in piling up local indebtedness as
+fast as possible with a reckless disregard of the future. The increase
+of the municipal debt, the increase of local taxation, like the
+increase of national taxation, has no terrors for Socialists. On the
+contrary, "Municipal debt is not a burden. It is a splendid
+investment. We 'owe' 370 millions. Do we 'own' nothing? The
+municipalities own all the roads, drains, sewers, public buildings,
+parks, libraries, a thousand waterworks, two hundred and sixty
+gasworks, three hundred and thirty-four electricity undertakings, one
+hundred and sixty-two tramways, two or three hundred markets, a
+hundred and fifty cemeteries, forty-three harbours, piers, and docks,
+numerous baths, washhouses, and working-class dwellings, thousands of
+schools, and thousands of acres of land."<a name="FNanchor_683_683" id="FNanchor_683_683"></a><a href="#Footnote_683_683" class="fnanchor">[683]</a> Since these words were
+written local indebtedness has increased. "We owe" now 470 millions.</p>
+
+<p>Unfortunately, many of the splendid assets enumerated possess no
+realisable value whatever, and many municipal enterprises are run
+without an adequate profit or with a loss.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_247" id="Page_247">[247]</a></span>The Socialist views and aims regarding local indebtedness are well
+summed up as follows by Suthers: "The 'municipal debt' argument is a
+bogey. The greater the municipal debt, the less private enterprise
+there will be. The greater the municipal debt, the cheaper and better
+the public services will be. The less private capital, the less
+profits going into a few pockets, the richer the general public will
+be. Up, then, with municipal debt."<a name="FNanchor_684_684" id="FNanchor_684_684"></a><a href="#Footnote_684_684" class="fnanchor">[684]</a> These are principles which
+threaten to make Great Britain bankrupt. "The annual report of the
+work of the Local Government Board for 1907 shows that the local debt
+of England and Wales, from being 17 per cent. of the National Debt in
+1879-80, has grown to 58.5 per cent. of the National Debt in 1904-5.
+The National and Local debts have grown as follows:</p>
+
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" width="60%" summary="National and Local debts">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr" width="24%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr" width="24%">1879-80</td>
+  <td class="tdr" width="24%">1904-5</td>
+  <td class="tdr3" width="28%"><i>Increase</i></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">National Debt</td>
+  <td class="tdr">&pound;770,604,774</td>
+  <td class="tdr">&pound;796,736,491</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">&pound;26,131,717&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Local Debt</td>
+  <td class="tdr">136,934,070</td>
+  <td class="tdr">466,459,269</td>
+  <td class="tdr">329,525,199"<a name="FNanchor_685_685" id="FNanchor_685_685"></a><a href="#Footnote_685_685" class="fnanchor">[685]</a></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p class="noin">Unless the Imperial Government interferes, the local debt will soon be
+larger than the National Debt.</p>
+
+<p>We have seen in the beginning of this Chapter that, as regards local
+government, the Socialists pursue a twofold aim: (1) To level up their
+districts; (2) To urge their districts to launch out into something
+new. Therefore we find, as Mr. John A. Fairlie says in his book on
+"Municipal Administration," that "the danger of excessive debt is most
+serious in the smallest cities. The largest cities, while they have
+the largest debts, have also the largest resources, and also the
+best-developed financial administration. The cities of modest size,
+however, which attempt to equal the works of the metropolis without
+its available sources of revenue, are very likely to find themselves
+in serious difficulties."</p>
+
+<p>The time may come, and it may come soon, when <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_248" id="Page_248">[248]</a></span>British local
+indebtedness will become greatly reduced by local bankruptcy and
+repudiation. That process would have no terrors for Socialists. They
+ought rather to look forward to it. As they demand the repudiation of
+the National Debt (see Chapter IX.), they should logically also strive
+to repudiate the local debt. A general repudiation of local debt would
+be the fitting and logical aim and end of municipal enterprise.
+Municipal enterprise aims at expropriating private property-owners,
+who, rightly considered, are paid not in cash but in debt
+certificates. The repudiation of all local debts would convey gratis
+to the municipality the municipally managed undertakings which,
+rightly considered, belong to the stockholders, and would at the same
+time ruin the capitalists who have advanced the money for acquiring
+those undertakings. The Socialist policy would triumph. This would be
+the fitting end of a rule by irresponsible and penniless demagogues.</p>
+
+<p>To the Socialist there is no limit to municipal enterprise. Not some
+branches of private trade and production, but all private trade and
+production are to be taken over by the municipalities. Private
+enterprise is to be extinguished altogether. The municipalities are to
+be universal owners, manufacturers, and providers. Among the first
+things which Socialist municipalities wish to control are the supply
+of bread, milk, coal; hospitals and public-houses, banks, fire
+insurances, and pawnshops.<a name="FNanchor_686_686" id="FNanchor_686_686"></a><a href="#Footnote_686_686" class="fnanchor">[686]</a></p>
+
+<p>All workers are to be municipal officials. Stretching out beyond their
+borders, the municipalities are ultimately to absorb the country, and
+to bring it under Socialist management and government.<a name="FNanchor_687_687" id="FNanchor_687_687"></a><a href="#Footnote_687_687" class="fnanchor">[687]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_249" id="Page_249">[249]</a></span>Some of the more immediate aims of Socialism as regards London are
+expressed by Sydney Webb, the brilliant, but unfortunately somewhat
+over-imaginative, leader of British scientific Socialism, as follows:</p>
+
+<p>"We see in imagination the County Council's aqueducts supplying London
+with pure soft water from a Welsh lake; the County Council's mains
+furnishing, without special charge, a constant supply up to the top of
+every house: the County Council's hydrants and standpipes yielding
+abundant cleansing fluid from the Thames to every street. When every
+parish has its public baths and washhouses open without fees, every
+Board school its swimming-bath and teacher of swimming, every railway
+station and public building its drinking-fountain and basin for
+washing the hands, every park its bathing and skating ponds&mdash;then we
+shall begin to show the world that we do not, after all, fall behind
+Imperial Rome in this one item of its splendid magnificence. By that
+time the landlord will be required, as a mere condition of sanitary
+fitness, to lay on water to every floor, if not to every tenement, and
+the bath will be as common an adjunct of the workman's home as it now
+is of the modern villa residence. And just as in some American cities
+hot water and superheated steam are supplied in pipes for warming
+purposes over large areas, we may even see the County Council laying
+on a separate service of hot water to be drawn at will from a tap in
+each tenement. Why should London's million families waste their
+million fires every time hot water is needed?</p>
+
+<p>"The economy of fuel leads, indeed, to the municipalised gas-supply,
+then laid on, as a matter of course, to every tenement, and used, not
+only for lighting, but still more largely for cooking in the stoves
+supplied at a nominal charge.</p>
+
+<p>"In order to relieve the pressure of population in the centre, and
+reduce the rents of the metropolitan <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_250" id="Page_250">[250]</a></span>"Connaughts," the County Council
+tramways will doubtless be made as free as its roads and bridges.
+Taxes on locomotion are universally condemned, and the economic
+effects of a penny tram-fare are precisely the same as those of a tax
+on the trip. The County Council will, however, free its trams on the
+empirical grounds of economy and the development of its suburban
+estates of artisans' dwellings, built on land bought to retain the
+unearned increment for the public benefit. Free trams may well imply
+free trains in the metropolitan and suburban area. Does not the
+Council already run a free service of steamboats on the Thames at
+North Woolwich&mdash;eventually, no doubt, to be extended all along the
+stream?</p>
+
+<p>"Public libraries and reading-rooms in every ward are nearly here
+already, but we may expect that the library and the public hall will
+go far to cut out the tavern (at present our only 'public' house) as
+the poor man's club. As for bands of music in the parks, municipal
+f&ecirc;tes, and fireworks on 'Labour Day,' and other instances of the
+communalisation of the means of 'enjoyment,' all this is already
+common form in France. The parks, indeed, will be tremendous affairs.
+But when London's gas and water and markets are owned and controlled
+by its public authorities; when its tramways, and perhaps its local
+railways, are managed like its roads and parks, not for private
+profit, but for public use; when the metropolis at length possesses
+its own river, and its own docks; when its site is secure from
+individual tyranny, and its artisans' dwellings from the whims of
+philanthropy; when, in short, London collectively really takes its own
+life into its own hands, a vast army of London's citizens will be
+directly enrolled in London's service."<a name="FNanchor_688_688" id="FNanchor_688_688"></a><a href="#Footnote_688_688" class="fnanchor">[688]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing political and economic programme would be more
+creditable to an imaginative schoolgirl ten years old than to a man of
+science and a politician. How <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_251" id="Page_251">[251]</a></span>are all these wonderful and almost
+miraculous changes to be financed? Quite simply and very easily&mdash;by
+plunder. Mr. Sidney Webb, like most "scientific" Socialists, is a
+loose and shallow thinker. He forgets in his calculations that
+stubborn little item&mdash;human nature. He forgets that nobody can become
+richer by transferring money from the right pocket to the left. If you
+plunder all capitalists and all middlemen, the workers will certainly
+not be better off. Owing to the absence of direct self-interest, the
+management by salaried officials will be inefficient. All experience
+of management by public bodies through officials shows that public
+enterprise is far more wasteful and far less efficient than private
+enterprise; that in official management routine, sloth, waste,
+irresponsibility, nepotism, favouritism, and often peculation too,
+become supreme. Besides, far more money than is wasted now by
+capitalists on themselves will be wasted by politicians hankering
+after popularity, and after jobs for themselves and their followers
+and dependents. The greatest wasters in the poorest districts are the
+irresponsible Socialist authorities. In palatial town halls
+sumptuously furnished, in magnificent public libraries, in marble
+baths, and other outlets of civic magnificence, money wrung from the
+hard-worked wage-earners is wasted in far greater sums than could
+possibly be spent by the most reckless capitalist on his private
+amusement. The most magnificent town halls, &amp;c., are to be found in
+the poorest districts. Besides, "salaries must be liberal enough to
+attract the best men to the public service."<a name="FNanchor_689_689" id="FNanchor_689_689"></a><a href="#Footnote_689_689" class="fnanchor">[689]</a> It is a matter of
+course that the rule of irresponsible Socialist agitators, that a
+system of local government whereby those who have no money are enabled
+to spend lavishly by drawing upon those who have money, will not make
+for efficiency and economy, and the end will be the Poplar-ising of
+Great Britain. There is a generally <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_252" id="Page_252">[252]</a></span>accepted principle, "No taxation
+without representation." That principle requires as a supplement, "No
+representation without taxation." Otherwise Great Britain will be
+ruled by a mob headed by imaginative and dishonest demagogues.</p>
+
+<p>No enterprise is too large or too costly for the Socialists. Quite
+recently the Fabians recommended in a leaflet that Glasgow should
+acquire the whole built-over ground of the city at a cost of
+24,000,000<i>l.</i>, issuing against that sum Corporation Bonds bearing
+3-1/4 per cent. interest. Provided that everything should be settled
+according to expectations, and supposing that Glasgow should be able
+to borrow 24,000,000<i>l.</i> at 3-1/4 per cent., which seems extremely
+unlikely, there would accrue, on the most favourable showing, a net
+profit of 200,000<i>l.</i> per annum to Glasgow, if nothing be allowed for
+the cost of management.<a name="FNanchor_690_690" id="FNanchor_690_690"></a><a href="#Footnote_690_690" class="fnanchor">[690]</a> The possibility that that gigantic
+speculation might prove a failure is not even considered. On the
+contrary, it is assumed as certain that Glasgow will greatly profit by
+the growing value of land. Now if through natural economic
+development, or through the rule of a Socialist national or local
+administration, Glasgow should decline and land in Glasgow should fall
+in value, the town might be ruined. Of course that would not hurt the
+penniless Socialist agitators. Besides, there would always be the
+sovereign remedy of repudiation.</p>
+
+<p>According to the fundamental Socialist doctrines which condemn
+profit,<a name="FNanchor_691_691" id="FNanchor_691_691"></a><a href="#Footnote_691_691" class="fnanchor">[691]</a> "Municipal trading does not seek profit. To the private
+trader the making of profits or losses is a vital matter. He makes the
+mistake of thinking the same motives induce a municipality to provide
+a public service."<a name="FNanchor_692_692" id="FNanchor_692_692"></a><a href="#Footnote_692_692" class="fnanchor">[692]</a> To the Socialist administrators it is quite
+immaterial whether their enterprises are run at a profit or at a loss,
+so long as they can draw <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_253" id="Page_253">[253]</a></span>freely on the rich and well-to-do to pay for
+their extravagance. "The Socialist view of the fair way of dealing
+with profits on trading concerns is to have none&mdash;if one may be
+excused so paradoxical a statement. Fair wages and good conditions
+generally for the employees, and selling at cost so that all may use
+freely the commodity or service, is the nearest approach to justice in
+respect to such municipal concerns as are incapable of being used with
+equal freedom by all."<a name="FNanchor_693_693" id="FNanchor_693_693"></a><a href="#Footnote_693_693" class="fnanchor">[693]</a> "The only sound principle of municipal
+management is to run all these things primarily for use, with no idea
+of making profit at all, and as far as possible at a price to the user
+covering the cost of the production only. Such profits as are made
+should be used either to extend municipal enterprise or be utilised
+for what in Scotland is known as "the common good," that is, in the
+provision of instruction, amusements, parks and open spaces, helpful
+and beneficial to all."<a name="FNanchor_694_694" id="FNanchor_694_694"></a><a href="#Footnote_694_694" class="fnanchor">[694]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Municipalisation or nationalisation must proceed on the right lines
+and for a practical object. What should be the object of
+municipalisation and nationalisation? The primary object should be the
+most economical provision of the best possible public services. The
+general well-being should be the first consideration to be served,
+having due regard to the welfare of each and all engaged in these
+services. The idea of profit either in the shape of interest on loans,
+or of reduced rates and taxes, should be eliminated altogether."<a name="FNanchor_695_695" id="FNanchor_695_695"></a><a href="#Footnote_695_695" class="fnanchor">[695]</a>
+"The private trader always pursues profits. That is why he is such a
+dreadful failure. The motive of municipal trading, on the contrary, is
+public welfare&mdash;the benefit of all the citizens. That is why it is
+such a tremendous success. No one ever thinks of criticising a town
+council because they make no profits <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_254" id="Page_254">[254]</a></span>on these services. Now when we
+consider the question of municipal trading in gas, tramways, and
+electricity, is the principle involved any different? Not at all. The
+provision of gas, trams, and electricity is inspired by just the same
+motives as inspired the provision of roads, parks, libraries,
+sewerages, police, and education. That is to say, the benefit of all
+the citizens."<a name="FNanchor_696_696" id="FNanchor_696_696"></a><a href="#Footnote_696_696" class="fnanchor">[696]</a> "The day may come when municipal trams and
+municipal light will be just as free as municipal streets and
+municipal libraries. That is to say, a rate will be levied on the
+citizens for their upkeep, and everyone will be free to use them as
+required."<a name="FNanchor_697_697" id="FNanchor_697_697"></a><a href="#Footnote_697_697" class="fnanchor">[697]</a></p>
+
+<p>Such an ideal state of affairs, as pictured by scientific Mr. Webb and
+his rapacious followers, would be most desirable from the point of
+view of the town loafer. He would no longer monopolise the free
+library, the lodging-house, and the public-house corners, as he does
+at present. He would vary the monotony of the reading-room and the
+street corner by free rides up and down the town and into the country.
+In the evening he would take a hot bath in the free public baths
+recommended by Sidney Webb, sit for a while in the free clubs
+recommended by the same gentleman, and then stroll out to the free
+public park to view the free fireworks and listen to the free music.
+Free meals and lodgings will no doubt follow in due course. Great
+Britain will be ruled for the benefit of the tramp. Why should anybody
+work in such a "free" country? Who would not be a loafer or a tramp
+under these conditions&mdash;especially as the "vice" of work, to use a
+Socialistic expression, would speedily be visited by punishment in the
+shape of confiscatory taxation, if not of direct confiscation? The
+populace of decaying Athens and Rome lived under those conditions
+which are the ideals of British Socialists. The citizens lived by
+their votes for a time in idleness. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_255" id="Page_255">[255]</a></span>They were fed and clothed by
+slaves and subject nations. But the end was starvation.</p>
+
+<p>To provide all these free benefits for those unwilling to work, the
+owners of property would of course have to be taxed out of existence.
+"There is no limit to the present rating powers of the local
+authority, nor to the taxing powers of the State. The recognised
+limits to local and national taxation are the needs of the respective
+authorities. Though not perhaps clearly or generally understood, the
+taxing powers of the community are based upon the principle that
+private property is only permitted to be held or enjoyed by
+individuals so long as that private possession is not opposed to the
+general welfare, and so long as the community does not require the
+property or the income for public purposes. The Socialist accepts the
+principle of taxation&mdash;taxation 'according to ability derived from the
+profits of stock-in-trade and other property'&mdash;but desires
+deliberately to incorporate another idea and purpose in taxation,
+namely, the taxation of the rich to secure such socially created
+wealth as is now taken in rent, interest, and profit, and to use this
+revenue for social reform purposes. In other words, we would by that
+means compel 'the rendering unto C&aelig;sar the things that are
+C&aelig;sar's.'"<a name="FNanchor_698_698" id="FNanchor_698_698"></a><a href="#Footnote_698_698" class="fnanchor">[698]</a> Municipal funds would be provided, not only by local
+rates, but also by a local income and land taxes.<a name="FNanchor_699_699" id="FNanchor_699_699"></a><a href="#Footnote_699_699" class="fnanchor">[699]</a> In other words,
+Socialism would eat the goose that lays the golden eggs.</p>
+
+<p>According to leading Socialists, municipal enterprise is preferable to
+private enterprise, not only for economic but also for moral reasons.
+"The system of private enterprise and competition reeks with
+corruption. Honesty under it is impossible. Municipal Socialism, on
+the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_256" id="Page_256">[256]</a></span>contrary, would provide an environment which would encourage and
+promote the growth of moral activities. Instead of leading to
+corruption it would lead away from it."<a name="FNanchor_700_700" id="FNanchor_700_700"></a><a href="#Footnote_700_700" class="fnanchor">[700]</a> "Private enterprise must
+lead to fraud, deceit, bribery, corruption, and even murder, in the
+struggle for existence. Municipal Socialism would entirely remove any
+temptation to commit these immoral actions. Why? Because, under
+municipal Socialism, every person who worked would be sure of a
+living."<a name="FNanchor_701_701" id="FNanchor_701_701"></a><a href="#Footnote_701_701" class="fnanchor">[701]</a> We have seen some samples of the moral and purifying
+influence of municipal Socialism in the investigations recently made
+by the Board of Trade. Unfortunately these have revealed the fact
+that, in many of the most advanced Socialist corporations, fraud,
+bribery, intimidation, favouritism, and common theft are of daily
+occurrence. What else can be expected when men of predatory instincts,
+who preach the gospel of idleness and confiscation, who live not by
+work but by talk, who have been accustomed to handle pence, and who
+have to be taught by the town clerk how to sign a cheque, are suddenly
+enabled to dispose of thousands of pounds and to negotiate loans?</p>
+
+<p>The general public takes little interest in local elections. Most
+citizens abstain from voting. Therefore the numerous corporation
+employees often have the decisive vote in local elections, and they
+will support only a candidate who promises shorter hours or higher
+pay. Municipal employees sitting in the public galleries will even
+dominate the council chamber, intimidate councillors, and shout down
+those of whom they disapprove. Besides, they may strike and
+disorganise the public services, and make the Socialistic authorities
+look ridiculous. Therefore it is better to humour and to obey them
+than to oppose them. The Fabian Society demands for municipal servants
+"full liberty of combination," because "the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_257" id="Page_257">[257]</a></span>servants of the public
+may often need protection against the public, as in the Post
+Office."<a name="FNanchor_702_702" id="FNanchor_702_702"></a><a href="#Footnote_702_702" class="fnanchor">[702]</a> The results of Socialist teachings are to be seen in
+many municipalities. "The servants of the public" are already, and
+will in an increasing degree become, the masters of the public.</p>
+
+<p>Under municipal Socialism the wages of tramway-men have increased as
+follows: "In Sheffield, where the private company paid 100<i>l.</i> for
+labour, the Corporation pay 165<i>l.</i> for the same amount of work. In
+Bolton, where the private company paid 100<i>l.</i>, the Corporation pay
+137<i>l.</i> In Wallasey, where the private company paid 100<i>l.</i>, the
+District Council pay 185<i>l.</i> In Northampton, where the private company
+paid 100<i>l.</i>, the Corporation pay 120<i>l.</i> In Birkenhead, where the
+private company paid 100<i>l.</i>, the Corporation pay 315<i>l.</i> In
+Portsmouth, where the private company paid 100<i>l.</i>, the Corporation
+pay 130<i>l.</i> In Sunderland, where the private company paid 100<i>l.</i>, the
+Corporation pay 145<i>l.</i> When the Manchester Corporation took over the
+trams they paid increased wages amounting to 60,000<i>l.</i> a year."<a name="FNanchor_703_703" id="FNanchor_703_703"></a><a href="#Footnote_703_703" class="fnanchor">[703]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing information is given by a Socialist. Some of the
+advances may be justified, but others, and probably the majority, have
+been made with that fine disregard of economy which is commonly found
+among men who can afford to be generous at other people's expense.
+Municipal Socialism is an ever-growing cancer which is rapidly
+exhausting the country.</p>
+
+<p>"Half the municipal debt is of a nature which can never yield a
+profit."<a name="FNanchor_704_704" id="FNanchor_704_704"></a><a href="#Footnote_704_704" class="fnanchor">[704]</a> The other half is invested in enterprises many of which
+are run regardless of economy and of expense, regardless of profit and
+loss, in accordance with the Socialistic principles stated in this
+Chapter. The policy of deliberate waste and of constant increase <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_258" id="Page_258">[258]</a></span>of
+debt, the principles of "launching out into something new" and
+"levelling up their districts," perhaps also the fear of eventual
+bankruptcy and repudiation, have at last frightened the investor.
+Corporation stocks can no longer be considered as safe first-class
+securities. Besides, the banks have begun to refuse to accommodate
+Socialistic municipalities with the necessary funds by overdrafts,
+short loans, &amp;c. Socialists have therefore begun to complain when they
+saw that the unlimited supply of other peoples' money was diminishing.
+They consider it a grievance that they can no longer arbitrarily
+squander on fantastic undertakings what is not their own. "The
+hostility of the banking interest to municipal borrowing, and the
+threat to 'cut off supplies' has at length taken practical form.
+Disappointed in their attempt to secure sufficiently favourable
+treatment from their bankers (Parr's), the Chester Corporation applied
+to four other banks in the city, viz. Lloyds, North and South Wales,
+National Provincial, and Liverpool Banks. All refused to tender for
+the account. The banks are not run for the public, the public are run
+for the bankers."<a name="FNanchor_705_705" id="FNanchor_705_705"></a><a href="#Footnote_705_705" class="fnanchor">[705]</a> Also, the banks, instead of lending their funds
+gratis to Socialist corporations, are heartless enough to demand
+interest "usury" on their loans. "Unfortunately at present public
+bodies must pay heavy tribute as interest on borrowed money."<a name="FNanchor_706_706" id="FNanchor_706_706"></a><a href="#Footnote_706_706" class="fnanchor">[706]</a>
+"Our embryo Socialistic enterprises are even now suffering from the
+toll of interest which a restricted credit and currency permit the
+money lords to exact."<a name="FNanchor_707_707" id="FNanchor_707_707"></a><a href="#Footnote_707_707" class="fnanchor">[707]</a></p>
+
+<p>Has the attitude of the investing public and the banks caused the
+Socialist municipalities to restrain their insane expenditure, and to
+keep it within legitimate bounds? No, they have tried to obtain money
+by borrowing it in <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_259" id="Page_259">[259]</a></span>small sums directly from the public. "The
+Corporation of Bolton, the Boroughs of Heywood, Middleton, and others,
+invite the investment of small sums of money in municipal enterprise,
+offering a higher rate of interest on deposits than the banks can
+supply."<a name="FNanchor_708_708" id="FNanchor_708_708"></a><a href="#Footnote_708_708" class="fnanchor">[708]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists advocate that the municipalities should raise money by
+issuing paper-money in unlimited quantities or that they should become
+bankers, pay interest on deposits, and invest the savings of the poor
+in highly speculative enterprises carried on without regard to economy
+and expense, or to profit and loss. "Why pay in usury at all? Abolish
+the gold monopoly by demonetising metals, and the sole remaining
+argument against municipal trading disappears along with the most
+crippling restriction under which public enterprise labours."<a name="FNanchor_709_709" id="FNanchor_709_709"></a><a href="#Footnote_709_709" class="fnanchor">[709]</a>
+"Credit notes would be of little use were the city's credit gone,
+because the people would be afraid to take them. However valuable the
+assets of a municipal authority might be&mdash;and municipal concerns are
+usually far more substantial and sound than banking companies are&mdash;it
+is public confidence that constitutes the first requisite, and this it
+is the duty of all reformers to establish and maintain against the
+assaults of those whose interest it is to break it down. The
+institution of municipal savings banks under the protection of, and
+subject to inspection by, the State would assist public authorities
+and render them less dependent on the bankers; then when people had
+become accustomed to thinking their city's credit at least equal to
+that of the leading banks, a limited issue of notes might be
+allowed."<a name="FNanchor_710_710" id="FNanchor_710_710"></a><a href="#Footnote_710_710" class="fnanchor">[710]</a> Further proposals for "demonetising" gold and issuing
+unlimited amounts of unconvertible notes, on the model of the
+assignats of the French Revolution, will be found <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_260" id="Page_260">[260]</a></span>in Chapter XX.
+"Some Socialist Views on Money, Banks, and Banking."<a name="FNanchor_711_711" id="FNanchor_711_711"></a><a href="#Footnote_711_711" class="fnanchor">[711]</a></p>
+
+<p>These and many other dangerous experiments could easily be undertaken
+by needy demagogues with fantastic ideas, if the supervision of
+municipalities by the national Government were abolished. Therefore
+the Independent Labour Party passed at the last Annual Conference the
+following resolution: "That this Conference urges the Labour party in
+Parliament to secure the extension of power to municipalities,
+enabling them to undertake trading and the development of existing
+municipal concerns, without the sanction of the Local Government
+Board, and to use any profits accruing from same in such manner as may
+be decided by the municipality, without the necessity of promoting
+Parliamentary Bills."<a name="FNanchor_712_712" id="FNanchor_712_712"></a><a href="#Footnote_712_712" class="fnanchor">[712]</a></p>
+
+<p>No administration can continue for long a financial and general policy
+of waste and pillage, such as that followed by the Socialist
+municipalities of Great Britain, without diminishing not merely
+private wealth but also the national wealth. The British Socialists
+seem determined to do all they can to destroy as fast as possible the
+accumulated wealth of the country and its productive power.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_668_668" id="Footnote_668_668"></a><a href="#FNanchor_668_668"><span class="label">[668]</span></a> <i>The Advance of Socialism</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_669_669" id="Footnote_669_669"></a><a href="#FNanchor_669_669"><span class="label">[669]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, pp. 27, 28.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_670_670" id="Footnote_670_670"></a><a href="#FNanchor_670_670"><span class="label">[670]</span></a> Snowden, <i>Straight Talk to Ratepayers</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_671_671" id="Footnote_671_671"></a><a href="#FNanchor_671_671"><span class="label">[671]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Mind your own Business</i>, p. 148.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_672_672" id="Footnote_672_672"></a><a href="#FNanchor_672_672"><span class="label">[672]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 157.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_673_673" id="Footnote_673_673"></a><a href="#FNanchor_673_673"><span class="label">[673]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Competition</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_674_674" id="Footnote_674_674"></a><a href="#FNanchor_674_674"><span class="label">[674]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Mind your own Business</i>, pp. 93, 94.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_675_675" id="Footnote_675_675"></a><a href="#FNanchor_675_675"><span class="label">[675]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Mind your own Business</i>, pp. 87, 88.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_676_676" id="Footnote_676_676"></a><a href="#FNanchor_676_676"><span class="label">[676]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Mind your own Business</i>, p. 88.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_677_677" id="Footnote_677_677"></a><a href="#FNanchor_677_677"><span class="label">[677]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 42.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_678_678" id="Footnote_678_678"></a><a href="#FNanchor_678_678"><span class="label">[678]</span></a> <i>The Times, Municipal Socialism</i>, p. 43.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_679_679" id="Footnote_679_679"></a><a href="#FNanchor_679_679"><span class="label">[679]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_680_680" id="Footnote_680_680"></a><a href="#FNanchor_680_680"><span class="label">[680]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Killed by High Rates</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_681_681" id="Footnote_681_681"></a><a href="#FNanchor_681_681"><span class="label">[681]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_682_682" id="Footnote_682_682"></a><a href="#FNanchor_682_682"><span class="label">[682]</span></a> Ellis Barker, <i>Modern Germany</i>, p. 552.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_683_683" id="Footnote_683_683"></a><a href="#FNanchor_683_683"><span class="label">[683]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Killed by High Rates</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_684_684" id="Footnote_684_684"></a><a href="#FNanchor_684_684"><span class="label">[684]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Municipal Debt</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_685_685" id="Footnote_685_685"></a><a href="#FNanchor_685_685"><span class="label">[685]</span></a> <i>Daily Mail</i>, November 26, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_686_686" id="Footnote_686_686"></a><a href="#FNanchor_686_686"><span class="label">[686]</span></a> See <i>A Municipal Bread Supply</i>; <i>Municipal Bakeries</i>;
+<i>Municipal Drink Traffic</i>; <i>Municipal Fire Insurance</i>; Washington,
+<i>Milk and Postage Stamps, &amp;c.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_687_687" id="Footnote_687_687"></a><a href="#FNanchor_687_687"><span class="label">[687]</span></a> <i>Municipalisation by Provinces.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_688_688" id="Footnote_688_688"></a><a href="#FNanchor_688_688"><span class="label">[688]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>The London Programme</i>, 1892, pp.
+208-213.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_689_689" id="Footnote_689_689"></a><a href="#FNanchor_689_689"><span class="label">[689]</span></a> Jowett, <i>Socialism and the City</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_690_690" id="Footnote_690_690"></a><a href="#FNanchor_690_690"><span class="label">[690]</span></a> <i>Forward</i>, October 12, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_691_691" id="Footnote_691_691"></a><a href="#FNanchor_691_691"><span class="label">[691]</span></a> See Chapter IV.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_692_692" id="Footnote_692_692"></a><a href="#FNanchor_692_692"><span class="label">[692]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Mind your own Business</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_693_693" id="Footnote_693_693"></a><a href="#FNanchor_693_693"><span class="label">[693]</span></a> Jowett, <i>The Socialist and the City</i>, p. 40.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_694_694" id="Footnote_694_694"></a><a href="#FNanchor_694_694"><span class="label">[694]</span></a> Irving, <i>The Municipality</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_695_695" id="Footnote_695_695"></a><a href="#FNanchor_695_695"><span class="label">[695]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 42.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_696_696" id="Footnote_696_696"></a><a href="#FNanchor_696_696"><span class="label">[696]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Mind your own Business</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_697_697" id="Footnote_697_697"></a><a href="#FNanchor_697_697"><span class="label">[697]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_698_698" id="Footnote_698_698"></a><a href="#FNanchor_698_698"><span class="label">[698]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, pp. 3, 4, 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_699_699" id="Footnote_699_699"></a><a href="#FNanchor_699_699"><span class="label">[699]</span></a> Jowett, <i>The Socialist and the City</i>, p. 38; Snowden,
+<i>The Socialist's Budget</i>, p. 83.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_700_700" id="Footnote_700_700"></a><a href="#FNanchor_700_700"><span class="label">[700]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Mind your own Business</i>, p. 119.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_701_701" id="Footnote_701_701"></a><a href="#FNanchor_701_701"><span class="label">[701]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 122.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_702_702" id="Footnote_702_702"></a><a href="#FNanchor_702_702"><span class="label">[702]</span></a> <i>A Labour Policy for Public Authorities</i>, p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_703_703" id="Footnote_703_703"></a><a href="#FNanchor_703_703"><span class="label">[703]</span></a> Suthers, <i>Mind your own Business</i>, p. 103.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_704_704" id="Footnote_704_704"></a><a href="#FNanchor_704_704"><span class="label">[704]</span></a> Snowden, <i>A Straight Talk to Ratepayers</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_705_705" id="Footnote_705_705"></a><a href="#FNanchor_705_705"><span class="label">[705]</span></a> McLachlan, <i>The Tyranny of Usury</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_706_706" id="Footnote_706_706"></a><a href="#FNanchor_706_706"><span class="label">[706]</span></a> Jowett, <i>The Socialist and the City</i>, p. 42.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_707_707" id="Footnote_707_707"></a><a href="#FNanchor_707_707"><span class="label">[707]</span></a> McLachlan, <i>The Tyranny of Usury</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_708_708" id="Footnote_708_708"></a><a href="#FNanchor_708_708"><span class="label">[708]</span></a> McLachlan, <i>The Tyranny of Usury</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_709_709" id="Footnote_709_709"></a><a href="#FNanchor_709_709"><span class="label">[709]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 13, 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_710_710" id="Footnote_710_710"></a><a href="#FNanchor_710_710"><span class="label">[710]</span></a> Jowett, <i>The Socialist and the City</i>, pp. 45, 46.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_711_711" id="Footnote_711_711"></a><a href="#FNanchor_711_711"><span class="label">[711]</span></a> See p. 281 ff.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_712_712" id="Footnote_712_712"></a><a href="#FNanchor_712_712"><span class="label">[712]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference</i>,
+1907, p. 50.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XVIII" id="CHAPTER_XVIII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_261" id="Page_261">[261]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XVIII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND AGRICULTURE</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">In one of his books Mr. Blatchford gives prominence to the following
+statement contained in Prince Kropotkin's book, "Fields, Factories,
+and Workshops": "If the soil of the United Kingdom were cultivated
+only as it was thirty-five years ago, 24,000,000 people could live on
+home-grown food. If the cultivable soil of the United Kingdom were
+cultivated as the soil is cultivated on the average in Belgium, the
+United Kingdom would have food for at least 37,000,000 inhabitants. If
+the population of this country came to be doubled, all that would be
+required for producing food for 80,000,000 inhabitants would be to
+cultivate the soil as it is now cultivated in the best farms of this
+country, in Lombardy, and in Flanders."</p>
+
+<p>Commenting on this statement Mr. Blatchford says: "Why, indeed, should
+we not be able to raise 29,000,000 quarters of wheat? We have plenty
+of land. Other European countries can produce, and do produce, their
+own food. Take the example of Belgium. In Belgium the people produce
+their own food. Yet their soil is no better than ours, and their
+country is more densely populated, the figures being: Great Britain
+per square mile, 378 persons; Belgium per square mile, 544 persons.
+Suppose wheat will cost us 2<i>s.</i> a quarter more to grow it than to buy
+it. On the 23,000,000 quarters we now import we should be saving
+2,000,000<i>l.</i> a year. Is that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_262" id="Page_262">[262]</a></span>a very high price to pay for security
+against defeat by starvation in time of war?"<a name="FNanchor_713_713" id="FNanchor_713_713"></a><a href="#Footnote_713_713" class="fnanchor">[713]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists very wisely demand that everything possible should be
+done to bring about a revival of our agriculture. They point to the
+agricultural prosperity of Belgium, France, and Germany, and they
+would be quite ready to sanction the re-introduction of Protection, as
+will be seen in Chapter XXI. Nevertheless they absolutely and
+unconditionally oppose the creation of a class of peasant proprietors,
+although the intensive agriculture of France, Belgium, and Germany is
+founded upon the system of peasant proprietorship, and although
+general experience, both in Europe and on other continents, has proved
+the great superiority of peasant proprietors over large farmers in
+intensive culture. "No Socialist desires to see the land of the
+country divided among small peasant freeholders, though this is still
+the ideal professed by many statesmen of 'advanced' views."<a name="FNanchor_714_714" id="FNanchor_714_714"></a><a href="#Footnote_714_714" class="fnanchor">[714]</a>
+"Socialism is hostile to small properties."<a name="FNanchor_715_715" id="FNanchor_715_715"></a><a href="#Footnote_715_715" class="fnanchor">[715]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists pretend to be opposed to the creation of peasant
+proprietors either on scientific grounds or for ethical reasons. "As a
+matter of economic evolution, small properties will have to go. But
+viewed from an ethical standpoint, surely nothing has been more
+conducive to the development of the worst side of human nature&mdash;of
+'hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness' than the system of small
+properties."<a name="FNanchor_716_716" id="FNanchor_716_716"></a><a href="#Footnote_716_716" class="fnanchor">[716]</a> "If England were cut up into small allotments, the
+general state would be harder and leaner than before."<a name="FNanchor_717_717" id="FNanchor_717_717"></a><a href="#Footnote_717_717" class="fnanchor">[717]</a> "Would
+Socialists take away the land from the landlords and let it out in
+little plots? No. Because that would make a lot of little proprietors
+as selfish as the landlords."<a name="FNanchor_718_718" id="FNanchor_718_718"></a><a href="#Footnote_718_718" class="fnanchor">[718]</a> "Divide <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_263" id="Page_263">[263]</a></span>the land into small
+allotments and very soon the cunning and rapacious would 'acquire' the
+estates of other men, and so we should come back to the present state
+of chaos. In fact, the parcelling out of the land means putting back
+the clock of civilisation about one thousand years."<a name="FNanchor_719_719" id="FNanchor_719_719"></a><a href="#Footnote_719_719" class="fnanchor">[719]</a></p>
+
+<p>The real reason which prompts Socialists to oppose by all means the
+creation of peasant proprietors is to be found neither in the realm of
+political economy nor in that of abstract ethics, but in that of party
+politics. The peasant proprietor, like every sensible owner of
+property, is hostile to Socialism. "The peasant has nothing else in
+the world but his farm, and that is one of the reasons why it is so
+very difficult to win him over to our cause. He is, indeed, one of the
+last bulwarks of private property."<a name="FNanchor_720_720" id="FNanchor_720_720"></a><a href="#Footnote_720_720" class="fnanchor">[720]</a> The philosopher of British
+Socialism frankly confesses: "On the Continent the peasant proprietor,
+who may now be reckoned as part of the <i>petite bourgeoisie</i>, just as
+the large landlord with us may be reckoned as part of the big
+capitalist class, is a potent factor in retarding the process of
+Socialisation."<a name="FNanchor_721_721" id="FNanchor_721_721"></a><a href="#Footnote_721_721" class="fnanchor">[721]</a></p>
+
+<p>The experience of Socialists in Germany, Austria-Hungary, France,
+Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and Switzerland shows that Socialism finds
+practically no adherents among the land-owning peasants. At the German
+Reichstag elections of 1903, for instance, the Social-Democrats
+received almost 60 per cent. of the votes in the large towns as
+compared with less than 20 per cent. of the votes in the country. Of
+the latter, the vast majority was given by artisans and landless rural
+labourers. The peasant, like every property-owner, is an enemy of
+fantastic schemes of confiscation and of general plunder lavishly
+embellished with promises of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_264" id="Page_264">[264]</a></span>Utopia. Therefore Social-Democrats will
+rather see the countryside of Great Britain turned into a wilderness
+than see it peopled by peasants.</p>
+
+<p>Desperately anxious lest the Government of Sir Henry
+Campbell-Bannerman should create a British peasantry, the Socialist
+press opposed the creation of a British peasantry as unscientific and
+certain to lead to disaster. The people were told in countless
+articles that peasant proprietorship had proved a failure everywhere.
+Under the heading "The Small-Holding Fraud" the "Social-Democrat"
+showed the true motive of the Socialist agitation by expressing the
+hope that "The Government will assuredly fail in their attempt to
+erect a peasant proprietary barrier against the rising
+proletariat"<a name="FNanchor_722_722" id="FNanchor_722_722"></a><a href="#Footnote_722_722" class="fnanchor">[722]</a>&mdash;Has the Socialist outcry against creating peasant
+proprietors influenced Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's Government in
+its land-settlement policy? Did Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman wish to
+satisfy the Socialists by rather creating small leaseholders than
+small freehold farmers?</p>
+
+<p>The positive proposals of Socialists for bringing about a revival of
+agriculture are frankly Utopian. Their proposals can of course not be
+practical, because they object to the present agricultural
+arrangements of Great Britain and to those prevailing on the continent
+of Europe. Many Socialists desire the towns to control and resettle
+the country. "The towns should claim the right of dictating to England
+the way in which the land should be put to profit. The great majority
+of the classes nearest the land, squires and farmers and parsons, are
+disqualified respectively by self-interest, by religious prejudice
+that scruples at anything that may lead to the mental enfranchisement
+of the poor, and by sheer sluggishness of intellect joined to a blind
+selfishness without parallel in any class of English society. The
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_265" id="Page_265">[265]</a></span>land and the labourer have hitherto been left to them. And we want a
+change of management."<a name="FNanchor_723_723" id="FNanchor_723_723"></a><a href="#Footnote_723_723" class="fnanchor">[723]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists want a "change of management" in agriculture, replacing the
+expert by the amateur in accordance with their general policy of
+turning everything upside down. Their ideal would seem to be that the
+owners of land should be dispossessed and driven into the towns, and
+be replaced by Socialistic town officials who would exploit the
+country in the interest of the town.</p>
+
+<p>The tenants whom the Socialists would like to create would, rightly
+considered, be merely wage-earners in the pay of the Socialistic
+administration, who, living from hand to mouth, would not be able to
+put anything by. With that object in view, rents would apparently be
+adjusted by Socialist administrations. "Tenancies would be granted for
+seven years or for twenty-one years revisable at periods of seven
+years, so that the tenant might not be able to appropriate the
+unearned increment of the land; but it should also be clearly
+understood that a satisfactory tenant would not be arbitrarily
+disturbed in his holding. At the same time no mercy would be extended
+to a bad cultivator; and when a tenant left his holding, either by the
+efflux of time or for any other reason, he would have no tenant-right
+to dispose of, but would only be entitled to compensation for
+unexhausted improvements and to a fair settlement of accounts as
+between himself and the committee. Rents would be fixed and disputes
+settled by the independent agricultural court, which would also
+continue the regulation of agricultural wages. Exploitation of the
+economically weak must not be permitted, even to a communal authority.
+It would be within the power of the committee to rent farms to
+co-operative associations of labourers if satisfied as to their
+industrial and financial capacity. Arrangements <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_266" id="Page_266">[266]</a></span>might also be made
+whereby a town could run its own dairy-farm or farms, since this is
+probably the only way in which a municipality can be sure of an
+uncontaminated supply of milk."<a name="FNanchor_724_724" id="FNanchor_724_724"></a><a href="#Footnote_724_724" class="fnanchor">[724]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists would like to resettle the country with colonies of
+town unemployed, but these proposals are opposed by some as
+impractical. "To imagine that any such colony could be
+self-supporting, that the land which no capitalist will now till with
+expert farm labourers at ten shillings a week would yield trade-union
+rates of wages to a mixed crowd of unemployed townsmen, that such a
+heterogeneous collection of waifs and strays, without a common
+acquaintanceship, a common faith, or a common tradition, could be
+safely trusted for a single day to manage the nation's land and
+capital; finally, to suppose that such a fortuitous agglomeration of
+undisciplined human atoms offers 'the most suitable and hopeful way of
+ushering in a Socialist State'&mdash;all this argues such a complete
+misconception of the actual facts of industrial and social life, such
+an entire misunderstanding of the process by which a democratic
+society passes from one stage of its development to another, that I
+feel warranted in quoting it as an extreme instance of
+Utopia-founding."<a name="FNanchor_725_725" id="FNanchor_725_725"></a><a href="#Footnote_725_725" class="fnanchor">[725]</a></p>
+
+<p>Whilst the various Socialist schools propound different Utopian
+schemes for the resettlement of the land in the future, their
+immediate aim is of course not so much to benefit agriculture, as they
+profess, but to gain adherents among the rural labourers. With this
+object in view they are urged to agitate for, and are promised to be
+given by the Socialists, better wages, safe and healthy homes, more
+powers for the parish councils, which are to be used for the
+restoration of common lands, real free schools and better ones, cheap
+and good allotments, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_267" id="Page_267">[267]</a></span>pensions for the old people, reform of taxation,
+&amp;c. The rural labourers are urged to form trade unions, and they are
+told, "All these things you can get for yourself by your trade union
+and your vote if you and all the other labourers in the district will
+join the union and will agree to vote only for those who will promise
+to help to get them for you."<a name="FNanchor_726_726" id="FNanchor_726_726"></a><a href="#Footnote_726_726" class="fnanchor">[726]</a></p>
+
+<p>In other pamphlets specially addressed to the rural labourers they are
+told how to get allotments, how to force the district councils to
+build good cottages for them, &amp;c.<a name="FNanchor_727_727" id="FNanchor_727_727"></a><a href="#Footnote_727_727" class="fnanchor">[727]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists propound the doctrine that the first and the principal
+object in re-creating the rural industries must be the bettering of
+the wages of rural labourers, and that the State should secure them
+better wages by arbitrarily reducing rents. The object, it need hardly
+be mentioned, is rather to destroy private capital in accordance with
+the Socialists' tenets than to benefit the labourers. The Fabian
+Society, for instance, claims, "It is necessary for the State to
+interfere, partly to secure the better utilisation of our national
+resources, partly to increase our agricultural population. The class
+most needing protection, the labourers, must be dealt with first in
+order to raise them to a decent level of comfort. A living wage must
+be secured to them, and, as a consequence, the farmers' rents must be
+fixed at a fair level. An agricultural court must be set up in each
+county to regulate wages and fix rents. Continental success in
+agriculture depends on co-operation, and that in turn is associated
+with the peasant-proprietor system. That system for sundry reasons
+cannot be adopted here, but its advantages can be obtained through
+security of tenure. The small farm system should, therefore, form <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_268" id="Page_268">[268]</a></span>the
+basis of our reconstruction, free play being left for a graded system
+of farms where possible. In each county an agricultural committee
+should have compulsory power to acquire land and let it out to
+tenants, chiefly smallholders. It should have power to advance capital
+to individuals on the collective guarantee of its tenants, and it
+should be its duty to organise the collection of farm produce and its
+disposal in the market."<a name="FNanchor_728_728" id="FNanchor_728_728"></a><a href="#Footnote_728_728" class="fnanchor">[728]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_713_713" id="Footnote_713_713"></a><a href="#FNanchor_713_713"><span class="label">[713]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, pp. 111, 112.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_714_714" id="Footnote_714_714"></a><a href="#FNanchor_714_714"><span class="label">[714]</span></a> <i>Socialism True and False</i>, p. 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_715_715" id="Footnote_715_715"></a><a href="#FNanchor_715_715"><span class="label">[715]</span></a> <i>Some Objections to Socialism Considered.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_716_716" id="Footnote_716_716"></a><a href="#FNanchor_716_716"><span class="label">[716]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_717_717" id="Footnote_717_717"></a><a href="#FNanchor_717_717"><span class="label">[717]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>The Pope's Socialism</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_718_718" id="Footnote_718_718"></a><a href="#FNanchor_718_718"><span class="label">[718]</span></a> Hazell, <i>The Red Catechism</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_719_719" id="Footnote_719_719"></a><a href="#FNanchor_719_719"><span class="label">[719]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>The Pope's Socialism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_720_720" id="Footnote_720_720"></a><a href="#FNanchor_720_720"><span class="label">[720]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_721_721" id="Footnote_721_721"></a><a href="#FNanchor_721_721"><span class="label">[721]</span></a> Bax, <i>Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 41.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_722_722" id="Footnote_722_722"></a><a href="#FNanchor_722_722"><span class="label">[722]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, November 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_723_723" id="Footnote_723_723"></a><a href="#FNanchor_723_723"><span class="label">[723]</span></a> Pedder, <i>The Secret of Rural Depopulation</i>, p. 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_724_724" id="Footnote_724_724"></a><a href="#FNanchor_724_724"><span class="label">[724]</span></a> <i>The Revival of Agriculture</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_725_725" id="Footnote_725_725"></a><a href="#FNanchor_725_725"><span class="label">[725]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>Socialism True and False</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_726_726" id="Footnote_726_726"></a><a href="#FNanchor_726_726"><span class="label">[726]</span></a> <i>What the Farm Labourer Wants</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_727_727" id="Footnote_727_727"></a><a href="#FNanchor_727_727"><span class="label">[727]</span></a> <i>Allotments and How to get Them</i>; <i>Parish Council
+Cottages and How to get Them.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_728_728" id="Footnote_728_728"></a><a href="#FNanchor_728_728"><span class="label">[728]</span></a> <i>The Revival of Agriculture</i>, p. 22.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XIX" id="CHAPTER_XIX"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_269" id="Page_269">[269]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XIX<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALIST VIEWS ON BRITISH RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Many Socialists complain, and they complain with good cause, about the
+railways of Great Britain. All the British railways are in private
+hands, and they are very inefficient. They are in many respects very
+backward, badly equipped, and badly managed. They have wasted their
+capital, watered their stock, and have paid dividends out of capital;
+their freight charges are exorbitant; besides, they give habitually
+and by various means, with which it would lead too far to deal in this
+book, preferential treatment of a very substantial kind to the
+foreigner.</p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists have extracted from British Government publications
+instances of such preferential treatment. One of the most widely read
+Socialist writers, for example, gives among others the following
+freight charges favouring the foreigner:</p>
+
+<p>"Carriage of a ton of British meat, Liverpool to London, 2<i>l.</i>:
+Carriage of a ton of foreign meat, Liverpool to London, 1<i>l.</i> 5<i>s.</i>:
+Carriage of a ton of eggs Galway to London, 4<i>l.</i> 14<i>s.</i>: Carriage of
+a ton of eggs Denmark to London, 1<i>l.</i> 4<i>s.</i>: Carriage of a ton of
+plums, apples, and pears, Queenborough (Kent) to London, 1<i>l.</i> 5<i>s.</i>:
+Carriage of same from Flushing (Holland), 12<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i>: Carriage per
+ton of English pianos Liverpool to London 3<i>l.</i> 10<i>s.</i>: Carriage as
+above of foreign, 1<i>l.</i> 5<i>s.</i>: British timber per ton Cardiff to
+Birmingham, 16<i>s.</i> 8<i>d.</i>: foreign as above 8<i>s.</i> 10<i>d.</i> In the
+carriage of iron ore and steel rails the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_270" id="Page_270">[270]</a></span>American railways charge
+6<i>s.</i> 3<i>d.</i> where the British charge 29<i>s.</i> 3<i>d.</i>"<a name="FNanchor_729_729" id="FNanchor_729_729"></a><a href="#Footnote_729_729" class="fnanchor">[729]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The real enemy are the monopolists of land and locomotion&mdash;the
+landlord and the raillord who are uprooting the British people from
+their native soil. It is in fact by no means easy to say which is the
+greater malefactor of the two."<a name="FNanchor_730_730" id="FNanchor_730_730"></a><a href="#Footnote_730_730" class="fnanchor">[730]</a> Such differential charges are
+bound to cripple the British industries, and in view of the harm which
+is thus being done to British farmers, manufacturers, and traders, it
+is only natural that British Socialists are unanimous in condemning
+the anti-British freight policy of the railways and in recommending
+that they should be taken over and managed by the State.</p>
+
+<p>"There are nearly 24,000 miles of railway in the kingdom, the greater
+part of which is owned or controlled by a dozen great companies, who,
+moreover, have standing conferences through which they exercise a
+virtual monopoly against the public, although they have all the
+expenses of competing concerns. The public bears the costs and
+inconveniences of competition without many of its benefits. The total
+capital of the companies is 1,300,000,000<i>l.</i> of which 200,000,000<i>l.</i>
+is nominal or 'watered' stock. A very large part of the rest was for
+extravagant sums paid to great landowners for their land and another
+large part for legal expenses. On this huge capital a sum of
+44,000,000<i>l.</i> has to be earned in dividends. If the State bought out
+the railways, it could borrow this necessary sum for at least
+5,000,000<i>l.</i> to 8,000,000<i>l.</i> a year less than this, and at once
+effect enormous savings resulting from the present competitive and
+chaotic methods of the companies. Despite the virtual monopoly, there
+are over 3,000 railway directors drawing fees or salaries amounting to
+nearly 1,500,000<i>l.</i> Of the principal of these there are eighty in the
+Lords and twenty-five in the Commons. Mr. Gladstone predicted that if
+the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_271" id="Page_271">[271]</a></span>State did not control the railway companies, they would control
+the State, and this has come to pass. Their servants are overworked
+and underpaid, extortionate freights are charged on the carriage of
+goods, unfair preferences are given, but Parliament is powerless to
+check this."<a name="FNanchor_731_731" id="FNanchor_731_731"></a><a href="#Footnote_731_731" class="fnanchor">[731]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The railway system to-day is the greatest protection ever heard of in
+favour of the foreigner, and neither Mr. Chamberlain nor Mr. Balfour,
+nor any other man makes a single proposal to touch the railway
+question. Why? Because the House of Commons is dominated by the
+railway interest."<a name="FNanchor_732_732" id="FNanchor_732_732"></a><a href="#Footnote_732_732" class="fnanchor">[732]</a> "Our railway experience proves that it is not
+enough to make preferential rates illegal. They reappear too easily in
+the form of rebates and even of allowances which belong to the more
+private chapters of capitalist history. The attempt of the Railway
+Commission to abolish preference in railway rates has left us with a
+system which could not be much worse from the national industrial
+point of view."<a name="FNanchor_733_733" id="FNanchor_733_733"></a><a href="#Footnote_733_733" class="fnanchor">[733]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Imperial trade suffers no more serious handicap than that imposed
+upon it by shipping rings and railway companies, which exploit the
+Imperial needs of transport for their own purposes, which hamper the
+ready flow of Imperial trade, and, for an insignificant percentage,
+turn the British seamen off the water in favour of the Lascar."<a name="FNanchor_734_734" id="FNanchor_734_734"></a><a href="#Footnote_734_734" class="fnanchor">[734]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The railways of India, which yield a great portion of our Indian
+revenue, are owned by the Indian Government. The well-managed and
+prosperous systems of Australasia, with the best conditions of labour
+and the lowest freights of any railways in the world, are State owned.
+Why, then, should not the British Government <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_272" id="Page_272">[272]</a></span>own and control in the
+public interest the systems which are so wastefully and inefficiently
+managed by the present companies?"<a name="FNanchor_735_735" id="FNanchor_735_735"></a><a href="#Footnote_735_735" class="fnanchor">[735]</a></p>
+
+<p>The last Annual Conference of the Independent Labour Party resolved:
+"That in the opinion of this Conference the time is ripe for the
+nationalisation of the railways of the country, and that our
+representatives be asked to urge forward a measure to that effect in
+Parliament."<a name="FNanchor_736_736" id="FNanchor_736_736"></a><a href="#Footnote_736_736" class="fnanchor">[736]</a> The Fabians think that "An equitable basis of
+purchase may be found in Mr. Gladstone's Act of 1844, which enables
+the Treasury to buy out the shareholders of lines built since that
+date at twenty-five years' purchase, calculated on the earnings of the
+previous three years. The price of the railways need not be an
+insuperable, or even a serious, difficulty in the way of national
+possession of the means of transit."<a name="FNanchor_737_737" id="FNanchor_737_737"></a><a href="#Footnote_737_737" class="fnanchor">[737]</a></p>
+
+<p>The demand of the Socialists that the Government should acquire the
+railways would perhaps be reasonable if that demand was not coupled
+with extravagant and fantastic ideas regarding their future
+management. The different Socialistic views as to the proper
+management of State railways are summed up as follows by Mr.
+Blatchford: "The railways belong to railway companies, who carry goods
+and passengers and charge fares and rates to make profit. Socialists
+all say that the railways should be bought by the people. Some say
+that fares should be charged, some that the railways should be
+free&mdash;just as the roads, rivers, and bridges now are; but all agree
+that any profit made by the railways should belong to the whole
+nation, just as do the profits now made by the Post Office and the
+telegraphs."<a name="FNanchor_738_738" id="FNanchor_738_738"></a><a href="#Footnote_738_738" class="fnanchor">[738]</a></p>
+
+<p>One Socialist writer modestly proposes that the fare <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_273" id="Page_273">[273]</a></span>anywhere in
+Great Britain should be a shilling. "Look at our railroads&mdash;might they
+not be the property of the community at large as well as the high
+roads, instead of being a monopoly in the hands of private persons
+whose sole object is to enrich themselves at the cost of their fellow
+citizens? If so, it has been proved that you could go to any part of
+these islands with a shilling ticket."<a name="FNanchor_739_739" id="FNanchor_739_739"></a><a href="#Footnote_739_739" class="fnanchor">[739]</a></p>
+
+<p>Other Socialists advocate that railway travelling should be made
+absolutely free to all, and that the costs of running the railways
+free of charge should be borne exclusively by the rich. "The blessings
+of free travel are too many by far for enumeration, but one stands
+out. It is the only effective means yet suggested for the extirpation
+of our vile city slums. At present the sweated must live near their
+work."<a name="FNanchor_740_740" id="FNanchor_740_740"></a><a href="#Footnote_740_740" class="fnanchor">[740]</a> "Overcrowding can only be cured outright by one sovereign
+remedy&mdash;by giving the toiler a home in the country; and free travel
+alone makes this possible. There is no reason why a 'docker' should
+not grow his own vegetables and be his own dairyman at the same time.
+Free travel would in a few years change the whole face of
+society."<a name="FNanchor_741_741" id="FNanchor_741_741"></a><a href="#Footnote_741_741" class="fnanchor">[741]</a> "A nation that can afford to spend 140,000,000<i>l.</i> a
+year on strong liquors might not unreasonably be asked to strike even
+the forty odd millions off its drink-bill&mdash;about half that amount
+would suffice for the purpose&mdash;and take them out in free ozone."<a name="FNanchor_742_742" id="FNanchor_742_742"></a><a href="#Footnote_742_742" class="fnanchor">[742]</a>
+"Then would rise the question how to make up for the abolition of
+passenger fares. The answer, it seems to me, is not far to seek. The
+substitute tax must be levied on the 'unearned increment' of land,
+urban and rural. The people must therefore unfalteringly press for the
+reassessment of the 'land-tax' by gradual increase up to 20<i>s.</i> in the
+pound, and in the meantime procure any <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_274" id="Page_274">[274]</a></span>further funds necessary from
+our surplus capital by a graduated income-tax. Personally I abhor
+usury, whether in the shape of railway dividends or Government
+Consols, as alike <i>contra naturam</i> and <i>contra Christum</i>."<a name="FNanchor_743_743" id="FNanchor_743_743"></a><a href="#Footnote_743_743" class="fnanchor">[743]</a></p>
+
+<p>In order to further the policy of free travelling by railway,
+Socialists appear to have founded a "Free Railway Travel League,"
+domiciled at 359 Strand, London, W.C. I am not aware whether the Free
+Railway Travel League&mdash;every tramp should join it&mdash;exists still.</p>
+
+<p>It is only logical that, if the railways should be made free for the
+carriage of people, they should likewise be made free for the
+transport of goods. "It is obvious that if railways can be worked free
+for passengers they may be made free for goods as well. Free goods
+traffic would everywhere equalise the price of commodities, be they
+the produce of sea or land, mine or manufacture, and equal wages in
+town and country would speedily follow equal prices with beneficial
+results to the people altogether incalculable. Granted free passes,
+free freights will doubtless in time follow almost as a matter of
+course."<a name="FNanchor_744_744" id="FNanchor_744_744"></a><a href="#Footnote_744_744" class="fnanchor">[744]</a></p>
+
+<p>When free travel by railway has been established, free travel by
+tramway, which has already been demanded by municipal reformers (see
+Chapter XVII.), will necessarily also be introduced. A publication
+issued by the most scientific body of British Socialists, the Fabian
+Society, urges: "There is only one safe principle to guide the
+reformer. The tramways, the light railways, and the railways must be
+regarded as the modern form of the king's highway. Our fathers spent
+time and trouble ridding the roads of tolls; and railway rates and
+passenger fares are merely modern tolls. Their abolition must come
+sooner or later."<a name="FNanchor_745_745" id="FNanchor_745_745"></a><a href="#Footnote_745_745" class="fnanchor">[745]</a> "We have abolished the turnpike gate and the
+toll-collector, and our highways are free in the sense that they are
+maintained by general assessment. And if the turnpike gate was an
+odious obstruction to the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_275" id="Page_275">[275]</a></span>traveller, how much more obnoxious to him,
+or her, is the railway ticket-box?"<a name="FNanchor_746_746" id="FNanchor_746_746"></a><a href="#Footnote_746_746" class="fnanchor">[746]</a></p>
+
+<p>Railways may be made free before the ideal Socialist State of the
+future has been created, but they will certainly be free as soon as
+the Socialist commonwealth has been established. "Railways will play a
+very great part indeed in the Socialist State, They will be absolutely
+'free' for every purpose. The cost of actual working is comparatively
+inconsiderable, while the benefits of free transit are incalculable.
+To decentralise the population so as to efface the distinction between
+dwellers in town and country is to renovate humanity physically and
+morally."<a name="FNanchor_747_747" id="FNanchor_747_747"></a><a href="#Footnote_747_747" class="fnanchor">[747]</a></p>
+
+<p>After travel and transport has been made absolutely free on land
+throughout the length and breadth of Great Britain, the free travel
+and transport principle will of course be extended to travel and
+transport by sea, and free travel and transport by sea will better
+bind the Empire together than a Pan-Britannic Customs Union. The most
+scientific body of British Socialists, the Fabian Society, says: "A
+logical consequence of the national management of internal means of
+communication will be the completion of the State control of our
+oversea transit. It is impossible here to go into details. Let it
+suffice to remark that already the nation has a direct financial
+interest in the great steamship lines, through its mail subsidies and
+Admiralty loans with corresponding claims for service in war; that
+intellectually the nation, by its pride in its magnificent mercantile
+fleet, regards it as a national possession, and declines to consider
+our shipping as the mere private property of the shareholders of the
+steamship companies; and finally, that our navy is maintained at
+enormous public expense expressly to protect the mercantile fleet,
+which at present is mainly private property."<a name="FNanchor_748_748" id="FNanchor_748_748"></a><a href="#Footnote_748_748" class="fnanchor">[748]</a> "The notion that
+the forces making for <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_276" id="Page_276">[276]</a></span>disintegration can be neutralised by 10 per
+cent. preferential duties is not worth discussing; indeed, the raising
+of the fiscal question seems at least as likely to reveal our
+commercial antagonisms as our community of interests. And the huge
+distances will be mighty forces on the side of disintegration unless
+we abolish them. Well, why not abolish them? Distances are now counted
+in days, not in miles. The Atlantic Ocean is as wide as it was in
+1870; but the United States are four days nearer than they were then.
+Commercially, however, distance is mainly a matter of freightage. Now
+it is as possible to abolish ocean freightage as it was to make
+Waterloo Bridge toll-free, or establish the Woolwich free ferry. It is
+already worth our while to give Canada the use of the British Navy for
+nothing. Why not give her the use of the mercantile marine for nothing
+instead of taxing bread to give her a preference? Or, if that is too
+much, why not offer her special rates? It is really only a question of
+ocean road making. A national mercantile fleet plying between the
+provinces of the Empire, and carrying Empire goods and passengers
+either free or at charges far enough below cost to bring Australasia
+and Canada commercially nearer to England than to the Continent, would
+form a link with the mother-country which once brought fully into use
+could never be snapped without causing a commercial crisis in every
+province."<a name="FNanchor_749_749" id="FNanchor_749_749"></a><a href="#Footnote_749_749" class="fnanchor">[749]</a></p>
+
+<p>The purchase of the whole British mercantile marine by the Government
+would incidentally have the effect of abolishing the British shipping
+rings, which, like the British railways, frequently penalise with
+discriminating rates the British producer and shipper. "Of the real
+conditions of ocean traffic, at present, the public has no suspicion.
+All our lines of communication are controlled by shipping rings which
+carry preferential rating (an illegal practice in our inland transit)
+to an extent that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_277" id="Page_277">[277]</a></span>would shock Mr. Chamberlain back again to Free
+Trade if he realised it; for their preferences are by no means
+patriotic; they have helped Belgium into our Indian market, and
+Germany and America into South Africa and New Zealand. The cotton
+conference of Liverpool directly assisted the American exporters of
+cotton to China by the heavy charges they made against the Lancashire
+manufacturer&mdash;charges which were modified only after repeated
+protests. These rings and rates constitute the most dangerous
+disintegrating force we have to face."<a name="FNanchor_750_750" id="FNanchor_750_750"></a><a href="#Footnote_750_750" class="fnanchor">[750]</a></p>
+
+<p>There is much justification in the complaints of the Socialists with
+regard to British railways and shipping, but their proposals are, as
+usual, quite Utopian. For all ills of the body politic and economic,
+the Socialists have only one remedy, and that an infallible
+one&mdash;nationalisation, or rather Socialisation.</p>
+
+<p>The policy of the British railway and shipping rings is no doubt a
+national scandal, but their defects and delinquencies may no doubt be
+counteracted by appropriate Government action and legislation. It is
+probably now too late for the State to acquire the railways. The State
+cannot afford to risk a large capital loss. Railway purchase would
+apparently be too speculative an undertaking.</p>
+
+<p>If the State should acquire the railways, they would certainly be run
+at a profit. The sooner the Socialists abandon their fixed idea that
+profit on private and national undertakings is immoral, the better
+will it be for them. So long as they decry profit and propose to work
+State undertakings without a profit, so long can they not be taken
+seriously. Profit consists in part of the salary of direction, in part
+of the earnings set aside for effecting the necessary alterations,
+improvements, and extensions, and for forming a reserve fund for
+making losses good, &amp;c. Therefore abandonment of profit would mean the
+decline and decay of the national capital.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_729_729" id="Footnote_729_729"></a><a href="#FNanchor_729_729"><span class="label">[729]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Free Trade</i> v. <i>Fettered Transport</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_730_730" id="Footnote_730_730"></a><a href="#FNanchor_730_730"><span class="label">[730]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_731_731" id="Footnote_731_731"></a><a href="#FNanchor_731_731"><span class="label">[731]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1907, pp. 119, 120.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_732_732" id="Footnote_732_732"></a><a href="#FNanchor_732_732"><span class="label">[732]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Real Reform</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_733_733" id="Footnote_733_733"></a><a href="#FNanchor_733_733"><span class="label">[733]</span></a> <i>Fabianism and the Fiscal Question</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_734_734" id="Footnote_734_734"></a><a href="#FNanchor_734_734"><span class="label">[734]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Labour and the Empire</i>, p. 96.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_735_735" id="Footnote_735_735"></a><a href="#FNanchor_735_735"><span class="label">[735]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1907, p. 120.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_736_736" id="Footnote_736_736"></a><a href="#FNanchor_736_736"><span class="label">[736]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference</i>,
+1907, p. 50.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_737_737" id="Footnote_737_737"></a><a href="#FNanchor_737_737"><span class="label">[737]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Labour Policy</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_738_738" id="Footnote_738_738"></a><a href="#FNanchor_738_738"><span class="label">[738]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 86.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_739_739" id="Footnote_739_739"></a><a href="#FNanchor_739_739"><span class="label">[739]</span></a> Sorge, <i>Socialism and the Worker</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_740_740" id="Footnote_740_740"></a><a href="#FNanchor_740_740"><span class="label">[740]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Free Trade and Fettered Transport</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_741_741" id="Footnote_741_741"></a><a href="#FNanchor_741_741"><span class="label">[741]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Free Rails and Trams</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_742_742" id="Footnote_742_742"></a><a href="#FNanchor_742_742"><span class="label">[742]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_743_743" id="Footnote_743_743"></a><a href="#FNanchor_743_743"><span class="label">[743]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Free Rails and Free Trams</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_744_744" id="Footnote_744_744"></a><a href="#FNanchor_744_744"><span class="label">[744]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_745_745" id="Footnote_745_745"></a><a href="#FNanchor_745_745"><span class="label">[745]</span></a> <i>Public Control of Electric Power and Transit</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_746_746" id="Footnote_746_746"></a><a href="#FNanchor_746_746"><span class="label">[746]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Free Rails and Trams</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_747_747" id="Footnote_747_747"></a><a href="#FNanchor_747_747"><span class="label">[747]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 158.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_748_748" id="Footnote_748_748"></a><a href="#FNanchor_748_748"><span class="label">[748]</span></a> <i>Public Control of Electric Power and Transit</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_749_749" id="Footnote_749_749"></a><a href="#FNanchor_749_749"><span class="label">[749]</span></a> <i>Fabianism and the Fiscal Question</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_750_750" id="Footnote_750_750"></a><a href="#FNanchor_750_750"><span class="label">[750]</span></a> <i>Fabianism and the Fiscal Question</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XX" id="CHAPTER_XX"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_278" id="Page_278">[278]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XX<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON MONEY, BANKS, AND BANKING</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">All Socialists wish to abolish private capital. Money embodies private
+capital in its most portable form. It can easily be hidden, and as the
+Socialists wish to prevent the re-accumulation of new private capital,
+the abolition of money, and especially of gold and silver, has
+prominently figured in all Socialistic programmes since the time of
+Protagoras and of Plato. Socialists wish to effect the exchange of
+commodities, the payment of labour, and the settlement of accounts
+mainly by book-keeping.</p>
+
+<p>"As there are no wares in the new community neither will there be any
+money."<a name="FNanchor_751_751" id="FNanchor_751_751"></a><a href="#Footnote_751_751" class="fnanchor">[751]</a> "In the Social-Democratic State the citizen will be
+granted an income, which will be indicated by labour checks or credit
+cards, as advocated by Gronlund, Bellamy, and John Carruthers."<a name="FNanchor_752_752" id="FNanchor_752_752"></a><a href="#Footnote_752_752" class="fnanchor">[752]</a>
+"Under ideal Socialism there would be no money at all and no wages.
+The industry of the country would be organised and managed by the
+State, much as the Post Office now is; goods of all kinds would be
+produced and distributed for use and not for sale, in such quantities
+as were needed. Hours of labour would be fixed, and every citizen
+would take what he or she liked from the common stock. Food, clothing,
+lodging, fuel, transit, amusement, and all other things would be
+absolutely free, and the only difference between a Prime Minister and
+a collier would be the difference of rank and occupation."<a name="FNanchor_753_753" id="FNanchor_753_753"></a><a href="#Footnote_753_753" class="fnanchor">[753]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_279" id="Page_279">[279]</a></span>"How will exchange then be carried on? By account facilitated by some
+such contrivance as labour checks. When in the Co-operative
+Commonwealth money becomes superannuated we shall have nothing but
+checks, notes, tickets&mdash;whatever you will call them&mdash;issued by
+authority."<a name="FNanchor_754_754" id="FNanchor_754_754"></a><a href="#Footnote_754_754" class="fnanchor">[754]</a> And how will international exchange be carried on?
+Very simply and easily. By barter. "So much tea is wanted from China.
+The Chinese Government is advised of the quantity and asked what
+British goods will be acceptable by the Celestials in exchange. There
+will be international barter on a grand and equitable scale."<a name="FNanchor_755_755" id="FNanchor_755_755"></a><a href="#Footnote_755_755" class="fnanchor">[755]</a> It
+is quite logical that the Socialists who wish to introduce the
+primitive Communism of the prehistoric ages (see Chapter XXIX.), wish
+also to reintroduce the aboriginal system of barter.</p>
+
+<p>However, the contemplated form of "international barter on a grand and
+equitable scale" will have its difficulties. China, for instance, may
+sell much silk and tea to England and take in exchange mostly foreign
+manufactured goods from America, Germany, Belgium, and Japan, as she
+does at present. It is to be feared that the "grand and equitable
+system of international barter" will prove impracticable even if, as
+most Socialists somewhat rashly assume, all States should become
+Socialistic commonwealths, or if the grand Socialist Republic of the
+world should actually be created. We have at present an international
+currency, Gold. The contemplated creation of unlimited paper issues in
+lieu of gold, the fulfilment of the ideal of many Socialists, would
+have a very simple, a very certain, and a very unpleasant consequence.
+Foreign merchants, doubting the value of the new paper currency and
+the stability of the new Socialist Government, would of course refuse
+to part with their goods. Not a pound of cotton, not a bushel of wheat
+would reach England <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_280" id="Page_280">[280]</a></span>from abroad. The nation would be starving, and
+Socialist deputations would hasten to search out Lord Rothschild in
+the workhouse, where no doubt he would reside, and implore him to
+reintroduce capitalism and food into Great Britain.</p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists of the saner kind fear that it will not be possible to
+abolish money. Kautsky, for instance, writes: "To abolish money I
+consider impossible. Money is the simplest means as yet known which
+renders it possible in a mechanism so complicated as the modern system
+of production, with its enormously minute subdivision of labour, to
+arrange for the smooth circulation of products and their distribution
+among the individual members of society; it is the means which enables
+everyone to satisfy his needs according to his individual taste
+(naturally within the limits of his economic power). As a medium of
+circulation, money will remain indispensable so long as nothing better
+is found."<a name="FNanchor_756_756" id="FNanchor_756_756"></a><a href="#Footnote_756_756" class="fnanchor">[756]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists declaim against the immorality of charging
+interest&mdash;"usury" as they call it (see Chapters IV., IX., and XVII.),
+and they are indignant that the banks are unwilling to advance gratis
+unlimited funds to Socialist town councils to be wasted as fancy may
+direct (see page 258). Therefore they wish to abolish "that most
+costly of all modern parasites, the banker."<a name="FNanchor_757_757" id="FNanchor_757_757"></a><a href="#Footnote_757_757" class="fnanchor">[757]</a> Some very
+irreligious, if not atheistic, Anarchist-Socialists, such as Mr.
+Morrison Davidson, pretend to object to interest on religious grounds
+because, "the Way, the Truth, and the Life said, 'Lend hoping for
+nothing again.'"<a name="FNanchor_758_758" id="FNanchor_758_758"></a><a href="#Footnote_758_758" class="fnanchor">[758]</a> Other Socialists wish to abolish the banks and
+the charging of interest for the benefit of the people and of the
+Socialist municipal and other councils. "Usury&mdash;in that offensive
+pregnant little word is contained the secret of Society's <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_281" id="Page_281">[281]</a></span>worries and
+Man's woes. Abolish usury: that is the true Fiscal Reform
+Policy."<a name="FNanchor_759_759" id="FNanchor_759_759"></a><a href="#Footnote_759_759" class="fnanchor">[759]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Usury can be arrested at present by nationalisation of exchange. The
+nationalisation of exchange must be undertaken. Metal must be
+demonetised and reduced to the ranks. Banking must be undertaken by
+the municipalities and county councils, and by these elective bodies
+only, while a durable paper currency issued on the basis of the
+ascertained wealth of the nation, and maintained in true relation to
+it, shall supersede gold. Then we arrive at a scientific solution of
+the question of exchange and put in operation the currency and credit
+system of Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_760_760" id="FNanchor_760_760"></a><a href="#Footnote_760_760" class="fnanchor">[760]</a></p>
+
+<p>When the banks and the gold currency have been abolished and when
+"exchange has been nationalised" the Socialist local authorities will
+no longer have any difficulty in procuring the unlimited funds they
+need for the execution of their boundless plans. They will raise the
+money by the printing of practically unlimited quantities of paper
+money issued against the security of "the ascertained wealth of the
+nation." If they wish to spend money, they simply "make it" by means
+of an ordinary printing press. Could a simpler and more ingenious
+system for making money be devised?</p>
+
+<p>"Recently notice has been given by leading bankers of their intention
+to discriminate against municipal loans. And as things now stand, it
+is certain that, if an organised effort is made generally by the
+bankers throughout the country by advising clients against such
+investments and by refusing to accept municipal bonds as collateral
+security for overdrafts, &amp;c.&mdash;a serious check will be put upon public
+enterprise. Those who imagine bankers either impotent or incapable of
+such treason against the public interest should remember what took
+place in the United States in 1893.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_282" id="Page_282">[282]</a></span>"The natural suggestion to be offered as a counter-move to the threat
+of the bankers and their Industrial Freedom League is to add to those
+enterprises now under municipal control that of banking. And surely
+there is nothing which lends itself more easily to municipalisation!
+If the credit of a banking house can be employed for promoting
+enterprise and earning dividends, why cannot municipalities employ
+their own credit directly? In others words, why cannot the credit of a
+city be utilised to carry on its municipal works instead of it having
+to borrow the credit of a bank and pay interest charges? Consider how
+public works are now financed. The London County Council decides to
+build decent and respectable houses in some locality for the working
+classes. It requires, we will say, 500,000<i>l.</i> with which to build
+dwellings for 2,000 families. Bankers are invited to tender for the
+loan, and finally the Council gets this advance on a guarantee of 3
+per cent. per annum, the principal being repayable at the end of
+thirty-three and a third years. At the end of this period the Council
+will have paid the bank 500,000<i>l.</i> in interest as well as the
+500,000<i>l.</i> original loan. The charge for the loan is equal to the
+entire cost of the whole undertaking; the result is that each family
+must pay about twice the amount of rent that it would otherwise have
+to pay if the Council had not incurred interest charges through
+borrowing other people's credit. Was there ever greater lunacy in
+public affairs?</p>
+
+<p>"Suppose that instead of issuing credit in the shape of bonds of large
+denomination, the Council issued it in notes of small denominations of
+pounds and shillings. Does anyone mean to assert that that credit
+which is eagerly purchased by a banker would be refused by a
+bricklayer or stonemason? Supposing the London County Council was
+empowered to issue its credit in one-pound notes, as well as large
+amounts, and supposing <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_283" id="Page_283">[283]</a></span>it was compulsory that these notes were good
+in payment of rates. Is there any question as to their being
+acceptable? The plan is so simple and so safe that at first it seems
+amazing it should have been so long out of employment."<a name="FNanchor_761_761" id="FNanchor_761_761"></a><a href="#Footnote_761_761" class="fnanchor">[761]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Of course gold will drain off abroad&mdash;if the foreigners don't follow
+in our footsteps at once. If the demonetised gold is withdrawn&mdash;well,
+we can have a new currency by nationalising the railways and paying
+the shareholders 'in current coin'" (which means in unconvertible
+notes), "not in redeemable, interest-bearing bonds. So long as solid
+wealth rests behind our issue, our financial policy is sound. Of
+course, the railway and other shareholders will want fresh
+investments; they won't find them, because no man will pay interest to
+usurers when he can monetise his credit at the mere cost of banking
+and exchange. They must therefore spend it, and the currency will
+never be restricted henceforward. And this national ownership of
+exchange can be operated to compel every monopolist to sell his
+monopoly to the nation."<a name="FNanchor_762_762" id="FNanchor_762_762"></a><a href="#Footnote_762_762" class="fnanchor">[762]</a></p>
+
+<p>This insane project is called by the writer, "A scientific way to
+Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_763_763" id="FNanchor_763_763"></a><a href="#Footnote_763_763" class="fnanchor">[763]</a></p>
+
+<p>Surely science is the most abused word in modern language. The
+creation of money by unlimited issues of paper secured by the national
+possessions was tried on the grandest scale at the French Revolution.
+The "assignats" were secured on the national domains, and their
+security seemed absolute to the revolutionaries. The great Mirabeau
+had stated on September 27, 1790: "Our assignats are not ordinary
+paper money. They are a new creation for which there is no precedent.
+What constitutes the value of metal money? Its intrinsic value. Now I
+ask you: Does paper which represents the foremost of the possessions
+of a nation such as France not possess <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_284" id="Page_284">[284]</a></span>all the characteristics of
+intrinsic and generally accepted value which metal money
+possesses?"<a name="FNanchor_764_764" id="FNanchor_764_764"></a><a href="#Footnote_764_764" class="fnanchor">[764]</a> The "assignats" speedily fell to a discount, although
+dealing in them at a discount was made punishable with twenty years'
+imprisonment with hard labour,<a name="FNanchor_765_765" id="FNanchor_765_765"></a><a href="#Footnote_765_765" class="fnanchor">[765]</a> and they fell ultimately to
+waste-paper value. A pair of boots worth thirty francs in gold cost
+10,000 francs in paper. On paper all were immensely rich. Yet the
+masses were starving. Unfortunately people cannot live by consuming
+unlimited quantities of credit notes. They can become prosperous
+neither by robbing the rich nor by calling a shilling a sovereign, but
+only by producing more. Greater wealth means simply increased
+consumption, and increased consumption, unless based on increased
+production, can only be effected by intrenching upon and diminishing
+the national capital, the national reserve store of food, clothing,
+tools, &amp;c., and thus causing widespread misery and starvation.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_751_751" id="Footnote_751_751"></a><a href="#FNanchor_751_751"><span class="label">[751]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman in the Past, Present, and Future</i>, p.
+192.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_752_752" id="Footnote_752_752"></a><a href="#FNanchor_752_752"><span class="label">[752]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, p. 90.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_753_753" id="Footnote_753_753"></a><a href="#FNanchor_753_753"><span class="label">[753]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_754_754" id="Footnote_754_754"></a><a href="#FNanchor_754_754"><span class="label">[754]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 103.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_755_755" id="Footnote_755_755"></a><a href="#FNanchor_755_755"><span class="label">[755]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 157.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_756_756" id="Footnote_756_756"></a><a href="#FNanchor_756_756"><span class="label">[756]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_757_757" id="Footnote_757_757"></a><a href="#FNanchor_757_757"><span class="label">[757]</span></a> Jowett, <i>The Socialist and the City</i>, p. 44.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_758_758" id="Footnote_758_758"></a><a href="#FNanchor_758_758"><span class="label">[758]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 57.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_759_759" id="Footnote_759_759"></a><a href="#FNanchor_759_759"><span class="label">[759]</span></a> McLachlan, <i>The Tyranny of Usury</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_760_760" id="Footnote_760_760"></a><a href="#FNanchor_760_760"><span class="label">[760]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 10, 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_761_761" id="Footnote_761_761"></a><a href="#FNanchor_761_761"><span class="label">[761]</span></a> <i>How to Finance Municipal Enterprises</i>, pp. 3-5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_762_762" id="Footnote_762_762"></a><a href="#FNanchor_762_762"><span class="label">[762]</span></a> McLachlan, <i>The Tyranny of Usury</i>, p. 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_763_763" id="Footnote_763_763"></a><a href="#FNanchor_763_763"><span class="label">[763]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_764_764" id="Footnote_764_764"></a><a href="#FNanchor_764_764"><span class="label">[764]</span></a> <i>Nouvelle Biographie G&eacute;n&eacute;rale</i>, vol. xxxv. p. 39.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_765_765" id="Footnote_765_765"></a><a href="#FNanchor_765_765"><span class="label">[765]</span></a> Roscher, <i>System</i>, p. 227.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXI" id="CHAPTER_XXI"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_285" id="Page_285">[285]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXI<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON FREE TRADE AND PROTECTION</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">In his thoughtful book on Socialism, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., the
+Socialist leader, attributes the rise of the Socialist movement in
+great Britain to various causes, one of which is "the reaction against
+Manchesterism."<a name="FNanchor_766_766" id="FNanchor_766_766"></a><a href="#Footnote_766_766" class="fnanchor">[766]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists, generally speaking, are opposed to Free Trade. Neither the
+moderate nor the revolutionary sections of British Socialism have a
+good word to say for it. The Socialist leaders, looking at the
+question of Free Trade and Protection from the worker's point of view,
+have arrived with Lecky at the conclusion that the whole Liberal Free
+Trade agitation is one of the greatest political impostures which the
+world has witnessed,<a name="FNanchor_767_767" id="FNanchor_767_767"></a><a href="#Footnote_767_767" class="fnanchor">[767]</a> a view which, by the by, was also expressed
+by Bismarck.<a name="FNanchor_768_768" id="FNanchor_768_768"></a><a href="#Footnote_768_768" class="fnanchor">[768]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists are not under any illusion as to the causes which led to
+the introduction of Free Trade into Great Britain, and they sneer at
+the humanitarian cant with which its promoters successfully surrounded
+it. One of the leading Socialist books states with regard to this
+point: "Protection was no longer needed by the manufacturers, who had
+supremacy in the world-market, unlimited access to raw material, and a
+long start of the rest of the world in the development of machinery
+and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_286" id="Page_286">[286]</a></span>in industrial organisation. The landlord class, on the other
+hand, was absolutely dependent on Protection. The triumph of Free
+Trade therefore signifies economically the decay of the old landlord
+class pure and simple, and the victory of capitalism. The capitalist
+class was originally no fonder of Free Trade than the landlords. It
+destroyed in its own interest the woollen manufacture in Ireland, and
+it would have throttled the trade of the colonies had it not been for
+the successful resistance of Massachusetts and Virginia. It was
+Protectionist so long as it suited its purpose to be so. But when
+cheap raw material was needed for its looms, and cheap bread for its
+workers; when it feared no foreign competitor, and had established
+itself securely in India, in North America, in the Pacific; then it
+demanded Free Trade."<a name="FNanchor_769_769" id="FNanchor_769_769"></a><a href="#Footnote_769_769" class="fnanchor">[769]</a> "Protection at home was needless to
+manufacturers who beat all their foreign rivals, and whose very
+existence was staked on the expansion of their exports. Protection at
+home was of advantage to none but to the producers of articles of food
+and other raw materials, to the agricultural interest, which, under
+the then existing circumstances in England, meant the receivers of
+rent, the landed aristocracy."<a name="FNanchor_770_770" id="FNanchor_770_770"></a><a href="#Footnote_770_770" class="fnanchor">[770]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Free Trade manufacturers, who were chiefly interested in cheapness
+of production, cared little what became of the workers. "The
+individualist devotees of <i>laisser faire</i> used to teach us that when
+restrictions were removed, free competition would settle everything.
+Prices would go down, and fill the 'consumer' with joy unspeakable;
+the fittest would survive, and as for the rest&mdash;it was not very clear
+what would become of them, and it really didn't matter."<a name="FNanchor_771_771" id="FNanchor_771_771"></a><a href="#Footnote_771_771" class="fnanchor">[771]</a></p>
+
+<p>The doctrines and the boasts of the Free Traders <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_287" id="Page_287">[287]</a></span>are usually treated
+by the Socialists with contempt. "Cobdenites ascribe every known or
+imagined improvement in commerce, and the condition of the masses, to
+Free Trade. Things are better than they were fifty years ago: Free
+Trade was adopted fifty years ago. <i>Ergo</i>&mdash;there you are. There is not
+a word about the development of railways and steamships, about
+improved machinery, about telegraphs, the cheap post and telephones,
+about education and better facilities of travel."<a name="FNanchor_772_772" id="FNanchor_772_772"></a><a href="#Footnote_772_772" class="fnanchor">[772]</a></p>
+
+<p>The unsoundness of the fundamental doctrine of Free Trade, "Buy in the
+cheapest and sell in the dearest market," has frequently been exposed
+by Socialists. Mr. Blatchford, for instance, in a book of his of which
+more than a million copies have been sold gives prominence to Cobden's
+pronouncement in the House of Commons in which he expounded the
+celebrated maxim: Buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market:
+"To buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest, what is the
+meaning of the maxim? It means that you take the article which you
+have in the greatest abundance and with it obtain from others that of
+which they have the most to spare; so giving to mankind the means of
+enjoying the fullest abundance of earth's goods."<a name="FNanchor_773_773" id="FNanchor_773_773"></a><a href="#Footnote_773_773" class="fnanchor">[773]</a> Mr. Blatchford
+then comments upon Cobden's doctrine as follows: "Let us reduce these
+fine phrases to figures. Suppose America can sell us wheat at 30<i>s.</i> a
+quarter, and suppose ours costs 32<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> a quarter. That is a gain
+of 1/15th in the cost of wheat. We get a loaf for 3<i>d.</i> instead of
+having to pay 3-1/4<i>d.</i> That is all the fine phrases mean. What do we
+lose? We lose the beauty and health of our factory towns; we lose
+annually some twenty thousand lives in Lancashire alone; we are in
+constant danger of great strikes; we are reduced to the meanest shifts
+and the most violent acts of piracy and slaughter <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_288" id="Page_288">[288]</a></span>to 'open up
+markets' for our goods; we lose the stamina of our people, and we lose
+our agriculture."<a name="FNanchor_774_774" id="FNanchor_774_774"></a><a href="#Footnote_774_774" class="fnanchor">[774]</a></p>
+
+<p>Most Socialists recognise that under the Free Trade <i>r&eacute;gime</i> Great
+Britain has sacrificed her safety and her strength to profit. "Did you
+ever consider what it involved, this ruin of British agriculture?
+Don't you see that if we lose our power to feed ourselves we destroy
+the advantages of our insular position?"<a name="FNanchor_775_775" id="FNanchor_775_775"></a><a href="#Footnote_775_775" class="fnanchor">[775]</a> "Don't you see that the
+people who depend on foreigners for their food are at the mercy of any
+ambitious statesman who chooses to make war upon them? And don't you
+think that is rather a stiff price to pay to get a farthing off the
+loaf? No nation can be secure unless it is independent; no nation can
+be independent unless it is based upon agriculture."<a name="FNanchor_776_776" id="FNanchor_776_776"></a><a href="#Footnote_776_776" class="fnanchor">[776]</a> "We must buy
+wheat from America with cotton goods; but first of all we must buy raw
+cotton with which to make those goods. We are therefore entirely
+dependent upon foreigners for our existence."<a name="FNanchor_777_777" id="FNanchor_777_777"></a><a href="#Footnote_777_777" class="fnanchor">[777]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The present national ideal is to become 'The workshop of the world.'
+That is to say, the British people are to manufacture goods for sale
+to foreign countries, and in return for those goods are to get more
+money than they could obtain by developing the resources of their own
+country for their own use. My ideal is that each individual should
+seek his advantage in co-operation with his fellows, and that the
+people should make the best of their own country before attempting to
+trade with other people's."<a name="FNanchor_778_778" id="FNanchor_778_778"></a><a href="#Footnote_778_778" class="fnanchor">[778]</a> "The Free Traders tell me that under
+their glorious system of free exchange nations naturally occupy
+themselves in those industries which produce the most wealth. Thus, if
+Great Britain, by employing a million men in growing corn, can produce
+50,000,000<i>l.</i> a year, while she can produce 51,000,000<i>l.</i> by
+employing the men <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_289" id="Page_289">[289]</a></span>in getting coal. Great Britain will 'naturally'
+employ those men in getting coal! Sending her coal abroad, Great
+Britain can get 1,000,000<i>l.</i> a year more wealth. What a beautiful
+doctrine! Enormous increase in wealth. Foreigners can send us
+51,000,000<i>l.</i> of corn for our coal, while Great Britain could only
+grow 50,000,000<i>l.</i> Free Trade for ever! It never occurs to the Free
+Traders to ask: 'Is it better to have a million men working in the
+bowels of the earth, or a million men tilling the surface?"<a name="FNanchor_779_779" id="FNanchor_779_779"></a><a href="#Footnote_779_779" class="fnanchor">[779]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The idea is, that if by making cloth, cutlery, and other goods we can
+buy more food than we can produce at home with the same amount of
+labour, it pays us to let the land go out of cultivation and make
+Britain the 'workshop of the world.' Now, assuming that we can keep
+our foreign trade, and assuming that we can get more food by foreign
+trade than we could produce by the same amount of work, is it quite
+certain that we are making a good bargain when we desert our fields
+for our factories? Suppose men can earn more in the big towns than
+they could earn in the fields, is the difference all gain? Rents and
+prices are higher in the towns; the life is less healthy, less
+pleasant. It is a fact that the death-rates in the towns are higher,
+that the duration of life is shorter, and that the stamina and
+physique of the workers are lowered by town life and by employment in
+the factories. And there is another very serious evil attached to the
+commercial policy of allowing our British agriculture to decay, and
+that is the evil of our dependence upon foreign countries for our
+food. The plain and terrible truth is that even if we have a perfect
+fleet and keep entire control of the seas, we shall still be exposed
+to the risk of almost certain starvation during a European war. As I
+have repeatedly pointed out before, we have by sacrificing our
+agriculture destroyed our insular position. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_290" id="Page_290">[290]</a></span>As an island we may be,
+or should be, free from serious danger of invasion. But of what avail
+is our vaunted silver shield of the sea if we depend upon other
+nations for our food? We are helpless in case of a great war. It is
+not necessary to invade England in order to conquer her. Once our
+food-supply is stopped, we are shut up like a beleaguered city, to
+starve or to surrender. Stop the import of food into England for three
+months and we shall be obliged to surrender at discretion. And our
+agriculture is to be ruined and the safety and honour of the Empire
+are to be endangered that a few landlords, coal-owners, and
+moneylenders may wax fat upon the vitals of the nation."<a name="FNanchor_780_780" id="FNanchor_780_780"></a><a href="#Footnote_780_780" class="fnanchor">[780]</a> "For
+over half a century we have been committing industrial suicide. By
+laying waste our own land and throwing ourselves upon the mercy of the
+foreign food-producers, we have been deliberately sacrificing the
+millions and the future to the millionaires and the moment."<a name="FNanchor_781_781" id="FNanchor_781_781"></a><a href="#Footnote_781_781" class="fnanchor">[781]</a></p>
+
+<p>The celebrated cheapness argument of the Free Traders has little
+attraction for Socialists. "'Ah,' says the Free Trader, 'but think of
+the cheaper grocery and the cheaper boots!' Yes, let us think of them.
+What good does it do me, my countrymen, one of the unemployed, to
+think of the wealth of the Rothschilds, or the cheap boots and the
+cheap bread and the cheap clothes of those who benefit by these
+things? I am one of the nation. Are these things that are so good for
+the nation good for me? How can these cheap wares do me any good, who
+have no money at all? The fact is that Free Trade and cheap goods are
+only good for certain individuals. They are good for those who benefit
+by them."<a name="FNanchor_782_782" id="FNanchor_782_782"></a><a href="#Footnote_782_782" class="fnanchor">[782]</a></p>
+
+<p>Cheapness means low wages. Cheapness may benefit <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_291" id="Page_291">[291]</a></span>that strange and
+mythical figure the abstract "consumer" of the text-books, but need
+not benefit the working man. Very likely it will harm him, because
+"Cheap goods mean cheap labour, and cheap labour means low wages. You
+have nothing but your labour to sell, and you are told that it will
+pay you to sell that cheaply."<a name="FNanchor_783_783" id="FNanchor_783_783"></a><a href="#Footnote_783_783" class="fnanchor">[783]</a> "All commodities are produced by
+labour, therefore to drive commodities down to their cheapest rate
+must result in cheap labour."<a name="FNanchor_784_784" id="FNanchor_784_784"></a><a href="#Footnote_784_784" class="fnanchor">[784]</a> Cheapness may fill those with joy
+who have money in their pocket and who do not care how cheap goods are
+produced. But incidentally the policy of Free Trade and of <i>laisser
+faire</i>, the policy of cheapness which benefits the consumer and takes
+no notice of the producer, encourages and causes sweating and untold
+misery to the workers. "Do you ever consider the lives of the people
+who make these marvellously cheap things? And do you ever think what
+kind of homes they have; in what kind of districts the homes are
+situated; and what becomes of those people when they are too ill, or
+too old, or too infirm to earn even four shillings as the price of a
+hundred and twelve hours' work?"<a name="FNanchor_785_785" id="FNanchor_785_785"></a><a href="#Footnote_785_785" class="fnanchor">[785]</a></p>
+
+<p>Free Trade may have been beneficial in Cobden's time, when Great
+Britain was the chief manufacturing country in the world. But what is
+its effect under the changed conditions of the present time, and how
+will these changes affect her industries and her workers? "In the
+early days of our great trade the commercial school wished Britain to
+be the 'workshop of the world,' and for a good while she was the
+workshop of the world. But now a change is coming. Other nations have
+opened world-workshops, and we have to face competition. France,
+Germany, Holland, Belgium, and America are all eager to take our
+coveted place as general factory, and China and Japan are changing
+swiftly from customers into rival <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_292" id="Page_292">[292]</a></span>dealers. Is it likely, then, that
+we can keep all our foreign trade, or that what we keep will be as
+profitable as it is at present?"<a name="FNanchor_786_786" id="FNanchor_786_786"></a><a href="#Footnote_786_786" class="fnanchor">[786]</a> "Suppose we lost a lump of our
+export trade. Suppose the Japanese, Chinese, or Americans capture some
+of our markets. Where should we get our food? If we could not sell our
+exports, we could not buy imports of food. We are walking on thin ice,
+my countrymen. And if competition became keener, what would the
+champions of Free Trade do to meet it? They would say: 'We must sell
+our manufactures, or you will get no food. To sell our manufactures we
+must reduce the price. To reduce the price we must reduce the cost of
+production. To reduce the cost of production we must cut down
+wages.'"<a name="FNanchor_787_787" id="FNanchor_787_787"></a><a href="#Footnote_787_787" class="fnanchor">[787]</a> "Free Trade means <i>laisser faire</i> all round, not only in
+regard to inanimate commodities, but in respect to that most important
+commodity of all&mdash;human labour power. Chinese, Japanese, Indians,
+negroes are all permitted under complete Free Trade to compete freely
+on their lower standard of life against the white man."<a name="FNanchor_788_788" id="FNanchor_788_788"></a><a href="#Footnote_788_788" class="fnanchor">[788]</a> "A demand
+for a general reduction of wages is the end of the fine talk about big
+profits, national prosperity, and the 'workshop of the world.' The
+British workers are to emulate the thrift of the Japanese, the
+Hindoos, and the Chinese, and learn to live on boiled rice and water.
+Why? So that they can accept low wages and retain our precious foreign
+trade. Yes, that is the latest idea. With brutal frankness the workers
+of Britain have been told again and again that, 'If we are to keep our
+foreign trade, the British workers must accept the conditions of their
+foreign rivals,' and that is the result of our commercial glory! For
+that we have sacrificed our agriculture and endangered the safety of
+our Empire."<a name="FNanchor_789_789" id="FNanchor_789_789"></a><a href="#Footnote_789_789" class="fnanchor">[789]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_293" id="Page_293">[293]</a></span>The assertion of the Free Traders that Free Trade has made Great
+Britain prosperous is treated with scorn. "The Free Traders say we,
+the nation, are richer under this system than we should be under
+Protection. By employing ourselves in those occupations in which we
+can produce the cheapest article, we earn the most wealth in money
+value.&mdash;In money value.&mdash;They do not consider the twelve million
+underfed, the hundreds of thousands of unemployed. The nation, <i>we</i>,
+are richer. That is the test. Well, my countrymen, I think it is a
+damnable doctrine, and its results are damnable. The Free Traders
+boast of our wealth. Are twelve million underfed, a million starving
+children, a million paupers, an infantile death-rate of 150 per
+1,000&mdash;are these signs of wealth? The question is not 'Is the nation
+wealthy?' but 'Are the people wealthy?' Judged by this standard, how
+poor a nation is this, my countrymen! The Free Traders tell us that we
+earn more wealth under Free Trade than we should under Protection.
+Again I ask: Who are <i>we</i>?"<a name="FNanchor_790_790" id="FNanchor_790_790"></a><a href="#Footnote_790_790" class="fnanchor">[790]</a> A Socialist weekly lately said:
+"Great Britain, I understand, has recovered its prosperity; our
+exports are going strong, and our imports have nothing much to
+complain about. Prosperity? Why, Great Britain is simply rolling
+in&mdash;statistics."<a name="FNanchor_791_791" id="FNanchor_791_791"></a><a href="#Footnote_791_791" class="fnanchor">[791]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists rightly demand that the effect of British fiscal policy
+should be judged not by its effect upon the wealth of the few, but
+upon the employment of the many, and they clearly recognise the
+destructive effect which Free Trade has upon the national industries.
+"Under Free Trade it is possible for a foreign trader to take trade
+away from a British trader. If for any reason we lost an important
+trade, or several small trades, our unemployed would naturally grow.
+The Free Trade theory that the capital and the labour in the lost
+trades <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_294" id="Page_294">[294]</a></span>will find other employment is simply theory. Suppose they
+didn't. The Free Trader has no answer except: Look at our enormous
+wealth. My countrymen, looking at another man's wealth does not feed
+me, clothe me, and house me."<a name="FNanchor_792_792" id="FNanchor_792_792"></a><a href="#Footnote_792_792" class="fnanchor">[792]</a> "When men are thrown out of work,
+by competition, or depression, or any cause, they do not so easily
+'transfer their services to some other new employment.' It is easy to
+make them do so&mdash;on paper. And when they do get a fresh job, is it
+always as good as the one lost? Do they not often lose all their
+belongings, and get into debt, while looking for that new employment
+which the Free Traders talk about so glibly? and do not capitalists
+often lose a good deal of capital before they give up the fight for
+the trade? Nevertheless, say the Free Traders, we, the nation, are
+richer under this system than we should be under Protection. By
+employing ourselves in those occupations in which we can produce the
+cheapest article, we earn the most wealth in money value."<a name="FNanchor_793_793" id="FNanchor_793_793"></a><a href="#Footnote_793_793" class="fnanchor">[793]</a> To
+this argument the Socialists reply: "Does your moral law say it is
+right that men should be thrown on the streets to starve because other
+men in other countries produce goods 2-1/2 per cent. cheaper?"<a name="FNanchor_794_794" id="FNanchor_794_794"></a><a href="#Footnote_794_794" class="fnanchor">[794]</a></p>
+
+<p>The statistics of an enormous foreign trade, which Free Traders
+triumphantly display for the edification of the masses, give,
+according to the Socialists, little consolation to the unemployed and
+ill-employed workers. "Figures, be they never so dazzling, and
+numbers, be they never so round, will not feed the hungry, house the
+homeless, or bring light and warmth into the drear, precarious lives
+of the mass of our people. The increase of trade means only an
+increase of production, and not necessarily of persons employed or
+wages gained. With the rapid concentration of industries and the
+perfection of labour-saving devices, production has been enormously
+increased without any corresponding increase of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_295" id="Page_295">[295]</a></span>employment; in some
+cases, with an actual decrease of employment. What the workers are
+interested in is not the mere growth of profitable trade, but the
+extent to which the industries of their country afford them and their
+families a security of livelihood, and the reasonable comforts and
+recreations which their labour has more than earned."<a name="FNanchor_795_795" id="FNanchor_795_795"></a><a href="#Footnote_795_795" class="fnanchor">[795]</a></p>
+
+<p>Most Socialists frankly own that Free Trade has been a failure. "In
+the House of Commons on March 12th, 1906, Mr. P. Snowden, M.P., said:
+'Sixty years of Free Trade had failed to mitigate or palliate to any
+considerable extent the grave industrial and social evils which Free
+Traders and Protectionists alike were compelled to admit. Sir H.
+Campbell-Bannerman had admitted them when he said that 30 per cent. of
+our population were on the verge of hunger. He contended that whatever
+improvement had been effected in the condition of the people during
+the last sixty years was due to other causes than Free Trade."<a name="FNanchor_796_796" id="FNanchor_796_796"></a><a href="#Footnote_796_796" class="fnanchor">[796]</a></p>
+
+<p>During 1907 the complaints among the Socialists about the effect of
+Free Trade upon employment have become louder. The fact that British
+unemployed workmen furnished an apparently inexhaustible supply of
+strike-breakers to Continental employers, that men fought like wild
+beasts at the registry offices in order to be allowed to act as
+strike-breakers in Hamburg and Antwerp, has shown the great prevalence
+of unemployment. Commenting hereon a Socialist monthly said in bitter
+irony, under the heading "British Blacklegs": "The intervention in the
+Antwerp dock-workers' strike of British workmen as blacklegs is a
+striking commentary on the prosperity of the people of this country.
+Under Free Trade we have been told&mdash;<i>ad nauseam</i>&mdash;by Liberal
+politicians that the British working-man is the most <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_296" id="Page_296">[296]</a></span>prosperous and
+well-fed human being on the face of the earth. He, with wages nearly
+double those of the best-paid Continental workman, with all kinds of
+provisions infinitely cheaper&mdash;thanks to Free Trade&mdash;than they can be
+procured elsewhere, is indeed 'God's Englishman.' It would be as
+unkind as rude to suggest that these honourable politicians had been
+lying. The only alternative conclusion to be arrived at is that the
+British workman is a most disinterested being, willing to sacrifice
+his prosperity and comfort in order to compel the miserably paid
+dockers of Antwerp and Hamburg to submit to the conditions against
+which they have revolted."<a name="FNanchor_797_797" id="FNanchor_797_797"></a><a href="#Footnote_797_797" class="fnanchor">[797]</a> The action of Mr. Haldane, the present
+Secretary of State for War, in dismissing a large number of workmen
+from Woolwich Arsenal and giving a contract for 100,000 horseshoes for
+the British Army to an American firm on account of greater cheapness,
+prompted the following verses:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Mr. Haldane was smiling and suave<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">As his views upon horseshoes he gave;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">He will buy from the Yanks<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">(Who take orders with thanks).<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And believes that much money he'll save.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">How thankful we all ought to be<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">That this most kind and careful M.P.<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Thus shows Woolwich men<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">They will be employed when<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">They're off to the States&mdash;Q.E.D.<a name="FNanchor_798_798" id="FNanchor_798_798"></a><a href="#Footnote_798_798" class="fnanchor">[798]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Some Socialists take a very pessimistic view of the economic position
+of Great Britain. Mr. Hyndman said that "Great Britain had lost her
+commercial and industrial supremacy. The United States now stood
+first, Germany second, and Great Britain was forced <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_297" id="Page_297">[297]</a></span>into third
+place."<a name="FNanchor_799_799" id="FNanchor_799_799"></a><a href="#Footnote_799_799" class="fnanchor">[799]</a> Many years ago some far-seeing Socialists had prophesied
+the coming industrial decline of Great Britain. "The notion that
+Britain can hold a monopoly of engineering, or of any other trade,
+must be given up. Britain cannot; countries that have been almost
+wholly agricultural are rapidly becoming manufacturers too."<a name="FNanchor_800_800" id="FNanchor_800_800"></a><a href="#Footnote_800_800" class="fnanchor">[800]</a> Of
+late these pessimistic forecasts have become louder and more frequent.
+The progress of industrial countries can be measured, to some extent,
+by their output of coal, and "at no distant date Germany will probably
+also surpass our output and we will be relegated to third place."<a name="FNanchor_801_801" id="FNanchor_801_801"></a><a href="#Footnote_801_801" class="fnanchor">[801]</a>
+This event will very likely take place about 1910. The statistics
+published by the British Board of Trade are deceptive. They leave out
+Germany's very large and constantly growing output of lignite, which
+amounts to about 60,000,000 tons per annum, and which increases
+Germany's coal output, as stated by the Board of Trade, by about 50
+per cent.</p>
+
+<p>British Socialists have found out that the Free Trade doctrine with
+its hypothetical "consumer" for a centre is opposed to science, to
+experience, and to common-sense. "The present system of trade is, in
+my opinion, opposed entirely to reason and justice. Nearly all our
+practical economists of to-day put the consumer first and the producer
+last. This is wrong. There can be no just or sane system which does
+not first consider the producer and then widely and equitably
+regulates the distribution of the things produced."<a name="FNanchor_802_802" id="FNanchor_802_802"></a><a href="#Footnote_802_802" class="fnanchor">[802]</a> They
+recognise that Free Trade has caused ill-balanced production, and
+that, through the stagnation and decay of industries, men who ought to
+be engaged in production have been forced into more or less
+unprofitable and more or less <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_298" id="Page_298">[298]</a></span>useless employments. "What this country
+is rotting for is the want of more and better producers of
+necessaries&mdash;more and better market-gardeners, fruit-growers,
+foresters, general farmers, wool-workers, builders, and useful makers
+generally. Instead of which, the present system is giving us more and
+more non-producers&mdash;more and more shopkeepers, middlemen, commercial
+travellers, advertising agents, dealers, and wasters generally.
+According to the last census returns, we find that whilst the
+agricultural class shows a terrible decline, and the industrial class
+has barely kept pace with the population as a whole, on the other hand
+the commercial, or selling class, shows an increase of over 42 per
+cent. inside ten years."<a name="FNanchor_803_803" id="FNanchor_803_803"></a><a href="#Footnote_803_803" class="fnanchor">[803]</a></p>
+
+<p>Free Trade has been tried and has been found wanting, and a return to
+Protection, which is in accordance with the needs of the times and the
+spirit of the workers, especially of the trade unionists, is
+inevitable. "Capitalist Free Trade is a manifest failure. Trade
+unionism is, in its essence, a very sturdy form of Protection, as we
+can see, if not here in Great Britain, certainly in America and in
+Australia."<a name="FNanchor_804_804" id="FNanchor_804_804"></a><a href="#Footnote_804_804" class="fnanchor">[804]</a> "Society is constantly changing its form of living:
+every day some supposed old truth goes into the limbo of forgotten
+things, and, looking around us, those who have eyes to see and ears to
+hear may see and hear on all hands the death-knell of the old
+Manchester school of political economy."<a name="FNanchor_805_805" id="FNanchor_805_805"></a><a href="#Footnote_805_805" class="fnanchor">[805]</a></p>
+
+<p>The claims of Free Trade and the cheap-food cry are disregarded and
+treated with contempt. "Free Traders talk about the folly of
+Protection. But Free Trade itself is a form of Protection. It protects
+the strong and the cunning against the weaker and the more honest. It
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_299" id="Page_299">[299]</a></span>protects the cheap and nasty against the good."<a name="FNanchor_806_806" id="FNanchor_806_806"></a><a href="#Footnote_806_806" class="fnanchor">[806]</a> The founder of
+modern Socialism had stated already in 1847: "What is Free Trade under
+the present conditions of society? Freedom of capital."<a name="FNanchor_807_807" id="FNanchor_807_807"></a><a href="#Footnote_807_807" class="fnanchor">[807]</a> Free
+Trade undoubtedly directly protects capital and leaves labour
+unprotected. "Your food will cost you more! I am to bow down to the
+idol of cheapness. I, one of the unemployed. What is cheapness to me,
+who have no money at all?"<a name="FNanchor_808_808" id="FNanchor_808_808"></a><a href="#Footnote_808_808" class="fnanchor">[808]</a> "Your Manchester school treat all
+social and industrial problems from the standpoint of mere animal
+subsistence."<a name="FNanchor_809_809" id="FNanchor_809_809"></a><a href="#Footnote_809_809" class="fnanchor">[809]</a> Declarations such as "The Social-Democratic
+Federation stands for universal free trade or free exchange and for
+the abolition of all indirect taxation,"<a name="FNanchor_810_810" id="FNanchor_810_810"></a><a href="#Footnote_810_810" class="fnanchor">[810]</a> and "The only form of
+Protection advocated by the Social-Democratic Federation is the
+protection of the proletariat against the robbery and exploitation of
+the master-class"<a name="FNanchor_811_811" id="FNanchor_811_811"></a><a href="#Footnote_811_811" class="fnanchor">[811]</a> have not the ring of seriousness about them.</p>
+
+<p>Only very rarely are utterances in favour of Free Trade to be found in
+Socialist writings. However, frequently the demand is made that Tariff
+Reform and Socialism must go hand in hand, and doubt is expressed
+whether the Tariff Reform agitation is carried on for the benefit of
+the manufacturer or for that of the workers. "Mr. Chamberlain is not a
+Socialist. His Government will not be a Socialist Government. His plan
+would protect only the rich. This fiscal fight is a fight between
+capitalists as to who shall make the profits. It is not a fight for
+the benefit of the 'nation.' That is what they tell you. The
+capitalist who loses his trade through foreign competition is a Tariff
+Reformer. He wants <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_300" id="Page_300">[300]</a></span>Protection. The capitalist who depends on cheap
+foreign imports for raw material is a Free Trader. He does not want
+his prices raised."<a name="FNanchor_812_812" id="FNanchor_812_812"></a><a href="#Footnote_812_812" class="fnanchor">[812]</a> "Preferential trade is the proposal of
+individual capitalists who desire to make profits out of our Imperial
+connections."<a name="FNanchor_813_813" id="FNanchor_813_813"></a><a href="#Footnote_813_813" class="fnanchor">[813]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Fabian organ looks at Free Trade and Protection merely as a
+business proposition. "We care nothing for abstract Cobdenite
+economics, and are quite willing to welcome Tariff Reform if its
+advocates show us that it can be used as a lever for raising the
+standards of life and labour. The Labour party is therefore eminently
+wise in seeing how far it can be used for their advantage.
+Protectionism of the Australian Labour party is the right kind of
+Protectionism&mdash;Labour-Protectionism: a very different thing from the
+Capital-Protectionism which is (with a few exceptions) the
+characteristic mark of Tariff Reformers in this country."<a name="FNanchor_814_814" id="FNanchor_814_814"></a><a href="#Footnote_814_814" class="fnanchor">[814]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some revolutionary Socialists are in favour of Free Trade because they
+hope that it will bring on a revolution in Great Britain. Their great
+leader, Karl Marx, taught sixty years ago, when Free Trade was being
+introduced: "The Protective system is nothing but a means of
+establishing manufacture upon a large scale in any given country.
+Besides this, the Protective system helps to develop free competition
+within a nation. Generally speaking, the Protective system in these
+days is conservative, while the Free Trade system works destructively.
+It breaks up old nationalities and carries the antagonism of
+proletariat and bourgeoisie to the uttermost point. In a word, the
+Free Trade system hastens the social revolution. In this revolutionary
+sense alone I am in favour of Free Trade."<a name="FNanchor_815_815" id="FNanchor_815_815"></a><a href="#Footnote_815_815" class="fnanchor">[815]</a> Those Socialist
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_301" id="Page_301">[301]</a></span>revolutionaries who wish to increase the misery of the people, hoping
+that unbearable poverty, owing to increasing unemployment and
+consequent want, will at least madden the people and cause a
+revolution&mdash;they remember that the great French revolutions were also
+brought about by unemployment and consequent widespread misery&mdash;are
+the most determined champions of Free Trade.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_766_766" id="Footnote_766_766"></a><a href="#FNanchor_766_766"><span class="label">[766]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_767_767" id="Footnote_767_767"></a><a href="#FNanchor_767_767"><span class="label">[767]</span></a> Lecky, <i>History of the Eighteenth Century</i>, quoted in
+<i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 81.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_768_768" id="Footnote_768_768"></a><a href="#FNanchor_768_768"><span class="label">[768]</span></a> Ellis Barker, <i>Modern Germany</i>, p. 531.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_769_769" id="Footnote_769_769"></a><a href="#FNanchor_769_769"><span class="label">[769]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 80, 81.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_770_770" id="Footnote_770_770"></a><a href="#FNanchor_770_770"><span class="label">[770]</span></a> F. Engels in Marx, <i>Discourse on Free Trade</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_771_771" id="Footnote_771_771"></a><a href="#FNanchor_771_771"><span class="label">[771]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 90.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_772_772" id="Footnote_772_772"></a><a href="#FNanchor_772_772"><span class="label">[772]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>God and My Neighbour</i>, p. 154.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_773_773" id="Footnote_773_773"></a><a href="#FNanchor_773_773"><span class="label">[773]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 33.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_774_774" id="Footnote_774_774"></a><a href="#FNanchor_774_774"><span class="label">[774]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 33.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_775_775" id="Footnote_775_775"></a><a href="#FNanchor_775_775"><span class="label">[775]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 33, 34.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_776_776" id="Footnote_776_776"></a><a href="#FNanchor_776_776"><span class="label">[776]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 35.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_777_777" id="Footnote_777_777"></a><a href="#FNanchor_777_777"><span class="label">[777]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 34.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_778_778" id="Footnote_778_778"></a><a href="#FNanchor_778_778"><span class="label">[778]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_779_779" id="Footnote_779_779"></a><a href="#FNanchor_779_779"><span class="label">[779]</span></a> Suthers, <i>My Right to Work</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_780_780" id="Footnote_780_780"></a><a href="#FNanchor_780_780"><span class="label">[780]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, pp. 97, 98, and
+118.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_781_781" id="Footnote_781_781"></a><a href="#FNanchor_781_781"><span class="label">[781]</span></a> Hall, <i>Land, Labour, and Liberty</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_782_782" id="Footnote_782_782"></a><a href="#FNanchor_782_782"><span class="label">[782]</span></a> Suthers, <i>My Right to Work</i>, p. 82.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_783_783" id="Footnote_783_783"></a><a href="#FNanchor_783_783"><span class="label">[783]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 92.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_784_784" id="Footnote_784_784"></a><a href="#FNanchor_784_784"><span class="label">[784]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 97.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_785_785" id="Footnote_785_785"></a><a href="#FNanchor_785_785"><span class="label">[785]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 97.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_786_786" id="Footnote_786_786"></a><a href="#FNanchor_786_786"><span class="label">[786]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_787_787" id="Footnote_787_787"></a><a href="#FNanchor_787_787"><span class="label">[787]</span></a> Suthers, <i>My Right to Work</i>, p. 103.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_788_788" id="Footnote_788_788"></a><a href="#FNanchor_788_788"><span class="label">[788]</span></a> <i>Justice</i>, November 23, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_789_789" id="Footnote_789_789"></a><a href="#FNanchor_789_789"><span class="label">[789]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_790_790" id="Footnote_790_790"></a><a href="#FNanchor_790_790"><span class="label">[790]</span></a> Suthers, <i>My Right to Work</i>, pp. 102, 103.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_791_791" id="Footnote_791_791"></a><a href="#FNanchor_791_791"><span class="label">[791]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, October 25, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_792_792" id="Footnote_792_792"></a><a href="#FNanchor_792_792"><span class="label">[792]</span></a> Suthers, <i>My Right to Work</i>, pp. 96, 97.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_793_793" id="Footnote_793_793"></a><a href="#FNanchor_793_793"><span class="label">[793]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 101.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_794_794" id="Footnote_794_794"></a><a href="#FNanchor_794_794"><span class="label">[794]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 104.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_795_795" id="Footnote_795_795"></a><a href="#FNanchor_795_795"><span class="label">[795]</span></a> <i>Labour Leader</i>, January 12, 1906.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_796_796" id="Footnote_796_796"></a><a href="#FNanchor_796_796"><span class="label">[796]</span></a> <i>National Union Gleanings</i>, vol. xxvi. January-June
+1906, p. 220.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_797_797" id="Footnote_797_797"></a><a href="#FNanchor_797_797"><span class="label">[797]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, September 1907, pp. 519, 520.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_798_798" id="Footnote_798_798"></a><a href="#FNanchor_798_798"><span class="label">[798]</span></a> <i>Battersea Vanguard</i>, November 1907, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_799_799" id="Footnote_799_799"></a><a href="#FNanchor_799_799"><span class="label">[799]</span></a> <i>Report, 27th Annual Conference Social-Democratic
+Federation</i> 1907, p. 29.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_800_800" id="Footnote_800_800"></a><a href="#FNanchor_800_800"><span class="label">[800]</span></a> Mann, <i>The International Labour Movement</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_801_801" id="Footnote_801_801"></a><a href="#FNanchor_801_801"><span class="label">[801]</span></a> Jones, <i>Mining Royalties</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_802_802" id="Footnote_802_802"></a><a href="#FNanchor_802_802"><span class="label">[802]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Competition</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_803_803" id="Footnote_803_803"></a><a href="#FNanchor_803_803"><span class="label">[803]</span></a> Hall, <i>Land, Labour, and Liberty</i>, pp. 9, 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_804_804" id="Footnote_804_804"></a><a href="#FNanchor_804_804"><span class="label">[804]</span></a> <i>Justice</i>, November 23, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_805_805" id="Footnote_805_805"></a><a href="#FNanchor_805_805"><span class="label">[805]</span></a> George Lansbury, <i>The Principles of the English Poor
+Law</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_806_806" id="Footnote_806_806"></a><a href="#FNanchor_806_806"><span class="label">[806]</span></a> Suthers, <i>My Right to Work</i>, p. 104.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_807_807" id="Footnote_807_807"></a><a href="#FNanchor_807_807"><span class="label">[807]</span></a> Karl Marx, <i>A Discourse on Free Trade</i>, p. 39.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_808_808" id="Footnote_808_808"></a><a href="#FNanchor_808_808"><span class="label">[808]</span></a> Suthers, <i>My Right to Work</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_809_809" id="Footnote_809_809"></a><a href="#FNanchor_809_809"><span class="label">[809]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_810_810" id="Footnote_810_810"></a><a href="#FNanchor_810_810"><span class="label">[810]</span></a> H. Quelch, <i>The Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_811_811" id="Footnote_811_811"></a><a href="#FNanchor_811_811"><span class="label">[811]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_812_812" id="Footnote_812_812"></a><a href="#FNanchor_812_812"><span class="label">[812]</span></a> Suthers, <i>My Right to Work</i>, p. 119.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_813_813" id="Footnote_813_813"></a><a href="#FNanchor_813_813"><span class="label">[813]</span></a> J. Ramsay Macdonald, <i>Labour and the Empire</i>, p. 97.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_814_814" id="Footnote_814_814"></a><a href="#FNanchor_814_814"><span class="label">[814]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, October 10, 1907, p. 369.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_815_815" id="Footnote_815_815"></a><a href="#FNanchor_815_815"><span class="label">[815]</span></a> Karl Marx, <i>A Discourse on Free Trade</i>, p. 42.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXII" id="CHAPTER_XXII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_302" id="Page_302">[302]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND EDUCATION</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The attitude of Socialists towards education is a peculiar one. They
+see in it apparently less an agency for distributing knowledge and
+discovering ability than an instrument for the propagation of
+Socialism and an institution for relieving parents of all cost and
+responsibility for the maintenance and the bringing up of their
+children. Hence most Socialists, in discussing education, consider it
+rather from the point of view of those who are desirous of State
+relief than from the point of view of those who wish for good
+education.</p>
+
+<p>Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded by the Social-Democratic
+Federation, the following embody its education programme: "Elementary
+education to be free, secular, industrial, and compulsory for all
+classes. The age of obligatory school attendance to be raised to
+sixteen. Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher
+education, both general and technical, and all such education to be
+free. Free maintenance for all attending State schools. Abolition of
+school rates; the cost of education in all State schools to be borne
+by the national Exchequer."<a name="FNanchor_816_816" id="FNanchor_816_816"></a><a href="#Footnote_816_816" class="fnanchor">[816]</a> An influential Socialist writer
+demands: "Education should be fee-less from top to bottom of the
+ladder, the universities included."<a name="FNanchor_817_817" id="FNanchor_817_817"></a><a href="#Footnote_817_817" class="fnanchor">[817]</a> In accordance with the
+Socialist views regarding the relation of the sexes, which are
+described in Chapter XXV. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_303" id="Page_303">[303]</a></span>"Socialism and Woman, the Family and the
+Home,"<a name="FNanchor_818_818" id="FNanchor_818_818"></a><a href="#Footnote_818_818" class="fnanchor">[818]</a> most Socialists demand co-education and identical
+education for both sexes. "Under Socialism boys and girls will receive
+exactly the same training and exercise in the fundamentals of a
+liberal education. Success in examinations of whatever character shall
+bring equal reward and distinction. There will be no separation into
+boys' classes and girls' classes. The instruction being the same, they
+shall receive it at the same time."<a name="FNanchor_819_819" id="FNanchor_819_819"></a><a href="#Footnote_819_819" class="fnanchor">[819]</a> "Education will be the same
+for all and for both sexes. The sexes will be separated only in cases
+in which functional differences make it absolutely necessary."<a name="FNanchor_820_820" id="FNanchor_820_820"></a><a href="#Footnote_820_820" class="fnanchor">[820]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists see in the schools chiefly a means whereby to abolish
+parental responsibilities and to secure "free State maintenance" for
+all children. In claiming free State maintenance, Socialists grossly
+exaggerate with regard to the number of underfed children. "It is
+doubtful if half the children at present attending school are
+physically fit to be educated, and medical men of eminence have
+unhesitatingly expressed the opinion that the alarming increase of
+insanity, which is one of the most terrible characteristics of modern
+social life, is largely, if not entirely, due to the attempt to
+educate those who are too ill-nourished to stand the mental strain
+that even the most elementary school-training involves. As a remedy
+for this, the Social-Democratic Federation advocates a complete system
+of free State maintenance for all children attending school. This is
+an essential corollary of compulsory education. Only complete free
+maintenance will meet the requirements of the case."<a name="FNanchor_821_821" id="FNanchor_821_821"></a><a href="#Footnote_821_821" class="fnanchor">[821]</a> "All
+children, destitute or not, should be fed, and fed without charge, at
+the expense of the State or municipality. We propose that the regular
+school course <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_304" id="Page_304">[304]</a></span>should include at least one meal a day. Thus only can
+we make sure that all the children who need feeding will be fed."<a name="FNanchor_822_822" id="FNanchor_822_822"></a><a href="#Footnote_822_822" class="fnanchor">[822]</a>
+"To cram dates into the poor little skulls of innocent children when
+you ought to be cramming dates down their throats is not a right thing
+to do, especially when you remember that the most precious thing in
+this world is a human life, and when you realise that you are
+murdering systematically thousands of children every year because they
+cannot get proper food&mdash;they cannot even get pure milk in the great
+cities of our land. One of our first duties in this nation is to see
+that every child has a right to the best and most ample provision for
+its physical needs. That should be the primary charge upon the nation.
+I am not here to-night to discuss the great question of the State
+maintenance of children. Personally I am absolutely in favour of
+it."<a name="FNanchor_823_823" id="FNanchor_823_823"></a><a href="#Footnote_823_823" class="fnanchor">[823]</a> Experience of other nations has taught that the institution
+of free meals for necessitous school-children is immediately and very
+grossly abused by unscrupulous parents easily able to feed their
+children. From Milan, for instance, we learn that "When in 1900 this
+service began, meals were given on only 133 days out of a possible 174
+days of school attendance. The outlay was then set down at 98,300
+francs. During the second year, however, free meals were served on 153
+days and cost 149,337 francs. In 1903 the free meals cost the
+municipality 247,766 francs and 277,603 in 1904. The outlay will now
+exceed 300,000 francs, and the number of pupils who manage to
+establish their claim to be fed gratuitously is ever increasing."<a name="FNanchor_824_824" id="FNanchor_824_824"></a><a href="#Footnote_824_824" class="fnanchor">[824]</a>
+British experiments of free feeding on a smaller scale have shown that
+"In the large majority of cases the children who are sent to school
+hungry are so sent, not by honest and poor <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_305" id="Page_305">[305]</a></span>parents, but by those who
+have an imperfectly developed sense of parental responsibility and are
+willing to shuffle out of the duty of providing for their children if
+they think anybody else will undertake it for them. These parents are
+not in need of assistance&mdash;they are perfectly well able to feed their
+own children; but if free meals can be had for the asking, they are
+not too proud to tell the child to ask. It relieves the mother of the
+trouble of preparing a meal for the child, and the money saved can be
+used for some more attractive form of personal expenditure."<a name="FNanchor_825_825" id="FNanchor_825_825"></a><a href="#Footnote_825_825" class="fnanchor">[825]</a> At
+Birmingham, for example, numerous applications were made by the
+teachers to the relieving officers on behalf of children under their
+care, but when inquiries were made into the circumstances of the
+parents it was found that many of them were earning over thirty
+shillings a week, and in one case the parent was in constant
+employment with an average wage of 3<i>l.</i> 17<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i> a week.<a name="FNanchor_826_826" id="FNanchor_826_826"></a><a href="#Footnote_826_826" class="fnanchor">[826]</a> In
+Bolton, where during the winter of 1904-5 a charitable society
+provided free meals for children in certain centres of the town, it
+was found that the parents of some of the children who were partaking
+of the free meals so provided, and even reported as being underfed,
+were in receipt of as much as from 2<i>l.</i> to 3<i>l.</i> a week.<a name="FNanchor_827_827" id="FNanchor_827_827"></a><a href="#Footnote_827_827" class="fnanchor">[827]</a> In
+Fulham (London) "More than one hundred names were sent to the Boards
+of Guardians of children who were adjudged to be underfed and were
+receiving meals from public charity. In hardly one of these cases did
+the relieving officer consider the complaint well founded. One family
+was found by him to be earning an income of 4<i>l.</i> 4<i>s.</i> a week, and
+yet the children were sent to share in the charitable meals."<a name="FNanchor_828_828" id="FNanchor_828_828"></a><a href="#Footnote_828_828" class="fnanchor">[828]</a>
+"Some of the parents who sent their children to the Johanna Street
+school in Lambeth said that they did not give their <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_306" id="Page_306">[306]</a></span>children food
+before going to school as they knew that if they did not do so they
+would receive it at the school, as the children of other people got
+food there and they did not see why theirs should not too."<a name="FNanchor_829_829" id="FNanchor_829_829"></a><a href="#Footnote_829_829" class="fnanchor">[829]</a> The
+fact that Socialists grossly exaggerate in giving the proportion of
+underfed school children, and in ascribing the cause of underfeeding
+solely to the poverty of parents, is clear to all who have studied the
+problem of poverty. Mr. Cyril Jackson, the chief inspector of public
+elementary schools, for instance, in summarising the evidence of the
+women inspectors appointed to inquire into the age of admission of
+infants into elementary schools, says: "The question of underfed
+children cannot fail to be touched in the course of such an inquiry.
+It is interesting to find a general agreement that it is unsuitable
+rather than insufficient feeding that is responsible for sickly
+children. Want of sufficient sleep, neglect of personal cleanliness,
+badly ventilated homes, are contributory causes of the low physical
+standard reached."<a name="FNanchor_830_830" id="FNanchor_830_830"></a><a href="#Footnote_830_830" class="fnanchor">[830]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists, though only a few, have been honest enough to express
+similar views. A Fabian tract, for instance, says: "We have said that
+universal free feeding appears to be the only way in which the evil of
+improper (as distinct from insufficient) feeding can be removed. At
+present many children whose parents get fairly good wages cannot feed
+their children properly, either because they do not know what is the
+best food to give, or because they have not the time or the skill to
+prepare it. Manifestly the case of these will not be met by any system
+which feeds only the patently starved and destitute child. But it will
+be met both directly and indirectly by a universal system; directly,
+because the children, whatever they get at home, will at least get
+proper food at school; indirectly, because it will serve to educate
+the next generation of mothers in the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_307" id="Page_307">[307]</a></span>knowledge of what is the best
+and most economical way of providing for their families. This is not
+the place to go into the very large question of what is the ideal diet
+for a child. All that need be insisted on here is that the provision
+should be bought and prepared under expert advice, and that
+consideration of cheapness should never be allowed to count as against
+the needs of nourishment. Every child should receive at least one
+solid meal in the middle of the day, and perhaps a glass of hot milk
+on arrival in the morning."<a name="FNanchor_831_831" id="FNanchor_831_831"></a><a href="#Footnote_831_831" class="fnanchor">[831]</a></p>
+
+<p>The "hungry children" argument is a valuable one for purposes of
+agitation, and it is used by the Socialists to the fullest extent. The
+workers are told: "The children are too ill provided for to be
+educated. This is not because the worker is idle or thriftless, but
+actually because he is too industrious and produces so much that his
+labour as a producer is at a discount. It is objected that to provide
+free State maintenance for all the children would be to destroy
+parental responsibility. But it is too late in the day to urge this
+objection, seeing that the State has taken upon itself the education
+of the children and is prepared to undertake, and does undertake,
+their maintenance and bringing-up when the parents are so careless of
+their responsibilities as to neglect them entirely."<a name="FNanchor_832_832" id="FNanchor_832_832"></a><a href="#Footnote_832_832" class="fnanchor">[832]</a> "The
+old-fashioned prejudice fostered by the capitalists and their
+hangers-on that it is degrading to accept anything from the State is
+fast dying out"<a name="FNanchor_833_833" id="FNanchor_833_833"></a><a href="#Footnote_833_833" class="fnanchor">[833]</a>&mdash;That workmen who are daily told by their leaders
+that it is unreasonable to expect that they should bring up their
+children frequently desert their family is natural. Every year many
+thousands of wives and children are deserted. At every police station
+the names of such men may be seen posted up, and those desertions are
+undoubtedly largely due to Socialistic teaching.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_308" id="Page_308">[308]</a></span>The real object of the Socialists in demanding free maintenance for
+the children is not humanity. In making that demand they do not even
+think of the welfare of the children, as the following extracts will
+prove, which clearly reveal the real object of their demands. "Free
+maintenance for children should be accepted by trade unionists as
+tending to raise the standard of comfort. All should demand it with
+the object of personally benefiting themselves."<a name="FNanchor_834_834" id="FNanchor_834_834"></a><a href="#Footnote_834_834" class="fnanchor">[834]</a> "In nine cases
+out of ten it is the hungry child who breaks the back of the strike.
+Let them feel assured that their children's dinner is secure, and they
+will continue the struggle to a victorious end."<a name="FNanchor_835_835" id="FNanchor_835_835"></a><a href="#Footnote_835_835" class="fnanchor">[835]</a> "Free
+maintenance for children would be a tax on that surplus wealth which
+the capitalists and the aristocracy share between them. To the worker
+free maintenance for his children would be equivalent to an additional
+income. His standard of living would rise. No doubt the capitalist
+would reduce his wages as much as possible, but the worker would then
+be able to fight him on more equal terms. His children being well
+cared for, he would be able to hold out against the capitalist for an
+indefinite period."<a name="FNanchor_836_836" id="FNanchor_836_836"></a><a href="#Footnote_836_836" class="fnanchor">[836]</a> "We counsel the workers to accept the offer
+as a small payment on account of a huge debt, but to accept it with no
+more gratitude than is shown by the class which is maintained in
+luxury, parents and children alike, by the collective industry of the
+workers. By dint of organisation they may be able very soon to exact
+payment of a more substantial sum&mdash;State maintenance, to wit."<a name="FNanchor_837_837" id="FNanchor_837_837"></a><a href="#Footnote_837_837" class="fnanchor">[837]</a></p>
+
+<p>The doctrines above given have unfortunately been accepted by many
+organised workers. A resolution <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_309" id="Page_309">[309]</a></span>of the Trades Union Congress at
+Leeds, in September 1904, asserted:</p>
+
+<p>"That having regard to the facts (<i>a</i>) that twelve millions of the
+population are living in actual poverty, or close to the poverty line;
+(<i>b</i>) that physical deterioration of the people is the inevitable
+result of this; (<i>c</i>) that it is impossible to teach starving and
+underfed children, this Congress urges the Government to introduce,
+without further delay, legislation instructing education authorities
+to provide at least one free meal a day for children attending
+State-supported schools."</p>
+
+<p>A resolution passed at the Scottish Miners' Conference on December 30,
+1904, stated:</p>
+
+<p>"That this Conference is in favour of State maintenance of children,
+but that in the meantime we identify ourselves with the movement in
+favour of free meals for school children."</p>
+
+<p>Resolutions passed by the National Labour Conference on the State
+maintenance of children, at the Guildhall, City of London, Friday,
+January 20, 1905, declared:</p>
+
+<p>"That this Conference of delegates from British Labour Organisations,
+Socialist and other bodies, declares in favour of State maintenance of
+children as a necessary corollary of universal compulsory education
+and as a means of partially arresting that physical deterioration of
+the industrial population of this country which is now generally
+recognised as a grave national danger. As a step towards such State
+maintenance this Conference, supporting the decision of the last
+Trades Union Congress upon this question, calls upon the Government to
+introduce without further delay such legislative measures as will
+enable the local authorities to provide meals for children attending
+the common schools, to be paid for out of the National Exchequer; and
+in support of this demand calls attention to the evidence given by Dr.
+Eichholz, the official witness of the Board of Education <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_310" id="Page_310">[310]</a></span>on the
+Committee on Physical Deterioration, in which he stated that the
+question of food is at the base of all the evils of child degeneracy,
+and that if steps were taken to ensure the proper adequate feeding of
+the children the evil will rapidly cease."</p>
+
+<p>A Socialist has worked out in a widely read book the cost of free
+education and State maintenance, which will require a yearly
+expenditure of 458,750,000<i>l.</i>, a sum four times as large as the
+entire national Budget. This outlay does not deter him. Combining the
+State schools with State workshops, he promises that they will yield a
+profit of exactly 105,850,000<i>l.</i> a year.<a name="FNanchor_838_838" id="FNanchor_838_838"></a><a href="#Footnote_838_838" class="fnanchor">[838]</a> This scheme should
+recommend itself to Chancellors of the Exchequer in search of a few
+millions.</p>
+
+<p>Another imaginative Socialist would make the abolition of all existing
+languages part of his educational scheme: "Socialism will steadfastly
+aim at the adoption of a universal language, be it English or volapuk.
+All the modern languages&mdash;and for the matter of that, the ancient
+also&mdash;are but jungles of verbiage which retard, rather than
+facilitate, human thought and progress. They have grown up anyhow; but
+what we now want is a made language, constructed on scientific
+principles, and so easy of comprehension that any intelligent person
+can acquire it in a few months."<a name="FNanchor_839_839" id="FNanchor_839_839"></a><a href="#Footnote_839_839" class="fnanchor">[839]</a></p>
+
+<p>Across the educational, as most other, proposals of British Socialists
+should be written in large letters, Utopia!</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_816_816" id="Footnote_816_816"></a><a href="#FNanchor_816_816"><span class="label">[816]</span></a> See Appendix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_817_817" id="Footnote_817_817"></a><a href="#FNanchor_817_817"><span class="label">[817]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Democrat's Address</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_818_818" id="Footnote_818_818"></a><a href="#FNanchor_818_818"><span class="label">[818]</span></a> See p. 330.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_819_819" id="Footnote_819_819"></a><a href="#FNanchor_819_819"><span class="label">[819]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, pp. 39, 40.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_820_820" id="Footnote_820_820"></a><a href="#FNanchor_820_820"><span class="label">[820]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 218.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_821_821" id="Footnote_821_821"></a><a href="#FNanchor_821_821"><span class="label">[821]</span></a> Quelch, <i>The Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_822_822" id="Footnote_822_822"></a><a href="#FNanchor_822_822"><span class="label">[822]</span></a> Fabian Tract, <i>After Bread, Education</i>, No. 120, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_823_823" id="Footnote_823_823"></a><a href="#FNanchor_823_823"><span class="label">[823]</span></a> Kirtlan, <i>Socialism for Christians</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_824_824" id="Footnote_824_824"></a><a href="#FNanchor_824_824"><span class="label">[824]</span></a> <i>Free Feeding of School Children</i>, p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_825_825" id="Footnote_825_825"></a><a href="#FNanchor_825_825"><span class="label">[825]</span></a> Cox, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_826_826" id="Footnote_826_826"></a><a href="#FNanchor_826_826"><span class="label">[826]</span></a> <i>Local Government Board Report</i>, Cd. 3105, p. 495.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_827_827" id="Footnote_827_827"></a><a href="#FNanchor_827_827"><span class="label">[827]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 506.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_828_828" id="Footnote_828_828"></a><a href="#FNanchor_828_828"><span class="label">[828]</span></a> <i>Times</i>, March 17, 1906.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_829_829" id="Footnote_829_829"></a><a href="#FNanchor_829_829"><span class="label">[829]</span></a> Cox, <i>Socialism</i>, pp. 16, 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_830_830" id="Footnote_830_830"></a><a href="#FNanchor_830_830"><span class="label">[830]</span></a> <i>Cd.</i> 2726, p. iii.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_831_831" id="Footnote_831_831"></a><a href="#FNanchor_831_831"><span class="label">[831]</span></a> Fabian Tract, <i>After Bread, Education</i>, No. 120, p.
+14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_832_832" id="Footnote_832_832"></a><a href="#FNanchor_832_832"><span class="label">[832]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_833_833" id="Footnote_833_833"></a><a href="#FNanchor_833_833"><span class="label">[833]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Trade Unionism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_834_834" id="Footnote_834_834"></a><a href="#FNanchor_834_834"><span class="label">[834]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Trade Unionism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_835_835" id="Footnote_835_835"></a><a href="#FNanchor_835_835"><span class="label">[835]</span></a> Fabian Tract, <i>After Bread, Education</i>, No. 120, p.
+11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_836_836" id="Footnote_836_836"></a><a href="#FNanchor_836_836"><span class="label">[836]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Trade Unionism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_837_837" id="Footnote_837_837"></a><a href="#FNanchor_837_837"><span class="label">[837]</span></a> Watts, <i>State Maintenance for Children</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_838_838" id="Footnote_838_838"></a><a href="#FNanchor_838_838"><span class="label">[838]</span></a> Richardson, <i>How It Can Be Done</i>, pp. 50-61.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_839_839" id="Footnote_839_839"></a><a href="#FNanchor_839_839"><span class="label">[839]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 166.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXIII" id="CHAPTER_XXIII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_311" id="Page_311">[311]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXIII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS PROVIDENCE, THRIFT, AND TEMPERANCE</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Socialism thrives upon the poverty, unhappiness, and misery of the
+workers. Starving and desperate men may easily be aroused to
+rebellion. Contented men will not become Socialists. Therefore it lies
+in the interest of the professional Socialist agitators to maintain
+poverty and misery among the masses, and if possible to increase it.
+With this object in view, many Socialist agitators oppose all measures
+which are likely to turn the propertyless wage-earner&mdash;the "wage
+slave" as the Socialists like to call him, in order to exasperate
+him&mdash;into an owner of property, a small capitalist. That might make
+him a contented man. Therefore, as we have seen in Chapter XVIII., the
+Socialist leaders strenuously oppose "for scientific reasons" the
+creation of peasant proprietors. They distinctly encourage
+improvidence and oppose, also "for scientific reasons," providence,
+thrift, and abstinence among the workers. The philosopher of British
+Socialism informs us: "Thrift, the hoarding up of the products of
+labour, it is obvious, must be without rhyme or reason, except on a
+capitalist basis,"<a name="FNanchor_840_840" id="FNanchor_840_840"></a><a href="#Footnote_840_840" class="fnanchor">[840]</a> and the Socialists do not wish the workers to
+become capitalists.</p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists were indiscreet enough to confess that they opposed
+providence, thrift, and temperance among the workers, as practised
+especially by the members of trade unions, co-operative societies, and
+friendly <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_312" id="Page_312">[312]</a></span>societies, because these are likely to elevate the masses
+and rob the Socialist leaders of supporters. We read, for instance:
+"The so-called thrift and temperance movements are essentially
+antagonistic to Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_841_841" id="FNanchor_841_841"></a><a href="#Footnote_841_841" class="fnanchor">[841]</a> "The trade co-operator canonises the
+bourgeois virtues, but Socialist vices, of 'over-work' and
+'thrift.'"<a name="FNanchor_842_842" id="FNanchor_842_842"></a><a href="#Footnote_842_842" class="fnanchor">[842]</a> "Co-operation, though regarded by the individual
+trader as an enemy, does not necessarily enter into conflict with the
+capitalist at all. Indeed, so far as it transforms workmen into
+shareholders, it forms a bulwark for capitalism, the same as the
+creation of small landholders or any other class of small proprietors
+would do."<a name="FNanchor_843_843" id="FNanchor_843_843"></a><a href="#Footnote_843_843" class="fnanchor">[843]</a> "Co-operation, as carried on in England, is an
+obstacle and a danger to the Socialist cause. Being capitalist
+concerns pure and simple, co-operative societies are subjected to the
+same influences as all other capitalistic ventures."<a name="FNanchor_844_844" id="FNanchor_844_844"></a><a href="#Footnote_844_844" class="fnanchor">[844]</a> "The
+friendly societies are the least promising of any of the democratic
+movements from the political point of view. The doctrine of 'thrift'
+also has been preached very vigorously to them. There is at present
+little prospect of the friendly societies identifying themselves with
+the general political labour movement of the country."<a name="FNanchor_845_845" id="FNanchor_845_845"></a><a href="#Footnote_845_845" class="fnanchor">[845]</a> The
+Anarchist Congress of 1869 at Marseilles stated very truly: "La
+coop&eacute;ration d&eacute;moralise les ouvriers en faisant des bourgeois."<a name="FNanchor_846_846" id="FNanchor_846_846"></a><a href="#Footnote_846_846" class="fnanchor">[846]</a></p>
+
+<p>Now let us take note of the "scientific" arguments with which British
+Socialists oppose providence, thrift, and sobriety among the workers.</p>
+
+<p>"Under present circumstances, the more frugal, thrifty, and abstemious
+working people as a class become, the more cheaply they have to live,
+the more cheaply they have to sell their labour power to the
+capitalist class, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_313" id="Page_313">[313]</a></span>wages being determined by the cost of
+subsistence."<a name="FNanchor_847_847" id="FNanchor_847_847"></a><a href="#Footnote_847_847" class="fnanchor">[847]</a> "Temperance, thrift, industry only serve to make
+labour an easier or more valuable prey to capital. If they reduce the
+cost of living in any particular, they but reduce the cost of labour
+to the capitalist."<a name="FNanchor_848_848" id="FNanchor_848_848"></a><a href="#Footnote_848_848" class="fnanchor">[848]</a> "If <i>all</i> the workers were very thrifty,
+sober, industrious, and abstemious they would be worse off in the
+matter of wages than they are now."<a name="FNanchor_849_849" id="FNanchor_849_849"></a><a href="#Footnote_849_849" class="fnanchor">[849]</a> "The mere cheapening of the
+cost of living only tends to reduce wages, and thus cannot advantage
+the worker."<a name="FNanchor_850_850" id="FNanchor_850_850"></a><a href="#Footnote_850_850" class="fnanchor">[850]</a> "If <i>all</i> workers were to become teetotalers and
+vegetarians, wages would inevitably fall to the wretched level,
+perchance, of Oriental countries like India and China, where thrift in
+every form is carried to incredible lengths."<a name="FNanchor_851_851" id="FNanchor_851_851"></a><a href="#Footnote_851_851" class="fnanchor">[851]</a> "Is it not proved
+that the Hindoos and the Chinese, who are the most temperate and the
+most thrifty people in the world, are always the worst paid? And don't
+you see that if the Lancashire workers would live upon rice and water,
+the masters would soon have their wages down to rice and water
+point?"<a name="FNanchor_852_852" id="FNanchor_852_852"></a><a href="#Footnote_852_852" class="fnanchor">[852]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing arguments, which are based on the "Iron Law of Wages,"
+of which a refutation has been given in Chapter IV.,<a name="FNanchor_853_853" id="FNanchor_853_853"></a><a href="#Footnote_853_853" class="fnanchor">[853]</a> may sound
+plausible to the unthinking workman. They may infuriate him and
+therefore serve the ends of the Socialist agitator, but they are
+utterly false and dishonest, as all Socialist leaders know. Wages
+depend partly on the supply and demand for labour, partly on the
+productiveness of labour. In machineless countries, such as China and
+India, the average worker produces very little, and the supply of
+workers is unlimited. Hence their wages are low. If the Socialistic
+arguments were right, Chinese and Hindoos <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_314" id="Page_314">[314]</a></span>could double or treble
+their wages by becoming drunkards, and English navvies could earn
+5<i>l.</i> a week by agreeing among themselves to drink champagne instead
+of beer. If the cost of subsistence determined the rate of wages, the
+wages for all workers in London ought to be approximately the same. In
+reality, however, we find that wages range in London from 3<i>l.</i> 10<i>s.</i>
+to 18<i>s.</i> per week. The most skilled workers receive the highest, the
+least skilled the lowest, wages. It is therefore evident that wages
+are determined by the cost of subsistence only in the case of the
+least skilled workers, provided an unlimited supply of such workers
+and unrestricted competition among them for work drive down their
+wages to the bare existence level.</p>
+
+<p>Providence, thrift, and temperance are habitually attacked by
+Socialists not only on "scientific" but also on moral and
+philosophical grounds. For instance, Mr. Keir Hardie tells us: "As for
+thrift, much which passes for such at present is little different from
+soul-destroying parsimony. Men and women starve their years of healthy
+activity that they may have enough to keep alive an attenuated old age
+scarcely worth preserving."<a name="FNanchor_854_854" id="FNanchor_854_854"></a><a href="#Footnote_854_854" class="fnanchor">[854]</a> In other words, he advises the
+workers to spend all they earn and to become paupers in their old age.
+A very influential Socialist writer says: "A man by starving his mind
+and his body is able to save money. He borrows books instead of buying
+them. He starves his emotional nature by neglecting to go to the
+theatre, because to go to the theatre costs money. He doesn't go to
+concerts because concerts cost money. He is a teetotaler, not so much
+because he wishes to keep his stomach clean and his head clear, but
+because his ideal men are teetotalers, grad-grinds, who mortify the
+flesh in order to save. And the money is saved with a bad intention.
+The aim is either to start independently in business, or else to
+secure shares <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_315" id="Page_315">[315]</a></span>in the undertaking paying the highest dividends
+compatible with security. The object of this man is to leave his class
+behind him, and to live <i>upon</i> labour rather than <i>by</i>
+it"<a name="FNanchor_855_855" id="FNanchor_855_855"></a><a href="#Footnote_855_855" class="fnanchor">[855]</a>&mdash;According to this authority it would be immoral for the
+rural labourer to save in order to be able to till his own field and
+to live in his own cottage; it would be immoral for the artisan to
+endeavour to have a workshop and a house of his own; it would be
+immoral for the worker to put his savings into a savings-bank or a
+friendly society, or some limited company, and to live upon his
+savings during his old age. It would almost seem as if from the
+Socialist point of view the only moral way of obtaining property was
+by plundering the rich. "Waste all you earn and die in the workhouse"
+is at present their advice to the worker, and the worker who follows
+that advice and who lives from hand to mouth easily becomes a pauper.
+For him a short spell of unemployment means starvation and despair.
+This is evidently a state of affairs which Socialist agitators favour
+because it will increase their following.&mdash;Another prominent Socialist
+writer says: "Among the many quack remedies for poverty, the most
+venerable and the most illusive is thrift or saving. The habit of
+saving is always represented by the rich as the highest of social
+virtues; but it is one they are careful rarely to practise
+themselves"<a name="FNanchor_856_856" id="FNanchor_856_856"></a><a href="#Footnote_856_856" class="fnanchor">[856]</a>&mdash;If the rich are so wasteful, how is it then that the
+national capital, held by the rich, as the Socialists tell us, has
+increased from 4,000,000,000<i>l.</i> to 12,000,000,000<i>l.</i> during the last
+sixty years, notwithstanding huge capital losses caused by suffering
+industries? The decay of agriculture alone has caused a capital loss
+which approximates 2,000,000,000<i>l.</i></p>
+
+<p>The great co-operative movement in England was created by the
+celebrated Rochdale Pioneers, the name <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_316" id="Page_316">[316]</a></span>given to the weavers of
+Rochdale who started it. On a rainy night in November 1843, twelve men
+met in the back room of a mean inn and commenced the co-operative
+movement by organising themselves as "The Rochdale Society of
+Equitable Pioneers." They agreed to pay twenty pence a week into a
+common fund, but only a few of these twelve men were able to pay their
+pence that evening. They began by buying a little tea and sugar at
+wholesale prices, which they sold to their members at little more than
+cost. In a year their number had grown to twenty-eight, and they had
+collected 28<i>l.</i>, with which they rented a little store and stocked it
+with 15<i>l.</i> worth of flour. During the first year they made no profit.
+In its second year the society had seventy-four members, 181<i>l.</i> in
+funds, 710<i>l.</i> of business, and made 22<i>l.</i> profit, 2-1/2 per cent. of
+which was used as a fund for education.<a name="FNanchor_857_857" id="FNanchor_857_857"></a><a href="#Footnote_857_857" class="fnanchor">[857]</a></p>
+
+<p>Gradually but constantly growing, this movement has branched out in
+every direction, and the result is that there are now in Great Britain
+1,685 co-operative societies with 2,263,562 members. These
+co-operative societies are manufacturers, ship owners, bankers,
+brokers, factors, merchants, millers, printers, bookbinders, and
+shopkeepers of every kind on the largest scale. The rapidly growing
+assets of the various undertakings represent a value of about
+50,000,000<i>l.</i>, the combined nominal capital comes to 42,813,348<i>l.</i>,
+and the yearly net profits amount to about 11,000,000<i>l.</i>, or to more
+than 35 per cent. per annum on the subscribed capital. In 1905 the net
+profits amounted to 37.4 per cent., in 1906 to 36.4 per cent. on the
+share capital.</p>
+
+<p>Capitalised at 4 per cent, the co-operative societies represent an
+investment value of about 300,000,000<i>l.</i>, or about 100<i>l.</i> per
+co-operator. The societies maintain an army of 107,727 employees.
+Their progress during the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_317" id="Page_317">[317]</a></span>last decade may be seen at a glance from
+the following figures:</p>
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="40%" summary="Co-operative Societies">
+  <tr>
+  <td colspan="2" class="tdc"><i>Total Trade of British Co-operative Societies.</i></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="60%">1896</td>
+  <td class="tdr3" width="40%">&pound;58,729,643</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1901</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">88,394,304</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1906</td>
+  <td class="tdr">110,085,826<a name="FNanchor_858_858" id="FNanchor_858_858"></a><a href="#Footnote_858_858" class="fnanchor">[858]</a></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p>Already the income of the co-operative societies is twice as large as
+the interest paid on the whole of the deposits in the British
+savings-banks. There is no reason why the co-operative movement should
+not further grow and increase, and it is to be hoped that it will
+further extend in every direction to the benefit of the industrious
+and thrifty workers. There ought to be no propertyless workers in
+Great Britain.</p>
+
+<p>The British co-operative societies have proved to the dismay of the
+Socialists that working men may improve their position unaided and may
+become capitalists. They have proved that thrift and ability create
+prosperity, and they have therefore incurred the hatred of the
+Socialist agitators. The philosopher of British Socialism complains:
+"Co-operation so far from being Socialism is the very antithesis of
+Socialism. Trade co-operation is simply a form of industrial
+partnership, in which the society of co-operators is in the relation
+of capitalist to the outer world. The units of the society may be
+equal amongst themselves, but their very existence in this form
+presupposes exploitation going on above, below, and around them."<a name="FNanchor_859_859" id="FNanchor_859_859"></a><a href="#Footnote_859_859" class="fnanchor">[859]</a>
+The editor of "Justice" seems to regret that co-operation encourages
+and rewards ability and thrift, for he says: "Co-operation is most
+valuable to those among the workers who are best off. The artisan
+earning a regular weekly wage has not only a better opportunity <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_318" id="Page_318">[318]</a></span>of
+becoming a member of the co-operative society than the more
+precariously employed and more poorly paid labourer, but the advantage
+to him is greater by reason of his having more money to spend at the
+store. In many cases the poorer members have to sell out, and then the
+affair becomes simply a joint-stock company of the more fortunate, the
+race being once more to the swift, the battle to the strong."<a name="FNanchor_860_860" id="FNanchor_860_860"></a><a href="#Footnote_860_860" class="fnanchor">[860]</a>
+"The ordinary workman can if he likes become a shareholder in the
+"co-op." So he may become a shareholder in a railway if he likes; but
+this does not make the capitalist domination of our railways less a
+fact. In a co-operative store, as elsewhere, the man with 2<i>l.</i> a week
+is worth just twice as much as the man with 1<i>l.</i> Co-operation as a
+factor in social progress has effected nothing, and is absolutely
+valueless except to a certain extent as an educational
+influence."<a name="FNanchor_861_861" id="FNanchor_861_861"></a><a href="#Footnote_861_861" class="fnanchor">[861]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some Socialist writers show their hatred of the co-operative societies
+and the co-operators by bitter and almost vicious attacks upon them.
+One of them complains: "Instances of successful co-operation <i>in
+production</i> have, as yet, been very few, and their moral results
+disappointing. Their general tendency has been, not to raise the
+workers as a class, but to raise a certain number of prudent&mdash;I had
+almost said selfish&mdash;workmen <i>out</i> of their class, and so to
+constitute a <i>Labour Caste</i>. Such co-operators employ and exploit
+other workmen even more mercilessly than the capitalist employers, and
+in struggles between Labour and Capital their sympathies have nearly
+always been on the side of the capitalists."<a name="FNanchor_862_862" id="FNanchor_862_862"></a><a href="#Footnote_862_862" class="fnanchor">[862]</a> Another says: "The
+Rochdale Pioneers hire and fleece labourers in the usual manner.
+Experience teaches, indeed, that such associations are the hardest
+taskmasters. Their interest becomes identified with Capital; and if
+ever circumstances should <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_319" id="Page_319">[319]</a></span>make it easier for the smarter labourers to
+start companies of the kind successfully, the creation of a <i>Labour
+Caste</i> would be the result. In a general dispute between Labour and
+Capital these associations, instead of being a vanguard of Labour,
+will go over to the side of Capital. The sons of Rochdale Pioneers,
+living in luxury, and imitating the airs and fashions of the wealthy
+of all times, point the moral. Where, then, is the gain to the
+labouring class? No, instead of advising workmen to save and to invest
+their savings in such risky enterprises, it would be much better to
+advise them to put their savings into their own flesh and bone."<a name="FNanchor_863_863" id="FNanchor_863_863"></a><a href="#Footnote_863_863" class="fnanchor">[863]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing extracts, and many similar ones which might be given,
+display a regrettable hatred of ability, providence, and
+thrift&mdash;qualities which, it is true, are not easily reconcilable with
+the tenets of Socialism.</p>
+
+<p>The British nation spends on intoxicating drink about 160,000,000<i>l.</i>
+per annum. Out of this enormous sum&mdash;a sum much larger than the
+national Budget&mdash;between 100,000,000<i>l.</i> and 120,000,000<i>l.</i> is spent
+by the working class alone. Drink is a fearful evil in Great Britain.
+The average working man spends every year two months' earnings in
+drink, and as there are many moderate drinkers and abstainers, there
+must be many who spend three months' earnings and more&mdash;that is,
+one-quarter of their wages, sometimes one-half, and sometimes more
+than one-half, on intoxicants. According to some of the foremost
+authorities on social science, and according to some of the most
+prominent medical men, drink is chiefly responsible for poverty,
+underfeeding, ill-health, and racial degeneration. Nevertheless, the
+British Socialists, instead of condemning drunkenness, rather
+encourage, or at least excuse, this terrible vice; and again, the
+universally discredited Iron Law of Wages is solemnly brought forth to
+prove "scientifically" <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_320" id="Page_320">[320]</a></span>that sobriety and abstinence on the part of
+the workers would not benefit the workers but the capitalists. "We are
+not prepared to admit that, if all workers were to become teetotalers,
+as I am, the 140,000,000<i>l.</i> now spent on intoxicants would benefit
+the workers to any appreciable extent. On the contrary, all economists
+tell us that wages always tend towards the minimum subsistence
+point&mdash;the level at which the wage-slave is willing to subsist and to
+reproduce his kind."<a name="FNanchor_864_864" id="FNanchor_864_864"></a><a href="#Footnote_864_864" class="fnanchor">[864]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Iron Law of Wages has been abandoned by all scientists because of
+its manifest absurdity. However, supposing the Iron Law of Wages were
+true, it would not by any means follow that general abstinence would
+lead to a lower rate of wages. Non-abstemious wage-earners live
+frequently in the most wretched homes, and are dressed in rags because
+they spend all they can spend in drink. If they should become sober,
+they would find better houses, better clothing, better furniture as
+indispensable as drink is now to them. In reality abstinence, instead
+of lowering wages, would probably increase them very considerably in
+accordance with the increased productive power of the worker. It is a
+general experience that the steady and abstemious worker commands a
+higher wage than his more or less drunken, unreliable, and untidy
+colleague.</p>
+
+<p>Socialists are fond of excusing drunkenness by arguing that the worker
+gets drunk "because he is physically and mentally exhausted, used up
+with the day's work";<a name="FNanchor_865_865" id="FNanchor_865_865"></a><a href="#Footnote_865_865" class="fnanchor">[865]</a> "because the wretched social condition of
+the mass of workers of this country&mdash;the long hours, the uncertainty
+of work, the insufficient food and clothing, and degrading home-life,
+which are their daily portion&mdash;makes drunkards."<a name="FNanchor_866_866" id="FNanchor_866_866"></a><a href="#Footnote_866_866" class="fnanchor">[866]</a> Another
+well-known writer states: "If thousands of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_321" id="Page_321">[321]</a></span>the workers drink to drown
+the cares and sorrows of their dreary, degraded, wretched existence,
+they do so at the expense of going without some of the merest
+necessaries."<a name="FNanchor_867_867" id="FNanchor_867_867"></a><a href="#Footnote_867_867" class="fnanchor">[867]</a> This is, unfortunately, only too true. But it is
+not true that "Our damnable, infernal, profit-mongering system
+manufactures and produces drunkards because huge profits can be made
+out of the business for the brewer and the publican."<a name="FNanchor_868_868" id="FNanchor_868_868"></a><a href="#Footnote_868_868" class="fnanchor">[868]</a></p>
+
+<p>The above statements, which excuse drunkenness as something natural
+and unavoidable in Great Britain, are untrue. All civilised countries
+are based upon the private possession of capital, and in all large
+profits can be made by brewers and publicans. Now, if it were true, as
+has been stated in the foregoing, that hard work and long hours cause
+drunkenness, drunkenness should be greater in the United States,
+Germany, and France than in Great Britain, for in these countries and
+most others workers work much harder and work much longer hours than
+in Great Britain. The British nation should therefore be the most
+sober nation, but it is in reality the most drunken nation, a fact
+which is known to all who have studied this question.</p>
+
+<p>The majority of British Socialist leaders apparently desire to keep
+the workers drunken, for every suggestion that the worker might
+improve his position by greater moderation in drinking is passionately
+denounced by them. In a speech Andrew Carnegie mentioned that "he had
+employed forty-five thousand men at one time, and his experience was
+that the man who drank was good for drinking and for nothing else. He
+had nothing to do with the man who drank. He did not believe in the
+Submerged Tenth, but what he wanted to do, remembering he was a
+working man himself, was to take an honest, sober, well-doing,
+hard-working man by the hand and help him if he could. He only wanted
+to help those <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_322" id="Page_322">[322]</a></span>who could help themselves." Commenting on this speech,
+one of the Socialist weeklies said: "According to the foregoing, no
+drunkard, no matter how chronic, could display a greater specimen of
+human demoralisation than does that reported speech of Dr. Andrew
+Carnegie depict himself; soulless beyond imagination almost, in spite
+of his self-advertised respect and sympathy for the honest, sober
+working man." In the same article we read: "Total abstainers are
+capable of viler actions than those of certain drunkards, while the
+profoundest depth of ignorance and incapacity to think are attributes
+of millions of total abstainers."<a name="FNanchor_869_869" id="FNanchor_869_869"></a><a href="#Footnote_869_869" class="fnanchor">[869]</a> When Mr. John Burns advised the
+workmen to help themselves by abstaining from drink and gambling, the
+whole Socialist press raged, and he was called a traitor to the cause
+and an agent of capitalism.</p>
+
+<p>Only rarely does a Socialist rebuke drunkenness. In "Socialism for
+Christians" we find a passage: "As long as you have a democracy sodden
+in drink you will have a democracy under the hoofs of capitalists.
+There is no hope for the democracy as long as it is content to grovel
+before the great pewter pot which it has made into a god."<a name="FNanchor_870_870" id="FNanchor_870_870"></a><a href="#Footnote_870_870" class="fnanchor">[870]</a>
+However, that passage was not penned by a professional Socialist, but
+by a clergyman, an outsider, and an amateur in Socialism.</p>
+
+<p>While British Socialist leaders try to degrade the masses and to
+increase their misery by encouraging them to waste a very large part
+of their wages in drink, instead of spending the money on necessary
+food and clothing, on sufficient living room and furniture, foreign
+Socialists try to elevate their followers and to combat the drinking
+evil among them. The foremost Belgian Socialist, who constantly
+agitates against drunkenness, wrote:</p>
+
+<p>"How often have we not found in Socialist pamphlets, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_323" id="Page_323">[323]</a></span>or in our
+newspapers, statements such as the following: 'Misery produces
+alcoholism,' or 'Drink is a consequence of capitalism, and will only
+disappear with the capitalistic system itself.' These are comfortable
+theories indeed, but they unfortunately come in conflict with the
+facts. The labourer must not only regard alcohol as one of the causes
+of poverty, demoralisation, and degeneration, but as a canker which
+destroys his strength and powers of resistance. We therefore address
+to all our comrades this warning: The more earnest you are and the
+stricter towards yourself, the greater will be the authority you bring
+to bear upon the branding of this evil. Everything which decreases the
+consumption of alcohol increases the helping powers of labour
+movements, raises the moral tone of the working class, and gives it
+fresh strength in its struggle for emancipation. Therefore all
+Socialistic societies should break away from out-of-date ideas with
+regard to alcoholism, and leave off expecting results from a social
+revolution which they themselves can attain to-day. It is our bounden
+duty to declare war against alcohol. War to the knife, for it is all
+the more dangerous as it dwells in our midst in the guise of
+friendship. When addicted to drink, the working class cannot do what
+must be done. Alcohol, by its paralysing qualities, naturally leads to
+fatigue, negligence, weakness, and impotence. Only those who can rule
+themselves are able and worthy to rule the world."<a name="FNanchor_871_871" id="FNanchor_871_871"></a><a href="#Footnote_871_871" class="fnanchor">[871]</a></p>
+
+<p>The German Socialist leaders also endeavour to elevate their followers
+by fighting drunkenness. At the Congress at Essen in 1907, a
+resolution was unanimously passed by the German Social-Democratic
+party in which various recommendations were made to the Government
+regarding the diminution of drunkenness, and which concluded with the
+words: "The working-class organisations are invited to suppress in
+their meeting all <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_324" id="Page_324">[324]</a></span>compulsion to consume alcoholic liquors, to put a
+stop to its sale in schools, in registry offices, and in places where
+collections are made for strikers, and to inform children and young
+men by word of mouth and by the Press of the danger of alcohol, and to
+watch over drinking habits which lead to the abuse of alcohol."<a name="FNanchor_872_872" id="FNanchor_872_872"></a><a href="#Footnote_872_872" class="fnanchor">[872]</a> A
+German Socialist periodical recently wrote: "Workers who drink neglect
+their duties towards their family, drink away their wages, bring
+disorder into their unions, lose the sympathy of the quiet and
+industrious citizens, become the slaves of the public-house, and
+damage Socialism. Therefore Socialists should abstain absolutely from
+drinking intoxicating drinks. Ordinary capitalism exploits the
+proletariat, but does not poison them too in their own persons and in
+their posterity. But alcohol does both; it lames the power of a whole
+nation and leads to the degeneration of the race, as does opium in
+China. The drinker loses his self-respect, his higher aims as a human
+being. It must be made a fundamental principle of the German
+Social-Democratic party that the proletariat can vanquish capital only
+after it has first vanquished drink. The sooner that victory is won,
+the sooner the fate of society will be decided."<a name="FNanchor_873_873" id="FNanchor_873_873"></a><a href="#Footnote_873_873" class="fnanchor">[873]</a></p>
+
+<p>Continental Socialist leaders recommend to their followers thrift,
+sobriety, and co-operation. British Socialist leaders, who have taken
+the whole of their doctrines from the Continent, condemn "on
+scientific and moral grounds," thrift, sobriety, and co-operation.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_840_840" id="Footnote_840_840"></a><a href="#FNanchor_840_840"><span class="label">[840]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 95.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_841_841" id="Footnote_841_841"></a><a href="#FNanchor_841_841"><span class="label">[841]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism</i>, p. 40.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_842_842" id="Footnote_842_842"></a><a href="#FNanchor_842_842"><span class="label">[842]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 94.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_843_843" id="Footnote_843_843"></a><a href="#FNanchor_843_843"><span class="label">[843]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Trade Unionism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_844_844" id="Footnote_844_844"></a><a href="#FNanchor_844_844"><span class="label">[844]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, April 1907, p. 212.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_845_845" id="Footnote_845_845"></a><a href="#FNanchor_845_845"><span class="label">[845]</span></a> Penny, <i>Political Labour Movement</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_846_846" id="Footnote_846_846"></a><a href="#FNanchor_846_846"><span class="label">[846]</span></a> Roscher, <i>Politik</i>, p. 575.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_847_847" id="Footnote_847_847"></a><a href="#FNanchor_847_847"><span class="label">[847]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism</i>, p. 41.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_848_848" id="Footnote_848_848"></a><a href="#FNanchor_848_848"><span class="label">[848]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Economics of Socialism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_849_849" id="Footnote_849_849"></a><a href="#FNanchor_849_849"><span class="label">[849]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 127.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_850_850" id="Footnote_850_850"></a><a href="#FNanchor_850_850"><span class="label">[850]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Economics of Socialism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_851_851" id="Footnote_851_851"></a><a href="#FNanchor_851_851"><span class="label">[851]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 107.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_852_852" id="Footnote_852_852"></a><a href="#FNanchor_852_852"><span class="label">[852]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Britain for the British</i>, p. 129.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_853_853" id="Footnote_853_853"></a><a href="#FNanchor_853_853"><span class="label">[853]</span></a> See p. 53 ff, <i>ante.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_854_854" id="Footnote_854_854"></a><a href="#FNanchor_854_854"><span class="label">[854]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a
+Week?</i> p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_855_855" id="Footnote_855_855"></a><a href="#FNanchor_855_855"><span class="label">[855]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Class War</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_856_856" id="Footnote_856_856"></a><a href="#FNanchor_856_856"><span class="label">[856]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 105.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_857_857" id="Footnote_857_857"></a><a href="#FNanchor_857_857"><span class="label">[857]</span></a> Bliss, <i>Encyclopedia of Social Reform</i>, pp. 358 and
+1195.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_858_858" id="Footnote_858_858"></a><a href="#FNanchor_858_858"><span class="label">[858]</span></a> <i>Labour Gazette</i>, December 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_859_859" id="Footnote_859_859"></a><a href="#FNanchor_859_859"><span class="label">[859]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 94.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_860_860" id="Footnote_860_860"></a><a href="#FNanchor_860_860"><span class="label">[860]</span></a> Quelch, <i>Trade Unionism</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_861_861" id="Footnote_861_861"></a><a href="#FNanchor_861_861"><span class="label">[861]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 13</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_862_862" id="Footnote_862_862"></a><a href="#FNanchor_862_862"><span class="label">[862]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 109.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_863_863" id="Footnote_863_863"></a><a href="#FNanchor_863_863"><span class="label">[863]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 51.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_864_864" id="Footnote_864_864"></a><a href="#FNanchor_864_864"><span class="label">[864]</span></a> Muse, <i>Poverty and Drunkenness</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_865_865" id="Footnote_865_865"></a><a href="#FNanchor_865_865"><span class="label">[865]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_866_866" id="Footnote_866_866"></a><a href="#FNanchor_866_866"><span class="label">[866]</span></a> Muse, <i>Poverty and Drunkenness</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_867_867" id="Footnote_867_867"></a><a href="#FNanchor_867_867"><span class="label">[867]</span></a> Glyde, <i>Britain's Disgrace</i>, p. 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_868_868" id="Footnote_868_868"></a><a href="#FNanchor_868_868"><span class="label">[868]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_869_869" id="Footnote_869_869"></a><a href="#FNanchor_869_869"><span class="label">[869]</span></a> <i>Forward</i>, November 16, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_870_870" id="Footnote_870_870"></a><a href="#FNanchor_870_870"><span class="label">[870]</span></a> Kirtlan, <i>Socialism for Christians</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_871_871" id="Footnote_871_871"></a><a href="#FNanchor_871_871"><span class="label">[871]</span></a> Vandervelde, <i>Drink and Socialism</i>, pp. 3, 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_872_872" id="Footnote_872_872"></a><a href="#FNanchor_872_872"><span class="label">[872]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, October 1907, p. 620.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_873_873" id="Footnote_873_873"></a><a href="#FNanchor_873_873"><span class="label">[873]</span></a> <i>Die Neue Gesellschaft</i>, November 1907, pp. 332, 337.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXIV" id="CHAPTER_XXIV"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_325" id="Page_325">[325]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXIV<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALIST VIEWS ON LAW AND JUSTICE</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Most Socialists have a very strong objection to the existing laws.
+"Law is only a masked form of brute force."<a name="FNanchor_874_874" id="FNanchor_874_874"></a><a href="#Footnote_874_874" class="fnanchor">[874]</a> "The laws to-day are
+defences of the foolish rich against the ignorant and hungry poor. The
+laws to-day, like the laws of the past, make more criminals than they
+punish. The laws keep the people ignorant and poor, and the rich idle
+and vicious."<a name="FNanchor_875_875" id="FNanchor_875_875"></a><a href="#Footnote_875_875" class="fnanchor">[875]</a> "The laws were made by ignorant and dishonest men;
+they are administered by men ignorant and selfish; they are dishonest
+laws, good for neither rich nor poor; evil in their conception, evil
+in their enforcement, evil in their results."<a name="FNanchor_876_876" id="FNanchor_876_876"></a><a href="#Footnote_876_876" class="fnanchor">[876]</a></p>
+
+<p>Most Englishmen are proud of the English judges because of their
+learning, high character, and integrity. To many Socialists the judges
+are the most contemptible and mercenary of men. The philosopher of
+British Socialism informs us: "It is an undoubted truth that no judge
+can be strictly an honest man. The judge must necessarily be a man of
+inferior moral calibre. A judge, by the fact of his being a judge,
+proclaims himself a creature on a lower moral level than us ordinary
+mortals, and this without any assumption of moral superiority above
+the average on our part. He deliberately pledges himself, that is, to
+be false to himself. He may any day have to pass sentence on one whom
+he believes to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_326" id="Page_326">[326]</a></span>be innocent. He lays himself under the obligation of
+administering a law which he may know to be bad on any occasion when
+called upon, merely because it is a law. He makes this surrender of
+humanity and honour for what? For filthy lucre and tawdry notoriety.
+Now, I ask, can we conceive a more abjectly contemptible character
+than that which acts thus?"<a name="FNanchor_877_877" id="FNanchor_877_877"></a><a href="#Footnote_877_877" class="fnanchor">[877]</a></p>
+
+<p>The cause of the hatred with which the British Socialists contemplate
+the law and the judges is obvious:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">They're blocking up the highway; yes, they think to keep us back<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">By piling barriers of law and falsehood on the track;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">We'll break the barriers down, and burn them into cinders black,<br /></span>
+<span class="i8">As we go marching to liberty.<a name="FNanchor_878_878" id="FNanchor_878_878"></a><a href="#Footnote_878_878" class="fnanchor">[878]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Come every honest lad and lass!<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Too long we've been kept under<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">By rusty chains of fraud and fear&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">We'll snap them all asunder!<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">That robbers' paction styled the Law<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">To frighten honest folk, sirs,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">We'll set ablaze and fumigate<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The country with the smoke, sirs.<a name="FNanchor_879_879" id="FNanchor_879_879"></a><a href="#Footnote_879_879" class="fnanchor">[879]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>When Jack Cade, whom the Socialists praise as a social reformer,
+marched at the head of the insurrectionists into London, one of his
+first acts was to burn the stored-up documents of the law, an act
+which Shakespeare immortalised in his "Henry VI." in the following
+words:</p>
+
+<p>"Cade: Is not this a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent
+lamb should be made parchment? that parchment, being scribbled o'er,
+should undo a man?... <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_327" id="Page_327">[327]</a></span>Away, burn all the records of the realm: my
+mouth shall be the parliament of England.</p>
+
+<p>"John (<i>aside</i>): Then we are like to have biting statutes, unless his
+teeth be pulled out.</p>
+
+<p>"Cade: And henceforward all things shall be in common."<a name="FNanchor_880_880" id="FNanchor_880_880"></a><a href="#Footnote_880_880" class="fnanchor">[880]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialism will abolish the law: "The great act of confiscation will be
+the seal of the new era; then, and not till then, will the knell of
+Civilisation, with its rights of property and its class-society, be
+sounded; then, and not till then, will justice&mdash;the justice not of
+Civilisation but of Socialism&mdash;become the corner-stone of the social
+arch."<a name="FNanchor_881_881" id="FNanchor_881_881"></a><a href="#Footnote_881_881" class="fnanchor">[881]</a> Therefore one of the first acts of Socialist government
+will be "the abrogation of 'civil law,' especially that largest
+department of it which is concerned with the enforcement of contract
+and me recovery of debt."<a name="FNanchor_882_882" id="FNanchor_882_882"></a><a href="#Footnote_882_882" class="fnanchor">[882]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists never tire of denouncing the barbarity of the existing law.
+According to their religious views given in Chapter XXVI. (see p.
+360), man is an irresponsible being. He does not know the difference
+between right and wrong, between good and evil. Therefore it is
+according to their opinion unjust and cruel to punish criminals. "The
+Christian regards the hooligan, the thief, the wanton, and the
+drunkard as men and women who have done wrong. But the humanist
+regards them as men and women who have been wronged."<a name="FNanchor_883_883" id="FNanchor_883_883"></a><a href="#Footnote_883_883" class="fnanchor">[883]</a> "Human law,
+like divine law, is based upon the false idea that men know what is
+right and what is wrong, and have power to choose the right."<a name="FNanchor_884_884" id="FNanchor_884_884"></a><a href="#Footnote_884_884" class="fnanchor">[884]</a>
+"Man becomes that which he is by the action of forces outside
+himself."<a name="FNanchor_885_885" id="FNanchor_885_885"></a><a href="#Footnote_885_885" class="fnanchor">[885]</a> "All human actions are ruled by heredity and
+environment. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_328" id="Page_328">[328]</a></span>Man is not responsible for his heredity and environment.
+Therefore all blame and all punishment are unjust. Blame and
+punishment, besides being unjust, are ineffectual."<a name="FNanchor_886_886" id="FNanchor_886_886"></a><a href="#Footnote_886_886" class="fnanchor">[886]</a></p>
+
+<p>"To the Socialist, for every crime committed the State, or the society
+in which it is committed, is as much or more responsible than the
+individual."<a name="FNanchor_887_887" id="FNanchor_887_887"></a><a href="#Footnote_887_887" class="fnanchor">[887]</a> "A society that employs the gallows and the 'cat'
+pretty much deserves all it gets at the hands of criminals. If the
+criminal, when he gets the chance of doing so with impunity, commits
+the crime for which the gallows or the lash is reserved, society has
+only itself to thank."<a name="FNanchor_888_888" id="FNanchor_888_888"></a><a href="#Footnote_888_888" class="fnanchor">[888]</a></p>
+
+<p>From the foregoing considerations it logically follows that "a
+Socialist administration would treat delinquents with the utmost
+leniency consistent with the existence of society."<a name="FNanchor_889_889" id="FNanchor_889_889"></a><a href="#Footnote_889_889" class="fnanchor">[889]</a> "A man of
+average sense ought to be able to protect himself against fraud. Theft
+only requires the restitution of the stolen property plus an addition,
+such as the Roman law provided. The ideal condition of a community is
+that the remorse following the commission of a crime should be an
+adequate preventive of its commission"<a name="FNanchor_890_890" id="FNanchor_890_890"></a><a href="#Footnote_890_890" class="fnanchor">[890]</a>&mdash;By its attitude towards
+crime, Socialism should secure for itself the enthusiastic support of
+the criminal classes. By abrogating the enforcement of contract and
+the recovery of debt, it should secure for itself the equally
+enthusiastic support of all fraudulent debtors. Conspirators and
+revolutionaries since the time of Catiline have opened the gaols and
+have relied on criminal desperadoes for the realisation of their
+ambitions. It is worth noting that most Anarchists also recommend the
+abolition of law and the law courts.<a name="FNanchor_891_891" id="FNanchor_891_891"></a><a href="#Footnote_891_891" class="fnanchor">[891]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_329" id="Page_329">[329]</a></span>Until the ideal Socialist commonwealth has been firmly established,
+and "until the economic change has worked itself out in ethical
+change, it is clear that a criminal law must exist. The only question
+is whether its basis shall be a mass of anomalous statutes and
+precedents or a logical system."<a name="FNanchor_892_892" id="FNanchor_892_892"></a><a href="#Footnote_892_892" class="fnanchor">[892]</a> Bax decides that the logical
+system and the Code Napol&eacute;on is to be introduced after the Socialist
+revolution.<a name="FNanchor_893_893" id="FNanchor_893_893"></a><a href="#Footnote_893_893" class="fnanchor">[893]</a> The fact that the people do not know the French laws
+apparently does not matter.</p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists complain that British laws, and American laws too, are
+not collected and codified. Hence the citizen does not, and cannot,
+know the law. "What is called 'the law' is something that no lawyer
+can learn in a lifetime, both on account of the bulk of the Reports,
+and because he never can be absolutely certain what is good and what
+is bad law. The profession chooses rather than ascertains the
+law."<a name="FNanchor_894_894" id="FNanchor_894_894"></a><a href="#Footnote_894_894" class="fnanchor">[894]</a> Owing to lack of a code of laws, the law is uncertain and
+exceedingly costly. Hence the poor man can obtain justice only with
+difficulty, if at all. Besides, "The fear of litigation is a weapon
+society places in the hands of the rich man to coerce the poor man,
+irrespective of the merits of the case, by dangling ruin before
+him."<a name="FNanchor_895_895" id="FNanchor_895_895"></a><a href="#Footnote_895_895" class="fnanchor">[895]</a> There is much justification for these complaints.</p>
+
+<p>We have seen in former Chapters that Socialism teaches that property
+is theft and that rich men are criminals. In the present Chapter we
+have learned that criminals are men wronged by society. The Socialist
+conception of law and justice should recommend itself to all
+criminals, and all criminals should be Socialists.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_874_874" id="Footnote_874_874"></a><a href="#FNanchor_874_874"><span class="label">[874]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 107.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_875_875" id="Footnote_875_875"></a><a href="#FNanchor_875_875"><span class="label">[875]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Not Guilty</i>, p. 258.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_876_876" id="Footnote_876_876"></a><a href="#FNanchor_876_876"><span class="label">[876]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 259.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_877_877" id="Footnote_877_877"></a><a href="#FNanchor_877_877"><span class="label">[877]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 108.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_878_878" id="Footnote_878_878"></a><a href="#FNanchor_878_878"><span class="label">[878]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Song Book</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_879_879" id="Footnote_879_879"></a><a href="#FNanchor_879_879"><span class="label">[879]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_880_880" id="Footnote_880_880"></a><a href="#FNanchor_880_880"><span class="label">[880]</span></a> <i>King Henry VI.</i>, Part II. Act IV. Scenes 2 and 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_881_881" id="Footnote_881_881"></a><a href="#FNanchor_881_881"><span class="label">[881]</span></a> Bax, <i>The Ethics of Socialism</i>, pp. 82, 83.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_882_882" id="Footnote_882_882"></a><a href="#FNanchor_882_882"><span class="label">[882]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 85, 86.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_883_883" id="Footnote_883_883"></a><a href="#FNanchor_883_883"><span class="label">[883]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>God and My Neighbour</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_884_884" id="Footnote_884_884"></a><a href="#FNanchor_884_884"><span class="label">[884]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Not Guilty</i>, p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_885_885" id="Footnote_885_885"></a><a href="#FNanchor_885_885"><span class="label">[885]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_886_886" id="Footnote_886_886"></a><a href="#FNanchor_886_886"><span class="label">[886]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Not Guilty</i>, p. 251.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_887_887" id="Footnote_887_887"></a><a href="#FNanchor_887_887"><span class="label">[887]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 146.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_888_888" id="Footnote_888_888"></a><a href="#FNanchor_888_888"><span class="label">[888]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 105.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_889_889" id="Footnote_889_889"></a><a href="#FNanchor_889_889"><span class="label">[889]</span></a> Bax, <i>Ethics of Socialism</i>, p. 59.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_890_890" id="Footnote_890_890"></a><a href="#FNanchor_890_890"><span class="label">[890]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 104.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_891_891" id="Footnote_891_891"></a><a href="#FNanchor_891_891"><span class="label">[891]</span></a> See Stirner, <i>Der Einzige und sein Eigentum</i>;
+Bakounine, <i>Dieu et l'&Eacute;tat</i>; Kropotkine, <i>Paroles d'un R&eacute;volt&eacute;</i>, &amp;c.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_892_892" id="Footnote_892_892"></a><a href="#FNanchor_892_892"><span class="label">[892]</span></a> Bax, <i>The Ethics of Socialism</i>, p. 88.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_893_893" id="Footnote_893_893"></a><a href="#FNanchor_893_893"><span class="label">[893]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 89.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_894_894" id="Footnote_894_894"></a><a href="#FNanchor_894_894"><span class="label">[894]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 138.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_895_895" id="Footnote_895_895"></a><a href="#FNanchor_895_895"><span class="label">[895]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 147.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXV" id="CHAPTER_XXV"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_330" id="Page_330">[330]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXV<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND WOMAN, THE FAMILY AND THE HOME</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Men in all classes of society save and endeavour to become owners of
+some property, not so much for their own sake as for the sake of their
+wives and of their children, whom they wish to leave "provided for."
+Married men are notoriously more provident and thrifty than unmarried
+ones. Property is the defence of the family. The fundamental aim of
+Socialism is the abolition of that private property which is the prop
+of the family. Consequently every prudent head of a family is likely
+to resist Socialism, and thus there exists a natural and innate
+hostility between Socialism and the family.</p>
+
+<p>Besides, the idea of the family is not easily reconcilable with the
+idea of the Socialistic State. The maintenance of the family requires
+private capital, and the present capitalistic and individualistic
+system of society, the modern State and modern civilisation, are based
+upon the family and have sprung from it. The citizen of the modern
+civilised State places the interest of his family above the interest
+of the community. Socialism wishes to reverse the situation and to
+subordinate the interest of the family to the interest of the
+community.</p>
+
+<p>Socialism strives after equality among the citizens. Therefore many
+British Socialists are avowed communists, as will be shown in Chapter
+XXIX. Now it is clear that a perfect equality among the citizens
+cannot be created by abolishing merely the institution of private
+property. The man who envied his neighbour for the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_331" id="Page_331">[331]</a></span>exclusive
+possession of his property may, after the abolition of private
+property, envy him for the exclusive possession of a particularly
+attractive wife. Therefore most of the great thinkers since Plato who
+have mapped out systems for the equalisation of fortunes, have
+logically insisted on the community of wives.</p>
+
+<p>Lastly, the subordination of the private family under the State, the
+control of work and food for all by the State, must logically lead
+also to State control of the increase of the population. Two thousand
+two hundred years ago, when in Athens the idea of the equalisation of
+fortunes had come to the front, Aristotle wrote: "Whoever would
+regulate the extent of private fortunes must also regulate the
+increase of families. If children multiply beyond the means of
+supporting them, the intention of the law will be frustrated and
+families will be suddenly reduced from opulence to beggary, a
+revolution always dangerous to public tranquillity."<a name="FNanchor_896_896" id="FNanchor_896_896"></a><a href="#Footnote_896_896" class="fnanchor">[896]</a> At the same
+time Aristophanes showed in his comedy "Ecclesiazusae" that the
+community of goods would necessarily lead to the community of wives.</p>
+
+<p>The assertion of the opponents of Socialism that Socialism means the
+dissolution of the marriage tie and the abolition of the family has
+been met with an indignant denial by many Socialists: "Socialism does
+not 'threaten the sanctity of the home.' Socialism has no more to do
+with the marriage laws than Toryism has."<a name="FNanchor_897_897" id="FNanchor_897_897"></a><a href="#Footnote_897_897" class="fnanchor">[897]</a> "No party&mdash;neither
+Socialist nor non-Socialist&mdash;has openly identified itself with the
+views of its prominent members on this question. The idea that
+marriage, as an institution, ought to be abolished has never received
+the sanction of any political organisation in Great Britain."<a name="FNanchor_898_898" id="FNanchor_898_898"></a><a href="#Footnote_898_898" class="fnanchor">[898]</a> "No
+Socialist entertains the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_332" id="Page_332">[332]</a></span>remotest idea of 'abolishing' the family,
+whether by law or otherwise. Only the grossest misrepresentation can
+fasten upon them such a purpose; moreover, it takes a fool to imagine
+that any form of family can either be created or abolished by
+decree."<a name="FNanchor_899_899" id="FNanchor_899_899"></a><a href="#Footnote_899_899" class="fnanchor">[899]</a></p>
+
+<p>The above is confirmed by an official declaration of recent date. At a
+meeting of the National Council of the Independent Labour Party, which
+took place in London on October 4 and 5, 1907, the following
+resolution was adopted:</p>
+
+<p>"The National Council of the Independent Labour Party repudiates the
+attack upon Socialism on the ground that Socialism is opposed to
+religion, and declares that the Socialist movement embraces men and
+women of all religions and forms of belief, and offers the most
+complete freedom in this respect within its ranks. It further
+repudiates the charge that Socialism is antagonistic to the family
+organisation, and reminds the public that the disintegration of the
+family, which has been in progress for some generations, has been
+owing to the creation of slums, the employment of children in
+factories, the dragging of mothers into workshops and factories, owing
+to the economic pressure created by low wages, sweating, and other
+operations of capitalism which the anti-Socialist campaign is designed
+to support, and which it is the purpose of Socialism to supplant."</p>
+
+<p>Now let us compare with these emphatic denials addressed to the
+general public the deliberate statements of the intellectual leaders
+of British and foreign Socialism regarding marriage and the family,
+addressed to their followers.</p>
+
+<p>The celebrated "Manifesto" issued by the founder of modern
+international Socialism declares: "On what foundation is the present
+family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. The
+bourgeois <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_333" id="Page_333">[333]</a></span>family will vanish as a matter of course when its
+complement vanishes. Bourgeois marriage is in reality a system of
+wives in common, and thus, at the most, what the Communists might
+possibly be reproached with is that they desire to introduce, in
+substitution for a hypocritically concealed, an openly legalised,
+community of women."<a name="FNanchor_900_900" id="FNanchor_900_900"></a><a href="#Footnote_900_900" class="fnanchor">[900]</a> The founders of British Socialism state:
+"Even now it is necessary that a certain code of morality should be
+supposed to exist, and to have some relation to that religion which,
+being the creation of another age, has now become a sham. With this
+sham, moreover, its accompanying morality is also stupid, and this is
+clung to with a determination, or even ferocity, natural enough, since
+its aim is the perpetuation of individual property in wealth, in
+workman, in wife, in child."<a name="FNanchor_901_901" id="FNanchor_901_901"></a><a href="#Footnote_901_901" class="fnanchor">[901]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Like every other institution of existing society, marriage, as we
+know it, is a consequence of private property. The primitive
+swag-monger could think of no better method of keeping his swag
+together after his death than by making the child of a particular
+slave-wife his heir. The chief pre-eminence of the Sultana of the
+harem lay in the fact that she acted, so to speak, as the conveyancer
+of the estate."<a name="FNanchor_902_902" id="FNanchor_902_902"></a><a href="#Footnote_902_902" class="fnanchor">[902]</a> The spokesmen of the Social-Democratic Federation
+say: "What is the position of Socialism towards the question of
+marriage as at present constituted? The existing monogamic relation is
+simply the outcome of the institution of private or individual
+property. It has developed, in proportion to the accentuation of the
+institution of private, as against communal, property. When private
+property ceases to be the fulcrum around which the relations between
+the sexes turn, any attempt at coercion, moral or material, in <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_334" id="Page_334">[334]</a></span>these
+relations must necessarily become repugnant to the moral sense of the
+community."<a name="FNanchor_903_903" id="FNanchor_903_903"></a><a href="#Footnote_903_903" class="fnanchor">[903]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing statements lead to the inevitable conclusion that "The
+transformation of the current family form into a freer, more real, and
+therefore a higher form, must inevitably follow the economic
+revolution which will place the means of production and distribution
+under the control of all for the good of all."<a name="FNanchor_904_904" id="FNanchor_904_904"></a><a href="#Footnote_904_904" class="fnanchor">[904]</a></p>
+
+<p>Another authority informs us "Socialism, Communism, or whatever one
+chooses to call it, by converting private property into public wealth
+and substituting co-operation for competition, will restore society to
+its proper condition of a thoroughly healthy organism, and ensure the
+material well-being of each member of the community. It will, in fact,
+give life its proper basis and its proper environment. Socialism
+annihilates family life, for instance. With the abolition of private
+property, marriage in its present form must disappear. This is part of
+the programme."<a name="FNanchor_905_905" id="FNanchor_905_905"></a><a href="#Footnote_905_905" class="fnanchor">[905]</a> A distinguished Fabian proclaims: "The Socialist
+no more regards the institution of marriage as a permanent thing than
+he regards a state of competitive industrialism as a permanent
+thing."<a name="FNanchor_906_906" id="FNanchor_906_906"></a><a href="#Footnote_906_906" class="fnanchor">[906]</a> The leading book of the Fabian Society states: "The
+economic independence of women and the supplanting of the head of the
+household by the individual as the recognised unit of the State will
+materially alter the status of children and the utility of the
+institution of the family."<a name="FNanchor_907_907" id="FNanchor_907_907"></a><a href="#Footnote_907_907" class="fnanchor">[907]</a> The leading periodical of the Fabians
+says: "Of all the stupid theories regarding the family, the most
+stupid is the belief that it is natural. On the contrary, the
+trinitarian <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_335" id="Page_335">[335]</a></span>family organisation is plainly a work of art, a
+deliberate device of man's. Nothing is more plain than the fact that
+the hierarchy of the family has been employed, and is still employed,
+as a model for the hierarchy of the State and of human society
+generally; in other words, as a prop of aristocracy."<a name="FNanchor_908_908" id="FNanchor_908_908"></a><a href="#Footnote_908_908" class="fnanchor">[908]</a> A leading
+member of the Independent Labour Party tells us: "I do not believe it
+is desirable to cultivate the family idea as at present understood,
+which in the main is designed to teach the children to think more of
+their own family than any other; I want to see the broader family life
+of society taught in the spirit of the West Country motto, 'One for
+all and all for each.'"<a name="FNanchor_909_909" id="FNanchor_909_909"></a><a href="#Footnote_909_909" class="fnanchor">[909]</a></p>
+
+<p>Marriage is, according to many Socialists, not only incompatible with
+Socialistic progress, but is also immoral. The philosopher of British
+Socialism, going a step further than did Marx in his Manifesto,
+endeavours to prove that marriage and prostitution are equally
+immoral. "Both legalised monogamic marriage and prostitution are based
+essentially on commercial considerations. The one is purchase, the
+other hire. The higher and only really moral form of the marriage
+relation which transcends both is based neither on sale nor hire.
+Prostitution is immoral as implying the taking advantage by the woman
+of a monopoly which costs her no labour for the sake of extorting
+money from the man. But the condition of legal
+marriage&mdash;maintenance&mdash;does the same."<a name="FNanchor_910_910" id="FNanchor_910_910"></a><a href="#Footnote_910_910" class="fnanchor">[910]</a> This opinion is shared by
+the leading American Socialist writer, who says: "The one has sold her
+person for money under cover of marriage, the other has done the same
+thing outside marriage."<a name="FNanchor_911_911" id="FNanchor_911_911"></a><a href="#Footnote_911_911" class="fnanchor">[911]</a> Other Socialists express similar
+opinions: "The present marriage system <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_336" id="Page_336">[336]</a></span>cannot be claimed by anyone as
+a success. Complete economic independence of women will, however,
+solve the question. Under Communism will and affection will be
+supreme. Marriage will be infinitely holier and more permanent than it
+is to-day."<a name="FNanchor_912_912" id="FNanchor_912_912"></a><a href="#Footnote_912_912" class="fnanchor">[912]</a> "Mere legal matrimony and familism could not survive
+the communalisation of property, and it may be well so. Marriage as we
+know it is merely one of the many unwholesome fungi that grow out of
+the reeking, rotting corpus of private property, and it would not be
+difficult to conceive of a sexual order infinitely more angelic."<a name="FNanchor_913_913" id="FNanchor_913_913"></a><a href="#Footnote_913_913" class="fnanchor">[913]</a></p>
+
+<p>There is no reason why an "infinitely more angelic sexual order"
+should not replace marriage as at present conceived and constituted,
+for "Marriage is no more a Christian ethic than it is a Mohammedan
+ethic, or a Japanese custom. We have already 'considered' the marriage
+laws and altered them. Where, then, is the immorality in demanding a
+further consideration? Our notions concerning the relations of men and
+women have changed with the changing times, and at each stage we have
+reached a more exalted plane of understanding. What right have we to
+assume, therefore, that the future does not hold a nobler ideal than
+our present one?"<a name="FNanchor_914_914" id="FNanchor_914_914"></a><a href="#Footnote_914_914" class="fnanchor">[914]</a></p>
+
+<p>The direction in which inter-sexual relations should be changed in
+order to attain a nobler ideal than the present one is obvious: "What
+we need is freedom from the restraints of an artificial existence;
+liberty to make the most of our inherent capacity, and human longing
+for a higher life will do all the rest."<a name="FNanchor_915_915" id="FNanchor_915_915"></a><a href="#Footnote_915_915" class="fnanchor">[915]</a> "Socialism will strike
+at the root at once of compulsory monogamy and of prostitution by
+inaugurating an era of marriage based on free choice and intention,
+and characterised by the absence <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_337" id="Page_337">[337]</a></span>of external coercion. For where the
+wish for the maintenance of the marriage relation remains, there
+external compulsion is unnecessary; where it is necessary, because the
+wish has disappeared, there it is undesirable."<a name="FNanchor_916_916" id="FNanchor_916_916"></a><a href="#Footnote_916_916" class="fnanchor">[916]</a> "The present
+marriage system was based on the general supposition of the economic
+dependence of the woman on the man, and the consequent necessity for
+his making provision for her which she can legally enforce. This basis
+would disappear with the advent of social economic freedom, and no
+binding contract would be necessary between the parties as regards
+livelihood; while property in children would cease to exist, and every
+infant that came into the world would be born into full citizenship
+and would enjoy all its advantages, whatever the conduct of its
+parents might be. Thus a new development of the family would take
+place, on the basis not of a predetermined life-long business
+arrangement to be formally and nominally held to, irrespective of
+circumstances, but on mutual inclination and affection, an association
+terminable at the will of either party. There would be no vestige of
+reprobation weighing on the dissolution of one tie and the forming of
+another."<a name="FNanchor_917_917" id="FNanchor_917_917"></a><a href="#Footnote_917_917" class="fnanchor">[917]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists, led by Bax, the philosopher of Socialism in Great
+Britain, and by Bebel, the head of the Social-Democratic party in
+Germany, take a very broad and a very primitive view with regard to
+marital relations and to the greater freedom in these relations in the
+Socialistic State of the future: "The whole of our sexual morality (as
+such), in so far as it has a rational, as opposed to a mystical,
+basis, is nothing but a 'plant' to save the ratepayers' pockets by
+fixing the responsibility for the maintenance of children on the
+individuals responsible for the procreation of them. To the consistent
+Socialist, the sexual relation is, <i>per se</i>, morally indifferent
+(neither moral <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_338" id="Page_338">[338]</a></span>nor immoral) like any other bodily function, but it
+may easily become immoral <i>per accidentem</i>, i.e., from the special
+circumstances under which it takes place, and whereby it acquires the
+character of an act of injustice or treachery, such as seduction of a
+friend's wife or daughter."<a name="FNanchor_918_918" id="FNanchor_918_918"></a><a href="#Footnote_918_918" class="fnanchor">[918]</a> A very influential Socialist writer
+asks: "Is chastity a virtue, and is there such a vice as unchastity?"
+and he answers his question by quoting the above statement of
+Bax.<a name="FNanchor_919_919" id="FNanchor_919_919"></a><a href="#Footnote_919_919" class="fnanchor">[919]</a> "If it be asked, Is marriage a failure? the answer of any
+impartial person must be&mdash;monogamic marriage is a failure&mdash;the rest is
+silence. We know not what new form of the family the society of the
+future, in which men and women will be alike economically free, may
+evolve and which may be generally adopted therein. Meanwhile, we ought
+to combat by every means within our power the metaphysical dogma of
+the inherent sanctity of the monogamic principle. Economic development
+on the one side and the free initiative of individuals on the other
+will do the rest."<a name="FNanchor_920_920" id="FNanchor_920_920"></a><a href="#Footnote_920_920" class="fnanchor">[920]</a></p>
+
+<p>Bebel thinks, "The satisfying of amatory desires is a law which every
+individual must fulfil as a sacred duty towards himself, if his
+development is to be healthy and normal, and he must refuse
+gratification to no natural impulse. The so-called animal passions
+occupy no lower rank than the so-called mental passions. A healthy
+manner of life, healthy employment, and a healthy education in the
+broadest sense of the word, combined with the natural gratification of
+natural and healthy instincts, must be brought within the reach of
+all."<a name="FNanchor_921_921" id="FNanchor_921_921"></a><a href="#Footnote_921_921" class="fnanchor">[921]</a> Freedom of love is to be equal to men and women: "In the
+choice of love woman is free just as man is free. She woos and is
+wooed and has no other inducement to bind herself than her own free
+will. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_339" id="Page_339">[339]</a></span>The contract between the two lovers is of a private nature as
+in primitive times. The gratification of the sexual impulse is as
+strictly the personal affair of the individual as the gratification of
+every other natural instinct. No one has to give an account of him or
+herself and no third person has the slightest right of
+intervention."<a name="FNanchor_922_922" id="FNanchor_922_922"></a><a href="#Footnote_922_922" class="fnanchor">[922]</a></p>
+
+<p>A prominent British Socialist shares Bebel's views: "For the
+non-childbearing woman the sex-relationship, both as to form and
+substance, ought to be a pure question of taste, a simple matter of
+agreement between the man and her, in which neither the society nor
+the State would have any need to interfere, a free sexual union, a
+relation solely of mutual sympathy and affection, its form and
+direction varying according to the feelings and wants of the
+individuals."<a name="FNanchor_923_923" id="FNanchor_923_923"></a><a href="#Footnote_923_923" class="fnanchor">[923]</a> The founders of British Socialism agree with the
+foregoing opinion. "Under a Socialistic system contracts between
+individuals would be free and unenforced by the community. This would
+apply to the marriage contract as well as others, and it would become
+a matter of simple inclination. Nor would a truly enlightened public
+opinion, freed from mere theological views as to chastity, insist on
+its permanently binding Nature in the face of any discomfort or
+suffering that might come of it."<a name="FNanchor_924_924" id="FNanchor_924_924"></a><a href="#Footnote_924_924" class="fnanchor">[924]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Socialists expect that, under Socialism, the terrible evil of
+prostitution will disappear. If it does not, it will be either because
+women are still denied political power, or because their votes have
+decided that the prostitute must remain. But if, as at present, the
+'unfortunate woman' be regarded as a necessity in those days of
+advanced thought and increased opportunities, then her status must be
+raised. She must not be an acknowledged necessity and a scorned
+outcast at the same time, as is <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_340" id="Page_340">[340]</a></span>the case now. Her position in the
+State will be clearly defined. She will be held to be performing a
+necessary social service. Whether this idea meets with favour or not,
+it is the only fair, the only possible, solution, if the prostitute is
+to remain."<a name="FNanchor_925_925" id="FNanchor_925_925"></a><a href="#Footnote_925_925" class="fnanchor">[925]</a></p>
+
+<p>"In a Socialistic State, no woman will be economically dependent upon
+any one man, father, brother, or husband. Her living will be assured
+to her by the community. Marriage will not make her the more
+dependent. If she should have children, she will be salaried, or
+otherwise supported, according to the number and the healthiness of
+her offspring. If no children are born to her, she will be at liberty
+to occupy herself with some other profitable work&mdash;not necessarily
+household labour, certainly not household labour all the time&mdash;for
+that will be reduced to a minimum. But she will engage in such useful
+work as her special tastes will direct. A free woman, she will thus be
+able to give her love freely."<a name="FNanchor_926_926" id="FNanchor_926_926"></a><a href="#Footnote_926_926" class="fnanchor">[926]</a> "The 'subjection of woman' being
+at an end in consequence of her economic emancipation, actions for
+breach of promise or seduction, as well as prostitution itself, will
+be rendered meaningless. When a woman sues for breach of promise she
+is really suing for loss of a lucrative situation. When she plies for
+hire on the public street, she does so because the scourge of
+starvation is laid on her shoulders. Remove that scourge, and instead
+of the hideous commerce between lust and lucre we shall, in all cases,
+have the fair exchange of genuine human love for love."<a name="FNanchor_927_927" id="FNanchor_927_927"></a><a href="#Footnote_927_927" class="fnanchor">[927]</a> "Free as
+the wind, the Socialist wife will be bound only by her natural love
+for husband and children."<a name="FNanchor_928_928" id="FNanchor_928_928"></a><a href="#Footnote_928_928" class="fnanchor">[928]</a></p>
+
+<p>Men and women being sexually free in the Socialist State of the
+future, the law will take cognisance neither <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_341" id="Page_341">[341]</a></span>of breach of promise,
+seduction, prostitution, and desertion of the family, nor of even
+graver offences against the present code of morality. The philosopher
+of British Socialism informs us: "Society is directly concerned&mdash;(1)
+with the production of offspring, (2) with the care that things
+sexually offensive to the majority shall not be obtruded on public
+notice, or obscenity on 'young persons.' Beyond this, all sexual
+actions (of course excluding criminal violence or fraud) are matters
+of purely individual concern."</p>
+
+<p>"Offences connected with sexual matters, from rape downwards, may be
+viewed from two or three different sides, and are complicated in ways
+which render the subject difficult of discussion in a work intended
+for promiscuous circulation. Here, as in the last case&mdash;viz. of theft
+or robbery&mdash;we must be careful in considering such offences to
+eliminate the element of brutality or personal injury, which may
+sometimes accompany the crime referred to, from the offence itself.
+For the rest I confine myself to remarking that this class also,
+though not so obviously as the last, springs from an instinct
+legitimate in itself but which has been suppressed or distorted. The
+opinions of most, even enlightened, people on such matters are,
+however, so largely coloured by the unconscious survival in their
+minds of sentiment derived from old theological and theosophical views
+of the universe, that they are not of much value. This is partly the
+reason why the ordinary good-natured bourgeois, who can complacently
+pass on by the other side after casting a careless look on the most
+fiendish and organised cruelty in satisfaction of the economic
+craving&mdash;gain&mdash;is galvanised into a frenzy of indignation at some
+sporadic case of real or supposed ill-usage perpetrated in
+satisfaction of some bizarre form of the animal craving&mdash;lust. Until
+people can be got to discuss this subject in the white light of
+physiological and pathological <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_342" id="Page_342">[342]</a></span>investigation rather than the dim
+religious gloom of semi-mystical emotion, but little progress will be
+effected towards a due appreciation of the character of the offences
+referred to. It is a curious circumstance, as illustrating the change
+of men's view of offences, that an ordinary indecent assault, which in
+the Middle Ages&mdash;in Chaucer's time, for instance&mdash;would evidently have
+been regarded as a species of rude joke, should now be deemed one of
+the most serious of crimes."<a name="FNanchor_929_929" id="FNanchor_929_929"></a><a href="#Footnote_929_929" class="fnanchor">[929]</a></p>
+
+<p>"When a sexual act, from whatever cause, is not, and cannot be,
+productive of offspring, the feeling of the majority has no <i>locus
+standi</i> in the matter. Not only is it properly outside the sphere of
+coercion, but it does not concern morality at all. It is a question
+simply of individual taste. The latter may be good or bad, but this is
+an &aelig;sthetic, and not directly a moral or social question."<a name="FNanchor_930_930" id="FNanchor_930_930"></a><a href="#Footnote_930_930" class="fnanchor">[930]</a> "No
+social and secular argument readily presents itself against the act
+for which the brilliant and wretched Wilde is to-day the associate of
+felons. In view of the exclamations of bated horror over this offence,
+and the tacit assumption that it stands second only to murder in its
+enormity, it may be worth while to point out that, tested by a
+non-theological ethic, it is not quite certain that such practices are
+immoral at all."<a name="FNanchor_931_931" id="FNanchor_931_931"></a><a href="#Footnote_931_931" class="fnanchor">[931]</a> "It has been well said that there are few laws
+so futile as those that profess to seek out and punish acts&mdash;normal or
+abnormal&mdash;done in secret and by mutual consent between adult persons.
+There are also few laws more unjust when the acts thus branded by law
+are the natural outcome of inborn disposition and not directly
+injurious to the community at large. The Moltke-Harden case brings
+these considerations clearly before us afresh, and compels us to ask
+ourselves whether it would not be possible to amend our laws in the
+direction not <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_343" id="Page_343">[343]</a></span>only of social purity and sincerity but of reason and
+humanity."<a name="FNanchor_932_932" id="FNanchor_932_932"></a><a href="#Footnote_932_932" class="fnanchor">[932]</a></p>
+
+<p>The "social purity" of Socialism would be the purity of Sodom and
+Gomorrah. It would be unrestricted bestiality.</p>
+
+<p>The majority of Socialists who have seriously considered the marriage
+problem in the Socialist State of the future&mdash;Marx, Lassalle,
+Rodbertus, and others, consider only the economic problems&mdash;have
+pronounced themselves in favour of free love in some form or the
+other. In this the conclusions of the Socialists agree with those of
+the Anarchists.<a name="FNanchor_933_933" id="FNanchor_933_933"></a><a href="#Footnote_933_933" class="fnanchor">[933]</a> Indeed, "collective" marriage and other
+abominations have been freely practised during a long time in the
+Socialist colonies of North America, such as Oneida and
+Wallingsford.<a name="FNanchor_934_934" id="FNanchor_934_934"></a><a href="#Footnote_934_934" class="fnanchor">[934]</a> Some Socialist thinkers, such as Saint-Simon and
+Enfantin, following the footstep of Plato, condemn marriage for life
+and recommend the organisation of procreation by the State. Others,
+such as Fourier, favour polygamy and polyandry. Others, such as
+Bellamy<a name="FNanchor_935_935" id="FNanchor_935_935"></a><a href="#Footnote_935_935" class="fnanchor">[935]</a> and Kautsky,<a name="FNanchor_936_936" id="FNanchor_936_936"></a><a href="#Footnote_936_936" class="fnanchor">[936]</a> believe that the people will remain
+attached to marriage as at present constituted. Others again find
+consolation in the fact that "despite the marital customs of the East,
+there is in the average human animal a strong monogamous
+instinct."<a name="FNanchor_937_937" id="FNanchor_937_937"></a><a href="#Footnote_937_937" class="fnanchor">[937]</a> Anton Menger compares free love with free competition,
+and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_344" id="Page_344">[344]</a></span>therefore objects to it<a name="FNanchor_938_938" id="FNanchor_938_938"></a><a href="#Footnote_938_938" class="fnanchor">[938]</a> for the same reason for which
+Aristophanes objected to it in his "Ecclesiazusae" 2200 years ago. He
+thinks that free love would benefit the young, strong and
+good-looking, and believes that the doctrine of free love owes its
+rise to hatred of Christianity among Socialists,<a name="FNanchor_939_939" id="FNanchor_939_939"></a><a href="#Footnote_939_939" class="fnanchor">[939]</a> monogamous
+marriage being a Christian institution.</p>
+
+<p>Socialists propose to break all the bonds which at present connect
+woman with her husband and her children, and to put her into an
+artificial and unnatural position calculated to unsex her. "For the
+first time since the world began, woman will in every respect be the
+equal of man. She will be the guardian of her own honour, and marriage
+will assume an entirely novel character. All unions will be unions of
+affection and esteem, and children, as of old, will primarily be the
+children of the mother. Her right to select the father of her own
+children is absolute. In such a society all children will be equally
+'legitimate,' and the Seventh Commandment will become practically
+obsolete, because the economic circumstances in which it was
+formulated will have passed away. She will be the complete arbiter of
+her own destiny. Her unsullied conscience will be the foundation of a
+purer morality than is at present even conceivable."<a name="FNanchor_940_940" id="FNanchor_940_940"></a><a href="#Footnote_940_940" class="fnanchor">[940]</a> The
+principles expressed in the foregoing recall to one's mind the decree
+of the French Convention, dated June 28, 1793, which runs as follows:
+"La nation se charge de l'&eacute;ducation physique et morale des enfants
+abandonn&eacute;s. D&eacute;sormais ils seront d&eacute;sign&eacute;s sous le seul nom
+d'orphelins. Aucune autre qualification ne sera permise"; and the
+principle of the French Code, "La r&eacute;cherche de la paternit&eacute; est
+interdite," will become a principle of British law. The State will
+have to become <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_345" id="Page_345">[345]</a></span>the protector of the husbandless mothers and the
+fatherless children.</p>
+
+<p>"Woman stands to gain much from the growth of a Socialist State. Among
+the free communistic services the right of the wife to maintenance
+during the period of maternity will quickly find a place."<a name="FNanchor_941_941" id="FNanchor_941_941"></a><a href="#Footnote_941_941" class="fnanchor">[941]</a> "For
+every child born, the State will make provision. Either the mother
+will be paid so much per child so long as it lives and thrives, as her
+wages for important work done for society in bearing and rearing it"
+(it should be noted that children will belong no more to their parents
+but to "society," that childbearing will be "work" paid for by
+"wages," and that the breeding of children will become as much a
+business on the part of independent women as is now the breeding of
+cats and dogs for profit), "or her absolute independence of her
+husband will be secured in some other way. The State doctor (a woman
+for this office) will prescribe and care for the child from the moment
+of its birth, and State nurses will be in attendance to see that the
+mother is in need of nothing for her own and the child's
+well-being."<a name="FNanchor_942_942" id="FNanchor_942_942"></a><a href="#Footnote_942_942" class="fnanchor">[942]</a> "Socialism will simply be the scientific development
+of those natural tendencies which augment the happiness or improve the
+comfort of the people. It is conceivable that every child shall come
+under the care of the administrative assembly. The right of the child
+is not interwoven with parental responsibility. They are separate
+considerations. Only a madman will hold that in the event of its
+parents being unmindful of their duties a helpless little one should
+be allowed to suffer. The fact of its being is the child's title to
+whatever provision society is able to make for it."<a name="FNanchor_943_943" id="FNanchor_943_943"></a><a href="#Footnote_943_943" class="fnanchor">[943]</a> "Socialism
+therefore teaches men to expect a communal watchfulness over infant
+life. If parents refuse, or are unable, to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_346" id="Page_346">[346]</a></span>meet the requirements of
+the case, the State will supply the deficiency."<a name="FNanchor_944_944" id="FNanchor_944_944"></a><a href="#Footnote_944_944" class="fnanchor">[944]</a> "A State that
+truly represents its members will legislate generously for those who
+announce frankly and without cant that they have no desire for the
+care of children."<a name="FNanchor_945_945" id="FNanchor_945_945"></a><a href="#Footnote_945_945" class="fnanchor">[945]</a></p>
+
+<p>In the Socialist State of the future, people could therefore get rid
+of new-born babes far more easily than they now can of puppies and
+kittens. The institution round the corner would be the general
+foster-mother. Hordes of fatherless and motherless children would
+throng the State nurseries. The words "father" and "mother" would lose
+their meaning. However, we are told that "Socialism would begin by
+making sure that there should not be a single untaught, unloved,
+hungry child in the kingdom."<a name="FNanchor_946_946" id="FNanchor_946_946"></a><a href="#Footnote_946_946" class="fnanchor">[946]</a> Love would evidently also be
+"organised" by the authorities.</p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists fear that, under a <i>r&eacute;gime</i> of free love and free
+State maintenance for mothers and children, life will become a riot,
+that husbands will constantly change wives and wives husbands, and
+that, owing to the absence of all responsibility on the part of the
+parents for their offspring, over-population and consequent
+pauperisation will take place. Therefore some Socialists think that "A
+time will come when the patriot will consider it to be his duty, not
+to kill as many enemies as possible in time of war, but to restrict
+his family as far as possible in time of peace."<a name="FNanchor_947_947" id="FNanchor_947_947"></a><a href="#Footnote_947_947" class="fnanchor">[947]</a> Socialist
+daydreamers seem to be unaware that the best preventive against
+over-population lies in the duty of parents to bring up and educate
+their children, a duty which they wish to abolish.</p>
+
+<p>As Aristotle pointed out 2200 years ago, the all-regulating State
+would also have to regulate the increase <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_347" id="Page_347">[347]</a></span>of population. "If the State
+is to guarantee wages, it is bound in self-protection to provide that
+no person shall be born without its consent. The State is to sanction
+the number of births; all others are immoral, because anti-social. As
+national wealth increased, a larger number of births would be allowed,
+or a larger sum would be expended on such as were allowed. An
+unsanctioned birth would receive no recognition from the State, and in
+times of over-population it might be needful to punish, positively or
+negatively, both father and mother. As such births may be due to
+ignorance or inefficiency of some check system, it would be the duty
+of the State to scientifically investigate the whole system of checks,
+and to spread among its citizens a thorough knowledge of such as were
+harmless and efficient in practice."<a name="FNanchor_948_948" id="FNanchor_948_948"></a><a href="#Footnote_948_948" class="fnanchor">[948]</a></p>
+
+<p>The State would control procreation. Intending couples would
+apparently have to take out a procreation licence, which would be
+granted only to those able to pass a searching examination. "Marriage
+between the mentally weak will not be allowed. Imbeciles, lunatics,
+and those with dangerous and ineradicable criminal tendencies will not
+be permitted to reproduce their species at all."<a name="FNanchor_949_949" id="FNanchor_949_949"></a><a href="#Footnote_949_949" class="fnanchor">[949]</a></p>
+
+<p>Unfortunately the writer fails to specify how unauthorised
+reproduction of the species would be prevented, and how contravention
+of the procreation laws would be punished. These details are furnished
+by another writer. "All those actually certified as degenerates must
+be prevented from procreating. Society has not only a right but a duty
+to protect itself against such by-products, and it can only do this by
+State control of marriage."<a name="FNanchor_950_950" id="FNanchor_950_950"></a><a href="#Footnote_950_950" class="fnanchor">[950]</a> "Marriage without a satisfactory
+medical certificate should be subjected to a penalty which would be in
+effect prohibitive. In certain cases asexualisation <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_348" id="Page_348">[348]</a></span>and sterilisation
+should be applicable under special safeguards and conditions."<a name="FNanchor_951_951" id="FNanchor_951_951"></a><a href="#Footnote_951_951" class="fnanchor">[951]</a></p>
+
+<p>Free love has apparently its limitations and its dangers. The
+procreation inspector might make an irreparable mistake.</p>
+
+<p>There are, of course, Socialists who think that the family ought to be
+preserved, and who oppose State nurseries. One of them writes: "The
+State, in its own interests, will do everything it can to develop
+individuality in its children. The barrack school and State
+nursery&mdash;never much more than the Utopian dreams of amiable
+people&mdash;are condemned by up-to-date psychologists. The personal touch
+and affection of the mother, the surroundings and ethics of a small
+community, the sense of continuity which comes to the maturing child's
+mind from a personal organisation like the family, are all invaluable
+to a State which must take as much care of its citizens of to-morrow
+as it does of its citizens of to-day."<a name="FNanchor_952_952" id="FNanchor_952_952"></a><a href="#Footnote_952_952" class="fnanchor">[952]</a> Mr. Macdonald's views on
+Socialism are hardly orthodox, and he has been denounced by
+thorough-going Socialists as an agent of the bourgeoisie.</p>
+
+<p>As women may be the strongest opponents to the dissolution of the
+family, Socialists addressing themselves to women try to persuade them
+that they are forced into matrimony by necessity, that marriage is a
+degradation to them and to their children, and that Socialism will
+elevate them and make them free and happy. "The average young woman of
+the working class, who is not herself employed in some well-paid
+occupation, has nothing but marriage to which to look forward. She
+gives herself and all she has or is in exchange for such board as her
+husband's means permit."<a name="FNanchor_953_953" id="FNanchor_953_953"></a><a href="#Footnote_953_953" class="fnanchor">[953]</a> "For the sake of bread and shelter she
+marries and becomes the unpaid <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_349" id="Page_349">[349]</a></span>cook and housekeeper of a husband and
+the mother of his children."<a name="FNanchor_954_954" id="FNanchor_954_954"></a><a href="#Footnote_954_954" class="fnanchor">[954]</a> "Woman has been degraded, the mother
+has been kept down; so the children have been born with slavish
+instincts, ready to creep for any favour, and only just awakening to
+the need for self-assertion and independence of action."<a name="FNanchor_955_955" id="FNanchor_955_955"></a><a href="#Footnote_955_955" class="fnanchor">[955]</a>
+Socialism will change all that, for "Socialism means freedom for
+women, just as it does for men."<a name="FNanchor_956_956" id="FNanchor_956_956"></a><a href="#Footnote_956_956" class="fnanchor">[956]</a></p>
+
+<p>What is the Socialistic conception of "freedom for women"? What are
+its privileges and its advantages? "In considering the position of the
+woman Socialist, one great central fact must be borne constantly in
+mind. What she will be, what she will do, how she will live&mdash;all will
+depend upon one great fact, the greatest fact in Socialism&mdash;a fact
+which constitutes Socialism&mdash;namely, that she will be economically
+free."<a name="FNanchor_957_957" id="FNanchor_957_957"></a><a href="#Footnote_957_957" class="fnanchor">[957]</a> "The new order will make husband and wife equals simply by
+enabling the wife to earn her living by fitting employment."<a name="FNanchor_958_958" id="FNanchor_958_958"></a><a href="#Footnote_958_958" class="fnanchor">[958]</a> "A
+living will be assured to every woman."<a name="FNanchor_959_959" id="FNanchor_959_959"></a><a href="#Footnote_959_959" class="fnanchor">[959]</a> "In the new community
+woman is entirely independent, a free being, the equal of man. Her
+education is the same as that of man except where the difference of
+sex makes a deviation from this rule and special treatment absolutely
+unavoidable. She works under exactly the same conditions as a
+man."<a name="FNanchor_960_960" id="FNanchor_960_960"></a><a href="#Footnote_960_960" class="fnanchor">[960]</a> "Under a Socialist <i>r&eacute;gime</i> every profession will be open
+to women as to men."<a name="FNanchor_961_961" id="FNanchor_961_961"></a><a href="#Footnote_961_961" class="fnanchor">[961]</a> "Socialism means enfranchising them, giving
+them the vote, so that they can lift their voice alongside with men's
+voice and fight with the same weapon for a better, happier
+life."<a name="FNanchor_962_962" id="FNanchor_962_962"></a><a href="#Footnote_962_962" class="fnanchor">[962]</a> <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_350" id="Page_350">[350]</a></span>"It is only by removing the disabilities and restraints
+imposed upon woman, and permitting her to enter freely into
+competition with men in every sphere of human activity, that her true
+position and function in the economy of life will ultimately be
+ascertained."<a name="FNanchor_963_963" id="FNanchor_963_963"></a><a href="#Footnote_963_963" class="fnanchor">[963]</a> "Socialism alone offers woman complete economic
+emancipation, with all that that implies. It provides her with
+suitable work, and it pays her exactly as men are paid. It educates
+her as men are educated, and protects her in pregnancy with tender
+regard; and, in so doing, Socialism will raise the whole level of
+society to a height of moral grandeur never yet attained and hardly
+ever dreamed of by the most optimist of poets and philosophers."<a name="FNanchor_964_964" id="FNanchor_964_964"></a><a href="#Footnote_964_964" class="fnanchor">[964]</a></p>
+
+<p>Apparently Socialists will elevate downtrodden woman by compelling her
+to work for a living, and it is doubtful, as will be seen in Chapter
+XXXVI., whether she will be allowed to select her task or whether she
+will have to work under a system of forced labour. She will be given
+that freedom and liberty which is now called licence by the abolition
+of all the laws of morality. In the words of an exceedingly
+straightforward Socialist, "Independence for women will mean a heavy
+sacrifice for them, for it will mean for them compulsory work."<a name="FNanchor_965_965" id="FNanchor_965_965"></a><a href="#Footnote_965_965" class="fnanchor">[965]</a>
+In return for such work they will be given full sexual license and the
+vote.</p>
+
+<p>There is another aspect to be taken note of with regard to the
+emancipation of woman. Many Socialists, in giving to woman equality
+with man as a wage-earner and voter, wish to unsex her completely.
+They wish to deprive her of those privileges which she possesses at
+present owing to her sex. The philosopher of British Socialism informs
+us: "The law nowadays makes no <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_351" id="Page_351">[351]</a></span>distinction of persons between men.
+True; but it makes distinctions between men and women, and where law
+draws no distinction, practice does. 'Benefit of clergy' is superseded
+by 'benefit of sex.'"<a name="FNanchor_966_966" id="FNanchor_966_966"></a><a href="#Footnote_966_966" class="fnanchor">[966]</a> "The tendency of the bourgeoisie world, as
+expressed in its legislation and sentiment, has been towards a
+factitious exaltation of the woman at the expense of the man&mdash;in other
+words, the cry for 'equality between the sexes' has in the course of
+its realisation become a sham, masking a <i>de facto</i> inequality. The
+inequality in question presses, as usual, heaviest upon the working
+man, whose wife, to all intents and purposes, now has him completely
+in her power. If dissolute or drunken, she can sell up his goods or
+break up his home at pleasure and still compel him to keep her and
+live with her to her life's end. There is no law to protect him. On
+the other hand, let him but raise a finger in a moment of exasperation
+against this precious representative of the sacred principle of
+'womanhood,' and straightway he is consigned to the treadmill for his
+six months amid the jubilation of the 'Daily Telegraph' and its
+kindred, who pronounce him a brute and sing p&aelig;ans over the power of
+the 'law' to protect the innocent and helpless female. Thus does
+bourgeois society offer sacrifice to the idol 'equality between the
+sexes.' For the law jealously guards the earnings or property of the
+wife from possible spoliation. She on any colourable pretext can
+obtain magisterial separation and protection."<a name="FNanchor_967_967" id="FNanchor_967_967"></a><a href="#Footnote_967_967" class="fnanchor">[967]</a> Bax concludes that
+if the law is right in flogging men it should flog women too, for "the
+brutality and cowardice of the proceeding is no greater in the one
+case than in the other."<a name="FNanchor_968_968" id="FNanchor_968_968"></a><a href="#Footnote_968_968" class="fnanchor">[968]</a></p>
+
+<p>The abolition of the marriage tie may mean that general barracks will
+take the place of private houses. Is the home worth preserving? Most
+Socialists think it is <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_352" id="Page_352">[352]</a></span>not. "It may be doubted after all whether it
+is necessary to regard 'the home' in the sense in which the phrase is
+here used as the final and immutable form of social organisation.
+Humanity does not stand or fall by the arrangement whereby families
+take their food in segregated cubicles."<a name="FNanchor_969_969" id="FNanchor_969_969"></a><a href="#Footnote_969_969" class="fnanchor">[969]</a> "The entire preparation
+of food will be undertaken by society in the future. The private
+kitchen will disappear."<a name="FNanchor_970_970" id="FNanchor_970_970"></a><a href="#Footnote_970_970" class="fnanchor">[970]</a> "Instead of a hundred kitchens and fires
+and cooks, we shall have one. Instead of a hundred meals to prepare,
+we shall have one. Instead of a hundred homes being made to reek of
+unsavoury dishes, or the detestable odour of bad cooking, the
+offensive effluvia will be confined to one building. Under Socialism
+domestic duties will be reduced to a minimum."<a name="FNanchor_971_971" id="FNanchor_971_971"></a><a href="#Footnote_971_971" class="fnanchor">[971]</a> "We set up one
+great kitchen, one general dining-hall, and one pleasant
+tea-garden."<a name="FNanchor_972_972" id="FNanchor_972_972"></a><a href="#Footnote_972_972" class="fnanchor">[972]</a> Only a few Socialists are in favour of individual
+houses, believing that "Each house should be self-contained."<a name="FNanchor_973_973" id="FNanchor_973_973"></a><a href="#Footnote_973_973" class="fnanchor">[973]</a></p>
+
+<p>The proposals of British Socialists regarding woman, the family, the
+home, and marriage are not new. They were tried in the French
+Revolution, and the consequences of the experiments recommended by the
+philosophers of the Revolution were as follows:</p>
+
+<p>"The legislation of the Revolution diminished the paternal authority
+and converted the family into a republic. Marriage became a contract
+which could be broken at will by either party, a contract which
+allowed of short notice and which could be concluded for any space of
+time. People married for a year, sometimes only for a month. They
+married for fun or for profit, and marriages were dissolved and others
+contracted if it paid to do so."<a name="FNanchor_974_974" id="FNanchor_974_974"></a><a href="#Footnote_974_974" class="fnanchor">[974]</a> The French police reports tell
+us: "The depravity <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_353" id="Page_353">[353]</a></span>of morals is extremely great, and the new
+generation is growing up in a state of disorder which promises to have
+the most unfortunate and most far-reaching consequences to future
+generations. Sodomy and Sapphic love flourish with the same
+shamelessness as prostitution, and the progress of all these vices is
+terrifying."<a name="FNanchor_975_975" id="FNanchor_975_975"></a><a href="#Footnote_975_975" class="fnanchor">[975]</a> From another source we learn: "Society has become
+terribly depraved; fornication, adultery, incest, and murder by poison
+or violence are the fruits of philosophism. Things are as bad in the
+villages as in Paris. Justices of the peace report that immorality has
+spread to such an extent that many communes will soon no longer be
+inhabitable by decent people."<a name="FNanchor_976_976" id="FNanchor_976_976"></a><a href="#Footnote_976_976" class="fnanchor">[976]</a> This is the new and the better
+world towards which Socialism is steering.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_896_896" id="Footnote_896_896"></a><a href="#FNanchor_896_896"><span class="label">[896]</span></a> Aristotle, <i>Politics</i>, Book ii. Chapter v.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_897_897" id="Footnote_897_897"></a><a href="#FNanchor_897_897"><span class="label">[897]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>What is this Socialism?</i> p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_898_898" id="Footnote_898_898"></a><a href="#FNanchor_898_898"><span class="label">[898]</span></a> Russell Williams, <i>The Difficulties of Socialism</i>, p.
+13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_899_899" id="Footnote_899_899"></a><a href="#FNanchor_899_899"><span class="label">[899]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Socialist Republic</i>, p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_900_900" id="Footnote_900_900"></a><a href="#FNanchor_900_900"><span class="label">[900]</span></a> Marx and Engels, <i>Manifesto of the Communist Party</i>,
+pp. 19, 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_901_901" id="Footnote_901_901"></a><a href="#FNanchor_901_901"><span class="label">[901]</span></a> Morris and Bax, <i>Socialism: Its Growth and Outcome</i>, p.
+9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_902_902" id="Footnote_902_902"></a><a href="#FNanchor_902_902"><span class="label">[902]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 164.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_903_903" id="Footnote_903_903"></a><a href="#FNanchor_903_903"><span class="label">[903]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 39.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_904_904" id="Footnote_904_904"></a><a href="#FNanchor_904_904"><span class="label">[904]</span></a> Bax, <i>The Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 145.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_905_905" id="Footnote_905_905"></a><a href="#FNanchor_905_905"><span class="label">[905]</span></a> Oscar Wilde, "The Soul of Man under Socialism,"
+<i>Fortnightly Review</i>, February 1891.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_906_906" id="Footnote_906_906"></a><a href="#FNanchor_906_906"><span class="label">[906]</span></a> Wells, "Socialism and the Middle Classes," <i>Fortnightly
+Review</i>, November 1906.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_907_907" id="Footnote_907_907"></a><a href="#FNanchor_907_907"><span class="label">[907]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 200.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_908_908" id="Footnote_908_908"></a><a href="#FNanchor_908_908"><span class="label">[908]</span></a> A.R. Orage in the <i>New Age</i>, November 21, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_909_909" id="Footnote_909_909"></a><a href="#FNanchor_909_909"><span class="label">[909]</span></a> Lansbury, <i>The Principles of the English Poor Law</i>, p.
+10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_910_910" id="Footnote_910_910"></a><a href="#FNanchor_910_910"><span class="label">[910]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 160.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_911_911" id="Footnote_911_911"></a><a href="#FNanchor_911_911"><span class="label">[911]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 151.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_912_912" id="Footnote_912_912"></a><a href="#FNanchor_912_912"><span class="label">[912]</span></a> Benson, <i>Woman, the Communist</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_913_913" id="Footnote_913_913"></a><a href="#FNanchor_913_913"><span class="label">[913]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Gospel of the Poor</i>, p. 149.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_914_914" id="Footnote_914_914"></a><a href="#FNanchor_914_914"><span class="label">[914]</span></a> Russell Williams, <i>The Difficulties of Socialism</i>, pp.
+14, 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_915_915" id="Footnote_915_915"></a><a href="#FNanchor_915_915"><span class="label">[915]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_916_916" id="Footnote_916_916"></a><a href="#FNanchor_916_916"><span class="label">[916]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, pp. 159, 160.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_917_917" id="Footnote_917_917"></a><a href="#FNanchor_917_917"><span class="label">[917]</span></a> Morris and Bax, <i>Socialism; Its Growth and Outcome</i>, p.
+199.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_918_918" id="Footnote_918_918"></a><a href="#FNanchor_918_918"><span class="label">[918]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, pp. 114, 115.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_919_919" id="Footnote_919_919"></a><a href="#FNanchor_919_919"><span class="label">[919]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_920_920" id="Footnote_920_920"></a><a href="#FNanchor_920_920"><span class="label">[920]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 160.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_921_921" id="Footnote_921_921"></a><a href="#FNanchor_921_921"><span class="label">[921]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, pp. 44, 86.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_922_922" id="Footnote_922_922"></a><a href="#FNanchor_922_922"><span class="label">[922]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman in the Past, Present, and Future</i>, pp.
+229, 230.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_923_923" id="Footnote_923_923"></a><a href="#FNanchor_923_923"><span class="label">[923]</span></a> Karl Pearson, <i>The Ethic of Free Thought</i>, p. 108.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_924_924" id="Footnote_924_924"></a><a href="#FNanchor_924_924"><span class="label">[924]</span></a> Morris and Bax, <i>Manifesto of the Socialistic League</i>,
+p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_925_925" id="Footnote_925_925"></a><a href="#FNanchor_925_925"><span class="label">[925]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 56.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_926_926" id="Footnote_926_926"></a><a href="#FNanchor_926_926"><span class="label">[926]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 59, 60.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_927_927" id="Footnote_927_927"></a><a href="#FNanchor_927_927"><span class="label">[927]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 165.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_928_928" id="Footnote_928_928"></a><a href="#FNanchor_928_928"><span class="label">[928]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 61,</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_929_929" id="Footnote_929_929"></a><a href="#FNanchor_929_929"><span class="label">[929]</span></a> Bax, <i>The Ethics of Socialism</i>, p. 62.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_930_930" id="Footnote_930_930"></a><a href="#FNanchor_930_930"><span class="label">[930]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 126.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_931_931" id="Footnote_931_931"></a><a href="#FNanchor_931_931"><span class="label">[931]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, p. 24.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_932_932" id="Footnote_932_932"></a><a href="#FNanchor_932_932"><span class="label">[932]</span></a> "The Moltke-Harden Case" in the <i>New Age</i>, November 14,
+1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_933_933" id="Footnote_933_933"></a><a href="#FNanchor_933_933"><span class="label">[933]</span></a> For details on this subject see Bebel, <i>Woman</i>;
+Meslier, <i>Le Testament</i>, 1864, ii. 226; Dezamy, <i>Code de la
+Communaut&eacute;</i>, 1842, p. 266; Godwin, <i>Enquiry concerning Political
+Justice</i>, ii. 507; Owen, <i>The Marriage System</i>, 1838, p. 66; Owen,
+<i>Manifesto</i>, 1840, p. 56; Owen, <i>What is Socialism?</i> 1841, p. 40;
+Morris, <i>News from Nowhere</i>, 1899, p. 90; Tucker, <i>Instead of a Book</i>,
+1897, p. 15; Grave, <i>Soci&eacute;t&eacute; Future</i>, ch. xii.; Charles Albert,
+<i>L'Amour Libre</i>, 1899, p. 191, &amp;c.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_934_934" id="Footnote_934_934"></a><a href="#FNanchor_934_934"><span class="label">[934]</span></a> See Nordhoff, <i>Communistic Societies</i>, 1875, p. 275;
+Noyes, <i>History of American Socialism</i>, 1870, p. 623; Hinds, <i>American
+Communities</i>, 1902, p. 196.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_935_935" id="Footnote_935_935"></a><a href="#FNanchor_935_935"><span class="label">[935]</span></a> <i>Looking Backward</i>, ch. xxiv.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_936_936" id="Footnote_936_936"></a><a href="#FNanchor_936_936"><span class="label">[936]</span></a> <i>Erfurter Programm</i>, 1892, p. 145.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_937_937" id="Footnote_937_937"></a><a href="#FNanchor_937_937"><span class="label">[937]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, p. 32</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_938_938" id="Footnote_938_938"></a><a href="#FNanchor_938_938"><span class="label">[938]</span></a> Menger, <i>L'&Eacute;tat Socialists</i>, 1904, p. 187.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_939_939" id="Footnote_939_939"></a><a href="#FNanchor_939_939"><span class="label">[939]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 188.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_940_940" id="Footnote_940_940"></a><a href="#FNanchor_940_940"><span class="label">[940]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, pp. 164, 166.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_941_941" id="Footnote_941_941"></a><a href="#FNanchor_941_941"><span class="label">[941]</span></a> Benson, <i>Woman the Communist</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_942_942" id="Footnote_942_942"></a><a href="#FNanchor_942_942"><span class="label">[942]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, pp. 48, 49.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_943_943" id="Footnote_943_943"></a><a href="#FNanchor_943_943"><span class="label">[943]</span></a> Russell Williams, <i>The Difficulties of Socialism</i>, p.
+9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_944_944" id="Footnote_944_944"></a><a href="#FNanchor_944_944"><span class="label">[944]</span></a> Russell Williams, <i>The Difficulties of Socialism</i>, p.
+10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_945_945" id="Footnote_945_945"></a><a href="#FNanchor_945_945"><span class="label">[945]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, Letter to Editor, November 14, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_946_946" id="Footnote_946_946"></a><a href="#FNanchor_946_946"><span class="label">[946]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>What is this Socialism?</i> p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_947_947" id="Footnote_947_947"></a><a href="#FNanchor_947_947"><span class="label">[947]</span></a> A. Menger, <i>Volkspolitik</i>, p. 51.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_948_948" id="Footnote_948_948"></a><a href="#FNanchor_948_948"><span class="label">[948]</span></a> Karl Pearson, <i>Socialism and Sex</i>, pp. 12, 108.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_949_949" id="Footnote_949_949"></a><a href="#FNanchor_949_949"><span class="label">[949]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 49.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_950_950" id="Footnote_950_950"></a><a href="#FNanchor_950_950"><span class="label">[950]</span></a> Victor Fisher, <i>The Babies' Tribute</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_951_951" id="Footnote_951_951"></a><a href="#FNanchor_951_951"><span class="label">[951]</span></a> Victor Fisher, <i>The Babies' Tribute</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_952_952" id="Footnote_952_952"></a><a href="#FNanchor_952_952"><span class="label">[952]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 98.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_953_953" id="Footnote_953_953"></a><a href="#FNanchor_953_953"><span class="label">[953]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 64.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_954_954" id="Footnote_954_954"></a><a href="#FNanchor_954_954"><span class="label">[954]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_955_955" id="Footnote_955_955"></a><a href="#FNanchor_955_955"><span class="label">[955]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 42.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_956_956" id="Footnote_956_956"></a><a href="#FNanchor_956_956"><span class="label">[956]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Leaflet</i>, No. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_957_957" id="Footnote_957_957"></a><a href="#FNanchor_957_957"><span class="label">[957]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 37.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_958_958" id="Footnote_958_958"></a><a href="#FNanchor_958_958"><span class="label">[958]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 148.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_959_959" id="Footnote_959_959"></a><a href="#FNanchor_959_959"><span class="label">[959]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 57.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_960_960" id="Footnote_960_960"></a><a href="#FNanchor_960_960"><span class="label">[960]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 229.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_961_961" id="Footnote_961_961"></a><a href="#FNanchor_961_961"><span class="label">[961]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 86.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_962_962" id="Footnote_962_962"></a><a href="#FNanchor_962_962"><span class="label">[962]</span></a> <i>What Socialism means for Women</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_963_963" id="Footnote_963_963"></a><a href="#FNanchor_963_963"><span class="label">[963]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>Citizenship of Women</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_964_964" id="Footnote_964_964"></a><a href="#FNanchor_964_964"><span class="label">[964]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 113.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_965_965" id="Footnote_965_965"></a><a href="#FNanchor_965_965"><span class="label">[965]</span></a> Menger, <i>L'&Eacute;tat Socialiste</i>, p. 191.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_966_966" id="Footnote_966_966"></a><a href="#FNanchor_966_966"><span class="label">[966]</span></a> Bax, <i>Ethics of Socialism</i>, p. 66.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_967_967" id="Footnote_967_967"></a><a href="#FNanchor_967_967"><span class="label">[967]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 116.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_968_968" id="Footnote_968_968"></a><a href="#FNanchor_968_968"><span class="label">[968]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 117.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_969_969" id="Footnote_969_969"></a><a href="#FNanchor_969_969"><span class="label">[969]</span></a> <i>After Bread, Education</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_970_970" id="Footnote_970_970"></a><a href="#FNanchor_970_970"><span class="label">[970]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 227.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_971_971" id="Footnote_971_971"></a><a href="#FNanchor_971_971"><span class="label">[971]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 70.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_972_972" id="Footnote_972_972"></a><a href="#FNanchor_972_972"><span class="label">[972]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 49.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_973_973" id="Footnote_973_973"></a><a href="#FNanchor_973_973"><span class="label">[973]</span></a> Jowett, <i>The Socialist and the City</i>, p. 60.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_974_974" id="Footnote_974_974"></a><a href="#FNanchor_974_974"><span class="label">[974]</span></a> Vandal, <i>L'Av&eacute;nement de Bonaparte</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_975_975" id="Footnote_975_975"></a><a href="#FNanchor_975_975"><span class="label">[975]</span></a> <i>Rapports de police publi&eacute;s par Schmidt</i>, iii. p. 389.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_976_976" id="Footnote_976_976"></a><a href="#FNanchor_976_976"><span class="label">[976]</span></a> Roussel, <i>Un Ev&eacute;que asserment&eacute;</i>, p. 298.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXVI" id="CHAPTER_XXVI"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_354" id="Page_354">[354]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXVI<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE SOCIALIST ATTITUDE TOWARDS CHRISTIANITY AND RELIGION</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">What is the attitude of Socialism towards Christianity and religion?</p>
+
+<p>A clerical apologist of Socialism informs us that "Socialism is
+founded on the doctrine of the Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of
+man."<a name="FNanchor_977_977" id="FNanchor_977_977"></a><a href="#Footnote_977_977" class="fnanchor">[977]</a> Another reverend gentleman states: "Socialism in the first
+place means combination, bringing together men for the building up of
+a sacred, holy life on this earth. It means the building up together
+of the different elements of human life. It is, in the grand words of
+the New Testament, which we were told Socialists did not believe in,
+'No man liveth unto himself, and no man dieth unto himself.'"<a name="FNanchor_978_978" id="FNanchor_978_978"></a><a href="#Footnote_978_978" class="fnanchor">[978]</a> A
+third clergyman tells us that "The ethics of Socialism are identical
+with the ethics of Christianity."<a name="FNanchor_979_979" id="FNanchor_979_979"></a><a href="#Footnote_979_979" class="fnanchor">[979]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some British Socialist leaders explain that Socialists are good
+Christians, and that Socialism attacks only the Church and professed
+Christians, but not religion. "Much of what is regarded as
+anti-Christian Socialist doctrine is only an attack upon the Churches
+and professed Christians, and, so far from being anti-Christian, is,
+as a matter of fact, inspired by the ethics of Christ's
+teaching."<a name="FNanchor_980_980" id="FNanchor_980_980"></a><a href="#Footnote_980_980" class="fnanchor">[980]</a> Other British Socialist leaders say that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_355" id="Page_355">[355]</a></span>Socialism,
+not being a religious doctrine, has no concern with religion and does
+not meddle with it. "A charge against Socialists is that they are
+Atheists whose aim is to destroy all religion and all morality. This
+is not true. It is true that many Socialists are Agnostics, and some
+are Atheists. But Atheism is no more a part of Socialism than it is a
+part of Toryism, or of Radicalism, or of Liberalism."<a name="FNanchor_981_981" id="FNanchor_981_981"></a><a href="#Footnote_981_981" class="fnanchor">[981]</a> "Socialism
+has no more to do with a man's religion than it has with the colour of
+his hair. Socialism deals with secular things, not with ultimate
+beliefs."<a name="FNanchor_982_982" id="FNanchor_982_982"></a><a href="#Footnote_982_982" class="fnanchor">[982]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is quite true that "there is at present no consensus of Socialist
+opinion on religious questions,"<a name="FNanchor_983_983" id="FNanchor_983_983"></a><a href="#Footnote_983_983" class="fnanchor">[983]</a> but it is hardly honest on the
+part of Socialist leaders to assert that Socialism has nothing to do
+with religion. The leading journal of the Fabian Society frankly
+confesses: "There is the argument that Socialism has nothing whatever
+to do with subjects such as religion and marriage. But if Socialism is
+a theory of the State, nothing human is alien to it. It may be true
+that no one of the specific theories of religion or marriage so far
+put forward by Socialists has any claim to be regarded as the
+Socialist view; but there is all the difference in the world between
+such an admission and the denial that Socialism has any concern with
+the questions at all."<a name="FNanchor_984_984" id="FNanchor_984_984"></a><a href="#Footnote_984_984" class="fnanchor">[984]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists proclaim that Socialism will carry out the will of
+Christ upon earth. Mr. Keir Hardie, for instance, says: "Christ laid
+down no elaborate system of either economics or theology. No great
+teacher ever did. His heart beat in sympathy with the great human
+heart of the race. His words are simple and not to be misunderstood
+when taken to mean what they say. His prayer&mdash;Thy kingdom come, Thy
+will be done on earth as it is in Heaven&mdash;was surely meant to be taken
+literally <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_356" id="Page_356">[356]</a></span>Are our opponents prepared to assert that in Heaven there
+will be factories working women and children for starvation wages;
+coal-mines and private property in land, dividing the population of
+Heaven into two classes, one revelling in riches and luxury,
+destructive of soul and body, the other grovelling in poverty, also
+destructive of all that is best in life? If not, how can they
+consistently support the system which inevitably produces that state
+of things upon earth?"<a name="FNanchor_985_985" id="FNanchor_985_985"></a><a href="#Footnote_985_985" class="fnanchor">[985]</a></p>
+
+<p>Other Socialists frankly confess that Socialism is absolutely
+incompatible with Christianity and all other religions; that Socialism
+can succeed only if religion be abolished, and that therefore religion
+must be abolished. The philosopher of British Socialism states:
+"Socialism utterly despises the 'other world' with all its stage
+properties&mdash;that is, the present objects of religion. It brings back
+religion from heaven to earth."<a name="FNanchor_986_986" id="FNanchor_986_986"></a><a href="#Footnote_986_986" class="fnanchor">[986]</a> "As to the ethical teaching of
+Christ, with its one-sided, introspective, and individualistic
+character, we venture to assert that no one acquainted with the theory
+of modern scientific Socialism can for one moment call it Socialistic.
+Socialism has no sympathy with the morbid,
+eternally-revolving-in-upon-itself transcendent morality of the Gospel
+discourses. This morality sets up a forced, to the vast majority
+impossible, standard of 'personal holiness' which, when realised, has
+seldom resulted in anything but (1) an apotheosised priggism, <i>e.g.</i>
+the Puritan type, or (2) in an epileptic hysteria, <i>e.g.</i> the Catholic
+saint type."<a name="FNanchor_987_987" id="FNanchor_987_987"></a><a href="#Footnote_987_987" class="fnanchor">[987]</a> Mr. Blatchford states: "I have been asked why I have
+'gone out of my way to attack religion.' In reply I beg to say that I
+am working for Socialism when I attack a religion which is hindering
+Socialism, that we must pull down before we can build up, and that I
+hope to do a little building, if only on the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_357" id="Page_357">[357]</a></span>foundation. I oppose the
+Christian religion because I do not think the Christian religion is
+beneficial to mankind, and because I think it an obstacle in the way
+of humanism."<a name="FNanchor_988_988" id="FNanchor_988_988"></a><a href="#Footnote_988_988" class="fnanchor">[988]</a> Another very influential writer says: "Personally I
+feel called upon to attack Christianity as I would any other harmful
+delusion. I do not believe in the theology of Jesus any more than I do
+in his sociology. It is no use pretending that Socialism will not
+profoundly revolutionise religion. The change in the economic basis of
+society is the more important thing to strive for; but if the triumph
+of the Socialist ideal does not crush supernatural religion, then we
+shall still have a gigantic fabric of falsity and convention upon
+which to wage war. Happily Christianity becomes less and less of a
+power every day. So far, indeed, from Christianity being able to
+support Socialism, it goes hard with Christianity to stand by itself.
+As a support to Socialism it would surely prove a broken reed."<a name="FNanchor_989_989" id="FNanchor_989_989"></a><a href="#Footnote_989_989" class="fnanchor">[989]</a></p>
+
+<p>A Socialist poet proclaims:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">The name of Christ has been the sovereign curse,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The opium drug that kept us slaves to wrong,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Fooled with a dream, we bowed to worse and worse.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">"In heaven," we said, "He will confound the strong."<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">O hateful treason that has tricked too long!<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Had we poor down-trod millions never dreamed<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Your dream of that hereafter for our woe,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Had the great powers that rule, no Father seemed,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">But Law relentless, long and long ago<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Had we risen and said, "We will not suffer so!"<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"O Christ, O You who found the drug of heaven,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">To keep consoled an earth that grew to hell,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">That else to cleanse and cure its sores had striven,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">We curse That name!"<a name="FNanchor_990_990" id="FNanchor_990_990"></a><a href="#Footnote_990_990" class="fnanchor">[990]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_358" id="Page_358">[358]</a></span>There is an eminently practical reason for the hostility of Socialists
+to Christianity. Religious people are not likely to become Socialists.
+"Christianity is like a set of manacles fastened upon the minds of
+those who believe in it. It is vain for us to look for aid from the
+Church and Christianity. It might be supposed that a hungry Christian
+would rebel against his hunger as readily as a hungry Atheist. But it
+is not the case."<a name="FNanchor_991_991" id="FNanchor_991_991"></a><a href="#Footnote_991_991" class="fnanchor">[991]</a></p>
+
+<p>The belief in a life after death also is incompatible with Socialism,
+and must therefore be combated: "We are compelled to abandon the
+belief in immortality. He who is given to meditating on his latter end
+and for whom the question of a post-physical future life for himself
+as an individual is of primary importance, is, generally speaking,
+indifferent where not positively hostile to social ideals."<a name="FNanchor_992_992" id="FNanchor_992_992"></a><a href="#Footnote_992_992" class="fnanchor">[992]</a> "The
+moment this belief in an after-death existence is erected into a
+dogma, the moment it comes to be looked upon as an article of faith,
+which it is a duty to hold, or at least which it is the evidence of an
+ignoble disposition of mind not to hold, then it becomes an enemy to
+be combated."<a name="FNanchor_993_993" id="FNanchor_993_993"></a><a href="#Footnote_993_993" class="fnanchor">[993]</a></p>
+
+<p>The practical teachings of Christ are directly opposed to the
+practical teachings of Socialism: "Jesus said, 'Blessed are the poor.'
+Socialism recognises that wealth is a good thing, and it exists for
+the purpose of securing a better share of it for the 'blessed' poor.
+Socialism declares that all ought to work; but Jesus did no manual
+work after he was thirty years of age, and he encouraged his disciples
+to leave their occupations, to wander about and to beg, and this last
+feature of discipleship has in all ages been well maintained.
+Socialism incites the workers of all countries to unite for the
+prosecution of the class war; but Jesus approved of obedience,
+contentment, and humility of spirit."<a name="FNanchor_994_994" id="FNanchor_994_994"></a><a href="#Footnote_994_994" class="fnanchor">[994]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_359" id="Page_359">[359]</a></span>Socialism has no use for Christianity. "To-day we have to settle down
+to our primers and our programmes, our Blue-books and our social
+experiments, just as if Jesus had never lived, or perhaps all the more
+because he lived. We get no assistance from Him. His followers are our
+enemies in every country which owns His influence&mdash;and the worst
+enemies of all because ever professing friendship."<a name="FNanchor_995_995" id="FNanchor_995_995"></a><a href="#Footnote_995_995" class="fnanchor">[995]</a></p>
+
+<p>Christianity is, according to Socialists, an outworn creed. "As Marx
+says, 'The religious world is but the reflex of the real world.
+Christianity, like all religions, is but an expression of material
+conditions, a direct outcome of social relations, the unsubstantial
+image of a world reflected in the muddy pool of human intellect. Jesus
+varies with the ages. Redeemer of Roman slave; War-God of Crusader;
+General Overseer of Manufacturing Capitalist."<a name="FNanchor_996_996" id="FNanchor_996_996"></a><a href="#Footnote_996_996" class="fnanchor">[996]</a> Besides,
+Socialists resent "the continual reference of ideal perfection to a
+semi-mythical Syrian of the first century when they see higher types
+even in some now walking this upper earth, but in vulgar flesh and
+blood and without the atmosphere of nineteen centuries to lend
+enchantment to them."<a name="FNanchor_997_997" id="FNanchor_997_997"></a><a href="#Footnote_997_997" class="fnanchor">[997]</a></p>
+
+<p>Lastly, Christianity has been a failure: "The success of Christianity
+as a moral force has been solely upon isolated individuals. In its
+effects on societies at large it has signally and necessarily
+failed."<a name="FNanchor_998_998" id="FNanchor_998_998"></a><a href="#Footnote_998_998" class="fnanchor">[998]</a> "Holiness! Your religion does not make it. Its ethics
+are too weak, its theories too unsound, its transcendentalism is too
+thin. There ought to be no such thing as poverty in the world. The
+earth is bounteous: the ingenuity of man is great. He who defends the
+claims of the individual, or of a class, against the rights of the
+human race is a criminal. A hungry man, an idle man, an ignorant man,
+a destitute or degraded woman, a beggar or pauper child, is a
+reproach <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_360" id="Page_360">[360]</a></span>to society and a witness against existing religion and
+civilisation. In such a world as this, friend Christian, a man has no
+business reading the Bible, singing hymns, and attending divine
+worship. He has not time. All the strength and pluck and wit he
+possesses are needed in the work of real religion, of real salvation.
+The rest is all 'dreams out of the ivory gate and visions before
+midnight.'"<a name="FNanchor_999_999" id="FNanchor_999_999"></a><a href="#Footnote_999_999" class="fnanchor">[999]</a> "In a really humane and civilised nation there should
+be and need be no such thing as poverty, ignorance, crime, idleness,
+war, slavery, hate, envy, pride, greed, gluttony, vice. But this is
+not a humane and civilised nation, and never will be while it accepts
+Christianity as its religion."<a name="FNanchor_1000_1000" id="FNanchor_1000_1000"></a><a href="#Footnote_1000_1000" class="fnanchor">[1000]</a></p>
+
+<p>Our belief in God also must be abandoned, but if we continue believing
+in God it follows that man is not responsible for his actions, that he
+cannot do wrong: "Man is what God made him; could only act as God
+enabled him or constructed him to act. If God is responsible for man's
+existence, God is responsible for man's act. Therefore man cannot sin
+against God."<a name="FNanchor_1001_1001" id="FNanchor_1001_1001"></a><a href="#Footnote_1001_1001" class="fnanchor">[1001]</a> "If God is all-knowing, He knew before He made man
+what man would do. If God is all-powerful, He need not have made man
+at all, or He could have made a man who would be strong enough to
+resist temptation. Or He could have made a man who was incapable of
+evil. If God had never made man, then man could never have succumbed
+to temptation. God made man of His own divine choice and made him to
+His own divine desire. How then could God blame man for anything man
+did? Man might justly say to God: 'I did not ask to be created. You
+knew when You made me how I should act. If You wish me to act
+otherwise, why did You not make me different? I was fore-ordained by
+You to be and to do what I am and have done. Is it my fault that You
+fore-ordained me <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_361" id="Page_361">[361]</a></span>to be and to do thus?' The actions of a man's will
+are as mathematically fixed at his birth as are the motions of a
+planet in its orbit. God, who made the man and the planet, is
+responsible for the actions of both."<a name="FNanchor_1002_1002" id="FNanchor_1002_1002"></a><a href="#Footnote_1002_1002" class="fnanchor">[1002]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Divine law says that certain acts are good and that certain acts are
+evil; and that God will reward those who do well and will punish those
+who do ill. And we are told that God will so act because God is just.
+But I claim that God cannot justly punish those who disobey, nor
+reward those who obey His laws. If God created all things, He must
+have created the evil as well as the good. Who, then, is responsible
+for good and evil? Only God, for he made them. He who creates all is
+responsible for all. God created all: God is responsible for all. He
+who creates nothing is responsible for nothing. Man created nothing:
+man is responsible for nothing. Therefore man is not responsible for
+his nature, nor for the acts prompted by that nature. Therefore God
+cannot justly punish man for his acts. Therefore the Divine law, with
+its code of rewards and punishments, is not a just law and cannot have
+emanated from a just God."<a name="FNanchor_1003_1003" id="FNanchor_1003_1003"></a><a href="#Footnote_1003_1003" class="fnanchor">[1003]</a></p>
+
+<p>"I do not pretend to say whether there is, or is not, <i>a</i> God, but I
+deny that there is a loving Heavenly Father who answers prayer. I deny
+the existence of Free Will and possibility of man's sinning against
+God. I deny that Christ is necessary to man's salvation from Hell or
+from Sin. I do not assert or deny the immortality of the soul. I know
+nothing about the soul, and no man is, or ever was, able to tell me
+more than I know."<a name="FNanchor_1004_1004" id="FNanchor_1004_1004"></a><a href="#Footnote_1004_1004" class="fnanchor">[1004]</a> "I do seriously mean that no man can, under
+any circumstances, be justly blamed for anything he may say or do.
+That is one of my deepest convictions."<a name="FNanchor_1005_1005" id="FNanchor_1005_1005"></a><a href="#Footnote_1005_1005" class="fnanchor">[1005]</a></p>
+
+<p>Mr. Blatchford's philosophy excuses, and therefore encourages, every
+action based upon a bad impulse, every <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_362" id="Page_362">[362]</a></span>vice and every crime, and his
+creed should find the unqualified approval of habitual criminals and
+loafers.</p>
+
+<p>Views similar to those of Mr. Blatchford are expressed by many other
+Socialists. We read, for instance: "It was pleasant to believe that a
+benevolent hand was guiding the steps of society; overruling all evil
+appearances for good; and making poverty here the earnest of a great
+blessedness and reward hereafter. It was pleasant to lose the sense of
+worldly inequality in the contemplation of our equality before God.
+But utilitarian questioning and scientific answering turned all this
+tranquil optimism into the blackest pessimism. Nature was shown to us
+as 'red in tooth and claw': if the guiding hand were indeed
+benevolent, then it could not be omnipotent, so that our trust in it
+was broken: if it were omnipotent, it could not be benevolent; so that
+our love in it turned to fear and hatred."<a name="FNanchor_1006_1006" id="FNanchor_1006_1006"></a><a href="#Footnote_1006_1006" class="fnanchor">[1006]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">As long as childhood pines in City slum;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">As long as Landlords steal their racking rent;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">As long as Love and Faith to gold succumb;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">As long as human life in war is spent;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">While false religion teaches men to pray<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">To a false Tyrant, whom they misname God;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Whose "Holy Will" is&mdash;so they glibly say&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The poor should suffer 'neath His chast'ning rod;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">As long as men do buy and sell the soil,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And thereby make their fellow men their slaves;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">While selfishness exacts its cruel spoil;<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">While yet the poor are ground into their graves;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Until these crying wrongs are made to cease<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Nowhere upon this earth can there be peace.<a name="FNanchor_1007_1007" id="FNanchor_1007_1007"></a><a href="#Footnote_1007_1007" class="fnanchor">[1007]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Although the Socialists have declared war against the Christian
+religion and the Christian Churches, they freely quote the Scriptures
+and the Fathers if it suits their purpose, and shamelessly misuse the
+name of Christ. In support of their maxim "Property is theft," they
+quote <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_363" id="Page_363">[363]</a></span>St. Jerome's saying: "Opulence is always the result of theft:
+if not by the actual possessor, then by his predecessors."<a name="FNanchor_1008_1008" id="FNanchor_1008_1008"></a><a href="#Footnote_1008_1008" class="fnanchor">[1008]</a> They
+quote Christ in support of their demand for the abolition of private
+property, marriage and the family. "Christ abolished all private
+property, and with it the State. He abolished all distinctions of
+race, rank, sex, and intellect. He made the first last and the last
+first, acknowledging only devoted <i>service</i> as true greatness; the
+only law, the Law of Love. In His sweeping condemnation of egoism in
+every form it seems doubtful if He did not even lay iconoclastic hands
+on marriage and the family, as they existed and exist. In the
+resurrection they neither marry nor give in marriage, but are as the
+angels in heaven. Woman (to His mother), what have I to do with thee?
+Whosoever shall do the will of My Father which is in heaven the same
+is My brother, and sister, and mother."<a name="FNanchor_1009_1009" id="FNanchor_1009_1009"></a><a href="#Footnote_1009_1009" class="fnanchor">[1009]</a> They use the name of
+Christ for electioneering purposes. At a West Ham election, for
+instance, the electors received leaflets which stated "If you vote for
+the Municipal Alliance you vote against God. If Christ were in
+Plaistow Ward, Christ would vote for Coe."<a name="FNanchor_1010_1010" id="FNanchor_1010_1010"></a><a href="#Footnote_1010_1010" class="fnanchor">[1010]</a></p>
+
+<p>Professor Sch&auml;ffle, perhaps the most fair-minded and moderate
+scientist who ever criticised Socialism, was perfectly right in
+stating: "Socialism of the present day is out-and-out irreligious, and
+hostile to the Church. It says that the Church is only a police
+institution for upholding capital, and that it deceives the common
+people with a 'cheque payable in heaven,' that the Church deserves to
+perish."<a name="FNanchor_1011_1011" id="FNanchor_1011_1011"></a><a href="#Footnote_1011_1011" class="fnanchor">[1011]</a> The above words were written with regard to German
+Socialism, and British Socialism is far more irreligious, violent, and
+revolutionary than is the German variety.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_977_977" id="Footnote_977_977"></a><a href="#FNanchor_977_977"><span class="label">[977]</span></a> Rev. E.T. Russell in <i>Forward</i>, November 23, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_978_978" id="Footnote_978_978"></a><a href="#FNanchor_978_978"><span class="label">[978]</span></a> Rev. L. Jenkyns Jones in <i>Forward</i>, November 16, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_979_979" id="Footnote_979_979"></a><a href="#FNanchor_979_979"><span class="label">[979]</span></a> Rev. Frank Ballard in <i>Socialism: A Cancerous Growth</i>,
+p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_980_980" id="Footnote_980_980"></a><a href="#FNanchor_980_980"><span class="label">[980]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 99.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_981_981" id="Footnote_981_981"></a><a href="#FNanchor_981_981"><span class="label">[981]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_982_982" id="Footnote_982_982"></a><a href="#FNanchor_982_982"><span class="label">[982]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 101.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_983_983" id="Footnote_983_983"></a><a href="#FNanchor_983_983"><span class="label">[983]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, October 10, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_984_984" id="Footnote_984_984"></a><a href="#FNanchor_984_984"><span class="label">[984]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_985_985" id="Footnote_985_985"></a><a href="#FNanchor_985_985"><span class="label">[985]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a
+Week?</i> p. 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_986_986" id="Footnote_986_986"></a><a href="#FNanchor_986_986"><span class="label">[986]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 52.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_987_987" id="Footnote_987_987"></a><a href="#FNanchor_987_987"><span class="label">[987]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 97.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_988_988" id="Footnote_988_988"></a><a href="#FNanchor_988_988"><span class="label">[988]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>God and My Neighbour</i>, p. 189.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_989_989" id="Footnote_989_989"></a><a href="#FNanchor_989_989"><span class="label">[989]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_990_990" id="Footnote_990_990"></a><a href="#FNanchor_990_990"><span class="label">[990]</span></a> Francis Adams, <i>The Mass of Christ</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_991_991" id="Footnote_991_991"></a><a href="#FNanchor_991_991"><span class="label">[991]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_992_992" id="Footnote_992_992"></a><a href="#FNanchor_992_992"><span class="label">[992]</span></a> Bax, <i>Ethics of Socialism</i>, pp. 192, 193.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_993_993" id="Footnote_993_993"></a><a href="#FNanchor_993_993"><span class="label">[993]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 196, 197.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_994_994" id="Footnote_994_994"></a><a href="#FNanchor_994_994"><span class="label">[994]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_995_995" id="Footnote_995_995"></a><a href="#FNanchor_995_995"><span class="label">[995]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_996_996" id="Footnote_996_996"></a><a href="#FNanchor_996_996"><span class="label">[996]</span></a> <i>Socialist Standard</i>, December 1, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_997_997" id="Footnote_997_997"></a><a href="#FNanchor_997_997"><span class="label">[997]</span></a> Bax, <i>The Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 90.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_998_998" id="Footnote_998_998"></a><a href="#FNanchor_998_998"><span class="label">[998]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 98.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_999_999" id="Footnote_999_999"></a><a href="#FNanchor_999_999"><span class="label">[999]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>God and My Neighbour</i>, p. 194.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1000_1000" id="Footnote_1000_1000"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1000_1000"><span class="label">[1000]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 197.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1001_1001" id="Footnote_1001_1001"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1001_1001"><span class="label">[1001]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 124.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1002_1002" id="Footnote_1002_1002"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1002_1002"><span class="label">[1002]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>God and My Neighbour</i>, pp. 135, 136.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1003_1003" id="Footnote_1003_1003"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1003_1003"><span class="label">[1003]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Not Guilty</i>, pp. 11, 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1004_1004" id="Footnote_1004_1004"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1004_1004"><span class="label">[1004]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>God and My Neighbour</i>, p. 122.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1005_1005" id="Footnote_1005_1005"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1005_1005"><span class="label">[1005]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 137.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1006_1006" id="Footnote_1006_1006"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1006_1006"><span class="label">[1006]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 27.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1007_1007" id="Footnote_1007_1007"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1007_1007"><span class="label">[1007]</span></a> <i>The Deadly Parallel</i>, October 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1008_1008" id="Footnote_1008_1008"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1008_1008"><span class="label">[1008]</span></a> Wheatley, <i>How the Miners are Robbed</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1009_1009" id="Footnote_1009_1009"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1009_1009"><span class="label">[1009]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Gospel of the Poor</i>, p. 149.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1010_1010" id="Footnote_1010_1010"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1010_1010"><span class="label">[1010]</span></a> <i>Times, Municipal Socialism</i>, p. 42.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1011_1011" id="Footnote_1011_1011"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1011_1011"><span class="label">[1011]</span></a> Sch&auml;ffle, <i>Quintessence of Socialism</i>, p. 116.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXVII" id="CHAPTER_XXVII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_364" id="Page_364">[364]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXVII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE RELIGION OF SOCIALISM</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">We have seen in Chapter XXVI. that Socialism makes war upon
+Christianity and upon religion, that it strives to eradicate religion
+out of the people's hearts. Now the question arises: How do Socialists
+propose to fill the void? What do they intend to put into the place of
+that religion which they wish to destroy?</p>
+
+<p>"Socialism involves a change which would be almost a revolution in the
+moral and religious attitude of the majority of mankind."<a name="FNanchor_1012_1012" id="FNanchor_1012_1012"></a><a href="#Footnote_1012_1012" class="fnanchor">[1012]</a>
+"Religion will share the fate of the State. It will not be
+'abolished,' God will not be dethroned, religion will not be 'torn out
+of the people's hearts.' Religion will disappear by itself without any
+violent attack."<a name="FNanchor_1013_1013" id="FNanchor_1013_1013"></a><a href="#Footnote_1013_1013" class="fnanchor">[1013]</a> "The establishment of society on a Socialistic
+basis would imply the definitive abandonment of all theological cults,
+since the notion of a transcendent god or semi-divine prophet is but
+the counterpart and analogue of the transcendent governing class. So
+soon as we are rid of the desire of one section of society to enslave
+another, the dogmas of an effete creed will lose their interest. As
+the religion of slave industry was Paganism; as the religion of
+serfage was Catholic Christianity, or Sacerdotalism; as the religion
+of Capitalism is Protestant Christianity or Biblical dogma, so the
+religion of collective and co-operative industry is Humanism, which is
+only another name for Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1014_1014" id="FNanchor_1014_1014"></a><a href="#Footnote_1014_1014" class="fnanchor">[1014]</a> <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_365" id="Page_365">[365]</a></span>"The religion of the future
+is to be the religion of the common life. It will have for its ideal
+the complete organic unity of the whole human race. And this religion
+will be a political religion. It will be a religion which will seek to
+realise its ideal in our industrial and social affairs by the
+application and use of political methods. The popular conception of
+politics as something apart from religion is a cunning device of the
+devil to serve his own ends; just in the same way as the popular
+impression that politics is something apart from bread and butter, and
+shorter hours, and better homes, and better industrial conditions.
+There can be no separation between politics and religion. The religion
+of the future will be an application of the moral truths of religion
+through politics to our industrial and social conditions."<a name="FNanchor_1015_1015" id="FNanchor_1015_1015"></a><a href="#Footnote_1015_1015" class="fnanchor">[1015]</a></p>
+
+<p>To root out the very memory of Christianity, Socialists would abolish
+the Sunday. "We would surrender once and for all this chimerical
+notion of one day of universal rest and institute three days a week,
+or, if necessary, more, as days of partial rest, <i>i.e.</i> on which
+different sections of the community would be freed from labour in
+turn."<a name="FNanchor_1016_1016" id="FNanchor_1016_1016"></a><a href="#Footnote_1016_1016" class="fnanchor">[1016]</a></p>
+
+<p>This proposal, like so many Socialist proposals, reminds us of the
+French Revolution, which also simultaneously abolished the Christian
+religion and changed the calendar. The month was divided into three
+periods of ten days. The tenth day, the "<i>decadi</i>," replaced
+Sunday.<a name="FNanchor_1017_1017" id="FNanchor_1017_1017"></a><a href="#Footnote_1017_1017" class="fnanchor">[1017]</a> The people were compelled to rest on <i>decadi</i> and to
+work on Sunday. Peasants who on Sundays did not bring their vegetables
+to market were prosecuted.<a name="FNanchor_1018_1018" id="FNanchor_1018_1018"></a><a href="#Footnote_1018_1018" class="fnanchor">[1018]</a> Policemen who on <i>decadi</i> heard
+suspicious noises broke by force into houses to find out whether
+people were <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_366" id="Page_366">[366]</a></span>"desecrating" <i>decadi</i> by work, and the people
+complained, "Where is the liberty you promised us when we may not even
+dance on any day we like?"<a name="FNanchor_1019_1019" id="FNanchor_1019_1019"></a><a href="#Footnote_1019_1019" class="fnanchor">[1019]</a></p>
+
+<p>The French Revolutionaries destroyed the statues and pictures in the
+churches. British Socialists at present only propose to replace the
+effigies of Christ and the saints by Socialist heroes: "Let the
+painters, sculptors, poets, and musicians do honour to the heroes of
+humanity, the apostles of science and progress, as they have
+heretofore lavished their taste and skill and imagination on a
+conventional Jesus, an ideal Madonna and imaginary saints, and Gospel
+scenes; let statues arise to Bruno, Vanini, Servetus; let the
+historian and the biographer recount with loving wealth of detail
+their struggles, controversies, flights, imprisonments, and
+martyrdoms; let poets and painters cast the halo of romantic art
+around Caxton, Galileo, William the Silent, Milton, Harry Vane, and
+great masterful Cromwell; let hymns be sung to Copernicus, Newton,
+Harvey, to Massaniello, Danton, Garibaldi, Delescluze, to Grace
+Darling, Sister Dora and Father Damien."<a name="FNanchor_1020_1020" id="FNanchor_1020_1020"></a><a href="#Footnote_1020_1020" class="fnanchor">[1020]</a></p>
+
+<p>"To the Socialist, Marx has said the last word that need be said on
+the subject of the relation of Socialism and religion. 'The religious
+reflex of the real world can only finally vanish when the practical
+relations of everyday life offer to man none but perfectly
+intelligible and reasonable relations with regard to his fellow men.'
+Material conditions rule. 'The English Established Church will more
+readily pardon an attack on thirty-eight of its thirty-nine articles
+than on one-thirty-ninth of its income.' This is as true to-day as
+when written in 1867."<a name="FNanchor_1021_1021" id="FNanchor_1021_1021"></a><a href="#Footnote_1021_1021" class="fnanchor">[1021]</a> Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded by
+the Social-Democratic Federation is, of course, "the disestablishment
+and disendowment of all State churches."<a name="FNanchor_1022_1022" id="FNanchor_1022_1022"></a><a href="#Footnote_1022_1022" class="fnanchor">[1022]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_367" id="Page_367">[367]</a></span>British Socialists, like the French Revolutionaries, have issued
+numerous travesties of the Christian church service. The following are
+extracts from a widely read "Socialist Ritual."</p>
+
+<div class="block">
+<h4 class="sc">"A Catechism for the Mob</h4>
+
+<p>"<i>Q.</i> What is thy name? <i>A.</i> Wageworker.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Who are thy parents?
+<i>A.</i> My father was called Wageworker&mdash;my mother's name is
+Poverty.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Where wast thou born? <i>A.</i> In a garret under the roof
+of a tenement house which my father and his comrades built.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What
+is thy religion? <i>A.</i> The Religion of Capital.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What duties does
+thy religion lay upon thee with regard to society? <i>A.</i> To increase
+the national wealth&mdash;first through my toil, and next through my
+savings, as soon as I can make any.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What does thy religion order
+thee to do with thy savings? <i>A.</i> To entrust them to the banks and
+such other institutions that have been established by philanthropic
+financiers, to the end that they may loan them out to themselves. We
+are commanded to place our earnings at all times at the disposal of
+our masters."</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">"A Litany</h4>
+
+<p class="noin">for the use of the respectable classes. Edited by Edward Carpenter.</p>
+
+<p>"O God, the Father of Heaven, have mercy upon us, miserable
+sinners.&mdash;Remember not, Lord, our offences, nor the offences of our
+forefathers, neither take thou vengeance of our sins. Spare us, good
+Lord; spare us whom thou hast brought into honour and good position
+through the precious blood of the toiling masses, and be not angry
+with us for ever: Spare us, good Lord.&mdash;From all evil and mischief,
+from the crafts and assaults of the thief and the burglar, from
+poverty and the everlasting <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_368" id="Page_368">[368]</a></span>damnation of the workhouse: Good Lord,
+deliver us.&mdash;From bad trade and bogus dividends, from shady and
+unprofitable investments, from all unsuccessful speculation and
+losses, whether on the turf or in the City: Good Lord, deliver us."</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">"The Capitalist's Ten Commandments</h4>
+
+<p>"I am Capital, thy Master, that brought thee out of the Land of
+Liberty into a State of Slavery. Thou shalt not become thine own
+Master, nor have any other Masters but me. Thou shalt commit murder
+for my sake only. Thou shalt give thy daughters in prostitution and
+thy wife in adultery to me."</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">The Latest Decalogue</h4>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Thou shalt have one God only, who<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Would be at the expense of two?<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">No graven images may be<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Worshipped, except the currency.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Swear not at all, as for thy curse<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Thine enemy is none the worse.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">At Church on Sunday to attend<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Will serve to keep the world thy friend.<a name="FNanchor_1023_1023" id="FNanchor_1023_1023"></a><a href="#Footnote_1023_1023" class="fnanchor">[1023]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+</div>
+
+<p>The foregoing representative statements and extracts clearly prove
+that the teachings of Socialism, far from being in harmony with
+Christianity, are incompatible and directly hostile not only to
+Christianity but to all religion. The philosopher of British Socialism
+has very truly said, "Socialism has been well described as a new
+conception of the world, presenting itself in industry as co-operative
+Communism, in politics as international Republicanism, in religion as
+atheistic Humanism, by which is meant the recognition of social
+progress as our being's highest end and aim."<a name="FNanchor_1024_1024" id="FNanchor_1024_1024"></a><a href="#Footnote_1024_1024" class="fnanchor">[1024]</a> As there is very
+little difference between "atheistic Humanism" and Atheism pure and
+simple, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_369" id="Page_369">[369]</a></span>Socialists have really no right to complain if their
+opponents, relying on Bax's high authority, reproach them with being
+Atheists. The excerpts given above show that the religion of Socialism
+is a political and economic one. Its character and principles may be
+found in the publications of the Labour Church Union and of the
+Socialist Sunday School Union. The prospectus of the Labour Church
+Union contains the following declaration of principles:</p>
+
+<p>"(1) That the Labour Church exists to give expression to the religion
+of the Labour movement. (2) That the religion of the Labour movement
+is not theological, but respects each individual's personal
+convictions upon this question. (3) That the religion of the Labour
+movement seeks the realisation of universal well-being by the
+establishment of Socialism&mdash;a Commonwealth founded upon justice and
+love. (4) The religion of the Labour movement declares that
+improvement of social conditions and the development of personal
+character are both essential to emancipation from social and moral
+bondage, and to that end insists upon the duty of studying the
+economic and moral forces of society."</p>
+
+<p>It will be noticed that the words Christianity, God, morality, virtue,
+&amp;c., do not occur in the foregoing statement.</p>
+
+<p>Now let us study the details of the Socialist religion. These details
+are taken from a statement of the aims, methods, &amp;c. of the Socialist
+Sunday Schools, published for the enlightenment of the public by the
+Glasgow and District Socialist Sunday School Union, the principal
+Socialist Sunday School Union of Great Britain. In that official
+publication we read: "Socialism, which the children are taught, is an
+idealism. It has been described as 'the highest flight of the ideal
+into the realm of the practical.' It is a faith&mdash;a faith based on the
+divine <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_370" id="Page_370">[370]</a></span>brotherhood and sisterhood of humanity&mdash;irrespective of class,
+colour, or creed. It is a religion&mdash;a religion greater than creeds or
+dogmas. It is a religion of love! Its followers and disciples are
+lovers of mankind! Its worship is service to humanity! Socialism has
+absorbed not only all the essential spiritual elements contained in
+the Christ teaching, but it has also, as Christianity itself has done
+before it, absorbed all the highest altruistic teaching of the ages.
+But Socialism has done something more&mdash;it has struck a new note,
+deep-sounding, far-reaching, and its vibrations are stirring in the
+hearts of the nations! Socialism has proclaimed its tenets, declaring
+the only possible ways and means whereby the sacred rites of the
+religion of love can be observed, and without which there can be no
+realisation of the divine sentiment&mdash;'the brotherhood of man.'</p>
+
+<p>"The Church, the State, and the people alike, in so far as they
+sanction and sanctify unrighteous social conditions, are equally
+guilty of breaking the very first laws of brotherhood, and thereby of
+violating the pure and holy religion of love. When the Sun of Social
+Justice&mdash;Socialism&mdash;has arisen in its full glory, all the artificial
+and unnatural causes of evil and error will have been rooted out from
+the pathway of human progress. The sons and daughters of men may then,
+without mockery, stand before the great throne of love and worship the
+beauty and the wonder and the glory of the earth, sky, and sea, as
+brothers and sisters in one holy unity, and be more worthy to fathom
+the deeper mystery. Thus Socialism, or the law of the religion of
+love, unfalteringly maintains: That private property in land is public
+robbery. It is public robbery because, the land being the source of
+all the necessaries of life, it should belong equally to all, by
+birthright of our common inheritance in the brotherhood of the world.
+'Let them know that the earth from which they were created is the
+common <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_371" id="Page_371">[371]</a></span>property of all men, and that therefore the fruits of the
+earth belong indiscriminately to all. Those who make private property
+of the gift of God, pretend in vain to be innocent, for they are the
+murderers of those who die daily for want of it.' Such is the terrible
+and unassailable dictum of one of the great founders of the early
+Christian Church, Saint Gregory I. Private property in
+capital&mdash;whether in money, railways, mines, factories, machinery,
+tools, &amp;c.&mdash;is public robbery. It is public robbery because it creates
+and divides the human family into classes. Classes of rich and idle
+people who claim and hold all these things as by right&mdash;and classes of
+hirelings who are thus forced to pay for the use of them&mdash;as rent in
+land, interest in capital, profit on labour. This means that the
+hireling classes require to give all the work of their hands and
+brains in order to secure a small share of the things which they need
+to live, and which they themselves have produced out of Nature's ample
+store. And this at once hinders the possibility of any unity of
+brotherhood or sisterhood and breaks the law of love."<a name="FNanchor_1025_1025" id="FNanchor_1025_1025"></a><a href="#Footnote_1025_1025" class="fnanchor">[1025]</a></p>
+
+<p>It will be noticed that in this lengthy statement God is mentioned
+only for party purposes, and that the chief aim of the "religion of
+love" is to sow hatred and to incite to plunder.</p>
+
+<p>The Labour Church Union and the Socialist Sunday Schools use the same
+form of the Socialist Ten Commandments, which are as follows:</p>
+
+<p>"Love your schoolfellows, who will be your fellow-workers in life.
+Love learning, which is the food of the mind, and be grateful to your
+teacher as to your parents. Make every day holy by good and useful
+deeds and kindly actions. Honour good men, be courteous to all, bow
+down to none. Do not hate or speak evil of anyone, do not be
+revengeful, but stand up for your rights and resist oppression. Do not
+be cowardly, be a friend to the weak <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_372" id="Page_372">[372]</a></span>and love justice. Remember that
+all the good things of the earth are produced by labour. Whoever
+enjoys them without working for them is stealing the bread of the
+workers. Observe and think in order to discover the truth. Do not
+believe what is contrary to reason, and never deceive yourself or
+others. Do not think that he who loves his own country must hate and
+despise other nations, or wish for war, which is a remnant of
+barbarism. Look forward to the day when all men will be free citizens
+of one fatherland and live together as brothers, in peace and
+righteousness. Socialism is the hope of the world."</p>
+
+<p>Here also the words Christianity and God do not occur.</p>
+
+<p>We are officially told that "Socialist Sunday Schools are intended to
+serve as a means of teaching economic causes of present-day social
+evils and of implanting a love of goodness in the child mind."<a name="FNanchor_1026_1026" id="FNanchor_1026_1026"></a><a href="#Footnote_1026_1026" class="fnanchor">[1026]</a></p>
+
+<p>The following extracts from the "Red Catechism" serve to show how
+"love of goodness" is inculcated in the Socialist Sunday Schools:</p>
+
+<p>"<i>Q.</i> Is there any difference in the teachings at Socialist Sunday
+schools and other Sunday schools? <i>A.</i> Yes.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What is taught in
+Christian schools? <i>A.</i> Christian morals and capitalist
+teachings.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What is meant by the term 'employing men for profit'?
+<i>A.</i> Capitalists, when they pay wages, make the workers produce three
+or four times the amount they pay them. The extra which the men
+produce over their wages is called profit.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What evidence is
+there that the workers earn a great amount and get very little? <i>A.</i>
+The national amount of wealth produced every year is two thousand
+millions and the amount paid out in wages is only five hundred
+millions, showing that the poor are poor because they are
+robbed.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Who creates all wealth? <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_373" id="Page_373">[373]</a></span><i>A.</i> The working class.&mdash;<i>Q.</i>
+Who creates all poverty? <i>A.</i> Our capitalist society.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Who are
+the workers? <i>A.</i> Men who work for wages.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What class of men get
+into Parliament? <i>A.</i> The capitalist and aristocratic class?&mdash;<i>Q.</i> How
+is that? <i>A.</i> Because the workers are opposed by men interested in
+keeping them poor.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> How many children are there in London who go
+to school insufficiently fed and clothed? <i>A.</i> It is stated as many as
+100,000; a number equal to the population of a small county.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> To
+what class do these poor starving children belong? <i>A.</i> The working
+class.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Is it not the working class which creates all wealth?
+<i>A.</i> Yes.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Do the rich trouble about the poor children of London
+who are ill-fed and clothed? <i>A.</i> No.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What is a pauper? <i>A.</i> One
+who lives upon others, while being able to work?&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Are the rich
+class able to work? <i>A.</i> Yes; because they are well cared for when
+young and grow up strong?&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Do they work? <i>A.</i> No; they consider
+it menial and beneath them.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Then they are paupers? <i>A.</i>
+Yes.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Do the rich and their children live at the expense of those
+who work? <i>A.</i> Yes.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What does machinery enable the workers to
+do? <i>A.</i> To produce wealth quicker.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Do the workers benefit by
+machinery? <i>A.</i> No. On the contrary. It generally reduces their wages
+and throws them out of work.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Why is that? <i>A.</i> Because the
+machinery is controlled by the capitalist class.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What is a
+wage-slave? <i>A.</i> A person who works for a wage and gives all he earns
+to a capitalist.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What proportion does a wage-slave receive of
+what he earns? <i>A.</i> On the average about a fourth. The slave and serf
+always had food, clothing, and shelter. The wage-slave, when he is out
+of work, must now starve or go into the workhouse and be made
+miserable, or commit suicide.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> What is the remedy for
+wage-slavery? <i>A.</i> Socialism.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Who pays the rent? <i>A.</i> Father and
+mother.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Who demands the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_374" id="Page_374">[374]</a></span>rent? <i>A.</i> The landlord.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Can you
+say how much the landlord takes from the wages of father, generally
+for rent? <i>A.</i> Yes; a fourth.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> That is sheer robbery, is it not?
+<i>A.</i> Yes; but working men cannot help it.&mdash;<i>Q.</i> Why is that? <i>A.</i>
+Because the landlord class have a monopoly of land and houses, and
+workmen have no land and are too poor to build for themselves."<a name="FNanchor_1027_1027" id="FNanchor_1027_1027"></a><a href="#Footnote_1027_1027" class="fnanchor">[1027]</a></p>
+
+<p>With this mendacious stuff the "Religion of Love" systematically
+poisons the innocent minds of little children. The religion of
+Socialism is indeed a political religion, as Mr. Snowden, M.P., has
+stated.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1012_1012" id="Footnote_1012_1012"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1012_1012"><span class="label">[1012]</span></a> Ball, <i>The Moral Aspects of Socialism</i>, p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1013_1013" id="Footnote_1013_1013"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1013_1013"><span class="label">[1013]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 213.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1014_1014" id="Footnote_1014_1014"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1014_1014"><span class="label">[1014]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 81.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1015_1015" id="Footnote_1015_1015"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1015_1015"><span class="label">[1015]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Christ that Is to be</i>, pp. 6, 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1016_1016" id="Footnote_1016_1016"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1016_1016"><span class="label">[1016]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, pp. 58, 59.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1017_1017" id="Footnote_1017_1017"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1017_1017"><span class="label">[1017]</span></a> Mignet, <i>Revolution Fran&ccedil;aise</i>, ch. viii.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1018_1018" id="Footnote_1018_1018"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1018_1018"><span class="label">[1018]</span></a> Sciout, iii. 176.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1019_1019" id="Footnote_1019_1019"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1019_1019"><span class="label">[1019]</span></a> Sciout, iv. 386.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1020_1020" id="Footnote_1020_1020"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1020_1020"><span class="label">[1020]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1021_1021" id="Footnote_1021_1021"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1021_1021"><span class="label">[1021]</span></a> <i>Socialist Standard</i>, December 1, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1022_1022" id="Footnote_1022_1022"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1022_1022"><span class="label">[1022]</span></a> See Appendix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1023_1023" id="Footnote_1023_1023"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1023_1023"><span class="label">[1023]</span></a> <i>A Socialists' Ritual</i>, pp. 7-16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1024_1024" id="Footnote_1024_1024"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1024_1024"><span class="label">[1024]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. 81.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1025_1025" id="Footnote_1025_1025"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1025_1025"><span class="label">[1025]</span></a> Glasier, <i>Socialist Sunday Schools</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1026_1026" id="Footnote_1026_1026"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1026_1026"><span class="label">[1026]</span></a> Glasier, <i>Socialist Sunday Schools</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1027_1027" id="Footnote_1027_1027"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1027_1027"><span class="label">[1027]</span></a> Hazell, <i>The Red Catechism</i>, pp. 3-10.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXVIII" id="CHAPTER_XXVIII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_375" id="Page_375">[375]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXVIII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The position of the Christian Churches and of Christian ministers
+towards Socialism is one of considerable difficulty. Socialism and
+Christianity are two words which are not easily reconcilable. Chapters
+XXVI. and XXVII. show that the attitude of British Socialists, not
+only towards Christianity but towards all religion, is in the main a
+hostile one. Their attitude is only logical. Socialists see in
+religious men and in religious corporations obstacles to their
+revolutionary and predatory progress. However, as many Socialists have
+declared that the teachings of Christ and of Socialism are identical,
+some large-hearted Christian ministers have tried to reconcile
+Christianity and Socialism. Working under the banner of Christian
+Socialism, these are rather trying to exercise practical Christianity
+than to assist the Socialist agitation, as may be seen from their
+programmes given in the Appendix.</p>
+
+<p>Many Christian Socialist ministers are pious and worthy men whose
+actions are wise and moderate. Others have adopted an attitude of
+hysterical enthusiasm and admiration towards Socialism. Whilst the
+former have only a few adherents, some of the latter have rapidly
+secured for themselves a considerable Socialist following, and if one
+takes note of their views, one cannot help doubting whether their
+motives are entirely disinterested. The following utterances, for
+instance, one would expect <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_376" id="Page_376">[376]</a></span>from the mouth of a Soudanese dervish or
+an Indian fakir, but not from the pen of a Christian minister:</p>
+
+<p>"Socialism is the Greatest Movement for Justice and Brotherhood that
+this old Planet has ever known. Socialism is the Greatest Passion for
+the Release and Freedom of the Human Soul that this world has ever
+felt. Socialism is the Greatest Urge of the Average Man to stand
+erect, independent, and free, without a Master and without a slave,
+that the human race has ever experienced.</p>
+
+<p>"The Spirit of the Lord of Life within me, burning as a fierce flame
+in my bones, saith 'Speak unto the people these words': There is only
+one Sacred Thing beneath the stars&mdash;Human Life. Human Life is the
+Incarnation of the Desire of the Lord of Life. Behold! He awaits the
+Full Expression, the Complete Emancipation, the Perfect Freedom of
+that Human Life, as Life, in all its undisclosed majestic meanings.
+And it doth not yet appear what it shall be! The Average Man at your
+side in the street, next door&mdash;the average woman, any woman, the
+child, any child&mdash;Behold here is the Sacred One. Love, Worship, and
+Bless in the name of the Lord of Life. 'Inasmuch as ye have done it
+unto one of the least of these, ye have done it unto Me.' No
+artificial, conventional, social, or financial dignity can make that
+Human One worthy; no present degradation or humiliation can finally
+obscure that Radiant One. 'I see through your sham tinsel and title; I
+see through the dirt and despair to the Human One shining there,'
+saith the Living Truth. 'The worship that passeth these Darlings of My
+Heart and leaveth them&mdash;that worship I am against,' saith the Lord of
+Life. O stand erect now, just where you are, just as you read these
+words. Thou hast no Superior! Thou art very Beautiful! Thou art the
+Freedom Incarnate, whose Heart-beat shall dissolve all slaveries and
+Injustice. I Love thee, O Thou Human <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_377" id="Page_377">[377]</a></span>One. There is only one Sacred
+Thing beneath the stars&mdash;Human Life. Whatever hurts, harms, makes
+cheap, blights, hinders, enslaves, subordinates, or profits off Human
+Life is Wrong tho' demanded by ten thousand priests, tho' framed in a
+thousand laws, tho' hoary with ten thousand years. Whatever hurts the
+Son of man&mdash;that&mdash;that is the Blasphemy. Whatever helps, releases,
+emancipates, makes free, glorifies, makes sacred, enlarges, enricheth
+Human Life, that is the Right and Good, tho' persecuted by private
+interests; that is the Truth, tho' withstood by dead men's creeds.
+Whatever emancipates the average man&mdash;that&mdash;that is the coming of the
+Lord. The Fundamental fact of Life is Bread. Man doth not&mdash;cannot live
+by Bread alone. But man cannot live without Bread. In the eating of
+Bread, behold the Divine Democracy of Human Life. The necessity of
+eating Bread&mdash;there is the Universal Sacrament&mdash;all are present&mdash;all
+partake. Behold, the Supper of the Lord is&mdash;just Bread&mdash;our common
+Daily Bread. Why is this Bread Sacred? Not in itself. No! Why, then?
+It is the food of the Sacred Ones&mdash;the Human Ones. It is the Food of
+the Incarnation of the Lord of Life. And the first Basic Sacred
+Ceremony of Man is&mdash;Labour in securing that Bread&mdash;the Fact of
+Bread-Getting. If that is not Just, True, Right, Good, a
+Blessing&mdash;then nothing is. All else is measured here. You cannot build
+a Sacred Ceremony in the superstructure of Human Life if the Basis in
+Bread-getting is a Lie, a Fraud, a Cheat, a Theft, a Slavery, a
+Service to the Gain-god&mdash;Mammon, a Gamble with Human Flesh. Nay,
+verily! 'I will not hear your prayers, your chants, your liturgies,
+your praises; My soul hateth even your solemn meeting,' said the Lord
+of Life, if thou wilt not see Me in these Human Ones as they struggle
+for Bread, if thou wilt not make thy Bread-getting Just, and Holy, and
+Good, and True.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_378" id="Page_378">[378]</a></span>"And now, O Capitalism, Thou art doomed! I am against thee, saith the
+Spirit. O Capitalism, I have weighed thee in My balances&mdash;thou art
+found wanting. O Capitalism, thou hast gambled with the Land that I
+gave to all for Bread. O Capitalism, thou hast gambled with the great
+machines that are for the bread-getting of the people. O Capitalism,
+thou hast made Human need an asset of thy gains. Thy Purse is filled
+with Bloody Coin. Thy Store-Houses burst where the many Hunger. The
+Little Ones cry in the streets whilst thou hidest thy Plunder. I am
+against thee, O Capitalism, I am against thee! Thou hast gambled with
+the very Bodies and Souls of men in thy Mad Mammonism. Thy fierce
+Profit-Hunger Hath rejoiced in the Hunger of Man. I am against thee, O
+Capitalism!</p>
+
+<p>"Behold! the Day Dawns! I see Justice arise. I see the Land redeemed!
+I see the Titans of Iron, the machinery of shops, used for man! I see
+the Toilers go forth to their labours and return with the product of
+their toil! I see Capitalism lie prone! I see Mammonism fallen! I see
+the Profit of the Many Arise! I see Freedom! I see Brotherhood! I see
+the Socialist Age! I see the Commonwealth of Man! 'Tis the coming of
+the Lord of Life."<a name="FNanchor_1028_1028" id="FNanchor_1028_1028"></a><a href="#Footnote_1028_1028" class="fnanchor">[1028]</a></p>
+
+<p>Much of the foregoing is printed in half-inch letters. At the end of
+these wild utterances we read in letters an inch tall: "Rally, Rally,
+Rally! Great Social Crusade! Rally, Rally, Rally!"&mdash;which unpleasantly
+reminds one of the shouting butcher's insistent cry, "Buy, Buy, Buy!"
+to be heard in crowded thoroughfares on Saturday nights.</p>
+
+<p>The moderate Christian Socialists cannot help opposing the most
+important item in the Socialist programme. For example, "The Christian
+Social Union asserts that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_379" id="Page_379">[379]</a></span>it has not the slightest sympathy with
+confiscation." In fact, "the whole question of expropriation is
+tacitly ignored in the literature of Christian Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1029_1029" id="FNanchor_1029_1029"></a><a href="#Footnote_1029_1029" class="fnanchor">[1029]</a> "The
+Christian who believes in the words: 'Take heed, and keep yourselves
+from all covetousness, for a man's life consisteth not in the
+abundance of the things which he possesseth,' cannot easily be a
+Socialist, and a Christian minister cannot easily approve of the
+spoliation of the Church."<a name="FNanchor_1030_1030" id="FNanchor_1030_1030"></a><a href="#Footnote_1030_1030" class="fnanchor">[1030]</a> Professor Flint stated quite
+correctly: "What is called Christian Socialism will always be found to
+be unchristian in so far as it is socialistic, or unsocialistic in so
+far as it is truly and fully Christian."<a name="FNanchor_1031_1031" id="FNanchor_1031_1031"></a><a href="#Footnote_1031_1031" class="fnanchor">[1031]</a></p>
+
+<p>Christian Socialist leaders urge Socialists to join the Christian
+Socialist movement. "Every Socialist who understands how deeply
+religion has been concerned in every movement that has ever won the
+enthusiasm of men, every Socialist who realises how enormous is the
+work before him, must welcome the assistance of this ancient and
+imperishable organ of love and justice. And every Christian who
+rejoices in the singular growth of religious zeal in recent years must
+long to see all that huge force given to the service of the Humanity
+which Jesus Christ has taken up into the Godhead. For the man that
+loves much is a Socialist, and the man that loves most is a saint, and
+every man that truly loves the brotherhood is in a state of
+salvation."<a name="FNanchor_1032_1032" id="FNanchor_1032_1032"></a><a href="#Footnote_1032_1032" class="fnanchor">[1032]</a> These words seem rather perfunctory and laboured.</p>
+
+<p>By far the largest number of Socialists regard the Christian Socialist
+movement with suspicion and dislike. The philosopher of British
+Socialism, Mr. Bax, for instance, wrote contemptuously: "The leaders
+of the Guild of St. Matthew wish to accomplish vast changes through 'a
+clarified Christianity'?&mdash;a Christianity which <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_380" id="Page_380">[380]</a></span>shall consist
+apparently of the skins of dead dogmas stuffed with adulterated
+Socialist ethics." A leading Socialist weekly wrote of the early
+Christian Socialists: "Whether their labours were largely beneficial
+depends on the way one looks at these things. We have no doubt that
+for the capitalist class these labours were eminently beneficial, and
+that is why Maurice and his friends are held in such great esteem by
+them. For the working class, however, their labours spelt slavery, and
+ought always to be remembered when similar attempts to 'Christianise'
+Socialism are made by the 'servants' of the Church. Here, as in many
+other things, the motto of the worker must be 'I fear the Greeks, even
+when they come with gifts.'"<a name="FNanchor_1033_1033" id="FNanchor_1033_1033"></a><a href="#Footnote_1033_1033" class="fnanchor">[1033]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1028_1028" id="Footnote_1028_1028"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1028_1028"><span class="label">[1028]</span></a> <i>The Social Crusade to Herald the Message of Truth and
+Freedom to this Age, conducted by Rev. J. Stitt Wilson, M.A.</i>,
+November 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1029_1029" id="Footnote_1029_1029"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1029_1029"><span class="label">[1029]</span></a> Woodworth, <i>Christian Socialism in England</i>, p. 161.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1030_1030" id="Footnote_1030_1030"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1030_1030"><span class="label">[1030]</span></a> <i>Church and Socialism</i>, p. 39.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1031_1031" id="Footnote_1031_1031"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1031_1031"><span class="label">[1031]</span></a> Flint, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 441.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1032_1032" id="Footnote_1032_1032"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1032_1032"><span class="label">[1032]</span></a> Dearmer, <i>Socialism and Christianity</i>, pp. 22, 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1033_1033" id="Footnote_1033_1033"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1033_1033"><span class="label">[1033]</span></a> <i>Justice</i>, October 19, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXIX" id="CHAPTER_XXIX"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_381" id="Page_381">[381]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXIX<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Socialism is not a simple but a complex movement. It contains a
+powerful strain both of Communism and of Anarchism. In fact one might
+almost divide all Socialists into two classes: Communist Socialists
+and Anarchist Socialists. A study of the history of Socialism,
+Communism, and Anarchism shows that all three movements have much in
+common. It shows instances of Socialistic parties branching out and
+having Communist and Anarchist offshoots, and shows instances of
+Anarchist and Communist groups combining under the red banner of
+Socialism.</p>
+
+<p>Owing to its intimate historical and sentimental connection with
+Communism and Anarchism, Socialism is hostile to the State, and many
+Socialists desire its downfall: "The expropriation of all the private
+proprietors of the means of production being effected, society starts
+on a new basis. The conditions of existence and of human life are
+changed. The State Organisation gradually loses its foundation. The
+State expires with the expiration of a ruling class, just as religion
+expires when the belief in supernatural beings or supernatural
+reasoning powers ceases to exist."<a name="FNanchor_1034_1034" id="FNanchor_1034_1034"></a><a href="#Footnote_1034_1034" class="fnanchor">[1034]</a> "The first act wherein the
+State appears as the real representative of the whole body social&mdash;the
+seizure of the means of production in the name of society&mdash;is also its
+last independent act as State. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_382" id="Page_382">[382]</a></span>The interference of the State in
+social relations becomes superfluous in one domain after another and
+falls of itself into desuetude. The place of a government over persons
+is taken by the administration of things and the conduct of the
+processes of production. The State is not 'abolished,' it dies
+out."<a name="FNanchor_1035_1035" id="FNanchor_1035_1035"></a><a href="#Footnote_1035_1035" class="fnanchor">[1035]</a> "The representatives of the State will have disappeared
+along with the State itself&mdash;ministers, parliaments, standing armies,
+police and <i>gens-d'armes</i>, law courts, lawyers and public prosecutors,
+prisons, rates, taxes and excises&mdash;the entire political apparatus. The
+great and yet so petty parliamentary struggles have given place to
+administrative colleges and administrative delegations, whose function
+it is to settle the best methods of production and
+distribution."<a name="FNanchor_1036_1036" id="FNanchor_1036_1036"></a><a href="#Footnote_1036_1036" class="fnanchor">[1036]</a> "The Co-operative Commonwealth will incorporate
+the whole people into society. The whole people does not want, or
+need, any government at all. It simply wants administration&mdash;good
+administration,"<a name="FNanchor_1037_1037" id="FNanchor_1037_1037"></a><a href="#Footnote_1037_1037" class="fnanchor">[1037]</a></p>
+
+<p>The arguments contained in the foregoing extracts are exceedingly
+shallow. The various authorities quoted tell us in more or less
+involved language that the State disappears because "governments" will
+be replaced by "administrations." Unconvincing verbiage apart, the
+only change which would take place would be a change of name.
+Countries would be ruled by Socialist governments instead of by
+non-Socialist ones. The State could disappear only with the
+disappearance of nations and of frontiers, with the advent of the
+"Brotherhood of Man." The first Socialist State might of course
+proclaim the Brotherhood of Man in accordance with the precedent set
+by the French Revolution, but other nations might feel as little
+inclined to join it as during the time when bloodthirsty demagogues
+ruled France in the name of Liberty, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_383" id="Page_383">[383]</a></span>Fraternity, and Equality, with
+the liberal assistance of the rifle and the guillotine.</p>
+
+<p>What is Communism? John Stuart Mill tells us: "The assailants of the
+principle of individual property may be divided into two
+classes&mdash;those whose scheme implies absolute equality in the
+distribution of the physical means of life and enjoyment, and those
+who admit inequality, but grounded on some principle, or supposed
+principle, of justice or general expediency, and not, like so many of
+the existing social inequalities, dependent on accident alone. The
+characteristic name for the former economical system is
+Communism."<a name="FNanchor_1038_1038" id="FNanchor_1038_1038"></a><a href="#Footnote_1038_1038" class="fnanchor">[1038]</a> "Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy" says:
+"Communism is the theory which teaches that the labour and the income
+of society should be distributed equally among all its members by some
+constituted authority."<a name="FNanchor_1039_1039" id="FNanchor_1039_1039"></a><a href="#Footnote_1039_1039" class="fnanchor">[1039]</a></p>
+
+<p>Let us now take note of some Socialist views on Communism. "Laurence
+Gronlund, whose 'Co-operative Commonwealth' has been styled the New
+Testament of Socialism (as the 'Capital' is its Old Testament), has
+tried to distinguish between Socialism and Communism by describing
+Communism as meaning 'each according to his needs,' and Socialism
+'each according to his deeds.'"<a name="FNanchor_1040_1040" id="FNanchor_1040_1040"></a><a href="#Footnote_1040_1040" class="fnanchor">[1040]</a> "As soon as the principle of
+equality is applied to Socialism, Socialism becomes
+'Communism.'"<a name="FNanchor_1041_1041" id="FNanchor_1041_1041"></a><a href="#Footnote_1041_1041" class="fnanchor">[1041]</a> "Socialism and Communism are very generally
+confounded, but they are quite distinct economic systems. Socialists
+seek only to control the instruments of production&mdash;Land and Capital;
+Communists leave nothing to the individual which he can call his own.
+St. Paul was a Socialist, Christ a Communist."<a name="FNanchor_1042_1042" id="FNanchor_1042_1042"></a><a href="#Footnote_1042_1042" class="fnanchor">[1042]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many so-called Socialists are in reality avowed <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_384" id="Page_384">[384]</a></span>Communists who look
+forward to the introduction of Communism more than to the advent of
+Socialism. They see in Socialism merely an intermediate stage towards
+their final goal. "If the millennial haven of Communism is to be
+reached by mankind generally, it must be through the disciplinary
+portal of Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1043_1043" id="FNanchor_1043_1043"></a><a href="#Footnote_1043_1043" class="fnanchor">[1043]</a> "Communism, the final goal of Socialism,
+is a form of Social Economy very closely akin to the principles set
+forth in the Sermon on the Mount."<a name="FNanchor_1044_1044" id="FNanchor_1044_1044"></a><a href="#Footnote_1044_1044" class="fnanchor">[1044]</a> "Socialism and freedom 'gang
+thegither.' Socialism implies the inherent equality of all human
+beings. It does not assume that all are alike, but only that all are
+equal."<a name="FNanchor_1045_1045" id="FNanchor_1045_1045"></a><a href="#Footnote_1045_1045" class="fnanchor">[1045]</a> "Between complete Socialism and Communism there is no
+difference whatever in my mind. Communism is, in fact, the completion
+of Socialism; when that ceases to be militant and becomes triumphant
+it will be Communism."<a name="FNanchor_1046_1046" id="FNanchor_1046_1046"></a><a href="#Footnote_1046_1046" class="fnanchor">[1046]</a> "The vision of freedom is an
+ever-expanding conception of life and its possibilities. The slave
+dreams of emancipation, the emancipated workman of citizenship; the
+enfranchised citizen of Socialism; the Socialist of Communism."<a name="FNanchor_1047_1047" id="FNanchor_1047_1047"></a><a href="#Footnote_1047_1047" class="fnanchor">[1047]</a></p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists champion Communism because Communism, the equality of
+all, is "natural," whilst individualism is "unnatural": "Capitalistic
+individualism has no prototype in Nature and is therefore unnatural.
+But some opponent will say, 'It is here, and therefore it must be a
+natural product.' The answer is simple. It is here, but it is one of
+Nature's failures. We have seen how, low down in the organic scale,
+Nature makes many failures in order to achieve one success. Sometimes
+even millions perish in order that one of high type may survive.
+Nature always accomplishes her purposes in the end. We know that her
+aim is Communism, for some of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_385" id="Page_385">[385]</a></span>the higher species have already reached
+it, and all are tending towards it."<a name="FNanchor_1048_1048" id="FNanchor_1048_1048"></a><a href="#Footnote_1048_1048" class="fnanchor">[1048]</a> The assertion, "We know"
+(who are we?) "that Nature's aim is Communism," can hardly be called a
+sufficient scientific proof of the foregoing proposition. Other
+Socialists assert that Communism is in accordance with the Bible:
+"Christ's teaching is often said to be Socialistic. It is not
+Socialistic, but it is Communistic, and Communism is the most advanced
+form of the policy generally known as Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1049_1049" id="FNanchor_1049_1049"></a><a href="#Footnote_1049_1049" class="fnanchor">[1049]</a></p>
+
+<p>A Socialist Bible student and very prolific writer says: "Can anything
+be conceived more diametrically opposed to the principle laid down by
+Christ than the present system, based as it is on the principle of
+competition? 'You are all brothers,' says Christ, and if all are
+brothers, then it needs no philosopher to tell us that all should work
+together for the common good."<a name="FNanchor_1050_1050" id="FNanchor_1050_1050"></a><a href="#Footnote_1050_1050" class="fnanchor">[1050]</a> In support of this doctrine that
+Communism is in accordance with the Bible, the said writer quotes Acts
+iv. 32-35, "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart
+and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things
+which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
+Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were
+possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the
+things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and
+distribution was made unto every man according as he had need."<a name="FNanchor_1051_1051" id="FNanchor_1051_1051"></a><a href="#Footnote_1051_1051" class="fnanchor">[1051]</a>
+The Socialist can quote Scripture for his purpose&mdash;and misquote it
+too. Therefore the pious Socialist writer leaves out the lines which
+follow: "But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold
+a possession, and kept back part of the price."<a name="FNanchor_1052_1052" id="FNanchor_1052_1052"></a><a href="#Footnote_1052_1052" class="fnanchor">[1052]</a> Will there be no
+Ananiases in the Socialist <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_386" id="Page_386">[386]</a></span>Commonwealth? Besides, the early Christian
+Communism was voluntary and dictated only by charity. It certainly was
+not enjoined as a religious duty.<a name="FNanchor_1053_1053" id="FNanchor_1053_1053"></a><a href="#Footnote_1053_1053" class="fnanchor">[1053]</a> Lastly, the first Christian
+experiment in Communism proved immediately a failure, probably because
+there were many Ananiases, and because Communism is opposed to human
+nature and leads to poverty and strife, not to prosperity and peace.
+Hence, St. Paul founded no more Communist settlements, but collected
+everywhere for the "poor saints at Jerusalem" in order to relieve them
+in their "deep poverty," as may be seen in Romans xv. 26-27, 1
+Corinthians xvi. 1-3, 2 Corinthians viii. and ix. To misquote
+Scripture in support of Socialist Communism with an attitude of deep
+piety is not only in bad taste, but also dishonest. It is cant and
+hypocrisy.</p>
+
+<p>Another prolific Socialist writer, under the title "Was Jesus a
+Socialist?" tells us that Socialism "claims complete equality of
+rewards for all members of society, not on any theologico-metaphysical
+ground, such as the Christian abstract principle of brotherhood, but
+because it sees men to have on the whole the same natural endowments,
+and the same natural needs."<a name="FNanchor_1054_1054" id="FNanchor_1054_1054"></a><a href="#Footnote_1054_1054" class="fnanchor">[1054]</a> Have they? Considered merely as
+two-legged animals requiring only food, warmth, and shelter, men have
+not even the same physical needs.</p>
+
+<p>It is very difficult to make out a good case in favour of Communism,
+an equal reward for all, a doctrine which will be attractive only to
+the lowest rank of workers, the lazy, and the inefficient. Therefore
+Socialist Communists endeavour to make Communism appear more palatable
+to the active and the efficient by the lavish use of poetry and
+hyperbole. For instance, we learn: "He who makes the canvas is as
+useful as he that paints the picture. He who cleanses the sewer and
+prevents disease is as useful as the physician who cures the malady
+after it has been <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_387" id="Page_387">[387]</a></span>contracted."<a name="FNanchor_1055_1055" id="FNanchor_1055_1055"></a><a href="#Footnote_1055_1055" class="fnanchor">[1055]</a> To learn painting or medicine
+requires at least ten years' study; sewer-cleaning requires no study.
+The offer of equal rewards for an hour's work at painting, at
+amputating in a hospital, and at cleaning sewers must be very
+attractive to sewermen. Will it prove equally attractive to surgeons
+and painters? Socialism is to be world-wide. Will the highly skilled
+British trade unionist agree to work side by side with unskilled
+Chinamen and for equal wages?</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">In youth, as I lay dreaming,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">I saw a country fair.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Where Plenty sheds its blessing down,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And all have equal share.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">There Poverty's sad features<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Are never, never, seen;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And each soul in the Brotherhood<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Scorns cunning arts or mean.<a name="FNanchor_1056_1056" id="FNanchor_1056_1056"></a><a href="#Footnote_1056_1056" class="fnanchor">[1056]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p class="noin">I think skilled workers will hardly hail with enthusiasm the day of
+liberty and equality and of sewermen's wages all round, poetry
+notwithstanding.</p>
+
+<p>Other Socialists try to recommend Communism by a ridiculous and
+dishonest play upon words: "He who declares himself an enemy of
+Communism declares himself an enemy of common interest, an enemy of
+society and mankind. Whoever wishes to annihilate Communism will have
+to destroy the common roads, the schools, he will have to destroy the
+public gardens and parks, he will have to abolish the public baths,
+the theatres, the waterworks, all the public buildings; he will have
+to destroy the railroads, the telegraphs, the post-office. For all
+these belong to Communism."<a name="FNanchor_1057_1057" id="FNanchor_1057_1057"></a><a href="#Footnote_1057_1057" class="fnanchor">[1057]</a> It would be as logical to say, "He
+who opposes Socialism will have to destroy the Royal Society, and all
+clubs, for all these are social institutions." The Social-Democratic
+Federation says <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_388" id="Page_388">[388]</a></span>about Communism: "Has there not always been the
+aggregation of wealth in the hands of a few in all stages of human
+society?&mdash;Certainly there has been a tendency to such concentration
+throughout history. In what did tribal society differ from civilised
+society?&mdash;Briefly, it differed in that its underlying principle was
+that of social solidarity and Communism. We may instance such examples
+as survived in the village communities of India before the
+establishment of British institutions; in the Russian Mir, in its
+older form; in the Arab tribal organisation and the Javan village
+communities."<a name="FNanchor_1058_1058" id="FNanchor_1058_1058"></a><a href="#Footnote_1058_1058" class="fnanchor">[1058]</a> That "primitive Communism" of "tribal society,"
+the organisation of savages and semi-savages, of the decadent and of
+the unfit, Socialists wish to foist upon a highly cultured nation. The
+above arguments, penned by the philosopher of British Socialism and
+the editor of "Justice" in recommendation of Communism, suffice to
+condemn it.</p>
+
+<p>We have a survival of ancient Communism in the Russian Mir, and to the
+Mir is the great backwardness of Russian agriculture chiefly to be
+attributed.<a name="FNanchor_1059_1059" id="FNanchor_1059_1059"></a><a href="#Footnote_1059_1059" class="fnanchor">[1059]</a> The Russian peasants, recognising the disadvantages
+of the Communist Mir, are gradually abandoning it and converting
+common into individual properties. Nevertheless some Socialists have
+the hardihood to ascribe the universal disappearance of ancient
+Communism to the tyranny of man, not to the logic of facts and the
+action of Nature which replaces inefficient by efficient
+organisations. "There have been attempts in all ages to introduce some
+system of holding things in common in order to alleviate and soften
+the hard struggle with Nature for food, clothing, and shelter. This
+voluntary Communism rendered the workers too independent for the
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_389" id="Page_389">[389]</a></span>governing classes, and the jealousy of Church and State invariably
+destroyed it as the Russian village communes are now being destroyed
+by the Government."<a name="FNanchor_1060_1060" id="FNanchor_1060_1060"></a><a href="#Footnote_1060_1060" class="fnanchor">[1060]</a></p>
+
+<p>Another Socialist quotes with approval the pronouncement of Gregory
+the Great "Let them know that the earth from which they spring, and of
+which they are formed, belongs to all men in common, and that
+therefore the fruits which the earth brings forth must belong, without
+distinction, to all."<a name="FNanchor_1061_1061" id="FNanchor_1061_1061"></a><a href="#Footnote_1061_1061" class="fnanchor">[1061]</a> China suffers from over-population and is
+very poor. Would the writer give to the Chinese a share of Great
+Britain's wealth since "the earth and its fruits belong without
+distinction to all?"</p>
+
+<p>Mr. Keir Hardie, M.P., who has apparently a somewhat elementary
+knowledge of ancient history, and who seems to rely for information on
+a primer such as "Little Willie's First History Book," recommends
+Communism because "In Sparta there were not only common lands, but
+also a common table, whilst dogs and horses were practically common
+property also. Sparta, which kept its Communism almost to the end, was
+also the Republic from which came the immortal heroes who made the
+pass of Thermopylae one of the great inspirations of the world."<a name="FNanchor_1062_1062" id="FNanchor_1062_1062"></a><a href="#Footnote_1062_1062" class="fnanchor">[1062]</a>
+The Spartans were barbarians among the Greeks. Spartan Communism was
+founded on slavery and on the virtual community of women.
+Slave-murder, child-murder, rape, and theft were legally enjoined, and
+that is the community which Mr. Keir Hardie bids us consider as our
+model. Mr. Keir Hardie concludes: "We have seen how mankind when left
+free has always, and in all parts of the world, naturally turned to
+Communism. [Has it? When, and where?] That it will do so again is the
+most likely forecast of the future which can be made, and the great
+industrial organisations, the Trade Unions, the Co-operative Movement,
+the Friendly <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_390" id="Page_390">[390]</a></span>Orders, the Socialist organisations and the Labour party
+are each and all developing the feeling of solidarity and of mutual
+aid which will make the inauguration of Communism a comparatively easy
+task as the natural successor to State Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1063_1063" id="FNanchor_1063_1063"></a><a href="#Footnote_1063_1063" class="fnanchor">[1063]</a></p>
+
+<p>The ideas of Socialists with regard to Communism are incredibly
+confused. For instance, we find in the same book the following
+contradictory statements describing Socialism: "Socialism is the
+common holding of the means of production and exchange, and <i>the
+holding of them for the equal benefit of all</i>"<a name="FNanchor_1064_1064" id="FNanchor_1064_1064"></a><a href="#Footnote_1064_1064" class="fnanchor">[1064]</a> (the italics are
+in the original), and "To distribute the gifts of Nature justly
+according to the labour done by each in the collective search for
+them. This desire is Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1065_1065" id="FNanchor_1065_1065"></a><a href="#Footnote_1065_1065" class="fnanchor">[1065]</a> These absolutely contradictory
+statements, telling us that Socialism is both individualistic and that
+it is also Communistic, are taken from the fundamental book of the
+Fabian Society, the most scientific body of Socialists, and they have
+been reprinted again and again down to the edition bearing the imprint
+"43rd Thousand."</p>
+
+<p>Socialism is eternally between the horns of a dilemma. It promises to
+make all men happy. If it rewards men by results, the inefficient and
+the lazy will be dissatisfied. If it rewards all men alike
+(Communism), the efficient, able, and energetic will be dissatisfied.
+Reward by result will, in the absence of self-regulating commercial
+demand and supply, require an autocratic and absolute authority which
+arbitrarily apportions the unequal rewards of labour. It would be the
+tyranny of the few over the many, and would mean the abolition of
+democracy. Communism, equal rewards for all, would lead to the tyranny
+of the many over the few, and would stifle all motives to excel. Well
+might the Fabians ask: "Since we are too dishonest for Communism
+without taxation or compulsory labour, and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_391" id="Page_391">[391]</a></span>too insubordinate to
+tolerate task work under personal compulsion, how can we order the
+transition so as to introduce just distribution without Communism and
+maintain the incentive to labour without mastership?"<a name="FNanchor_1066_1066" id="FNanchor_1066_1066"></a><a href="#Footnote_1066_1066" class="fnanchor">[1066]</a>
+Unfortunately for the Socialists, that question is unanswerable. It is
+likely always to remain so, and the impossibility of answering it
+makes Socialism impossible. However, since Socialists wish to array
+the masses against the classes, the poor against the rich, they
+naturally incline, for tactical reasons rather than from honest
+conviction, to Communism, the worst of all tyrannies, and the most
+retrograde and inefficient of economic organisations.</p>
+
+<p>"Communism in proposing the appropriation of the results of the
+unequally productive labour for a uniformly equal distribution
+according to needs, seeks to establish a universal and monstrous
+appropriation by one set of persons of the surplus value belonging to
+others. Socialism would, in short, do to a far greater degree the very
+thing with which to-day it so indignantly and bitterly reproaches
+capitalism."<a name="FNanchor_1067_1067" id="FNanchor_1067_1067"></a><a href="#Footnote_1067_1067" class="fnanchor">[1067]</a> Whilst Mr. Keir Hardie and his numerous followers
+enthusiastically support a free Communism in which "the rule of life
+will be&mdash;From each according to his ability, to each according to his
+needs,"<a name="FNanchor_1068_1068" id="FNanchor_1068_1068"></a><a href="#Footnote_1068_1068" class="fnanchor">[1068]</a> "the Fabian Society resolutely opposes all pretensions
+to hamper the Socialisation of industry with equal wages, equal hours
+of labour, equal official status, or equal authority for everyone.
+Such conditions are not only impracticable, but incompatible with the
+equality of subordination to the common interest which is fundamental
+in modern Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1069_1069" id="FNanchor_1069_1069"></a><a href="#Footnote_1069_1069" class="fnanchor">[1069]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Communistic idea is not yet dead. The short-sightedness and folly
+of mankind is such that Communism, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_392" id="Page_392">[392]</a></span>in spite of a record of more than
+2,000 years of universal failure, is still a power to be reckoned
+with. Visionaries like Saint-Simon and Owen, and madmen like Fourier,
+are still able to lead the people astray.</p>
+
+<p>Fourier taught that Communism would alter not only man but the
+physical world as well. The duration of the human race on earth would
+be 80,000 years, divided into two periods of ascending and two of
+descending vibrations. Lions would be taught to draw waggons, as a
+symbol of the victory of man over Nature. Human life would on an
+average last 144 years. The aurora borealis, which now rarely appears
+in northern regions, would become permanently visible and be fixed at
+the Pole. It would give out, not only light, as at present, but also
+heat. It would decompose the sea water by the creation of citric
+boreal acid and convert it into a kind of lemonade which would
+dispense with the necessity of provisioning ships with fresh water.
+Oranges would grow in Siberia and tame whales would pull becalmed
+sailing-ships. The full indulgence of human nature in all its passions
+would produce happiness and virtue. Society would harmoniously be
+organised in groups (phalanxes) of 1,600 persons to inhabit a large
+palace called a phalanstery. If England would introduce these
+phalanxes, her labour would become so productive that she could pay
+off her national debt in six months by the sale of hens' eggs. Labour
+would be organised and occupation be changed every two hours. Workers
+would be taken in carriages to and from their work, and agricultural
+labourers would work under tents so as to be protected against the
+rain. The relations between the sexes would be of the freest. All
+should freely satisfy all their passions, and all passions would
+naturally combine in one grand harmony. The world would become a huge
+Republic which would be governed from Constantinople, and French would
+be the universal language.<a name="FNanchor_1070_1070" id="FNanchor_1070_1070"></a><a href="#Footnote_1070_1070" class="fnanchor">[1070]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_393" id="Page_393">[393]</a></span>Notwithstanding the evident insanity of Fourier's proposals, and the
+almost equally extravagant proposals of Owen, more than a hundred
+phalansteries and other Communistic settlements were founded in Great
+Britain and elsewhere, especially in the United States. Their failure
+was universal and their immorality was very great.<a name="FNanchor_1071_1071" id="FNanchor_1071_1071"></a><a href="#Footnote_1071_1071" class="fnanchor">[1071]</a> "The trouble
+with all the Fourierite communities was that they were fanciful and
+theoretical schemes, not simple and natural growths. They had little
+definite religious spirit to hold them together. They had little
+business headship. At the least discouragement and misfortune they
+melted away. Only religious communism, the facts seem to prove, can be
+successful."<a name="FNanchor_1072_1072" id="FNanchor_1072_1072"></a><a href="#Footnote_1072_1072" class="fnanchor">[1072]</a> Only the communism of the convent and of the
+monastery, the equality of all based on a fervent religious belief, on
+a firm discipline, on an equal and absolute poverty, and on the almost
+insurmountable difficulty of re-entering the world, has hitherto
+proved practicable from the time of the Essenes to the present day.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1034_1034" id="Footnote_1034_1034"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1034_1034"><span class="label">[1034]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 178.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1035_1035" id="Footnote_1035_1035"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1035_1035"><span class="label">[1035]</span></a> Engels, <i>Socialism: Utopian and Scientific</i>, pp. 76,
+77.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1036_1036" id="Footnote_1036_1036"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1036_1036"><span class="label">[1036]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 212.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1037_1037" id="Footnote_1037_1037"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1037_1037"><span class="label">[1037]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 123</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1038_1038" id="Footnote_1038_1038"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1038_1038"><span class="label">[1038]</span></a> Mill, <i>Political Economy</i>, Book iii. ch. i. par. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1039_1039" id="Footnote_1039_1039"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1039_1039"><span class="label">[1039]</span></a> <i>Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy</i>, vol. i.
+p. 297.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1040_1040" id="Footnote_1040_1040"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1040_1040"><span class="label">[1040]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, p. 89.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1041_1041" id="Footnote_1041_1041"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1041_1041"><span class="label">[1041]</span></a> Menger, <i>L'&Eacute;tat Socialiste</i>, p. 35.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1042_1042" id="Footnote_1042_1042"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1042_1042"><span class="label">[1042]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 93.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1043_1043" id="Footnote_1043_1043"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1043_1043"><span class="label">[1043]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 94.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1044_1044" id="Footnote_1044_1044"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1044_1044"><span class="label">[1044]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 36.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1045_1045" id="Footnote_1045_1045"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1045_1045"><span class="label">[1045]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1046_1046" id="Footnote_1046_1046"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1046_1046"><span class="label">[1046]</span></a> Morris, <i>Communism</i>, pp. 11, 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1047_1047" id="Footnote_1047_1047"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1047_1047"><span class="label">[1047]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 77.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1048_1048" id="Footnote_1048_1048"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1048_1048"><span class="label">[1048]</span></a> Connell, <i>Socialism and the Survival of the Fittest</i>,
+p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1049_1049" id="Footnote_1049_1049"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1049_1049"><span class="label">[1049]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1050_1050" id="Footnote_1050_1050"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1050_1050"><span class="label">[1050]</span></a> Ward, <i>Are All Men Brothers?</i> p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1051_1051" id="Footnote_1051_1051"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1051_1051"><span class="label">[1051]</span></a> Ward, <i>All Things in Common</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1052_1052" id="Footnote_1052_1052"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1052_1052"><span class="label">[1052]</span></a> Acts v. 1, 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1053_1053" id="Footnote_1053_1053"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1053_1053"><span class="label">[1053]</span></a> Acts v. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1054_1054" id="Footnote_1054_1054"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1054_1054"><span class="label">[1054]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1055_1055" id="Footnote_1055_1055"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1055_1055"><span class="label">[1055]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 159.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1056_1056" id="Footnote_1056_1056"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1056_1056"><span class="label">[1056]</span></a> <i>Clarion Song Book</i>, p. 27.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1057_1057" id="Footnote_1057_1057"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1057_1057"><span class="label">[1057]</span></a> Sorge, <i>Socialism and the Workers</i>, p. 8</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1058_1058" id="Footnote_1058_1058"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1058_1058"><span class="label">[1058]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, pp.
+20, 21.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1059_1059" id="Footnote_1059_1059"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1059_1059"><span class="label">[1059]</span></a> See Simkhowitsch, <i>Die Feldgemeinschaft</i>, 1898;
+Haxthausen, <i>Studien</i>, &amp;c.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1060_1060" id="Footnote_1060_1060"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1060_1060"><span class="label">[1060]</span></a> Benson, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1061_1061" id="Footnote_1061_1061"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1061_1061"><span class="label">[1061]</span></a> Ward, <i>All Things in Common</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1062_1062" id="Footnote_1062_1062"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1062_1062"><span class="label">[1062]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1063_1063" id="Footnote_1063_1063"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1063_1063"><span class="label">[1063]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, pp. 96, 97.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1064_1064" id="Footnote_1064_1064"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1064_1064"><span class="label">[1064]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 212.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1065_1065" id="Footnote_1065_1065"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1065_1065"><span class="label">[1065]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1066_1066" id="Footnote_1066_1066"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1066_1066"><span class="label">[1066]</span></a> B. Shaw, <i>The Impossibilities of Anarchism</i>, p. 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1067_1067" id="Footnote_1067_1067"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1067_1067"><span class="label">[1067]</span></a> Sch&auml;ffle, <i>The Impossibility of Social Democracy</i>, p.
+60.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1068_1068" id="Footnote_1068_1068"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1068_1068"><span class="label">[1068]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 89.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1069_1069" id="Footnote_1069_1069"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1069_1069"><span class="label">[1069]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1070_1070" id="Footnote_1070_1070"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1070_1070"><span class="label">[1070]</span></a> See Fourier, <i>&OElig;uvres</i>; Pellarin, <i>Fourier</i>;
+Sargant, <i>Social Innovators</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1071_1071" id="Footnote_1071_1071"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1071_1071"><span class="label">[1071]</span></a> See Noyes, <i>History of American Socialism</i>; Nordhoff,
+<i>Communistic Societies of the United States</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1072_1072" id="Footnote_1072_1072"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1072_1072"><span class="label">[1072]</span></a> Bliss, <i>Encyclopedia of Social Reform</i>, p. 319.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXX" id="CHAPTER_XXX"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_394" id="Page_394">[394]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXX<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND ANARCHISM</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Socialism is, on the whole, hostile to the State. All Socialists hate
+the State as at present constituted, because it protects the property
+which they wish to seize. However, many Socialists hate not only the
+State in its present form. They have become doubtful whether private
+capital or the State is the greater evil. They long for liberty, and
+would not welcome the restraint of any State, and least of all that of
+the absolute, all-regulating, and constantly interfering Socialistic
+State. Hence many Socialists have become Anarchists. Socialists may be
+divided into two classes&mdash;Communists and Anarchists&mdash;and Prince
+Kropotkin, the foremost Anarchist leader living, described the two
+Socialistic sections as follows: "A section of Socialists believes
+that it is impossible to attain Socialism without sacrificing personal
+liberty on the altar of the State. Another section, to which we
+belong, believes, on the contrary, that it is only by the abolition of
+the State, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by
+free agreement, association, and absolute free federation, that we can
+reach Communism."<a name="FNanchor_1073_1073" id="FNanchor_1073_1073"></a><a href="#Footnote_1073_1073" class="fnanchor">[1073]</a> Many Socialists, seeing the enemy rather in
+the State than in private capital, express their passionate hatred of
+the State: "The State at present is simply a huge machine for robbing
+and slave-driving the poor by brute force."<a name="FNanchor_1074_1074" id="FNanchor_1074_1074"></a><a href="#Footnote_1074_1074" class="fnanchor">[1074]</a> "The Parliament ever
+cries for more <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_395" id="Page_395">[395]</a></span>money, more money for the service of the State. Just
+heavens! Of what service is the State? Of very little service to
+honest, industrious men,"<a name="FNanchor_1075_1075" id="FNanchor_1075_1075"></a><a href="#Footnote_1075_1075" class="fnanchor">[1075]</a> The philosopher of British Socialism
+frankly confesses himself a revolutionary Anarchist: "As an
+international revolutionist I have always been strongly sympathetic
+with all movements for local autonomy as most directly tending to
+destroy the modern 'nation' or centralised bureaucratic State."<a name="FNanchor_1076_1076" id="FNanchor_1076_1076"></a><a href="#Footnote_1076_1076" class="fnanchor">[1076]</a>
+"It is quite true that Socialism will have to take over the accursed
+legacy of existing national frontiers from the bourgeois world-order;
+but Socialism will take it over merely with the view of killing it off
+and burying it at the earliest possible moment. The modern nation or
+centralised State is a hideous monstrosity, the offspring of
+capitalism in its various phases; in its present shape the outcome of
+the developed capitalism of the great industry. We quite admit that in
+form it may, and probably will, survive the earlier stage of
+Socialism, but its ultimate disappearance is none the less certain.
+The sentiment of the national patriotism will then, let us hope, be
+reduced to its last expression&mdash;the holding of annual dinners, or some
+harmless festivity of this sort, such as is affected by the natives of
+certain English counties resident in the metropolis. The Nationalist
+movement, therefore, is an old Radical 'plank' which clearly no longer
+belongs to us as Socialists."<a name="FNanchor_1077_1077" id="FNanchor_1077_1077"></a><a href="#Footnote_1077_1077" class="fnanchor">[1077]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Socialist-Anarchist hates State government in every form. To him a
+Social-Democratic State is quite as hateful as any other form of
+government: "The State is the evil, the inveterate foe of labour&mdash;be
+the Government Autocratic, Bureaucratic, or Social-Democratic. For
+what, after all, is our vaunted nose-counting, majority-ridden
+Democracy but an expansion of the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_396" id="Page_396">[396]</a></span>old-time tyranny of monarch and
+oligarch, inasmuch as the Governmentalist, whatever his stripe, is
+doomed to act on the two root principles of statecraft&mdash;force and
+fraud? And, obviously, so long as that is so, his particular
+profession of political faith is almost a matter of
+indifference."<a name="FNanchor_1078_1078" id="FNanchor_1078_1078"></a><a href="#Footnote_1078_1078" class="fnanchor">[1078]</a> "What was, what is the State, wherever it exists,
+but a community of human beings barbarically held together by a
+well-drilled gang of magistrates, soldiers, policemen, gaolers, and
+hangmen?"<a name="FNanchor_1079_1079" id="FNanchor_1079_1079"></a><a href="#Footnote_1079_1079" class="fnanchor">[1079]</a> Mr. Blatchford, who is apparently never quite sure in
+his mind whether he is a Socialist, a Communist, or an Anarchist,
+gives voice to his Anarchist sentiments in the words: "Rightly or
+wrongly, I am opposed to godship, kingship, lordship, priestship.
+Rightly or wrongly, I am opposed to imperialism, militarism, and
+conquest. Rightly or wrongly, I am for universal brotherhood and
+universal freedom."<a name="FNanchor_1080_1080" id="FNanchor_1080_1080"></a><a href="#Footnote_1080_1080" class="fnanchor">[1080]</a></p>
+
+<p>Another influential Socialist writer exclaims: "What is freedom but
+the unfettered use of all the powers which God for use has
+given?"<a name="FNanchor_1081_1081" id="FNanchor_1081_1081"></a><a href="#Footnote_1081_1081" class="fnanchor">[1081]</a>&mdash;a sentiment which is heartily endorsed by all
+Anarchists. However, the unfettered use of all powers means that the
+will of the individual, not the will of society, is the supreme law.
+It means the denial of the supremacy of society, the State,
+government. Similar sentiments are expressed with greater energy and
+greater fulness by many Socialist writers. Mr. Davidson, for instance,
+says: "In the new order every man (woman, of course, included) will be
+his own legislator. In the state of ultimate and universal freedom to
+which we aspire, when the greatest of all tyrants, poverty, is slain
+and plenty sits on the throne which the lean monster has so long
+usurped&mdash;it may well be that there shall be no necessity for any law
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_397" id="Page_397">[397]</a></span>except that which the purified conscience of every individual man and
+woman will readily supply. Then will have come the true Golden Age,
+the millennium of Christian Anarchism."<a name="FNanchor_1082_1082" id="FNanchor_1082_1082"></a><a href="#Footnote_1082_1082" class="fnanchor">[1082]</a></p>
+
+<p>The claims, programme, and aims of Socialism and Anarchism are
+curiously alike. Prince Kropotkin, the leading exponent of Anarchism,
+writes: "Anarchy appears as a constituent part of the new philosophy,
+and that is why Anarchists come in contact on so many points with the
+greatest thinkers and poets of the present day. In fact, it is certain
+that in proportion as the human mind frees itself from ideas
+inculcated by minorities of priests, military chiefs, and judges, all
+striving to establish their domination, and of scientists paid to
+perpetuate it, a conception of society arises, in Which conception
+there is no longer room for those dominating minorities. A society
+entering into possession of the social capital accumulated by the
+labour of preceding generations, organises itself so as to make use of
+this capital in the interests of all, and constitutes itself without
+reconstituting the power of the ruling minorities. Acknowledging as a
+fact the equal rights of all its members to the treasures accumulated
+in the past, it no longer recognises a division between exploited and
+exploiters, governed and governors, dominated and dominators, and it
+seeks to establish a certain harmonious compatibility in its midst not
+by subjecting all its members to an authority that is fictitiously
+supposed to represent society, not by trying to establish uniformity,
+but by urging all men to develop free initiative, free action, free
+association."<a name="FNanchor_1083_1083" id="FNanchor_1083_1083"></a><a href="#Footnote_1083_1083" class="fnanchor">[1083]</a></p>
+
+<p>There is little difference between the Anarchism of Proudhon,
+Bakounin, and Kropotkin, and the Socialism of many British Socialists.
+The economic doctrines <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_398" id="Page_398">[398]</a></span>of Socialism and Anarchism are practically
+identical. Socialism has taken the most important doctrines from
+Proudhon,<a name="FNanchor_1084_1084" id="FNanchor_1084_1084"></a><a href="#Footnote_1084_1084" class="fnanchor">[1084]</a> and, owing to the similarity of their views and aims,
+Socialists and Anarchists are commingling and fraternising. Anarchists
+see in Socialists a wing of the great Anarchist army of destruction,
+and Socialists see in Anarchists associates and friends and partners
+in the revolution and general pillage which both movements equally
+strongly desire to bring about. Therefore a leading Fabian Socialist
+tells us: "Kropotkin is really an advocate of free Democracy, and I
+venture to suggest that he describes himself as an Anarchist rather
+from the point of view of the Russian recoiling from a despotism
+compared to which Democracy seems to be no government at all, than
+from the point of view of the American or Englishman who is free
+enough already to begin grumbling over Democracy as 'the tyranny of
+the majority' and 'the coming slavery.'"<a name="FNanchor_1085_1085" id="FNanchor_1085_1085"></a><a href="#Footnote_1085_1085" class="fnanchor">[1085]</a> If Kropotkin is a
+"Democrat," then Ravachol, Vaillant, Henry, Pallas, and Bresci were
+also merely Democrats.</p>
+
+<p>British Anarchists are closely watching the British Socialist Labour
+movement, which they wish to lead into Anarchist channels. Thus we
+learn from an Anarchist monthly: "The question of the position to be
+taken in relation to the labour movement is certainly one of the
+greatest importance to Anarchists. It does not suffice for us to form
+groups for propaganda and for revolutionary action. We must convert as
+far as possible the mass of the workers, because without them we can
+neither overthrow the existing society nor reconstitute a new one. And
+since to rise from the submissive state in which the great majority of
+the proletarians now vegetate to a conception of Anarchism and a
+desire for its realisation, is required an evolution which generally
+is not passed <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_399" id="Page_399">[399]</a></span>through under the sole influence of the propaganda;
+since the lessons derived from the facts of daily life are more
+efficacious than all doctrinaire preaching, it is for us to take an
+active part in the life of the masses and to use all the means which
+circumstances permit to gradually awaken the spirit of revolt, and to
+show by these facts the path which leads to emancipation. Amongst
+these means the Labour movement stands first, and we should be wrong
+to neglect it. In this movement we find numbers of workers who
+struggle for the amelioration of their conditions. They may be
+mistaken as to the aim they have in view and as to the means of
+attaining it, and in our view they generally are. But at least they no
+longer resign themselves to oppression nor regard it as just&mdash;they
+hope and they struggle. We can more easily arouse in them that feeling
+of solidarity towards their exploited fellow-workers and of hatred
+against exploitation, which must lead to a definitive struggle for the
+abolition of all domination of man over man."<a name="FNanchor_1086_1086" id="FNanchor_1086_1086"></a><a href="#Footnote_1086_1086" class="fnanchor">[1086]</a> Anarchists
+therefore constantly try to influence the British Socialist Labour
+movement. When, for instance, in the autumn of 1907 the possibility of
+a railway strike was being discussed, Anarchists did their best to
+bring about a revolutionary struggle: "The railway crisis must have
+shown very clearly that if the men had but the will, they have the
+power to bring about at any time a revolutionary situation in the
+struggle of labour against capital. Some day they will have to do
+this, for the conditions of the conflict will leave them no choice.
+They will perhaps learn also that the glorification of a man like
+Bell&mdash;whose fooling of their cause is his method of
+advertisement&mdash;means putting powers into one man's hands that no man
+ought to possess. Nothing could be more absurd than the prolongation
+of this 'crisis' which has been done so that one man might have the
+centre of the stage, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_400" id="Page_400">[400]</a></span>while hundreds of thousands of men toil on in
+suspense. Bell is everything: the workers are mere cyphers. Yet this
+man is mistrusted by many; and everyone knows how on occasion he can
+join the feast of the directors and be one of them. And if generalship
+were needed, what an ass this would be to attempt to lead the men to
+victory! Successful strikes are never made by the farcical tactics of
+a Bell. Recognition, forsooth! They'll recognise you when you strike.
+Workers, watch your leaders!"<a name="FNanchor_1087_1087" id="FNanchor_1087_1087"></a><a href="#Footnote_1087_1087" class="fnanchor">[1087]</a></p>
+
+<p>In view of the connection existing between British Socialism and
+Anarchism, it is but natural that Socialists have become the
+apologists of Anarchism. "The vulgar notion that Anarchism is a
+synonym for disorder is as nearly as possible the reverse of the
+truth. It is Governments and Laws that do all the mischief. They
+produce the very evils they pretend to remedy."<a name="FNanchor_1088_1088" id="FNanchor_1088_1088"></a><a href="#Footnote_1088_1088" class="fnanchor">[1088]</a> "Verily the
+State is the evil. Back to the land. Back to the simple life. Away
+with Governments, palavers, Dumas, and Courts of Law. Long live the
+Commune."<a name="FNanchor_1089_1089" id="FNanchor_1089_1089"></a><a href="#Footnote_1089_1089" class="fnanchor">[1089]</a></p>
+
+<p>Anarchists contend that the "Social Revolution" for which most
+Socialists strive will become an Anarchist revolution: "If the workers
+succeed by revolt in destroying the mutual insurance society of
+landlords, bankers, priests, judges, and soldiers; if the people
+become masters of their destiny for a few months, and lay hands on the
+riches they have created and which belong to them by right&mdash;will they
+really begin to reconstitute that blood-sucker, the State<a name="FNanchor_1090_1090" id="FNanchor_1090_1090"></a><a href="#Footnote_1090_1090" class="fnanchor">[1090]</a>?" "On
+the day when ancient institutions splinter into fragments before the
+axe of the proletariat, voices will be heard shouting: Bread for all!
+Lodging for all! Right for all to the comforts of life! And these
+voices will be <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_401" id="Page_401">[401]</a></span>heeded. The people will say to themselves: Let us
+begin by satisfying our thirst for the life, the joy, the liberty we
+have never known. And when all have tasted happiness we will set to
+work; the work of demolishing the last vestiges of middle-class rule,
+with its account-book morality, its philosophy of debit and credit,
+its institutions of mine and thine. 'While we throw down we shall be
+building' as Proudhon said, 'we shall build in the name of Communism
+and of Anarchy."<a name="FNanchor_1091_1091" id="FNanchor_1091_1091"></a><a href="#Footnote_1091_1091" class="fnanchor">[1091]</a> Anarchists are authorities on revolutions. Very
+likely Prince Kropotkin's view is right.</p>
+
+<p>There are two kinds of Anarchists: Philosophic Anarchists who
+propagate their views by speech and pen, and Anarchists of action who
+propagate their views by dynamite and dagger, and the former are
+responsible for the crimes of the latter. Many British Socialists
+defend not only philosophic Anarchism, but also that form of Anarchism
+which finds its expression in murder.</p>
+
+<p>Leading British Socialists refer, for instance, to the four
+Anarchists, Spies, Fischer, Engel, and Parsons, the heroes of the
+Chicago bomb outrage, who were responsible for the death of six
+policemen and for the wounding of about sixty, and who were hanged in
+November 1886 in Chicago, as "martyrs,"<a name="FNanchor_1092_1092" id="FNanchor_1092_1092"></a><a href="#Footnote_1092_1092" class="fnanchor">[1092]</a> and British Socialists
+are urged to follow the glorious footsteps of the Chicago Anarchists:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Then on to revolution, boys! Keep Freedom's highway broad.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The path where Spies and Parsons fell&mdash;as fearlessly they trod;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And though we fall as they fell&mdash;millions follow on the road,<br /></span>
+<span class="i6">To carry the Red Flag to victory.<a name="FNanchor_1093_1093" id="FNanchor_1093_1093"></a><a href="#Footnote_1093_1093" class="fnanchor">[1093]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The sympathy which British Socialists feel for the Chicago Anarchists
+arises from the similarity of their <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_402" id="Page_402">[402]</a></span>aims. The programme of the
+American Anarchists was, according to the Pittsburg proclamation, as
+follows:</p>
+
+<p>(1) Destruction of the existing class rule, by all means, <i>i.e.</i> by
+energetic, relentless, revolutionary, and international action. (2)
+Establishment of a free Society based upon co-operative organisation
+of production. (3) Free exchange of equivalent products by and between
+the productive organisations without commerce and profit-mongery. (4)
+Organisation of education on a secular, scientific, and equal basis
+for both sexes. (5) Equal rights for all without distinction of sex or
+race. (6) Regulation of all public affairs by free contracts between
+the autonomous (independent) communes and associations resting on a
+federalists basis.<a name="FNanchor_1094_1094" id="FNanchor_1094_1094"></a><a href="#Footnote_1094_1094" class="fnanchor">[1094]</a></p>
+
+<p>The attitude of many leading British Socialists towards the murdering
+of monarchs and statesmen may be gauged from the following extracts:
+"On the occasion of the assassination of any potentate or statesman,
+the public opinion of the possessing class and its organs is lashed up
+to a white heat of artificial fury and indignation against the
+perpetrator, while they have nothing but approbation for the
+functionary&mdash;military or civil&mdash;who puts to death a fellow-creature in
+the course of what they are pleased to call his duty. Evidently force
+and bloodshed, when contrary to the interests of the possessing class,
+is a monstrous crime, but when it is in their favour it becomes a duty
+and a necessity."<a name="FNanchor_1095_1095" id="FNanchor_1095_1095"></a><a href="#Footnote_1095_1095" class="fnanchor">[1095]</a> "We believe the 'potting' of the 'heads' of
+States to be a foolish and reprehensible policy, but the matter does
+not concern us as Socialists. We have our own quarrel with the
+Anarchists, both as to principles and tactics, but that is no reason
+why, as certain persons seem to think, we should put on sackcloth and
+ashes, and dissolve ourselves in tears because, say, M. Carnot or the
+head of any other <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_403" id="Page_403">[403]</a></span>State has been assassinated by Anarchists. What is
+Carnot to us or we to Carnot, that we should weep for him? We do not
+specially desire the death of political personages, while we often
+regret their slaying on grounds of expediency, if on no others. But at
+the same time Socialists have no sentimental tears to waste over the
+heads of States and their misfortunes. To the Socialist the head of a
+State, as such, is simply a figure-head to whose fate he is
+indifferent&mdash;a ninepin representing the current political and social
+order."<a name="FNanchor_1096_1096" id="FNanchor_1096_1096"></a><a href="#Footnote_1096_1096" class="fnanchor">[1096]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">We're low, we're low, we're very very low.<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">And yet when the trumpets ring.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The thrust of a poor man's arm will go<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Through the heart of the proudest king.<a name="FNanchor_1097_1097" id="FNanchor_1097_1097"></a><a href="#Footnote_1097_1097" class="fnanchor">[1097]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The "Socialist Annual" contains in its calendar pages numerous items
+under the heading "For the Working Class to Remember," which is filled
+with Socialist dates such as "birth of Mr. Blatchford," and with the
+records of the most conspicuous Anarchist, Nihilist, and Revolutionary
+crimes. Details regarding the deeds of Orsini and Louise Michel, Jack
+Cade and Wat Tyler, the execution of Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette,
+the assassination of Presidents Lincoln, McKinley, and Carnot, the
+attempt on King Alfonso, and other facts are there recorded&mdash;"for the
+working class to remember." Earlier or later the
+Socialist-Communist-Anarchist agitation in Great Britain may, and very
+likely will, lead to Anarchist outrages.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1073_1073" id="Footnote_1073_1073"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1073_1073"><span class="label">[1073]</span></a> Prince Kropotkin, <i>Anarchism</i>, p. 16.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1074_1074" id="Footnote_1074_1074"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1074_1074"><span class="label">[1074]</span></a> B. Shaw, <i>The Impossibilities of Anarchism</i>, p. 24.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1075_1075" id="Footnote_1075_1075"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1075_1075"><span class="label">[1075]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Democrat's Address</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1076_1076" id="Footnote_1076_1076"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1076_1076"><span class="label">[1076]</span></a> Bax, <i>Paris Commune</i>, p. 35.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1077_1077" id="Footnote_1077_1077"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1077_1077"><span class="label">[1077]</span></a> Bax, <i>Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 98, 99.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1078_1078" id="Footnote_1078_1078"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1078_1078"><span class="label">[1078]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Christ, State, and Commune</i>, pp. 16, 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1079_1079" id="Footnote_1079_1079"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1079_1079"><span class="label">[1079]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1080_1080" id="Footnote_1080_1080"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1080_1080"><span class="label">[1080]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>God and My Neighbour</i>, p. 195.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1081_1081" id="Footnote_1081_1081"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1081_1081"><span class="label">[1081]</span></a> Thompson, <i>That Blessed Word Liberty</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1082_1082" id="Footnote_1082_1082"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1082_1082"><span class="label">[1082]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 172.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1083_1083" id="Footnote_1083_1083"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1083_1083"><span class="label">[1083]</span></a> Kropotkin, <i>Anarchism</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1084_1084" id="Footnote_1084_1084"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1084_1084"><span class="label">[1084]</span></a> Brockhaus, <i>Konversations Lexikon</i>, vol. i. p. 578.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1085_1085" id="Footnote_1085_1085"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1085_1085"><span class="label">[1085]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Impossibilities of Anarchism</i>, p. 26.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1086_1086" id="Footnote_1086_1086"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1086_1086"><span class="label">[1086]</span></a> <i>Freedom</i>, November 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1087_1087" id="Footnote_1087_1087"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1087_1087"><span class="label">[1087]</span></a> <i>Freedom</i>, November 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1088_1088" id="Footnote_1088_1088"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1088_1088"><span class="label">[1088]</span></a> Davidson, <i>Christ, State, and Commune</i>, p. 22.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1089_1089" id="Footnote_1089_1089"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1089_1089"><span class="label">[1089]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 31.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1090_1090" id="Footnote_1090_1090"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1090_1090"><span class="label">[1090]</span></a> Kropotkin, <i>Anarchism</i>, p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1091_1091" id="Footnote_1091_1091"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1091_1091"><span class="label">[1091]</span></a> Kropotkin, <i>The Wage System</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1092_1092" id="Footnote_1092_1092"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1092_1092"><span class="label">[1092]</span></a> See Leatham, <i>Lives of the Chicago Martyrs</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1093_1093" id="Footnote_1093_1093"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1093_1093"><span class="label">[1093]</span></a> <i>Social-Democratic Federation Song Book</i>, p. 35.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1094_1094" id="Footnote_1094_1094"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1094_1094"><span class="label">[1094]</span></a> Bliss, <i>Encyclopedia of Social Reform</i>, p. 63.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1095_1095" id="Footnote_1095_1095"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1095_1095"><span class="label">[1095]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p.
+31.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1096_1096" id="Footnote_1096_1096"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1096_1096"><span class="label">[1096]</span></a> Bax, <i>A Short History of the Paris Commune</i>, p. 78.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1097_1097" id="Footnote_1097_1097"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1097_1097"><span class="label">[1097]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Song Book</i>, p. 33.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXXI" id="CHAPTER_XXXI"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_404" id="Page_404">[404]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXXI<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>SOCIALISM AND REVOLUTION</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The "Socialist Catechism" contains the following passage: "<i>Q.</i> How
+are forms of government changed so as to readjust them to the
+economical changes in the forms of production which have been silently
+evolving in the body of society? <i>A.</i> By means of revolution.&mdash;<i>Q.</i>
+Give an instance of this? <i>A.</i> The French Revolution of 1789."<a name="FNanchor_1098_1098" id="FNanchor_1098_1098"></a><a href="#Footnote_1098_1098" class="fnanchor">[1098]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many British Socialists are revolutionaries. They hope to introduce
+Socialism into Great Britain by revolutionary means. They have studied
+the French revolutions, and have become pupils of the French
+revolutionary leaders. "Socialism is essentially revolutionary,
+politically and economically, as it aims at the complete overthrow of
+existing economic and political conditions. We should organise and be
+prepared for what might be described as a revolutionary outbreak. The
+economic changes which are taking place, and the corresponding changes
+in other conditions, are bringing about a revolutionary transformation
+in human society, and what we have to do is to help on this
+development, and to prepare the way for it."<a name="FNanchor_1099_1099" id="FNanchor_1099_1099"></a><a href="#Footnote_1099_1099" class="fnanchor">[1099]</a> "We Socialists are
+not reformers; we are revolutionists. We Socialists do not propose to
+change forms. We care nothing for forms. We want a change of the
+inside of the mechanism of society; let the form take care of
+itself."<a name="FNanchor_1100_1100" id="FNanchor_1100_1100"></a><a href="#Footnote_1100_1100" class="fnanchor">[1100]</a> British <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_405" id="Page_405">[405]</a></span>Socialism was founded by revolutionary
+Communists. Marx was a revolutionary. "For a number of years the late
+William Morris, the greatest man whom the Socialist movement has yet
+claimed in this country, held and openly preached this doctrine of
+cataclysmic upheaval and sudden overthrow of the ruling
+classes."<a name="FNanchor_1101_1101" id="FNanchor_1101_1101"></a><a href="#Footnote_1101_1101" class="fnanchor">[1101]</a> That idea has been revived by modern British
+Socialists, many of whom believe that "The only effective way to
+induce the ruling class to attempt to palliate the evils of their
+system is to organise the workers for the overthrow of that
+system."<a name="FNanchor_1102_1102" id="FNanchor_1102_1102"></a><a href="#Footnote_1102_1102" class="fnanchor">[1102]</a> "In the International Socialist movement we are at last
+in the presence of a force which is gathering unto itself the rebel
+spirits of all lands and uniting them into a mighty host to do battle,
+not for the triumph of a sect, or of a race, but for the overthrow of
+a system which has filled the world with want and woe. 'Workers of the
+world, unite!' wrote Karl Marx; 'you have a world to win and nothing
+to lose but your chains.' And they are uniting under the crimson
+banner of a world-embracing principle which knows nor sect, nor creed,
+nor race, and which offers new life and hope to all created
+beings&mdash;the glorious gospel of Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1103_1103" id="FNanchor_1103_1103"></a><a href="#Footnote_1103_1103" class="fnanchor">[1103]</a></p>
+
+<p>In many respects the French Revolution has served as a model to
+British Socialists of the Anarchist-Revolutionary type. They have
+adopted its outward emblems, its songs, and its most effective
+catch-phrases: "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity was the brave and
+splendid legend inscribed on the blood-red banners of the French
+Revolutionists. And in strange ways the oppressed and hunger-maddened
+people sought to realise their ideal. It is still the battle-cry of
+the English Socialists&mdash;indeed, of the world-wide Socialist
+movement."<a name="FNanchor_1104_1104" id="FNanchor_1104_1104"></a><a href="#Footnote_1104_1104" class="fnanchor">[1104]</a> In the Socialist <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_406" id="Page_406">[406]</a></span>song-books a translation of the
+"Marseillaise" is to be found, which is sung at Socialist gatherings:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">Shall hateful tyrants, mischief-breeding,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">With hireling hosts, a ruffian band,<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">Affright and desolate the land,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">While Peace and Liberty lie bleeding?<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">To arms! to arms, ye brave!<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">The avenging sword unsheathe!<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">March on! March on! all hearts resolved<br /></span>
+<span class="i1">On Liberty or death.<a name="FNanchor_1105_1105" id="FNanchor_1105_1105"></a><a href="#Footnote_1105_1105" class="fnanchor">[1105]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>In the eyes of many British Socialists the French Revolution was not
+sufficiently democratic, not sufficiently radical, not sufficiently
+violent. We are told that the French revolutionaries were soft-hearted
+men, and that our sympathy with their innocent victims, such as Queen
+Marie Antoinette, is quite uncalled for. "The Revolution was in its
+conception, its inception, and its results a middle-class revolution.
+The revolution was inaugurated by the Parliament of Paris&mdash;a
+pettifogging legal assembly. Marie Antoinette was but one fine useless
+woman among the millions, and she personified the heedless prodigal
+selfishness of autocracy. We of the Socialist movement, who are full
+of the idea of social service, of making a full return to society for
+the bread we eat, the clothes we wear out, and the house-room we
+occupy, how can we be expected to think so much of the suffering of
+one idle extravagant woman and so little of the age-long privation and
+torture of the hard-working useful mothers and sisters of France? The
+crimes of ignorant, passionate democracy, of which Burke and Carlyle
+have made so much, are as a drop in the ocean by comparison with the
+deliberate enormities perpetrated by enlightened cold-blooded
+autocracy, from Herod to Nicholas. The democracy has always been
+pitiful, extremely pitiful. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_407" id="Page_407">[407]</a></span>Even the September massacres, carried out
+by the lowest of the low in an enraged and degraded and
+terror-stricken populace, are brightened by golden patches of clemency
+and love such as the annals of class punishment nowhere reveal."<a name="FNanchor_1106_1106" id="FNanchor_1106_1106"></a><a href="#Footnote_1106_1106" class="fnanchor">[1106]</a></p>
+
+<p>The outbreak of the Paris Commune of 1871, having been less a
+"middle-class" revolution, is considered by Socialists with greater
+approval than the French Revolution of 1789. The philosopher of
+British Socialism writes: "The Commune of Paris is the one event which
+Socialists throughout the world have agreed with single accord to
+celebrate. Every 18th of March witnesses thousands of gatherings
+throughout the civilised world to commemorate the (alas! only
+temporary) victory of organised Socialist aspiration over the forces
+of property and privilege in 1871."<a name="FNanchor_1107_1107" id="FNanchor_1107_1107"></a><a href="#Footnote_1107_1107" class="fnanchor">[1107]</a> Another leading Socialist
+writer says: "Year by year as the 18th of March comes round, it is the
+custom with Socialists to commemorate the proclamation of the Commune
+of Paris. As a Socialist I am a friend of the Commune."<a name="FNanchor_1108_1108" id="FNanchor_1108_1108"></a><a href="#Footnote_1108_1108" class="fnanchor">[1108]</a></p>
+
+<p>What was the Paris Commune, and what did it do? In the words of an
+impartial publication, "The Communard chiefs were revolutionaries of
+every sect, who, disagreeing on governmental and economic principles,
+were united in their vague but perpetual hostility to the existing
+order of things. History has rarely known a more unpatriotic crime
+than that of the insurrection of the Commune."<a name="FNanchor_1109_1109" id="FNanchor_1109_1109"></a><a href="#Footnote_1109_1109" class="fnanchor">[1109]</a> "The Commune was
+an insurrection which initiated a series of terrible outrages by the
+murder of the two generals Lecomte and Thomas.... The incapacity and
+mutual hatred of their chiefs rendered all organisation and durable
+resistance impossible.... The Communists <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_408" id="Page_408">[408]</a></span>were committing the most
+horrible excesses: the Archbishop of Paris, President Bonjean,
+priests, magistrates, journalists, and private individuals, whom they
+had seized as hostages, were shot in batches in prisons, and a scheme
+of destruction was ruthlessly carried into effect by men and women
+with cases of petroleum. The H&ocirc;tel de Ville, the Palais de Justice,
+the Tuileries, the Ministry of Finance, the Palace of the Legion of
+Honour, that of the Council of State, part of the Rue de Rivoli, &amp;c.,
+were ravaged by the flames; barrels of gunpowder were placed in Notre
+Dame and the Pantheon ready to blow up the buildings, and the whole
+city would have been involved in ruin if the national troops had not
+gained a last and crowning victory."<a name="FNanchor_1110_1110" id="FNanchor_1110_1110"></a><a href="#Footnote_1110_1110" class="fnanchor">[1110]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialists have nothing but praise for the Communards, who killed and
+burned, desecrated the churches and devastated the town. They speak
+with enthusiasm of the leaders of that outbreak as of heroes who
+fought for the "Brotherhood of Man," and they exalt them above the
+saints of early Christianity. The philosopher of British Socialism
+exclaims: "Limitless courage and contempt of death was displayed in
+defence of an ideal, the colossal proportions of which dwarf
+everything in history, and which alone suffices to redeem the
+sordidness of the nineteenth century. Here was a heroism in the face
+of which the much-belauded Christian martyrs cut a very poor
+figure."<a name="FNanchor_1111_1111" id="FNanchor_1111_1111"></a><a href="#Footnote_1111_1111" class="fnanchor">[1111]</a> "It was in the Commune that we saw manifested as never
+before the strong compelling force of a secular altruism. Without hope
+of heaven and without fear of hell, men lived and died for the idea of
+a brotherhood of self-governing and self-respecting men and
+women."<a name="FNanchor_1112_1112" id="FNanchor_1112_1112"></a><a href="#Footnote_1112_1112" class="fnanchor">[1112]</a></p>
+
+<p>Even the murderous Paris Commune was too moderate for the taste of
+many British Socialists, who favour sterner <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_409" id="Page_409">[409]</a></span>measures. The philosopher
+of British Socialism informs us; "The Commune had one special fault,
+that of a fatuous moderation in all its doings. Probably never since
+history began have any body of men allowed themselves and theirs to be
+treated as lambs in the slaughterhouse with more lamb-like forbearance
+and absence of retaliation than the Commune and its adherents; we have
+seen this illustrated by the incredible fact that up to the last, amid
+all the slaughterings of Communists, the vast majority of the hostages
+and prisoners in its hands remained unscathed."<a name="FNanchor_1113_1113" id="FNanchor_1113_1113"></a><a href="#Footnote_1113_1113" class="fnanchor">[1113]</a> "One of the most
+unfortunate characteristics of the leaders of the Commune was their
+sensitiveness to bourgeois public opinion. The first thing for the
+leader of a revolutionary movement to learn is a healthy contempt for
+the official public opinion of the 'civilised world.' He must
+resolutely harden his heart against its 'thrills of horror,' its
+'indignation,' its 'abomination,' and its 'detestation,' and he must
+learn to smile at all the names it will liberally shower upon him and
+his cause."<a name="FNanchor_1114_1114" id="FNanchor_1114_1114"></a><a href="#Footnote_1114_1114" class="fnanchor">[1114]</a></p>
+
+<p>Whilst the revolutionary criminals who ruled by murder and arson were
+heroes and martyrs, the defenders of law and order were criminals
+according to British Socialists: "The thirst of the well-to-do classes
+for the blood of the Communards was insatiable. The latter were tried
+and shot in batches."<a name="FNanchor_1115_1115" id="FNanchor_1115_1115"></a><a href="#Footnote_1115_1115" class="fnanchor">[1115]</a> "The Communards, desperate as they were,
+only faintly imitated the wholesale savagery of the regular
+troops."<a name="FNanchor_1116_1116" id="FNanchor_1116_1116"></a><a href="#Footnote_1116_1116" class="fnanchor">[1116]</a> Peaceful M. Thiers, being at the head of the
+government, was "probably the cleverest, most hypocritical, and most
+unscrupulous villain that ever denied the pages of history."<a name="FNanchor_1117_1117" id="FNanchor_1117_1117"></a><a href="#Footnote_1117_1117" class="fnanchor">[1117]</a></p>
+
+<p>Although Socialists pose as democrats, they do not believe in majority
+government.<a name="FNanchor_1118_1118" id="FNanchor_1118_1118"></a><a href="#Footnote_1118_1118" class="fnanchor">[1118]</a> Being aware that they <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_410" id="Page_410">[410]</a></span>will hardly be able to gain
+over the majority of the people to their revolutionary and visionary
+plans, they may, like the Paris Commune, try to force Socialism upon
+an unwilling majority. Therefore the attempt of the Parisian
+Socialists to overrule France is not condemned but regretted by the
+British Socialists: "The revolt was open to the objection that may be
+urged against most insurrections. It was an attempt to impose the will
+of a minority on a large majority of the people. The Socialists in the
+Commune must have realised at times that the people of France were not
+prepared for even the small instalments of Socialism which they sought
+to introduce. The revolutionists may have thought to impose their
+policy upon France by a mere <i>coup de main</i>."<a name="FNanchor_1119_1119" id="FNanchor_1119_1119"></a><a href="#Footnote_1119_1119" class="fnanchor">[1119]</a></p>
+
+<p>The attitude of Socialists makes it appear possible that the
+revolutionary outbreak of 1871 will not be the last. The next
+revolutionary attempt may conceivably take place in Great Britain.
+"One man with an idea in his head is in danger of being considered a
+madman; two men with the same idea in common may be foolish, but can
+hardly be mad; ten men sharing an idea begin to act; a hundred draw
+attention as fanatics, a thousand and society begins to tremble, a
+hundred thousand and there is war abroad."<a name="FNanchor_1120_1120" id="FNanchor_1120_1120"></a><a href="#Footnote_1120_1120" class="fnanchor">[1120]</a> "Whilst our backers
+at the polls are counted by tens, we must continue to crawl and drudge
+and lecture as best we can. When they are counted by hundreds, we can
+permeate and trim and compromise. When they rise to tens of thousands,
+we shall take the field as an independent party. Give us hundreds of
+thousands, as you can if you try hard enough, and we will ride the
+whirlwind and direct the storm."<a name="FNanchor_1121_1121" id="FNanchor_1121_1121"></a><a href="#Footnote_1121_1121" class="fnanchor">[1121]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1098_1098" id="Footnote_1098_1098"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1098_1098"><span class="label">[1098]</span></a> Joynes, <i>A Socialist Catechism</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1099_1099" id="Footnote_1099_1099"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1099_1099"><span class="label">[1099]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p.
+37.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1100_1100" id="Footnote_1100_1100"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1100_1100"><span class="label">[1100]</span></a> De Leon, <i>Reform or Revolution</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1101_1101" id="Footnote_1101_1101"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1101_1101"><span class="label">[1101]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1102_1102" id="Footnote_1102_1102"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1102_1102"><span class="label">[1102]</span></a> <i>Socialist Standard</i>, October 1, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1103_1103" id="Footnote_1103_1103"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1103_1103"><span class="label">[1103]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 86.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1104_1104" id="Footnote_1104_1104"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1104_1104"><span class="label">[1104]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1105_1105" id="Footnote_1105_1105"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1105_1105"><span class="label">[1105]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Song Book</i>, p. 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1106_1106" id="Footnote_1106_1106"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1106_1106"><span class="label">[1106]</span></a> Leatham, <i>French Revolution</i>, pp. 13, 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1107_1107" id="Footnote_1107_1107"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1107_1107"><span class="label">[1107]</span></a> Bax, <i>Paris Commune</i>, Preface.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1108_1108" id="Footnote_1108_1108"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1108_1108"><span class="label">[1108]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Commune of Paris</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1109_1109" id="Footnote_1109_1109"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1109_1109"><span class="label">[1109]</span></a> <i>Encyclop&aelig;dia Britannica</i>, vol. xxviii. p. 480.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1110_1110" id="Footnote_1110_1110"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1110_1110"><span class="label">[1110]</span></a> <i>Encyclop&aelig;dia Britannica</i>, vol. xviii. p. 294.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1111_1111" id="Footnote_1111_1111"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1111_1111"><span class="label">[1111]</span></a> Bax, <i>Paris Commune</i>, p. 59.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1112_1112" id="Footnote_1112_1112"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1112_1112"><span class="label">[1112]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Commune of Paris</i>, p. 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1113_1113" id="Footnote_1113_1113"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1113_1113"><span class="label">[1113]</span></a> Bax, <i>Paris Commune</i>, p. 74.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1114_1114" id="Footnote_1114_1114"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1114_1114"><span class="label">[1114]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 88.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1115_1115" id="Footnote_1115_1115"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1115_1115"><span class="label">[1115]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Commune of Paris</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1116_1116" id="Footnote_1116_1116"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1116_1116"><span class="label">[1116]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1117_1117" id="Footnote_1117_1117"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1117_1117"><span class="label">[1117]</span></a> Bax, <i>Paris Commune</i>, p. 86.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1118_1118" id="Footnote_1118_1118"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1118_1118"><span class="label">[1118]</span></a> See Chapters XV. and XXX. <i>ante.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1119_1119" id="Footnote_1119_1119"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1119_1119"><span class="label">[1119]</span></a> Leatham, <i>The Commune of Paris</i>, p. 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1120_1120" id="Footnote_1120_1120"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1120_1120"><span class="label">[1120]</span></a> Morris, <i>Art, Labour, and Socialism</i>, p. 24.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1121_1121" id="Footnote_1121_1121"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1121_1121"><span class="label">[1121]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Fabian Society and its Early History</i>, p.
+28.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXXII" id="CHAPTER_XXXII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_411" id="Page_411">[411]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXXII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>STATE SOCIALISM</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Most Socialist agitators in Great Britain oppose and condemn State
+Socialism for two reasons: firstly, because, owing to their Communist
+and Anarchist leanings, they oppose and hate the State as such, as has
+been shown in the Chapters on "Socialism and Communism," "Socialism
+and Anarchism," "Socialism and Revolution"; secondly, because with the
+introduction of State Socialism their occupation would be gone.
+Socialist agitators do not wish others to govern the State. They wish
+to govern it themselves. The welfare of the masses is to them
+apparently only a secondary consideration. Hence most British
+Socialist agitators condemn the State Socialism of Germany, though it
+has greatly benefited the masses, and perhaps because it has greatly
+benefited the masses. They also condemn the British Post Office,
+although, being not overburdened with scruples, they praise it to the
+skies as a Socialistic model institution when it happens to suit them.
+In fact, most Socialist leaders condemn all existing Government
+institutions, ostensibly because they are capitalistic enterprises
+which are run at a "profit," and because they "exploit" their workers.
+It would of course be fatal to the Socialist agitators had they to
+preach the gospel of envy and hatred, of destruction and pillage, to
+the contented.</p>
+
+<p>"The State of to-day, nationally and locally, is only the agent of the
+possessing class."<a name="FNanchor_1122_1122" id="FNanchor_1122_1122"></a><a href="#Footnote_1122_1122" class="fnanchor">[1122]</a> "Mere nationalisation or mere
+municipalisation of any industry is not <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_412" id="Page_412">[412]</a></span>Socialism or Collectivism; it
+may be only the substitution of corporate for private administration;
+the social idea and purpose with which Collectivism is concerned may
+be completely absent."<a name="FNanchor_1123_1123" id="FNanchor_1123_1123"></a><a href="#Footnote_1123_1123" class="fnanchor">[1123]</a> "Mere Statification, as we may term it,
+does not mean Socialism. The State of to-day is mainly an agent of the
+possessing classes, and industrial or commercial undertakings run
+to-day by Governmental bodies are largely run in the interests of
+these classes. Their aim in all cases is to show a profit, in the same
+way as ordinary capitalistic enterprises. This profit accrues to the
+possessing classes in the form of relief of imperial or local
+taxation, mainly paid by them, interests on loans, &amp;c. In other words,
+these industrial undertakings are run for profit and not for use, and
+their employees are little, if at all, better off than those of
+private employers."<a name="FNanchor_1124_1124" id="FNanchor_1124_1124"></a><a href="#Footnote_1124_1124" class="fnanchor">[1124]</a> "The modern State is but the organisation
+which capitalist society gives itself in order to maintain the
+external conditions of capitalist production against the attacks both
+of the workmen and of individual capitalists. The modern State,
+whatever its form, is essentially a capitalist machine."<a name="FNanchor_1125_1125" id="FNanchor_1125_1125"></a><a href="#Footnote_1125_1125" class="fnanchor">[1125]</a> "State
+administration is very far from being the same as a Socialistic
+administration, as is sometimes erroneously supposed. The State
+administration is just as much a system of capitalistic exploitation
+as if the institutions in question were in the hands of private
+undertakers."<a name="FNanchor_1126_1126" id="FNanchor_1126_1126"></a><a href="#Footnote_1126_1126" class="fnanchor">[1126]</a> "A bureaucracy&mdash;that is, a body of permanent
+officials, entrenched in Government departments, according to whose
+piping ministers themselves have willingly or unwillingly to dance&mdash;is
+totally incompatible with the very elementary conditions of
+Socialistic administration."<a name="FNanchor_1127_1127" id="FNanchor_1127_1127"></a><a href="#Footnote_1127_1127" class="fnanchor">[1127]</a> "Bismarckian State control is
+brusque and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_413" id="Page_413">[413]</a></span>baneful, and is certainly not the desire of the true
+Socialist."<a name="FNanchor_1128_1128" id="FNanchor_1128_1128"></a><a href="#Footnote_1128_1128" class="fnanchor">[1128]</a></p>
+
+<p>"State ownership, State tyranny, State interference exist to-day. We
+have to bear them now; we have to submit to them now; we have to pay
+for them now. The people, as such, own nothing. And the Socialists
+demand that the people shall own everything. Not the 'State,' the
+'People.' So great is the difference between the word 'State' and the
+word 'people.'"<a name="FNanchor_1129_1129" id="FNanchor_1129_1129"></a><a href="#Footnote_1129_1129" class="fnanchor">[1129]</a> "Do you propose that all these means of
+production which are now owned by individuals, by this class, as you
+say, should be made the property of the Government, like the Post
+Office and the telegraph system are in this country, and the railways
+as well in some others, or that they should be owned by municipal
+bodies, as waterworks, tramways, gasworks, and so on, are in many
+cases already?&mdash;No. Socialism does not mean mere Governmental
+ownership or management. The State of to-day, nationally or locally,
+is only the agent of the possessing class; the Post Office and the
+other State-owned businesses are run for profit just as other
+businesses are; and the Government, as the agent of the possessing
+class, has, in the interests of its employers, to treat the employees
+just as other employees are treated. The organised democratic society
+contemplated by Socialists is a very different thing from the class
+State of to-day. When society is organised for the control of its own
+business, and has acquired the possession of its own means of
+production, its officers will not be the agents of a class, and
+production will be carried on for the use of all and not for the
+profit of a few."<a name="FNanchor_1130_1130" id="FNanchor_1130_1130"></a><a href="#Footnote_1130_1130" class="fnanchor">[1130]</a> "The Post Office to-day is an organised
+sweating-den. The Government get the largest possible amount of work
+for the lowest possible wages. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_414" id="Page_414">[414]</a></span>That is capitalist wage-slavery under
+Government control."<a name="FNanchor_1131_1131" id="FNanchor_1131_1131"></a><a href="#Footnote_1131_1131" class="fnanchor">[1131]</a> "The country postman has to walk excessive
+distances for miserable wages in order that the profit on the Post
+Office may be filched from the employees and from the public by the
+Chancellor of the Exchequer."<a name="FNanchor_1132_1132" id="FNanchor_1132_1132"></a><a href="#Footnote_1132_1132" class="fnanchor">[1132]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Fabians, on the other hand, advocate State Socialism, but they are
+a small minority. "The Socialism advocated by the Fabian Society is
+State Socialism exclusively."<a name="FNanchor_1133_1133" id="FNanchor_1133_1133"></a><a href="#Footnote_1133_1133" class="fnanchor">[1133]</a> Some Socialists would welcome
+State Socialism in the hope that it would prepare the way for free
+Communism. Mr. Keir Hardie, for instance, says: "State Socialism with
+all its drawbacks, and these I frankly admit, will prepare the way for
+free Communism, in which the rule, not merely the law of the State,
+but the rule of life will be&mdash;From each according to his ability, to
+each according to his needs."<a name="FNanchor_1134_1134" id="FNanchor_1134_1134"></a><a href="#Footnote_1134_1134" class="fnanchor">[1134]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Socialists only believe in the fraternal State. Paternal State
+Socialism all Socialists unanimously oppose."<a name="FNanchor_1135_1135" id="FNanchor_1135_1135"></a><a href="#Footnote_1135_1135" class="fnanchor">[1135]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1122_1122" id="Footnote_1122_1122"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1122_1122"><span class="label">[1122]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1123_1123" id="Footnote_1123_1123"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1123_1123"><span class="label">[1123]</span></a> Ball, <i>The Moral Aspects of Socialism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1124_1124" id="Footnote_1124_1124"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1124_1124"><span class="label">[1124]</span></a> Bax, <i>Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1125_1125" id="Footnote_1125_1125"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1125_1125"><span class="label">[1125]</span></a> Engels, <i>Development of Socialism from Utopia to
+Science</i>, p. 71.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1126_1126" id="Footnote_1126_1126"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1126_1126"><span class="label">[1126]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, pp. 198, 199.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1127_1127" id="Footnote_1127_1127"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1127_1127"><span class="label">[1127]</span></a> Bax, <i>Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1128_1128" id="Footnote_1128_1128"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1128_1128"><span class="label">[1128]</span></a> Ben Tillett, <i>Trades Unionism and Socialism</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1129_1129" id="Footnote_1129_1129"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1129_1129"><span class="label">[1129]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, October 18, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1130_1130" id="Footnote_1130_1130"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1130_1130"><span class="label">[1130]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism of Socialism</i>, pp. 8,
+9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1131_1131" id="Footnote_1131_1131"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1131_1131"><span class="label">[1131]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Social-Democracy</i>, p. 22.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1132_1132" id="Footnote_1132_1132"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1132_1132"><span class="label">[1132]</span></a> <i>Fabian Election Manifesto</i>, 1892, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1133_1133" id="Footnote_1133_1133"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1133_1133"><span class="label">[1133]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy</i>, 1896, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1134_1134" id="Footnote_1134_1134"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1134_1134"><span class="label">[1134]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 89.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1135_1135" id="Footnote_1135_1135"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1135_1135"><span class="label">[1135]</span></a> Bliss, <i>Encyclopedia of Social Reform</i>, p. 1262.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXXIII" id="CHAPTER_XXXIII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_415" id="Page_415">[415]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXXIII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE SOCIALIST ORGANISATIONS: THEIR MUTUAL RELATIONS AND THEIR POLICY</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The Social-Democratic Federation is the most honest and
+straightforward of the various Socialist organisations. Its aims are
+revolutionary, as the following statement proves:</p>
+
+<p>"The Social-Democratic Federation is a militant Socialist organisation
+whose members&mdash;men and women&mdash;belong almost entirely to the working
+classes. Its object is the realisation of Socialism&mdash;the emancipation
+of the working class from its present subjection to the capitalist
+class. The means by which it seeks to attain that end are: agitation,
+education, and the organisation of the working class into a
+class-conscious political party&mdash;that is, a party clearly conscious of
+the present position of the workers as a subject class, in consequence
+of all the means of production being owned and controlled by another
+class, and clearly conscious of its duty and mission to free them from
+that position by the conquest of all the powers of the State, and by
+making all the means of production collective common property, to be
+used for the benefit of all instead of for the profit of a class. To
+this end the Social-Democratic Federation proclaims and preaches the
+class war."<a name="FNanchor_1136_1136" id="FNanchor_1136_1136"></a><a href="#Footnote_1136_1136" class="fnanchor">[1136]</a></p>
+
+<p>"According to the report for the year ending March 1907 it has 186
+branches and affiliated societies. One of its members sits in
+Parliament as a member of the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_416" id="Page_416">[416]</a></span>Labour party, and about 120 are members
+of various local bodies. Its gross income and expenditure through, out
+the country is estimated at 15,500<i>l.</i> It has a weekly paper,
+'Justice,' and a monthly magazine, 'The Social-Democrat.'<a name="FNanchor_1137_1137" id="FNanchor_1137_1137"></a><a href="#Footnote_1137_1137" class="fnanchor">[1137]</a> "In
+its own estimation "Justice" is "the most respected of Socialist
+newspapers."<a name="FNanchor_1138_1138" id="FNanchor_1138_1138"></a><a href="#Footnote_1138_1138" class="fnanchor">[1138]</a></p>
+
+<p>The various Socialist organisations do not love each other. The Fabian
+Society caustically remarks: "The Federation runs a newspaper called
+'Justice' which has not hitherto been worth a penny to any man whose
+pence are so scarce as a labourer's, and which has made repeated
+attacks on the ordinary working-class organisations without whose
+co-operation Socialists can at present do nothing except cry in the
+wilderness. The branches are expected to sell this paper at their
+meetings."<a name="FNanchor_1139_1139" id="FNanchor_1139_1139"></a><a href="#Footnote_1139_1139" class="fnanchor">[1139]</a> "The Social-Democratic Federation is virtually the
+oldest Socialist society and is certainly the most conservative. It
+was founded as the Democratic Federation about 1880, and adopted its
+present name in 1884. Mr. H.M. Hyndman, its most prominent member,
+imported its doctrines&mdash;which were of German origin&mdash;and the S.D.F.
+(as it is familiarly called) has ever since endeavoured to maintain an
+unshaken faith in all the teachings of Karl Marx. In fact, the S.D.F.
+changes its doctrines not with the times, but a dozen years or so
+after; so that it is always rather out of touch with the actualities
+of politics and attracts the type of mind that prefers clear-cut
+principles to practical political progress."<a name="FNanchor_1140_1140" id="FNanchor_1140_1140"></a><a href="#Footnote_1140_1140" class="fnanchor">[1140]</a></p>
+
+<p>Other Socialist organisations which are less straightforward than the
+Social-Democratic Federation hide <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_417" id="Page_417">[417]</a></span>their identity and object under
+misleading titles. The Independent Labour Party, for instance, is a
+purely Socialist party notwithstanding its name. "Its object is, an
+Industrial Commonwealth founded upon the Socialisation of land and
+capital. Its methods are the education of the community in the
+principles of Socialism; the industrial and political organisation of
+the workers; the independent representation of Socialist principles on
+all elective bodies."<a name="FNanchor_1141_1141" id="FNanchor_1141_1141"></a><a href="#Footnote_1141_1141" class="fnanchor">[1141]</a> "No one will find much difference in the
+programmes of the Social-Democratic Federation and the Independent
+Labour Party."<a name="FNanchor_1142_1142" id="FNanchor_1142_1142"></a><a href="#Footnote_1142_1142" class="fnanchor">[1142]</a> "The Independent Labour Party, commonly called
+the I.L.P., which must be carefully distinguished from the Labour
+party, is much the largest, and politically the most important,
+Socialist organisation. It was founded at Bradford in 1892, by Mr.
+Keir Hardie, M.P., and others, and it has from the first advocated
+Socialism of the English type and endeavoured to work in harmony with
+trade unionists. The Labour party is mainly due to its initiative, and
+through its members in trade unions it largely controls the policy of
+the party. In August 1907 it had over 700 branches, of which 155 had
+been formed in the preceding six months. Its operations have recently
+expanded with extraordinary rapidity, its central office expenditure
+for the years ending February 28 having been 955<i>l.</i> in 1905,
+1,817<i>l.</i> in 1906, and 3,552<i>l.</i> in 1907. It does a very large
+business in the publication and sale of pamphlets and books, and has a
+weekly paper, "The Labour Leader." At the general election of 1906,
+eighteen of its members were returned to Parliament, all belonging to
+the Labour party, and two more have since been elected, one for the
+Labour party, and one, Mr. Victor Grayson, as an independent
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_418" id="Page_418">[418]</a></span>Socialist. Over five hundred of its members sit on town councils and
+other local bodies. The total membership is estimated at 40,000, and
+its income and expenditure at perhaps 100,000<i>l.</i>"<a name="FNanchor_1143_1143" id="FNanchor_1143_1143"></a><a href="#Footnote_1143_1143" class="fnanchor">[1143]</a> "The
+Independent Labour Party was formed in January 1893. As years have
+passed the Independent Labour Party has steadily strengthened its
+programme, until it is to-day entirely Socialist, but it has not quite
+got rid of the strain of opportunism, at elections its independence
+being more in evidence in its name than in its conduct."<a name="FNanchor_1144_1144" id="FNanchor_1144_1144"></a><a href="#Footnote_1144_1144" class="fnanchor">[1144]</a></p>
+
+<p>Wishing to secure Socialist and non-Socialist adherents, and
+masquerading as a Liberal Labour party, the attitude of the
+Independent Labour Party is not a straightforward one. One of its
+competitors states: "The Independent Labour Party has continued its
+policy of bargain-making with capitalist politicians. The leaders at
+times call themselves Socialists, and at other times protest against
+frightening their supporters by introducing the word into resolutions.
+At the general election, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald at Leicester, and Mr.
+James Parker at Halifax, were amongst the candidates who entered into
+compacts with the Liberals. At the Amsterdam International Congress
+they voted for a resolution extolling the 'tried and victorious policy
+based on the class war,' and on their return to England referred to
+the class war as a 'shibboleth' and as a 'reactionary and Whiggish
+precept, certain to lead the movement away from the real aims of
+Socialism.'"<a name="FNanchor_1145_1145" id="FNanchor_1145_1145"></a><a href="#Footnote_1145_1145" class="fnanchor">[1145]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Fabian Society is the least open and the least straightforward
+Socialist organisation. Ostensibly it adopted its curious name because
+"for the right moment you must wait, as Fabius did most patiently when
+warring against Hannibal, though many censured his <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_419" id="Page_419">[419]</a></span>delays; but when
+the time comes you must strike hard as Fabius did, or your waiting
+will be in vain, and fruitless."<a name="FNanchor_1146_1146" id="FNanchor_1146_1146"></a><a href="#Footnote_1146_1146" class="fnanchor">[1146]</a> In reality the misleading title
+was probably adopted because the Fabian Society habitually and on
+principle sails under a false flag, wishing not to arouse suspicion as
+to its objects.</p>
+
+<p>The object of the small but powerful Fabian Society is a peculiar one:
+"Founded on a small scale in 1884 and actually the oldest of the three
+great Socialist organisations, the Fabian Society has never aimed at a
+large membership or endeavoured to become a political party. Its work
+has been mainly educational, its endeavour to translate the principles
+of Socialism into practical politics suited to English conditions.
+From the first it refused to accept Marxian teaching. The Fabian
+Society is not a political body, in that it allows its members
+complete freedom to adopt any method of carrying out the principles
+they profess. Hence its members in Parliament belong to the Liberal or
+the Labour party, and they sit as Progressives on London local bodies.
+The Society is mainly middle-class, and the majority of its members
+belong to London, where fortnightly meetings are held for the
+discussion of Socialism. Its great force lies in the ability of many
+of its members, some of whom, Mr. Bernard Shaw, the dramatist; Mr.
+Sidney Webb, the political writer; Sir Sydney Olivier, now Governor of
+Jamaica, have belonged to it from the start; whilst others, such as
+Mr. H.G. Wells and the Rev. R.J. Campbell, are more recent recruits.
+Recently it has greatly increased its membership, now nearly 2,000,
+and has formed substantial branches in the Universities and in many
+large towns. Eleven of its members sit in Parliament."<a name="FNanchor_1147_1147" id="FNanchor_1147_1147"></a><a href="#Footnote_1147_1147" class="fnanchor">[1147]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The chief object to which the Society devotes its <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_420" id="Page_420">[420]</a></span>resources is the
+education of the people in political, economic, and social subjects.
+To effect this purpose it must in the first place educate itself by
+the discussion of those problems which from time to time appear ripe
+for solution. Its members therefore undertake the study of such
+problems, and lay the results before the Society, where they are
+considered from various points of view. Finally the conclusions
+adopted and generally approved by the members are published, usually
+in penny tracts, and by this means made available for the information
+of all. The Society further endeavours to promote social amelioration
+by the dissemination of information about existing institutions, in
+order that better use may be made of the powers already possessed by
+local administrative authorities, now too often neglectful of their
+obligations. The same ends are sought to be attained by means of
+circulating libraries supplied to Working-men's Clubs, Co-operative
+Societies, Trade Unions, and similar bodies, and by the publication of
+lists of best books on social and political subjects. The Society also
+at times engages trained lecturers to give courses of lectures during
+the winter months on social politics to working-class and other
+organisations. The members of the Society who control its policy are
+Socialists; that is to say, are committed to the theory of the
+probable direction of economic evolution which is now often called
+Collectivism."<a name="FNanchor_1148_1148" id="FNanchor_1148_1148"></a><a href="#Footnote_1148_1148" class="fnanchor">[1148]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The object of the Fabian Society is to persuade the English people to
+make their political constitution thoroughly democratic, and so to
+socialise their industries as to make the livelihood of the people
+entirely independent of private Capitalism. The Fabian Society
+endeavours to pursue its Socialist and Democratic objects with
+complete singleness of aim. For example: It has no distinctive
+opinions on the Marriage Question, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_421" id="Page_421">[421]</a></span>Religion, Art, abstract Economics,
+historic Evolution, Currency, or any other subject than its own
+special business of practical Democracy and Socialism. It brings all
+the pressure and persuasion in its power to bear on existing forces,
+caring nothing by what name any party calls itself, or what
+principles, Socialist or other, it professes, but having regard solely
+to the tendency of its actions supporting those which make for
+Socialism and Democracy and opposing those which are reactionary. It
+does not propose that the practical steps towards Social Democracy
+should be carried out by itself, or by any other specially organised
+society or party. It does not ask the English people to join the
+Fabian Society. The Fabian Society does not claim to be the people of
+England, or even the Socialist party, and therefore does not seek
+direct political representation by putting forward Fabian candidates
+at elections. But it loses no opportunity of influencing elections and
+inducing constituencies to select Socialists as their
+candidates."<a name="FNanchor_1149_1149" id="FNanchor_1149_1149"></a><a href="#Footnote_1149_1149" class="fnanchor">[1149]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The Fabian Society, far from holding aloof from other bodies, urges
+its members to lose no opportunity of joining them and permeating them
+with Fabian ideas as far as possible."<a name="FNanchor_1150_1150" id="FNanchor_1150_1150"></a><a href="#Footnote_1150_1150" class="fnanchor">[1150]</a> "The typical Fabian is an
+uncompromising Socialist and Democrat; but he holds aloof from no
+association that can possibly be induced to push in his direction.
+Instead of wasting time in forming new sects, he tries to inoculate
+with his Socialism the existing organisations&mdash;the political clubs,
+the caucuses, the trade unions, the Press, the co-operative societies,
+and the rival party leaders."<a name="FNanchor_1151_1151" id="FNanchor_1151_1151"></a><a href="#Footnote_1151_1151" class="fnanchor">[1151]</a></p>
+
+<p>Whilst the other Socialist organisations rely chiefly on direct
+driving force, the Fabian Society relies chiefly on subtle, indirect
+action and on intrigue. One of its <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_422" id="Page_422">[422]</a></span>most prominent men boasted: "In
+1888 it only cost us twenty-eight postcards, written by twenty-eight
+members, to convince the newly-born 'Star' newspaper that London was
+aflame with Fabian Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1152_1152" id="FNanchor_1152_1152"></a><a href="#Footnote_1152_1152" class="fnanchor">[1152]</a> "Our policy has been to try to
+induce some of these regular papers to give a column or two to
+Socialism, calling it by what name they please. And I have no
+hesitation in saying that the effect of this policy as shown in the
+'Manchester Sunday Chronicle,' the 'Star,' the London 'Daily
+Chronicle,' and other more exclusively working-class papers, notably
+the 'Clarion,' has done more for the cause than all the time and money
+that has been wasted on 'Justice' since the 'Star' was founded. Our
+mission is to Socialise the Press as we hope to Socialise Parliament
+and the other estates of the realm, not to run the Press
+ourselves."<a name="FNanchor_1153_1153" id="FNanchor_1153_1153"></a><a href="#Footnote_1153_1153" class="fnanchor">[1153]</a></p>
+
+<p>Owing to these peculiar methods, by which they secured the support of
+many people who did not know they were Socialists, the Fabians have
+been very successful in their policy: "In 1888 we had not been found
+out even by the 'Star.' The Liberal party was too much preoccupied
+over Mr. O'Brien's breeches and the Parnell Commission, with its
+dramatic climax in the suicide of the forger Pigott, to suspect that
+the liveliness of the extreme left of the Radical wing in London meant
+anything but the usual humbug about working-class interests. We urged
+our members to join the Liberal and Radical Associations of their
+districts, or if they preferred it, the Conservative Associations. We
+told them to become members of the nearest Radical club and
+co-operative store and to get delegated to the Metropolitan Radical
+Federation and the Liberal and Radical Union if possible. On these
+bodies we made speeches and moved resolutions, or better still, got
+the Parliamentary candidate for the constituency to move them, and
+secured reports and encouraging little articles for him in the 'Star.'
+We <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_423" id="Page_423">[423]</a></span>permeated the party organisations and pulled all the wires we
+could lay our hands on with our utmost adroitness and energy; and we
+succeeded so far that in 1888 we gained the solid advantage of a
+Progressive majority, full of ideas that would never have come into
+their heads had not the Fabian put them there, on the first London
+County Council. The generalship of this movement was undertaken
+chiefly by Sidney Webb, who played such bewildering conjuring tricks
+with the Liberal thimbles and the Fabian peas that to this day both
+the Liberals and the sectarian Socialists stand aghast at him."<a name="FNanchor_1154_1154" id="FNanchor_1154_1154"></a><a href="#Footnote_1154_1154" class="fnanchor">[1154]</a>
+Fabians rely for their success chiefly on their artfulness. "Always
+remember that, even if you cannot convert a man to Socialism, you may
+get his vote all the same."<a name="FNanchor_1155_1155" id="FNanchor_1155_1155"></a><a href="#Footnote_1155_1155" class="fnanchor">[1155]</a></p>
+
+<p>Fabian middle-class Socialism differs from the democratic Socialism of
+the larger Socialist organisations which appeal to the working class:
+"The Socialism advocated by the Fabian Society is State Socialism
+exclusively."<a name="FNanchor_1156_1156" id="FNanchor_1156_1156"></a><a href="#Footnote_1156_1156" class="fnanchor">[1156]</a> "We have never advanced the smallest pretensions
+to represent the working classes of this country."<a name="FNanchor_1157_1157" id="FNanchor_1157_1157"></a><a href="#Footnote_1157_1157" class="fnanchor">[1157]</a> Therefore the
+Fabians are very cordially hated by the Democratic Socialists. The
+Social-Democratic Federation blames them for their "cynical
+opportunism."<a name="FNanchor_1158_1158" id="FNanchor_1158_1158"></a><a href="#Footnote_1158_1158" class="fnanchor">[1158]</a> Another organisation declares: "The Fabian Society
+poses as a Socialist organisation, for we are told that this Society
+'consists of Socialists.' It is indeed composed of middle-class men
+who naturally deny the class struggle, profess to believe in
+permeating the capitalist class with Socialism, and hold that the
+tendency of society is towards government by the expert-Fabianism
+therefore tends towards the rule of the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_424" id="Page_424">[424]</a></span>bureaucrats or that section
+of the educated middle-class. The Fabians are the cult of the civil
+service and are Socialists neither in name nor in fact."<a name="FNanchor_1159_1159" id="FNanchor_1159_1159"></a><a href="#Footnote_1159_1159" class="fnanchor">[1159]</a></p>
+
+<p>Let us now consider the genesis and character of the great Labour
+party.</p>
+
+<p>Formerly Socialists and trade unionists marched and fought apart.
+However, "On the 27th February, 1900, a joint Socialist and Trade
+Union Conference met in the Memorial Hall, London. One hundred and
+seventeen delegates were present representing sixty-seven Trade
+Unions, seven representing the Independent Labour Party, four the
+Social-Democratic Federation, one the Fabian Society. The result was
+the formation of the Labour Representation Committee,"<a name="FNanchor_1160_1160" id="FNanchor_1160_1160"></a><a href="#Footnote_1160_1160" class="fnanchor">[1160]</a>
+simultaneously representing trade unions and Socialists. "At the
+General Election of 1906, the Labour Representation Committee ran
+fifty candidates for Parliament and returned thirty. That year its
+name was changed to the Labour Party."<a name="FNanchor_1161_1161" id="FNanchor_1161_1161"></a><a href="#Footnote_1161_1161" class="fnanchor">[1161]</a> The Labour party
+therefore unites trade unionists and Socialists. The Fabian Society
+and the Independent Labour party have joined it. Only the
+Social-Democratic Federation has so far kept aloof from it.</p>
+
+<p>The Labour party, being chiefly composed of trade unionists, is fond
+of posing as a non-Socialist party. It is true that "Mr. Keir Hardie,
+the Labour leader, said they did not want Toryism, Liberalism, or
+Socialism, only Labourism, but the same Keir Hardie sits as a delegate
+on the International Socialist Bureau."<a name="FNanchor_1162_1162" id="FNanchor_1162_1162"></a><a href="#Footnote_1162_1162" class="fnanchor">[1162]</a> "Many of the Labour
+members in Parliament are avowed Socialists. The working-class
+movement already is largely a Socialist movement, and is in continual
+process of becoming more so. With the speculative side of Socialism
+the average man with us has but small <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_425" id="Page_425">[425]</a></span>concern; it is its common-sense
+which appeals to him. By inherited instinct we are all Communists at
+heart."<a name="FNanchor_1163_1163" id="FNanchor_1163_1163"></a><a href="#Footnote_1163_1163" class="fnanchor">[1163]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The Labour party, which now has thirty-one members in the House of
+Commons, is not purely Socialist, but twenty-three or twenty-four of
+its M.P.s, and nearly all its elected executive, are Socialists. It
+has no official programme; but in view of its membership its policy is
+and must be Socialist. This is not because the majority rules. It is
+because the Socialist section has a policy and the non-Socialist
+section approves of that policy so far as it can be translated into
+Bills or resolutions to be laid before Parliament. There is no
+anti-Socialism in the Labour party. There is far more difference
+between sections of Liberals or Conservatives than there is between
+Socialist and non-Socialist Labour men. All these bodies are working
+more or less together for the same great ends."<a name="FNanchor_1164_1164" id="FNanchor_1164_1164"></a><a href="#Footnote_1164_1164" class="fnanchor">[1164]</a> The connection
+between organised Labour and organised Socialism is further
+illustrated by the important letters printed on pages 141-143 of this
+book.</p>
+
+<p>The demands and semi-official programme of the Labour party are
+practically identical with those of avowed Socialists, as may be seen
+from the following statement of its Secretary:</p>
+
+<p>"We are in favour of the special taxation of land values, of a minimum
+income-tax on earned incomes, and a super-tax on a graded scale on all
+incomes over, say, 1,000<i>l.</i> This is described as robbing the rich.
+That does not express either the purpose or the spirit of the Labour
+party however. We call it&mdash;securing for the public values created by
+the public. Our critics, if they are to have any effect on intelligent
+public opinion, must understand this cardinal point in our creed, this
+axiom in our programme-making. We do not regard taxation as a <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_426" id="Page_426">[426]</a></span>taking
+by the State of property which belongs to other people, but the
+appropriation of property which ought to belong to itself. This theory
+of taxation goes very far, and its full application involves the
+complete destruction of parasitic classes. It can only be applied
+slowly, but as people get clearly to understand that socially-created
+values should be socially-owned values, many of our most recondite
+problems, like overcrowding, waste-lands, high rating, will be in a
+fair way to settlement."<a name="FNanchor_1165_1165" id="FNanchor_1165_1165"></a><a href="#Footnote_1165_1165" class="fnanchor">[1165]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing shows that the Labour party, like the most predatory
+Socialist, wishes to tax all private capital out of existence. "The
+Labour party is not as yet a purely Socialist organisation, because
+any attempt to make it such would disrupt it."<a name="FNanchor_1166_1166" id="FNanchor_1166_1166"></a><a href="#Footnote_1166_1166" class="fnanchor">[1166]</a> However, its rank
+and file are rapidly being permeated with Socialism.</p>
+
+<p>The following table shows the composition of the Labour party and its
+numerical strength and growth:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">"Growth of the Labour Party</h4>
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="55%" summary="Growth of the Labour Party">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="22%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="26%" style="vertical-align: bottom;">Trades Union Membership</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="26%" style="vertical-align: bottom;">Socialist <br />Membership</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="26%" style="vertical-align: bottom;">Total</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1900-1</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">353,070</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">22,861</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">375,931</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1901-2</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">455,450</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">13,861</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">169,311</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1902-3</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">847,315</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">13,835</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">861,150</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1903-4</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">956,025</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">13,775</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">969,800</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1904-5</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">885,270</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">14,730</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">900,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1905-6</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">904,496</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">16,784</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">921,280</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1906-7</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">975,182</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">20,885</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">*998,338</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" colspan="4">*This total includes 2,271 co-operators"<a name="FNanchor_1167_1167" id="FNanchor_1167_1167"></a><a href="#Footnote_1167_1167" class="fnanchor">[1167]</a></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p>Apparently only one-fiftieth of the members of the Labour party are
+Socialists, but in reality their proportion is very much larger,
+because only a few working men with Socialistic leanings have actually
+joined a <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_427" id="Page_427">[427]</a></span>Socialist party. "When the daily Press states that out of a
+million affiliated members of the Labour party there are only 17,000
+Socialists, its readers naturally inquire, 'How then is it that there
+are at least twenty Socialists among its thirty M.P.s?' The reply is
+that as the trade union candidates were elected by the ballot of the
+members of their respective societies, it must be supposed that those
+candidates with Socialist views were the most acceptable to the
+majority of members. This situation was strikingly reflected in the
+results of the election of 1906. The votes cast for declared
+Socialists account for 232,378, or 70 per cent. of the total Labour
+Representation Committee poll of 331,280, whilst of the whole Labour
+poll, comprising that of the L.R.C., Scottish workers, miners, trades
+union group, and Socialists, the votes for declared Socialists
+accounted for 274,631 out of 530,643, or nearly 52 per cent."<a name="FNanchor_1168_1168" id="FNanchor_1168_1168"></a><a href="#Footnote_1168_1168" class="fnanchor">[1168]</a>
+"The Labour party is not a Socialist party yet, but those who possess
+an ear for the great changes now taking place in the depths of the
+nation will understand that the Labour party is going to be a
+Socialist party one day."<a name="FNanchor_1169_1169" id="FNanchor_1169_1169"></a><a href="#Footnote_1169_1169" class="fnanchor">[1169]</a></p>
+
+<p>It seems likely that the more or less Socialist Labour party in
+Parliament will soon absorb practically the whole trade union group.
+"Of the eighteen miners' representatives in the House of Commons
+fifteen are in the trade union group. In October 1907, at the
+Conference of the Federated Miners' Associations, a resolution was
+adopted declaring that the time had come for joining the Labour party
+and ordering a ballot of the whole Federation area to be taken. It is
+practically a foregone conclusion that the proposal will be carried,
+in which case the fifteen miners' representatives now sitting on the
+Ministerial benches will cross the House and practically double the
+effective power of the Labour party as against <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_428" id="Page_428">[428]</a></span>the Government. The
+trade union group will then practically cease to exist. The railway
+servants have decided that all their candidates at the next election
+must join the Labour party. Therefore Richard Bell must sign the
+constitution of the Labour party or retire in favour of someone who
+will. Of the remaining seven members of the group W.C. Steadman is the
+only recognised leader of trade unionism."<a name="FNanchor_1170_1170" id="FNanchor_1170_1170"></a><a href="#Footnote_1170_1170" class="fnanchor">[1170]</a></p>
+
+<p>Apart from the larger Socialist parties described in the foregoing,
+there are two smaller organisations composed of revolutionary
+Socialists of the most violent type, whose Socialism is a misnomer for
+Anarchism. They are "The Socialist Party of Great Britain" domiciled
+in London, and "The Socialist Labour Party" (an American importation),
+domiciled in Edinburgh. Their programmes, as those of the other
+Socialist organisations, will be found in the Appendix.</p>
+
+<p>The numerous Socialistic organisations mentioned in this Chapter
+oppose and fight one another. Many Socialists recommend that a united
+Socialist party should be formed, but it is clear to all who are
+acquainted with the inner history of British Socialism that "the vital
+differences that exist among Socialist parties as to tactics&mdash;as to
+the way to attain Socialism&mdash;cannot be glossed over by a few
+expressions of brotherly love."<a name="FNanchor_1171_1171" id="FNanchor_1171_1171"></a><a href="#Footnote_1171_1171" class="fnanchor">[1171]</a> The Socialists are divided among
+themselves, and the rivalry and enmity between some of the sections is
+deep-seated and bitter. Nominally they differ with regard to the
+policy to be pursued, but in reality their differences seem to be
+rather of a personal nature. Socialist leaders, though they have the
+words "democracy," "freedom," "liberty," and "love" constantly on
+their lips, are apt to be very autocratic as soon as their sphere of
+political influence is threatened by competition, and as soon as their
+private property, their political capital which they have created, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_429" id="Page_429">[429]</a></span>is
+threatened with "socialisation." The men who so glibly recommend the
+world-wide brotherhood of man, and the socialisation and co-operation
+of the world, cannot even co-operate among themselves although they
+pursue the identical immediate aim: the plunder of the well-to-do. It
+is an old experience that revolutionaries always end in cutting one
+another's throats.</p>
+
+<p>Some Socialist groups have been formed owing to very peculiar and very
+unsavoury circumstances. A comparatively innocent though
+psychologically highly interesting and characteristic Socialist new
+formation has recently occurred in that ally of the Socialists, the
+Women's Social and Political Union. "In September 1907 a bombshell was
+thrown into the camp of the Women's Social and Political Union by the
+extraordinary action of Mrs. Pankhurst, who, as 'the founder,'
+announced that she had discharged the Executive Committee of the
+Union."<a name="FNanchor_1172_1172" id="FNanchor_1172_1172"></a><a href="#Footnote_1172_1172" class="fnanchor">[1172]</a> In the words of an opponent: "Mrs. Pankhurst tore up the
+constitution, robbed the branches and members of all control over the
+National Committee, abolished the annual conference, and elected
+herself and a few personal friends as an autocratic permanent
+committee answerable to no one in the world and to sit at her
+pleasure."<a name="FNanchor_1173_1173" id="FNanchor_1173_1173"></a><a href="#Footnote_1173_1173" class="fnanchor">[1173]</a> The consequence of this personal squabble among
+leaders for supremacy was of course the splitting up of the party, and
+the aggrieved ladies formed a new party, the "Women's Freedom League."</p>
+
+<p>Socialists never tire of declaiming against competition, and of
+praising co-operation. At present there are two "competitive" Women's
+Freedom societies. If they continue pushing the identical article of
+agitation, all custom will go to the larger party. Therefore we may
+expect that, unless the breach is healed, the two parties will agree
+to differ "on the basic principles of women's <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_430" id="Page_430">[430]</a></span>freedom" and will
+recommend slightly different political mixtures.</p>
+
+<p>The example of France, Germany, and other countries shows that the
+jealousy and envy of leaders and party tyranny is nowhere greater than
+among Socialists. It will not be easy for British Socialists to found
+a united party, especially as it is more difficult to create unity
+among individualistic Englishmen, who are by their nature impatient of
+restraint, than among Frenchmen and Germans, who are more used to
+co-operation and who through their military training have learned the
+necessity of discipline and the duty of obedience.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1136_1136" id="Footnote_1136_1136"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1136_1136"><span class="label">[1136]</span></a> Quelch, <i>The Social-Democratic Federation</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1137_1137" id="Footnote_1137_1137"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1137_1137"><span class="label">[1137]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1908, pp. 74, 75.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1138_1138" id="Footnote_1138_1138"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1138_1138"><span class="label">[1138]</span></a> <i>Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation
+Conference 1906</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1139_1139" id="Footnote_1139_1139"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1139_1139"><span class="label">[1139]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Fabian Society</i>, p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1140_1140" id="Footnote_1140_1140"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1140_1140"><span class="label">[1140]</span></a> The Secretary of the Fabian Society in <i>Daily Mail
+Year Book</i>, 1908, p. 72.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1141_1141" id="Footnote_1141_1141"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1141_1141"><span class="label">[1141]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1906, p. 73.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1142_1142" id="Footnote_1142_1142"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1142_1142"><span class="label">[1142]</span></a> <i>Report of the Twenty-sixth Annual Conference,
+Social-Democratic Federation, 1906</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1143_1143" id="Footnote_1143_1143"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1143_1143"><span class="label">[1143]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book, 1908</i>, p. 73; <i>Daily Mail Year
+Book, 1908</i>, p. 72.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1144_1144" id="Footnote_1144_1144"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1144_1144"><span class="label">[1144]</span></a> <i>Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation
+Conference, 1906</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1145_1145" id="Footnote_1145_1145"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1145_1145"><span class="label">[1145]</span></a> <i>Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain</i>,
+p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1146_1146" id="Footnote_1146_1146"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1146_1146"><span class="label">[1146]</span></a> <i>Capital and Land</i>, Motto.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1147_1147" id="Footnote_1147_1147"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1147_1147"><span class="label">[1147]</span></a> Secretary of Fabian Society in <i>Daily Mail Year Book,
+1908</i>, p. 72.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1148_1148" id="Footnote_1148_1148"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1148_1148"><span class="label">[1148]</span></a> Official Circular: <i>The Fabian Society</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1149_1149" id="Footnote_1149_1149"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1149_1149"><span class="label">[1149]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy</i>, 1896, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1150_1150" id="Footnote_1150_1150"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1150_1150"><span class="label">[1150]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1151_1151" id="Footnote_1151_1151"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1151_1151"><span class="label">[1151]</span></a> <i>Scottish Leader</i>, September 4, 1890, reprinted by
+Fabian Society and issued in form of a leaflet.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1152_1152" id="Footnote_1152_1152"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1152_1152"><span class="label">[1152]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Fabian Society</i>, p. 26.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1153_1153" id="Footnote_1153_1153"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1153_1153"><span class="label">[1153]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 24.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1154_1154" id="Footnote_1154_1154"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1154_1154"><span class="label">[1154]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Fabian Society</i>, pp. 18, 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1155_1155" id="Footnote_1155_1155"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1155_1155"><span class="label">[1155]</span></a> <i>How to Lose and How to Win an Election</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1156_1156" id="Footnote_1156_1156"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1156_1156"><span class="label">[1156]</span></a> <i>Report on Fabian Policy</i>, 1896, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1157_1157" id="Footnote_1157_1157"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1157_1157"><span class="label">[1157]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Fabian Society</i>, p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1158_1158" id="Footnote_1158_1158"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1158_1158"><span class="label">[1158]</span></a> <i>Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation
+Conference, 1906</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1159_1159" id="Footnote_1159_1159"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1159_1159"><span class="label">[1159]</span></a> <i>Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1160_1160" id="Footnote_1160_1160"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1160_1160"><span class="label">[1160]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 52.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1161_1161" id="Footnote_1161_1161"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1161_1161"><span class="label">[1161]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 53.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1162_1162" id="Footnote_1162_1162"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1162_1162"><span class="label">[1162]</span></a> <i>Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain</i>, p. 13.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1163_1163" id="Footnote_1163_1163"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1163_1163"><span class="label">[1163]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, pp. 33, 34.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1164_1164" id="Footnote_1164_1164"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1164_1164"><span class="label">[1164]</span></a> Secretary, Fabian Society, in <i>Daily Mail Year Book</i>,
+1908, p. 73.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1165_1165" id="Footnote_1165_1165"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1165_1165"><span class="label">[1165]</span></a> R. Macdonald, M.P., in <i>Daily Mail Year Book</i>, 1908,
+p. 109.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1166_1166" id="Footnote_1166_1166"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1166_1166"><span class="label">[1166]</span></a> <i>Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain</i>, p. 3.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1167_1167" id="Footnote_1167_1167"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1167_1167"><span class="label">[1167]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1908, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1168_1168" id="Footnote_1168_1168"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1168_1168"><span class="label">[1168]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1907, p. 51.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1169_1169" id="Footnote_1169_1169"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1169_1169"><span class="label">[1169]</span></a> <i>Social-Democrat</i>, October 1907, p. 607.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1170_1170" id="Footnote_1170_1170"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1170_1170"><span class="label">[1170]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1908, p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1171_1171" id="Footnote_1171_1171"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1171_1171"><span class="label">[1171]</span></a> <i>Socialist</i>, December 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1172_1172" id="Footnote_1172_1172"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1172_1172"><span class="label">[1172]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Year Book</i>, 1908, p. 28.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1173_1173" id="Footnote_1173_1173"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1173_1173"><span class="label">[1173]</span></a> <i>Forward</i>, November 23, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXXIV" id="CHAPTER_XXXIV"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_431" id="Page_431">[431]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXXIV<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE GROWTH AND DANGER OF BRITISH SOCIALISM</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Up to a recent date the Socialists in Great Britain had neither power
+nor influence. Whilst Germany, France, and other countries had large
+Socialist parties, British Socialism was practically unrepresented in
+Parliament. Many Englishmen thought that the free British democracies
+did not offer a soil favourable to the growth of Socialism, whilst
+many Socialist leaders believed that England possessed ideal
+conditions for effecting a social revolution because no other country
+contains, proportionally, so large a propertyless proletariat as
+England.<a name="FNanchor_1174_1174" id="FNanchor_1174_1174"></a><a href="#Footnote_1174_1174" class="fnanchor">[1174]</a> In view of the large number of propertyless people in
+Great Britain and the nervous restlessness of the race since it has
+become a race of town-dwellers we cannot wonder at the rapid growth of
+British Socialism, and we must look forward to its further increase.</p>
+
+<p>The following most interesting table gives a picture of the growth of
+the Socialist vote in the three most Socialistic countries on the
+Continent of Europe, and in Great Britain. It shows that Socialism has
+apparently passed the zenith on the Continent of Europe, but that it
+has not yet reached maturity in Great Britain.</p>
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_432" id="Page_432">[432]</a></span><br />
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" width="60%" summary="growth of the Socialist vote">
+  <tr>
+  <td colspan="3" class="tdcsc br">"Germany</td>
+  <td colspan="3" class="tdcsc bl">France</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="10%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3" width="20%">Votes</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br" width="20%">Members of <br />Parliament</td>
+  <td class="tdl bl" width="10%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3" width="20%">Votes</td>
+  <td class="tdr3" width="20%">Members of <br />Parliament</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1867</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">30,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">8</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1887</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">47,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">19</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1878</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">437,158</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">9</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1889</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">120,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">9</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1887</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">763,123</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">11</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1893</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">440,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">49</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1890</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">1,427,298</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">35</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1898</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">790,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">50</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1893</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">1,876,738</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">44</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1902</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">805,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">48</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1896</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">2,107,076</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">57</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1906</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">896,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">52</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1903</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">3,010,472</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">81</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">&nbsp;</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1907</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">3,258,968</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">43</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">&nbsp;</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td colspan="3" class="tdcsc br" style="padding-top: .5em;">Great Britain</td>
+  <td colspan="3" class="tdcsc bl" style="padding-top: .5em;">Belgium</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">Votes</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">Members of <br />Parliament</td>
+  <td class="tdl bl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">Votes</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">Members of <br />Parliament</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1895</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">46,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">0</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1894</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">320,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">32</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1900*</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">65,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">2</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1900</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">344,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">33</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1906*</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">335,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">30</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1902</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">467,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">34</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1904</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">463,967</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">28</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 br">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdlp bl">1906</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">469,094</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">30</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" colspan="6">*This is the vote of the Labour party candidates,
+     not all of whom were Socialists."<a name="FNanchor_1175_1175" id="FNanchor_1175_1175"></a><a href="#Footnote_1175_1175" class="fnanchor">[1175]</a></td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p>A glance at the above table shows that the Socialist vote in Great
+Britain is as yet insignificant by comparison with other countries,
+and it seems likely to increase very greatly. More than a third of the
+Australian House of Representatives and Senate consists of Socialists.
+May not proportionately as large a Socialist party arise in Great
+Britain, especially as no political party can outbid the Socialists?
+The Socialist danger is probably greater in Great Britain than it is
+in France, Germany, or Belgium. In those countries a vast body of
+freehold peasants exists who are absolutely opposed to revolutionary
+schemes. Besides, owing to the fact that the majority of Continental
+workers have a substantial stake in the country, either in the form of
+land, houses, or other property, Continental Socialism is
+comparatively moderate, whilst it is violent, Anarchistic, and
+revolutionary in Great Britain, where the majority of workers possess
+far <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_433" id="Page_433">[433]</a></span>less property than the majority of French, German, and Belgian
+workers. The German Socialists, since Germany's unity, have gone the
+way of Lassalle, the patriot Socialist. "They have ceased to denounce
+the churches. From a necessary evil or a mere stop-gap, the present
+State has become to them gradually, and perhaps unconsciously, their
+own State."<a name="FNanchor_1176_1176" id="FNanchor_1176_1176"></a><a href="#Footnote_1176_1176" class="fnanchor">[1176]</a> It is true that the Socialist vote is ten times
+larger in Germany than in Great Britain. Nevertheless the danger of
+Socialist troubles of the very gravest kind is perhaps greater in
+England than in Germany, especially as unemployment is far greater in
+Great Britain than in Germany.<a name="FNanchor_1177_1177" id="FNanchor_1177_1177"></a><a href="#Footnote_1177_1177" class="fnanchor">[1177]</a> It seems that Great Britain will
+pass through bad industrial times, and it should not be forgotten that
+the French Revolutions of 1789 and of 1848 were made by unemployed
+workmen upon whom Socialist and Communistic doctrines had taken a firm
+hold; that the distress caused by the siege of Paris led to the rising
+of the Commune in 1871; that between 1837 and 1848 the Chartist
+movement in Great Britain rose and declined in almost exact
+correspondence with the variations in the economic distress of the
+people.</p>
+
+<p>The present aspect of Great Britain resembles the aspect of
+pre-Revolution France, owing to the unequal distribution of property.
+"Almost three-quarters of the soil of France belonged to the nobility
+and the clergy, or to 350,000 people. The whole of the rest of the
+nation possessed less than one-third of the soil."<a name="FNanchor_1178_1178" id="FNanchor_1178_1178"></a><a href="#Footnote_1178_1178" class="fnanchor">[1178]</a> The absence
+of a sturdy property-owning lower middle-class, the disappearance of
+the yeomen, is a source of instability and weakness to Great Britain.
+Vast numbers of British workers live from hand to mouth. They are
+being inflamed by Socialist agitators against the wealthy, and they
+are being promised an equal share in the whole wealth of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_434" id="Page_434">[434]</a></span>the nation.
+In case of very acute distress, either through purely economic causes
+or through a war with a strong naval power, which might lead to
+starvation in a country which is absolutely dependent on foreign
+countries for its food, a revolutionary outbreak in the overgrown
+towns of Great Britain seems by no means impossible. The revolutionary
+centre of the world may conceivably move from Paris to London.</p>
+
+<p>The Socialists in Great Britain may not always remain a chaotic
+multitude led by rival agitators who fight and intrigue against one
+another. Socialists believe: "So soon as Socialism becomes popular,
+great statesmen and philosophers will arise and take their stand
+boldly with the people in their fight for industrial freedom."<a name="FNanchor_1179_1179" id="FNanchor_1179_1179"></a><a href="#Footnote_1179_1179" class="fnanchor">[1179]</a>
+There are more than 2,000,000 trade unionists in Great Britain, and
+Socialism is spreading rapidly among them. "Already the working-class
+movement is largely a Socialistic movement and is in continual process
+of becoming more so."<a name="FNanchor_1180_1180" id="FNanchor_1180_1180"></a><a href="#Footnote_1180_1180" class="fnanchor">[1180]</a> The political character of the trade
+unionists is changing owing to the influence of Socialism and of the
+new unions. "The differences between the 'old' and 'new' unions are
+becoming more and more accentuated. The former adhere to the 'No
+politics' cry, <i>i.e.</i> no working-class politics, and still pin their
+faith to the Liberal or even Tory party; while the latter, like their
+Continental comrades, understand that their emancipation can only be
+achieved by means of political action as a class."<a name="FNanchor_1181_1181" id="FNanchor_1181_1181"></a><a href="#Footnote_1181_1181" class="fnanchor">[1181]</a> "It is not
+possible for the working-class movement to dissociate itself from the
+Socialists, or from Socialism, because Socialism, however vaguely the
+fact may yet be recognised, is as essentially the political expression
+of that movement as Toryism was the political expression of
+landlordism and Liberalism is that of the bourgeoisie. In other words,
+there can be no <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_435" id="Page_435">[435]</a></span>working-class movement as such without
+Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1182_1182" id="FNanchor_1182_1182"></a><a href="#Footnote_1182_1182" class="fnanchor">[1182]</a> "It is true that the present Parliamentary Labour
+party is committed to independence on 'Labour questions only,' but no
+one has yet defined what is a 'Labour question,' and still less has
+anyone attempted to show what political questions are not labour
+questions."<a name="FNanchor_1183_1183" id="FNanchor_1183_1183"></a><a href="#Footnote_1183_1183" class="fnanchor">[1183]</a> The letters printed on pages 141-143 of this book
+show that Socialism and Labour are commingling.</p>
+
+<p>Socialism and Socialist influence have grown far more rapidly in Great
+Britain than is generally known. Their growth can be gauged not so
+much by the result of the General Election of 1906, and of some
+startling by-election results, as by the reports of the Socialist
+societies, and especially by the sale of their literature. Therefore
+the following facts indicating the growth of British Socialism should
+prove to be of considerable interest.</p>
+
+<p>The Independent Labour Party reported at its yearly meeting held at
+Derby on April 1 and 2, 1907:</p>
+
+<p>"No department of our activities has been more encouraging in its work
+this year than that of literature. Last year our literature sales
+amounted to 1,200<i>l.</i>, which was 600<i>l.</i> more than the previous twelve
+months. This year they amount to 2,830<i>l.</i>, or 1,600<i>l.</i> more than
+last year. The sales of books and pamphlets are nearly double that of
+last year. This is a magnificent result. Many branches have
+established literature stalls in the markets or public streets of
+their towns, and have met with much success. The fruits of this
+propaganda are certain, and will be reaped sooner or later by the
+branches concerned. The income is larger than has been the case in any
+former year, and amounts to the sum of 6,064<i>l.</i> 12<i>s.</i>, as against
+1,884<i>l.</i> 7<i>s.</i> 9<i>d.</i> for last year. The excess of assets over
+liabilities amounts to 3,729<i>l.</i> 2<i>s.</i> 5<i>d.</i>, as against <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_436" id="Page_436">[436]</a></span>1,511<i>l.</i>
+last year. The financial position of the party is thus becoming
+increasingly solid and stable."<a name="FNanchor_1184_1184" id="FNanchor_1184_1184"></a><a href="#Footnote_1184_1184" class="fnanchor">[1184]</a></p>
+
+<p>Since the time when that report was given, the Independent Labour
+Party has continued its rapid growth, as may be seen from the
+following "Facts of Progress" recently published by that party. "At
+the time of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Independent Labour
+Party, held at Derby at Easter 1907, there were then in existence 545
+branches of the party. Now (November 1907), there are 709 branches.
+Gain in seven months, 164 branches. There are few Parliamentary
+constituencies in the United Kingdom without branches, and it is hoped
+before the present year to make even these omissions good. There are
+now six branches of the Independent Labour Party in Ireland, and more
+to follow. The Independent Labour Party has now 845 of its members on
+local governing bodies, endeavouring to put into operation locally the
+principles for which the party stands. During the summer nearly 2,000
+meetings have been held each week throughout the country. Twenty-two
+special organisers have been at work for this last six months."<a name="FNanchor_1185_1185" id="FNanchor_1185_1185"></a><a href="#Footnote_1185_1185" class="fnanchor">[1185]</a></p>
+
+<p>The latest reports of the other Socialist Societies give a picture of
+a similarly great activity, and of a similarly rapid growth.</p>
+
+<p>It is true that the funds of the Socialist organisations are
+comparatively small, but it must not be forgotten that "1,000 men who
+subscribe 1<i>d.</i> are stronger in the poll than one man who subscribes
+1,000<i>l.</i>"<a name="FNanchor_1186_1186" id="FNanchor_1186_1186"></a><a href="#Footnote_1186_1186" class="fnanchor">[1186]</a> Besides, the Independent Labour Party has since 1893
+spent more than 250,000<i>l.</i> for purposes of propaganda. That is a
+large sum to be spent in agitation. Furthermore, it is significant
+that many Socialist pamphlets and books have been sold in more than a
+hundred thousand copies, and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_437" id="Page_437">[437]</a></span>a few even in more than a million
+copies. The Socialist periodicals have a considerable circulation.
+"The circulation of the 'Clarion' alone is 74,000."<a name="FNanchor_1187_1187" id="FNanchor_1187_1187"></a><a href="#Footnote_1187_1187" class="fnanchor">[1187]</a></p>
+
+<p>The danger of British Socialism lies not only in its rapid increase
+among the workers, but also in the fact that it is making converts
+among the large class of people who possess no settled conviction of
+their own, and who are easily carried away by a plausible
+catch-phrase. The persons who count are the multitude of loose
+thinkers who are drifting towards Socialism without knowing it.
+"Politicians who have no suspicion that they are Socialists are
+advocating further instalments of Socialism with a recklessness of
+indirect results which scandalises the conscious
+Social-Democrat."<a name="FNanchor_1188_1188" id="FNanchor_1188_1188"></a><a href="#Footnote_1188_1188" class="fnanchor">[1188]</a> "Year by year more legislation is proposed of
+which the effect is to draw upon the earnings of the efficient for the
+benefit of the inefficient. Year by year Parliament makes life harder
+for those whose labour benefits the State and easier for those who are
+a drag upon it."<a name="FNanchor_1189_1189" id="FNanchor_1189_1189"></a><a href="#Footnote_1189_1189" class="fnanchor">[1189]</a> "There is in fact no definite and declared
+Socialist party in the present House of Commons, and yet what may be
+called the spirit of Socialism pervades the whole House to a greater
+extent than in any previous Parliament."<a name="FNanchor_1190_1190" id="FNanchor_1190_1190"></a><a href="#Footnote_1190_1190" class="fnanchor">[1190]</a> For instance, Mr.
+Rutherford, M.P., in an anti-Socialistic speech brought forward a
+"Democratic Tory Programme" which, in the words of a Socialist
+periodical, was "cribbed almost bodily from the Socialist programme.
+He advocated among other reforms-nationalisation of the railways,
+State provision of work for the unemployed, payment of Members,
+manhood and womanhood suffrage, the suppression of adulteration, town
+planning on the German system, crime to be treated as a disease,
+compulsory closing of slums, taxation of site <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_438" id="Page_438">[438]</a></span>values, and State
+powers to purchase any site at the price on the rate-book, a national
+system of insurance against accident and sickness, feeding and
+clothing poor children, free opening of secondary schools and
+universities."<a name="FNanchor_1191_1191" id="FNanchor_1191_1191"></a><a href="#Footnote_1191_1191" class="fnanchor">[1191]</a> In giving prominence to this "anti-Socialist"
+speech the "Labour Leader" sarcastically remarked: "The items do not,
+of course, take us quite as far as we Socialists would go; but they
+are fairly good to be going on with. Ours is to once again cordially
+welcome Mr. Rutherford as champion against Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1192_1192" id="FNanchor_1192_1192"></a><a href="#Footnote_1192_1192" class="fnanchor">[1192]</a></p>
+
+<p>A further danger consists in this, that many Socialists in Parliament
+and out of it like to sail under a false flag, in accordance with the
+tactics usually employed by the Fabian Society (see <i>ante</i>, Chapter
+XXXIII). Socialist publications inform us: "Among Socialists who stood
+and were elected as official Liberals are P. Alden, Clement Edwards,
+and L.G. Chiozza Money."<a name="FNanchor_1193_1193" id="FNanchor_1193_1193"></a><a href="#Footnote_1193_1193" class="fnanchor">[1193]</a> "Many Liberals, like Mr. Chiozza Money,
+Mr. Masterman, Mr. J.M. Robertson, not to speak of the Liberal-Labour
+group, are committed to Socialist or semi-Socialist legislation. Many
+Liberal newspapers, we cannot fairly deny, are avowedly on the side of
+Socialism. The Liberal rank and file are also in the majority of
+instances quite favourable to the general principles of
+municipalisation and Labour legislation. Above all, as has so often
+been predicted by us, the two political camps of landlordism and
+capitalism are bound to combine together against Socialism, and they
+can only do so effectively under the Imperialist, Tariff Reform,
+anti-Land Reform, and anti-Municipalisation flags. The Liberal party
+cannot attempt single-handed to withstand us."<a name="FNanchor_1194_1194" id="FNanchor_1194_1194"></a><a href="#Footnote_1194_1194" class="fnanchor">[1194]</a> Socialism often
+poses as Liberalism and is accepted as such by the unwary.</p>
+
+<p>A further danger of British Socialism lies in the fact <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_439" id="Page_439">[439]</a></span>that it leads
+to the deterioration of the national character. "The strength of every
+community must finally depend on the character of the individuals who
+compose it. If they are self-reliant, energetic, and dutiful, the
+community will be strong; if, on the contrary, they have been taught
+to rely upon others rather than on themselves, to take life easily and
+to avoid unpleasant duties, then the community will be weak. Teach men
+that they owe no duty to their families, no duty to their country, and
+that their only responsibility is to humanity at large, and they will
+quickly begin to think and act as if they had no responsibility to
+anyone but themselves."<a name="FNanchor_1195_1195" id="FNanchor_1195_1195"></a><a href="#Footnote_1195_1195" class="fnanchor">[1195]</a> "Many workmen are being ruined morally
+and materially by Socialistic doctrines, because directly a man
+becomes imbued with the idea that he is not receiving full recompense
+for his labours he thinks himself justified in doing as little as he
+can for his employer. The consequence is that his labour, which is to
+him his stock-in-trade, depreciates in value and when business
+slackens down he is one of the first to get the 'sack.'"<a name="FNanchor_1196_1196" id="FNanchor_1196_1196"></a><a href="#Footnote_1196_1196" class="fnanchor">[1196]</a></p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1174_1174" id="Footnote_1174_1174"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1174_1174"><span class="label">[1174]</span></a> See Karl Marx, <i>Capital</i>; Yorke, <i>Secret History of
+the International</i>; Stegmann und Hugo, <i>Handbuch</i>, p. 177; Kautsky,
+<i>Social Revolution</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1175_1175" id="Footnote_1175_1175"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1175_1175"><span class="label">[1175]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism</i>, pp. 125, 126.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1176_1176" id="Footnote_1176_1176"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1176_1176"><span class="label">[1176]</span></a> <i>Encyclop&aelig;dia Britannica</i>, vol. xxxii. p. 666.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1177_1177" id="Footnote_1177_1177"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1177_1177"><span class="label">[1177]</span></a> Ellis Barker, <i>Modern Germany</i>, p. 546.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1178_1178" id="Footnote_1178_1178"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1178_1178"><span class="label">[1178]</span></a> Block, <i>Dictionnaire G&eacute;n&eacute;ral</i>, vol. ii. p. 822.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1179_1179" id="Footnote_1179_1179"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1179_1179"><span class="label">[1179]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, p. 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1180_1180" id="Footnote_1180_1180"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1180_1180"><span class="label">[1180]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 34.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1181_1181" id="Footnote_1181_1181"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1181_1181"><span class="label">[1181]</span></a> Aveling, <i>Working-Class Movement in England</i>, p. 40.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1182_1182" id="Footnote_1182_1182"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1182_1182"><span class="label">[1182]</span></a> <i>The Socialist Annual</i>, 1907, p. 38.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1183_1183" id="Footnote_1183_1183"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1183_1183"><span class="label">[1183]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 39.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1184_1184" id="Footnote_1184_1184"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1184_1184"><span class="label">[1184]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Annual Report Conference</i>,
+pp. 10, 12, 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1185_1185" id="Footnote_1185_1185"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1185_1185"><span class="label">[1185]</span></a> <i>Labour Leader</i>, November 29, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1186_1186" id="Footnote_1186_1186"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1186_1186"><span class="label">[1186]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1906, p. 80.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1187_1187" id="Footnote_1187_1187"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1187_1187"><span class="label">[1187]</span></a> <i>Clarion</i>, December 20, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1188_1188" id="Footnote_1188_1188"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1188_1188"><span class="label">[1188]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 188.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1189_1189" id="Footnote_1189_1189"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1189_1189"><span class="label">[1189]</span></a> Lord Balfour of Burleigh in the <i>Times</i>, October 3,
+1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1190_1190" id="Footnote_1190_1190"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1190_1190"><span class="label">[1190]</span></a> Cox, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1191_1191" id="Footnote_1191_1191"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1191_1191"><span class="label">[1191]</span></a> <i>Labour Leader</i>, October 18, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1192_1192" id="Footnote_1192_1192"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1192_1192"><span class="label">[1192]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1193_1193" id="Footnote_1193_1193"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1193_1193"><span class="label">[1193]</span></a> <i>Reformers' Year Book</i>, 1907, p. 58.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1194_1194" id="Footnote_1194_1194"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1194_1194"><span class="label">[1194]</span></a> <i>Labour Leader</i>, October 11, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1195_1195" id="Footnote_1195_1195"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1195_1195"><span class="label">[1195]</span></a> Cox, <i>Socialism</i>, p. 20.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1196_1196" id="Footnote_1196_1196"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1196_1196"><span class="label">[1196]</span></a> Daw, <i>Socialism Unmasked</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXXV" id="CHAPTER_XXXV"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_440" id="Page_440">[440]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXXV<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>HOW THE PROGRESS OF SOCIALISM MAY BE CHECKED</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">What can be done to check the growth of Socialism? Some most
+interesting statistics supplied by the German Social-Democratic party
+will furnish the best reply to that question. An analysis of the
+electorate of Magdeburg and Bremen, two typical commercial and
+industrial towns, gave the following result:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">Composition of Electorate</h4>
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="65%" summary="Composition of Electorate">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdc">Magdeburg</td>
+  <td class="tdc">Bremen</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="45%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="25%">Numbers &nbsp; Per cent.</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="30%">Numbers &nbsp; Per cent.</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1. Capitalists</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">4,491&nbsp;&nbsp; = &nbsp;&nbsp;8.08</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">5,085&nbsp;&nbsp; = &nbsp;&nbsp;8.34</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">2. High officials</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">559&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;1.06</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">197&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;0.32</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">3. Medium officials</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">2,304&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;4.35</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">615&nbsp;&nbsp; =    &nbsp;&nbsp;1.01</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">4. Lower officials</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">4,364&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;7.75</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">3,567&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;5.85</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">5. Professional men</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">1,422&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;2.55</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">1,047&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;1.72</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">6. Newer middle-class</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">3,924&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;7.06</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">4,882&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;8.01</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">7. Independent artisans</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">3,704&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;6.67</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">5,196&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;8.53</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">8. Bakers and grocers</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">932&nbsp;&nbsp; =    &nbsp;&nbsp;1.57</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">1,124&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;1.84</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">9. Older middle-class</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">2,787&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;5.01</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">4,074&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;6.68</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">10. Clerks and bookkeepers</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">3,121&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;5.62</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">5,247&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;8.61</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">11. Working men in State and municipal employment</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">1,424&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;2.55</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">1,415&nbsp;&nbsp; =  &nbsp;&nbsp;2.32</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">12. Working men in privateer employment</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bb">26,423&nbsp;&nbsp; = 47.73</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bb">28,573&nbsp;&nbsp; = 46.77</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bt">55,563&nbsp;&nbsp; = 100&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr now bt">60,962&nbsp;&nbsp; = 100<a name="FNanchor_1197_1197" id="FNanchor_1197_1197"></a><a href="#Footnote_1197_1197" class="fnanchor">[1197]</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p>Commenting upon the foregoing table, a German Socialist periodical
+wrote: "An analytical comparison of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_441" id="Page_441">[441]</a></span>the electorate of Hamburg and
+Bremen reveals an extraordinary similarity in its social composition.
+It shows that the workers form hardly a majority of the population.
+They can be victorious only when they march hand in hand with
+professional men, the lower officials, and the newer middle-class.
+However, not all working men are Socialists. At the last election
+3,000 working men in Magdeburg, and 2,500 working men in Bremen, voted
+against Social-Democracy. The patriotic anti-Socialist working-men's
+associations are rapidly increasing their membership. A thousand
+workmen, one-third of the whole occupied at the Krupp-Gruson Works in
+Magdeburg, have joined the anti-Socialist working-men's associations.
+The 'working-men's associations for fighting Social-Democracy' have
+grown in a surprising fashion."<a name="FNanchor_1198_1198" id="FNanchor_1198_1198"></a><a href="#Footnote_1198_1198" class="fnanchor">[1198]</a></p>
+
+<p>The lower middle-class forms the strongest bulwark against the
+progress of Socialism, and Socialists know it. The philosopher of
+British Socialism, for instance, wrote: "The proletariat proper, the
+class which bears the future Socialist world in its womb, by no means
+at present everywhere outweighs, numerically, all other classes. On
+the contrary, so far as I am aware, this is only the case in Great
+Britain and some of the North American States, and even in these
+countries the majority is not large. The bulk of the non-proletarian
+sections of the democracy are by no means proletarian or
+Social-Democratic, even in their instincts, let alone Socialistic in
+their convictions. The predominating, or at all events most
+influential, elements in the non-proletarian democracy are what, for
+brevity, I have rather loosely termed the clerk and the shopkeeping
+class: in other words, they who are, or hope to become, small
+capitalists, the small middle-class. This last section of the 'people'
+or the democracy is, as such, the most formidable, because the most
+subtle, enemy <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_442" id="Page_442">[442]</a></span>with which the Socialist movement has to contend. The
+aim of the small capitalist, and of him who hopes to become one, is
+security and free play under the most advantageous conditions for his
+small capital to operate. On this account the little bourgeois, the
+small middle-class in its various sections, is the great obstacle
+which will have to be suppressed before we can hope to see even the
+inauguration of a consciously Socialist policy. It must be destroyed
+or materially crippled as a class before real progress can be
+made."<a name="FNanchor_1199_1199" id="FNanchor_1199_1199"></a><a href="#Footnote_1199_1199" class="fnanchor">[1199]</a></p>
+
+<p>Whilst many Socialists wish to destroy the lower middle-class, others,
+especially the Fabians, endeavour to convert it to Socialism, and to
+set it on against the wealthy. They argue: "The commercial clerk with
+his reading, his writing, his arithmetic, and his shorthand is a
+proletarian, and a very miserable proletarian, only needing to be
+awakened from his poor little superstition of shabby gentility to take
+his vote from the Tories and hand it over to us. The small tradesmen
+and ratepayers who are now allying themselves with the Duke of
+Westminster in a desperate and unavailing struggle&mdash;against the rising
+rates entailed by the eight hours day and standard wages for all
+public servants, besides great extensions of corporate activity in
+providing accommodation and education at the public expense, must
+sooner or later see that their interest lies in making common cause
+with the workers to throw the burden of taxation directly on to
+unearned incomes."<a name="FNanchor_1200_1200" id="FNanchor_1200_1200"></a><a href="#Footnote_1200_1200" class="fnanchor">[1200]</a> "It only needs one evening's intelligent
+discussion of this monstrous state of affairs to make a beginning of a
+really sensible and independent organisation of the middle classes for
+their own defence and for their escape from between the two millstones
+of organised Labour and organised Plutocracy, which are at present
+grinding the last penny in the pound out of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_443" id="Page_443">[443]</a></span>them."<a name="FNanchor_1201_1201" id="FNanchor_1201_1201"></a><a href="#Footnote_1201_1201" class="fnanchor">[1201]</a> It is
+estimated that there are in England 500,000 clerks.<a name="FNanchor_1202_1202" id="FNanchor_1202_1202"></a><a href="#Footnote_1202_1202" class="fnanchor">[1202]</a> With the
+object of permeating this large section of the middle class with
+Socialism, a new monthly paper, the "Clerk," has recently been started
+under Fabian auspices.</p>
+
+<p>Socialism is undermining the lower middle-class, and it is
+unconsciously being assisted in this policy by short-sighted
+anti-capitalistic Parliamentary legislation, which, as usual, hits
+hardest the smaller capitalists. If Great Britain wishes to erect a
+dam against the rising tide of Socialism, she must strengthen the
+lower middle-class in town and country by well-devised legislation,
+and she should before all re-create her peasantry. Great Britain
+should encourage the accumulation of small capitals by encouraging
+thrift. At present thrift is discouraged by the difficulty which small
+savers experience in obtaining satisfactory investments. The low
+interest of 2-3/4 per cent. paid by the British
+savings-banks&mdash;Continental savings-banks give 4 per cent.&mdash;is quite
+inadequate; and the British Company Laws are so bad and sound
+investments so scarce that the small investor who wants a higher
+return than 2-3/4 per cent. is almost certain to lose his money if he
+buys stocks or shares. Leasehold investments are very unsatisfactory,
+because the object bought automatically reverts to the landlord, and
+small freehold properties are as a rule unobtainable under the present
+system of land-holding. Therefore the first and most important step to
+encourage thrift should be to enable the small saver to invest his
+savings profitably and securely in land and houses where it is under
+his own control. Co-operation also should be encouraged. Co-operative
+banking, which is highly developed in Germany, Austria-Hungary, and
+Italy, but almost unknown in Great Britain, would at the same time
+greatly benefit the small investor and the small <i>bon&acirc;-fide</i> borrower.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1197_1197" id="Footnote_1197_1197"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1197_1197"><span class="label">[1197]</span></a> <i>Die Neue Gesellschaft</i>, September 1907, p. 325.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1198_1198" id="Footnote_1198_1198"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1198_1198"><span class="label">[1198]</span></a> <i>Die Neue Gesellschaft</i>, September 1907, pp. 325,
+326.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1199_1199" id="Footnote_1199_1199"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1199_1199"><span class="label">[1199]</span></a> Bax, <i>Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 40, 41.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1200_1200" id="Footnote_1200_1200"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1200_1200"><span class="label">[1200]</span></a> Shaw, <i>The Fabian Society</i>, p. 26.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1201_1201" id="Footnote_1201_1201"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1201_1201"><span class="label">[1201]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, November 1907, p. 23.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1202_1202" id="Footnote_1202_1202"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1202_1202"><span class="label">[1202]</span></a> <i>Clerk</i>, January 1908.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXXVI" id="CHAPTER_XXXVI"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_444" id="Page_444">[444]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXXVI<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>IS SOCIALISM POSSIBLE?&mdash;A GLANCE INTO THE SOCIALIST STATE OF THE FUTURE</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The realisation of Socialism, the creation of a Socialistic
+commonwealth in which private property does not exist, seems
+impossible. Socialists entirely leave out of their calculations two
+elementary factors:</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">Nature, and Human Nature</h4>
+
+<p>A State devoid of private property is an unthinkable proposition.
+Private property is not a fortuitous creation, but a natural growth.
+It is founded not merely upon law, but upon immemorial custom which
+owes its rise to a fundamental human instinct, an instinct which has
+been a characteristic of the human race in all countries, and which is
+as old as humanity itself. The instinct of acquisition, of
+accumulation, and of property is common to all men from Central Africa
+to the poles. It is equally strongly developed in the most civilised
+nations and among savages.</p>
+
+<p>However, supposing that the instinct of acquisition, of accumulation,
+and of property, which is found not only among all races of mankind
+but even among the higher animals, could be overcome, would human
+nature allow of the creation of a co-operative commonwealth based on
+voluntary co-operation, not on compulsion? Could the brotherhood of
+man be made a reality, and would men co-operate without strife in that
+mutual friendship and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_445" id="Page_445">[445]</a></span>good-fellowship which one finds but rarely,
+even among those who are connected by the closest ties of affection
+and blood relationship, unless self-interest acts as the determining
+factor? Did not Plato found his ideal commonwealth upon perfectly wise
+and virtuous men? "Does not Socialist society presuppose extraordinary
+human beings, real angels, as regards unselfishness and gentleness,
+joy of work and intelligence? Is not the Social Revolution, with the
+present brutal and egoistical race of men, bound to become the signal
+for desolating struggles for the booty or for general idleness in
+which it would go to ruin?"<a name="FNanchor_1203_1203" id="FNanchor_1203_1203"></a><a href="#Footnote_1203_1203" class="fnanchor">[1203]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Who is more ready to tilt against society than the average Socialist?
+And if the individuals in it are so deeply imbued with a double dose
+of original sin as not to be able to handle any part of distribution
+and exchange, it follows that you cannot trust the individual."<a name="FNanchor_1204_1204" id="FNanchor_1204_1204"></a><a href="#Footnote_1204_1204" class="fnanchor">[1204]</a>
+"In a social State you must consider two things&mdash;man and his
+surroundings. You often forget man, because you think it easier to
+alter his surroundings. The real question is: Can you produce men fit
+for the new social State?"<a name="FNanchor_1205_1205" id="FNanchor_1205_1205"></a><a href="#Footnote_1205_1205" class="fnanchor">[1205]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Socialism postulates an intelligent democracy."<a name="FNanchor_1206_1206" id="FNanchor_1206_1206"></a><a href="#Footnote_1206_1206" class="fnanchor">[1206]</a> "The
+proletariat will require high intelligence, strong discipline, perfect
+organisation of its great masses. We may expect that it will only
+succeed when it will have developed these qualities in the highest
+degree."<a name="FNanchor_1207_1207" id="FNanchor_1207_1207"></a><a href="#Footnote_1207_1207" class="fnanchor">[1207]</a> "Socialists demand a higher morality than any now to be
+found."<a name="FNanchor_1208_1208" id="FNanchor_1208_1208"></a><a href="#Footnote_1208_1208" class="fnanchor">[1208]</a> "It is incumbent upon Socialism to recognise the
+existence of an intellectual motive, and it must place that motive
+above the economic, because without it the economic struggle would be
+devoid of any constructive <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_446" id="Page_446">[446]</a></span>value; it would be a mere tug-of-war; it
+would never bring us to Socialism. It would lead to a scramble for the
+spoils and mutual throat-cutting."<a name="FNanchor_1209_1209" id="FNanchor_1209_1209"></a><a href="#Footnote_1209_1209" class="fnanchor">[1209]</a> "If 'each for all and all for
+each' be nothing more than a text for a banner or a motto for a wall;
+if its truth has not captured the hearts and minds of men and women in
+that new society, we shall be an official-ridden people with our eye
+on the best posts in the State for ourselves or our sons; and we shall
+be as pitiable in our spiritual deformity as we are in our economic
+bondage."<a name="FNanchor_1210_1210" id="FNanchor_1210_1210"></a><a href="#Footnote_1210_1210" class="fnanchor">[1210]</a> "Socialism demands more than that we should merely
+import Socialistic institutions into our midst. It insists on a moral
+regeneration of society of the most complete and searching kind in
+order to make a lasting foundation for the political and social
+changes we many of us long to see."<a name="FNanchor_1211_1211" id="FNanchor_1211_1211"></a><a href="#Footnote_1211_1211" class="fnanchor">[1211]</a> "Convey it in what spirit we
+may, an appeal to class interest is an appeal to personal interest.
+Socialist propaganda carried on as a class war suggests none of those
+ideals of moral citizenship with which Socialist literature abounds,
+'each for all and all for each,' 'service to the community is the sole
+right of property' and so on. It is an appeal to individualism" [which
+seems to be a euphemism for envy and cupidity], "and results in
+getting men to accept Socialist formul&aelig; without becoming
+Socialists."<a name="FNanchor_1212_1212" id="FNanchor_1212_1212"></a><a href="#Footnote_1212_1212" class="fnanchor">[1212]</a></p>
+
+<p>Unfortunately there is nothing ideal and elevating in the Socialist
+teachings, as the previous chapters show. Socialism appeals to all the
+passions and to all the vices, such as hatred, jealousy, envy,
+cupidity. It encourages, or at least excuses, wastefulness,
+improvidence, profligacy, and drunkenness. Its aim is plunder.</p>
+
+<p>The voluntary co-operation of all for the benefit of all presupposes
+the existence of wise, virtuous, and unselfish <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_447" id="Page_447">[447]</a></span>citizens. Do the
+people in England, or in any other country, possess these high
+qualities, or are these qualities likely to be created by the
+teachings of the Socialists? A distinguished Socialist despairingly
+exclaimed: "That spirit which animated the apostles, prophets,
+martyrs, is alive in Japan to-day. Is it alive in us as a nation? If
+not, if we have replaced it to any extent by some selfish opposite, by
+any such diabolically careless sentiment as 'after me the deluge,'
+then we as a nation have lost our soul, sold it for mere individual
+prosperity, sold it in some poor cases for not even that, for mere
+liquid refreshment, and we are on the down grade."<a name="FNanchor_1213_1213" id="FNanchor_1213_1213"></a><a href="#Footnote_1213_1213" class="fnanchor">[1213]</a> Another
+Socialist wrote: "We are all of us great-great-grandchildren of the
+beasts. We carry the bestial attributes in our blood, some more, some
+less. Who amongst us is so pure and exalted that he has never been
+conscious of the bestial taint?"<a name="FNanchor_1214_1214" id="FNanchor_1214_1214"></a><a href="#Footnote_1214_1214" class="fnanchor">[1214]</a> "Descendants of barbarians and
+beasts, we have not yet conquered the greed and folly of our bestial
+and barbarous inheritance. Our nature is an unweeded garden. Our
+hereditary soil is rank."<a name="FNanchor_1215_1215" id="FNanchor_1215_1215"></a><a href="#Footnote_1215_1215" class="fnanchor">[1215]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Socialists themselves acknowledge that Socialism presupposes a
+nation composed of ideal individuals, industrious, gentle, mutually
+helpful, unselfish, forbearing, and wise. They also acknowledge that
+men are the descendants of barbarians and beasts. Do Socialist
+agitators really believe that they can convert the descendants of
+barbarians and beasts into ideal beings by constantly preaching to
+them the gospel of hatred, envy, selfishness, self-indulgence, and
+plunder, and by even encouraging them to continue poisoning themselves
+and their descendants by over-indulgence in alcoholic drink?<a name="FNanchor_1216_1216" id="FNanchor_1216_1216"></a><a href="#Footnote_1216_1216" class="fnanchor">[1216]</a>
+Surely "the defective natures of citizens will show themselves in the
+bad acting of whatever social structure they <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_448" id="Page_448">[448]</a></span>are arranged into. There
+is no political alchemy by which you can get golden conduct out of
+leaden instincts."<a name="FNanchor_1217_1217" id="FNanchor_1217_1217"></a><a href="#Footnote_1217_1217" class="fnanchor">[1217]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is clear to most thinking Socialists that human nature, as at
+present constituted, will make the realisation of Socialism
+impossible. How do Socialists, then, propose to meet the difficulty?
+Very simply. By bold assertions and prophecies. That which all
+religions and all philosophers have been unable to accomplish during
+3,000 years, Socialists will effect as by the touch of a magician's
+wand. "Socialism will change human nature. The opportunity makes the
+man. Socialism will take away the desire for accumulating riches.
+Under such conditions the possession of riches will be a superfluous
+burden which no sane man will wish to bear."<a name="FNanchor_1218_1218" id="FNanchor_1218_1218"></a><a href="#Footnote_1218_1218" class="fnanchor">[1218]</a> "As soon as high
+purpose, intense human attachments, are the springs of action and
+resolve, discipline will come into our movement to crush out base
+selfishness, vanity, and personal ambition,"<a name="FNanchor_1219_1219" id="FNanchor_1219_1219"></a><a href="#Footnote_1219_1219" class="fnanchor">[1219]</a> This is very nice,
+but how are "high purpose" and "intense human attachment" to be made
+the "springs of action"? Unfortunately the writer keeps the secret to
+himself.</p>
+
+<p>The philosopher of British Socialism states: "Socialism only calls for
+enlightened selfishness. But the fact that this selfishness is
+enlightened and recognises that it can serve itself by serving the
+common interest will completely change its character, so that it will
+cease to be the narrow selfishness of to-day, which so often defeats
+its own ends. Selfishness passing through the refining fire of
+economic change ceases to be selfishness and becomes Socialism."<a name="FNanchor_1220_1220" id="FNanchor_1220_1220"></a><a href="#Footnote_1220_1220" class="fnanchor">[1220]</a>
+If selfishness ceases to be selfishness and becomes Socialism, then it
+changes merely its name, and Socialism and selfishness are identical,
+which is quite correct. Other <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_449" id="Page_449">[449]</a></span>Socialist leaders prophesy: "May we not
+assume that under these conditions a new type of mankind will evolve
+which will surpass the highest type which culture has produced up till
+now? An overman, if you please, not as an exception, but as the
+rule."<a name="FNanchor_1221_1221" id="FNanchor_1221_1221"></a><a href="#Footnote_1221_1221" class="fnanchor">[1221]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Selfishness will become public spirit."<a name="FNanchor_1222_1222" id="FNanchor_1222_1222"></a><a href="#Footnote_1222_1222" class="fnanchor">[1222]</a> "The desire to serve
+the common life, to advance its welfare, will be the highest ambition
+of the individual."<a name="FNanchor_1223_1223" id="FNanchor_1223_1223"></a><a href="#Footnote_1223_1223" class="fnanchor">[1223]</a> "Just as the nightingale sings in the
+evening shades, or the lark trills in the summer sky, so man in
+natural surroundings" [does Socialism create "natural" surroundings or
+unnatural ones?] "will seek to gratify his higher nature. Socialism
+will create a condition of things favourable to the development of the
+higher type of individuality."<a name="FNanchor_1224_1224" id="FNanchor_1224_1224"></a><a href="#Footnote_1224_1224" class="fnanchor">[1224]</a> "This is the religious aspect of
+labour. It is dignified, ennobling. That is the divine ideal, the
+aspect concerning labour which God intended should be realised. Just
+think of it! The ordinary working man as divinely taught and inspired
+as the prophets and seers of old, and having the capacity to
+understand the sublimest truths and the profoundest philosophy
+concerning human life and the eternal destinies."<a name="FNanchor_1225_1225" id="FNanchor_1225_1225"></a><a href="#Footnote_1225_1225" class="fnanchor">[1225]</a></p>
+
+<p>The statements given above, with their superlatives, their laboured
+philosophy, their lyrics, hysterics, and prophecies, are singularly
+unconvincing. The manner in which the simple question, "How do you
+propose to fit actual human nature into your scheme?" is answered by
+the Socialists, proves that they find that question unanswerable.
+History teaches us that revolutions based on plunder, euphemistically
+called confiscation, expropriation, or socialisation, have indeed
+altered human nature, but they have altered it for the worse. All
+revolutions <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_450" id="Page_450">[450]</a></span>have hitherto caused a fearful depravation of manners and
+led to the most hideous crimes&mdash;and will a Socialistic revolution
+prove an exception? Why should it be an exception? Are its teachings
+such as make it seem likely that a Socialistic revolution will prove
+an exception? An attempt to establish the Socialist Commonwealth would
+undoubtedly lead, not to a revolution, but to a series of revolutions,
+to Anarchism and to civil war. The tragedy of the great French
+Revolution might be acted over again.</p>
+
+<p>Now let us look into some practical questions which the Socialist
+State of the future will have to settle. Let us, for instance,
+inquire:</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">How Will Labour Be Remunerated?</h4>
+
+<p>Many Socialists think that different workers should get different
+wages: "The citizens shall be consciously public functionaries, and
+their labours shall be rewarded according to results."<a name="FNanchor_1226_1226" id="FNanchor_1226_1226"></a><a href="#Footnote_1226_1226" class="fnanchor">[1226]</a>
+"Socialism does not propose that everyone shall have an equal share of
+the product of collective labour."<a name="FNanchor_1227_1227" id="FNanchor_1227_1227"></a><a href="#Footnote_1227_1227" class="fnanchor">[1227]</a> How, then, is the amount of
+the unequal wages to be calculated? Some Socialists, following Marx,
+propose to determine wages by means of labour-time. "Ascertain the
+time taken to produce two commodities and we know their relative
+exchange value. And this quality tallies with market valuations. So
+far as creating value is concerned, then, one man creates as much
+value as another, and on the basis of equal labour-time equal value,
+Socialists rest their argument of social equality."<a name="FNanchor_1228_1228" id="FNanchor_1228_1228"></a><a href="#Footnote_1228_1228" class="fnanchor">[1228]</a> "The working
+time which the making of an article requires is the only scale by
+which its social value can be measured. Ten minutes <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_451" id="Page_451">[451]</a></span>of social work in
+one branch are exchangeable for ten minutes of social work in another.
+It will be easy to calculate how much social working time each single
+product requires."<a name="FNanchor_1229_1229" id="FNanchor_1229_1229"></a><a href="#Footnote_1229_1229" class="fnanchor">[1229]</a> A hunter hunts all day and shoots a deer. A
+fisher fishes all day and catches a sprat. Will the hunter exchange
+his deer for the sprat, on the principle of equal labour-time? Will
+highly skilled workers be satisfied to receive the same wages as the
+most unskilled labourers? Will equal labour-time pay for all not lead
+to universal dawdling, shrinkage in production, and consequent
+starvation? Would workers not strive to get the maximum pay for the
+minimum work? To prevent dawdling, could it be ascertained how long it
+should take to repair a machine, paint a picture, amputate a leg,
+plough an acre?</p>
+
+<p>It is manifestly impossible to pay men of varying capacity and
+productive power equal labour-time wages. Therefore many Socialists,
+especially the Fabians, maintain: "The principle of inequality of
+payment must be recognised. It is a necessary consequence of
+inequality of ability."<a name="FNanchor_1230_1230" id="FNanchor_1230_1230"></a><a href="#Footnote_1230_1230" class="fnanchor">[1230]</a> "Every man should receive from the
+Commonwealth a fair equivalent in payments or services for the
+payments or services which the Commonwealth receives from him. It is
+not possible to say exactly how much each citizen has contributed to
+the wealth of the State, and absolute economic justice is therefore
+impossible."<a name="FNanchor_1231_1231" id="FNanchor_1231_1231"></a><a href="#Footnote_1231_1231" class="fnanchor">[1231]</a> The question now arises how is the "fair equivalent
+for services rendered" to be determined? Many Socialists teach the
+doctrine that "the labourer is entitled to the entire product of his
+labour."<a name="FNanchor_1232_1232" id="FNanchor_1232_1232"></a><a href="#Footnote_1232_1232" class="fnanchor">[1232]</a> Should the labourer be given an equivalent to the
+product of his labour <i>minus</i> various necessary expenditures? Could
+the value of the labour of an individual be calculated at all <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_452" id="Page_452">[452]</a></span>in the
+complicated processes of modern industry? What is the value produced
+by a day's labour of a ploughman, a railway porter, a postman, a
+book-keeper, a policeman, a machine-minder? Mr. Bax very sensibly
+argues: "What does each man produce of himself as an individual? Show
+me how much cotton any given factory operative has produced in the
+course of a year? I don't mean the amount of wages the capitalist has
+given him for the exploitation of his labour power during that
+period&mdash;but the actual product of his labour in the manufactured
+article. You could not do so, because his labour, like all modern
+labour, is associated; and the work of the individual producer is
+completely and indissolubly merged in that of the group (factory,
+mill) to which he belongs, which is again inseparable from that of the
+machinery employed in the process and from that of other
+groups."<a name="FNanchor_1233_1233" id="FNanchor_1233_1233"></a><a href="#Footnote_1233_1233" class="fnanchor">[1233]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is impossible to calculate the exact value of service to the
+community by work in a factory or a field as soon as the wages system
+based on demand and supply has ceased to exist. Besides, differential
+pay will be impossible, because none will be satisfied with the pay
+received, except those who receive the highest pay. Therefore the same
+Fabian Society which in other writings, such as those quoted in the
+foregoing, advocates unequal payment, concludes: "Inequality of pay
+would be odious; the impossibility of estimating the separate value of
+each man's labour with any really valid result, the friction which
+would arise, the jealousies which would be provoked, the inevitable
+discontent, favouritism, and jobbery that would prevail: all these
+things will drive the Communal Council into the right path&mdash;equal
+remuneration of all workers."<a name="FNanchor_1234_1234" id="FNanchor_1234_1234"></a><a href="#Footnote_1234_1234" class="fnanchor">[1234]</a> The Fabians, like so many other
+Socialists, cannot apparently quite make up their mind <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_453" id="Page_453">[453]</a></span>whether to
+plunge into the Scylla of equal pay or into the Charybdis of unequal
+pay. Therefore they plunge alternately into the one or the other.</p>
+
+<p>Many Socialists are in favour of equal pay: "The credits granted to
+the citizens will be equal in all cases, without reference to skill,
+intelligence, or the nature of the service performed."<a name="FNanchor_1235_1235" id="FNanchor_1235_1235"></a><a href="#Footnote_1235_1235" class="fnanchor">[1235]</a> "The
+labours of the bus driver or the mangler will be appraised just as
+highly as those of the Prime Minister, with this difference perchance,
+that if it can be clearly shown by statistics that buscraft uses up
+the life energy of a man more rapidly than statecraft, four hours of
+busmanship shall count, say, as five of statesmanship."<a name="FNanchor_1236_1236" id="FNanchor_1236_1236"></a><a href="#Footnote_1236_1236" class="fnanchor">[1236]</a> Equal
+wages should logically be followed by equal treatment for all. "An
+anti-Socialist will say, 'How will you sail a ship in a Socialist
+condition?' How? Why, with a captain and mates and sailing-master and
+engineer (if it be a steamer) and A.B.s and stokers, and so on, and so
+on. Only there will be no first and second and third class among the
+passengers, the sailors and stokers will be as well fed and lodged as
+the captain or passengers, and the captain and the stoker will have
+the same pay."<a name="FNanchor_1237_1237" id="FNanchor_1237_1237"></a><a href="#Footnote_1237_1237" class="fnanchor">[1237]</a></p>
+
+<p>So confused are the minds even of the leading Socialists with regard
+to the important question of the remuneration of labour that Mr.
+William Morris, one of the founders of British Socialism, in a poem
+first recommends individualistic Socialism and pay according to
+results:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0"><i>For that which the worker winneth shall then be his indeed</i>,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Nor shall half be reaped for nothing by him that sowed no seed.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Two lines later in the same poem he recommends Communism and equal pay
+for all, regardless of the work done:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza"><span class='pn'><a name="Page_454" id="Page_454">[454]</a></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Then all Mine and Thine shall be Ours</i>, and no more shall any man crave<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">For riches that serve for nothing but to fetter a friend for a slave.<a name="FNanchor_1238_1238" id="FNanchor_1238_1238"></a><a href="#Footnote_1238_1238" class="fnanchor">[1238]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The above extracts show that confusion reigns in the Socialist camp
+regarding the settlement of the Wage Question.</p>
+
+<p>Wage-earners are not philanthropists. Highly skilled men will not be
+content with wages equal to those of unskilled labour, not even in the
+name of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. In the absence of a free
+demand and supply, which automatically graduates wages in accordance
+with the social value of the work done, its attractiveness or
+unattractiveness, &amp;c., it cannot scientifically, though it can perhaps
+autocratically, be determined how wages should be graduated. When it
+comes to the fixing of differential wages in the Socialist State of
+the future, quarrels will immediately arise, which will lead to strife
+and rebellion, for all workers will use arguments such as the
+following ones recently put forward by Mr. Smillie, President of the
+Lanarkshire Miners' County Union. In reply to the reproach that
+miners, by unduly high wages, increased the cost of coal to the poor,
+Mr. Smillie answered: "Miners are being blamed in some quarters for
+the high price of coal. Their wages at present range from 6<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i>
+to 8<i>s.</i> per day, or from 30<i>s.</i> to 2<i>l.</i> 5<i>s.</i> per week when broken
+time is taken into consideration. Will anyone grudge an income of this
+kind to a worker whose labour is of a most uncomfortable and
+exhausting nature, and who takes his life in his hand from the moment
+he steps into the cage until he reaches the surface again? The miner
+recognises that high-priced coal means pinching and suffering in the
+homes of the poor, and he has real sympathy for this class, but he
+argues that the true value of coal must include a reasonable
+sustenance for those who risk their lives in <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_455" id="Page_455">[455]</a></span>its production."<a name="FNanchor_1239_1239" id="FNanchor_1239_1239"></a><a href="#Footnote_1239_1239" class="fnanchor">[1239]</a>
+If miners claim higher wages than other workers because their work is
+uncomfortable and dangerous, railway workers, sailors, and many others
+will raise the same claims; fishers and butchers will claim higher
+wages because their work is disgusting; factory workers because their
+work is sedentary and monotonous; waiters because it is menial;
+postmen because they have to walk; drivers because they have to sit
+still; washerwomen because they have to stand; farm labourers because
+they have to work in the cold; bakers because they have to work in the
+heat, &amp;c. All workers would of course demand the maximum pay, and who
+could adjudicate on all the rival claims? The Wages Question seems
+likely to prove insoluble.</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">How Will Labour Be Organised and Directed?</h4>
+
+<p>We are told: "Labour will be organised on principles of perfect
+freedom. Everyone decides for himself in which branch he desires to be
+employed. If a superfluity of workmen occur in one branch and a
+deficiency in another, it will be the duty of the executive to arrange
+matters and readjust the inequality."<a name="FNanchor_1240_1240" id="FNanchor_1240_1240"></a><a href="#Footnote_1240_1240" class="fnanchor">[1240]</a> In accordance with the
+variations in demand and supply and the rise and decay of industries,
+the introduction of labour-saving machinery, &amp;c., labour requires
+continual redistribution. That redistribution is at present
+automatically effected largely through the rise and fall of wages. A
+rise in the wages of industries which require more labour, and a
+decline in the wages of industries which require less labour, cause
+labour to turn from shrinking to growing industries. When wages are no
+longer fixed with reference to commercial demand and supply, how will
+the periodical and necessary redistribution of labour <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_456" id="Page_456">[456]</a></span>be effected?
+Some Socialist leaders think: "As the workers, of course, will not be
+drafted into the different branches of production under military
+compulsion, irrespective of their wishes, it may well turn out that
+some will have a superfluity of labour, while others will suffer from
+scarcity. The necessary equilibrium could then be restored by reducing
+the wages in those industries where the applicants are too many and by
+raising them in those where the applicants are too few, till each
+branch has just the number of workers which it requires. It could be
+restored also by other means; for instance, by the shortening of the
+hours of labour in those industries that are short of workers. With
+all that, however, the general rate of wages throughout the working
+class will be influenced no longer by supply and demand, but by the
+quantity of available products. A general fall of wages in consequence
+of over-production will be impossible."<a name="FNanchor_1241_1241" id="FNanchor_1241_1241"></a><a href="#Footnote_1241_1241" class="fnanchor">[1241]</a> In other words, the
+beautiful schemes of remuneration independent of the laws of supply
+and demand discussed in the foregoing would immediately break down. In
+order to redistribute labour, workers would either have to be
+compelled by direct force to work in those trades which required
+additional labour, or their wages or hours of work would arbitrarily
+be altered in order to effect the necessary changes by economic
+pressure&mdash;that is, by reducing their food. In other words, commercial
+demand and supply would break down the Utopian regulations of the
+Socialist Commonwealth as soon as they had been framed.</p>
+
+<p>While some Socialists wish to distribute and redistribute labour by
+arbitrarily changing wages and hours of labour, some of the more
+logical and scientific Socialist leaders are frankly in favour of
+compulsory labour: "We already see official salaries regulated, not
+according to the state of the labour market, but by <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_457" id="Page_457">[457]</a></span>consideration of
+the cost of living. This principle we seek to extend to the whole
+industrial world. Instead of converting every man into an independent
+producer, working when he likes and as he likes, we aim at enrolling
+every able-bodied person directly in the service of the community for
+such duties and under such kind of organisation, local or national, as
+may be suitable to his capacity and social function. If a man wants
+freedom to work or not to work, just as he likes, he had better
+emigrate to Robinson Crusoe's island or else become a millionaire. To
+suppose that the industrial affairs of a complicated industrial State
+can be run without strict subordination and discipline, without
+obedience to orders, and without definite allowances for maintenance,
+is to dream, not of Socialism but of Anarchism."<a name="FNanchor_1242_1242" id="FNanchor_1242_1242"></a><a href="#Footnote_1242_1242" class="fnanchor">[1242]</a> "Everyone
+should have a legal right to an opportunity of earning his living in
+the society in which he has been born; but no one should or could have
+the right to ask that he shall be employed at the particular job which
+suits his peculiar taste and temperament. Each of us must be prepared
+to do the work which society wants doing, or take the consequences of
+refusal."<a name="FNanchor_1243_1243" id="FNanchor_1243_1243"></a><a href="#Footnote_1243_1243" class="fnanchor">[1243]</a> And what consequences would refusal to do the allotted
+work at the allotted pay entail? Either dismissal, which would mean
+starvation&mdash;for the State, as the sole employer, would control all
+employment and all the food&mdash;or bodily chastisement, or imprisonment.
+There could be no strike on the part of dissatisfied workers, for the
+State&mdash;that is, the officials&mdash;holding all the wealth, would be able
+to starve them out in a week.</p>
+
+<p>Socialists admit: "Mankind is as lazy as it dares to be."<a name="FNanchor_1244_1244" id="FNanchor_1244_1244"></a><a href="#Footnote_1244_1244" class="fnanchor">[1244]</a> "In
+the average man there is a strong tendency to mere idleness and
+aimlessness which, but for the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_458" id="Page_458">[458]</a></span>compulsions and temptations of
+existing circumstances, might run to great lengths. The trouble is
+that, while the average man is willing to work occasionally where his
+choice is free, he considers his lot a hard one if necessity compels
+him to continue regularly at a given task. He is willing to work at
+almost anything save that at which he is asked to work. It is a common
+thing to hear even good workmen profess a dislike to their
+trade."<a name="FNanchor_1245_1245" id="FNanchor_1245_1245"></a><a href="#Footnote_1245_1245" class="fnanchor">[1245]</a></p>
+
+<p>How will shirking and idling be prevented in the Socialist
+Commonwealth when men are no longer compelled by economic necessity
+and free competition to do their best?</p>
+
+<p>The leading American exponent of Socialism prophesies that workers
+will work no longer in order to live in comfort, but that they will
+henceforth see in work a semi-religious duty, which they perform owing
+to their strong sense of beneficence: "In the New Commonwealth the
+butcher will be conscious and satisfied that 'the essential thing is
+not that he shall have a living, but that meat shall be supplied.' The
+work of the citizen will be the willing performance of social office.
+He will be a worker whose best efforts, best ardour, and highest aims
+will be drawn out by his sense of the beneficence of his work, even
+though it be such a coarse routine of manual labour as machinery
+should soon remove altogether from human hands. He will be habituated
+to regard his wages, not as a <i>quid pro quo</i>, but as the provision
+made by society to enable him to carry out his labour."<a name="FNanchor_1246_1246" id="FNanchor_1246_1246"></a><a href="#Footnote_1246_1246" class="fnanchor">[1246]</a> Will the
+"sense of beneficence" induce men who are not satisfied with the
+condition and remuneration of labour to transport milk and other
+provisions during the night so that the townspeople may have them
+early in the morning? Will men be induced by their sense of duty to
+clean the sewers? To <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_459" id="Page_459">[459]</a></span>ask these questions is to answer them. Bebel
+puts the question, "What becomes of the difference between the
+industrious and the idle, the intelligent and the stupid?" and
+answers, "There will be no such difference, because that which we
+associate with these conceptions will have ceased to exist."<a name="FNanchor_1247_1247" id="FNanchor_1247_1247"></a><a href="#Footnote_1247_1247" class="fnanchor">[1247]</a> "If
+there is one vice more certain than another to be unpopular in a
+Socialist community, it is laziness. The man who shirked would find
+his mates making his position intolerable even before he suffered the
+doom of expulsion."<a name="FNanchor_1248_1248" id="FNanchor_1248_1248"></a><a href="#Footnote_1248_1248" class="fnanchor">[1248]</a> Arguments such as the above should really
+not be placed before grown-up people. They are only fit for the
+nursery.</p>
+
+<p>The tendency towards lazing and idling, the desire to make money
+without exertion, is strongly developed in Great Britain. "The essence
+of gambling is the craving to obtain something from others without
+giving an equivalent."<a name="FNanchor_1249_1249" id="FNanchor_1249_1249"></a><a href="#Footnote_1249_1249" class="fnanchor">[1249]</a> Perhaps in no country is betting and
+gambling in every form so much in evidence as it is in Great Britain.
+Betting on the turf, missing-word competitions, limerick competitions,
+&amp;c., draw every year many millions of pounds from the pockets of
+millions of British workers. How then can the natural tendency of men
+to loaf and idle and to live rather by their wits than by their work,
+which is strong in all men, be overcome in the Socialist State of the
+future? The fundamental book of the Fabian Society, the most
+scientific Socialist body in Great Britain, tells us: "A very small
+share of the profits arising from associated labour acts as a
+tremendous stimulus to each individual producer,"<a name="FNanchor_1250_1250" id="FNanchor_1250_1250"></a><a href="#Footnote_1250_1250" class="fnanchor">[1250]</a> and it
+suggests, as do many Socialist writers, that the workers will do their
+best because they know that the more they produce the greater will be
+their individual share in the general production. Great Britain has
+12,000,000 workers. Therefore a worker will make as his own share an
+extra sovereign if <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_460" id="Page_460">[460]</a></span>by extra exertion he succeeds in producing an
+extra 12,000,000<i>l.</i> worth of goods, a feat the accomplishment of
+which will require several thousand years. That is a "tremendous
+stimulus" to the individual producer! Can any argument be more foolish
+than the foregoing one?</p>
+
+<p>An influential Socialist writer tells us: "The credits granted to the
+citizens will be equal in all cases, without reference to skill,
+intelligence, or the nature of the service performed; but no credits
+will be given to the able-bodied shirkers, who will thus be starved
+into doing their share of the world's work without other
+compulsion."<a name="FNanchor_1251_1251" id="FNanchor_1251_1251"></a><a href="#Footnote_1251_1251" class="fnanchor">[1251]</a> Other Socialist writers have put forth similar
+views. This is a cheerful outlook for the free citizens of the free
+Socialist Commonwealth. The workers will become "wage-slaves" in the
+fullest sense of the term. They will have to submit to forced labour,
+arbitrary wages, and arbitrary hours of labour, and those who do not
+produce as much as the official overseers require&mdash;and they may have a
+private grudge against some unfortunate worker who does his best&mdash;will
+be starved until they work harder. The lot of savages ruled by the
+knout, the kourbash, and the sjambok will be preferable to the lot of
+men ruled by starvation in the free Socialist Commonwealth of the
+future. The former have at least some liberty, while the latter will
+be kept by officials, who will distribute food and force them to work
+by rewards of food alternated by starvation, like performing dogs and
+apes.</p>
+
+<p>To carry on the business of the country the Socialist Government would
+have to drop the principle of perfect freedom and to rely on coercion,
+and it would be justified in doing so. If, as Mr. Blatchford has
+repeatedly told us, "man has no right to himself because he did not
+make himself," if man belongs not to himself and his family, but to
+"society," it logically follows that society may compel him to work,
+apportioning to him his task and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_461" id="Page_461">[461]</a></span>his pay, without reference to his
+wishes. Society being represented by its officials, elected or
+appointed, these officials would absolutely dispose of the people.
+Great Britain would be ruled like a gigantic convict prison.</p>
+
+<p>The spirit in which even moderate Socialists already contemplate the
+freedom of the individual may be seen from an address on Sweated
+Labour which Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., delivered in Glasgow in
+autumn 1907. He said: "There was no use tinkering with the problem.
+Personally, he was not in favour of home work at all. To eliminate it
+might seem a cold-blooded way of dealing with sweating, but it was the
+only way that would give definite and final results. He would,
+however, proceed carefully and scientifically. Home work had got
+extremes, but one section was much riper for treatment than the other,
+and he would begin with the worst. The first difficulty was to find
+out the sweated workers. It was certain that a great percentage
+escaped detection by sanitary inspectors. Now his proposal was that,
+instead of the sanitary inspectors hunting for the home worker, the
+home worker should hunt for the inspector; and this he sought to
+accomplish under the Bill introduced last session, by making it
+necessary for the home worker to take out a licence and by making it
+obligatory on the employer to keep an absolutely complete list of his
+workers. The factory inspector must have right of access, and a
+certificate must be obtained from him for a separate licence. The
+casual home-worker would be discouraged." In other words, factory
+inspectors should apparently be authorised to break without a search
+warrant into private houses. They should certainly be empowered to
+prosecute a working man if he defended the privacy of his house by
+refusing the inspector admittance. That measure would abolish the
+sanctity of the home. The "Right to Work," which the Socialists so
+loudly champion, would be taken from the home-worker, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_462" id="Page_462">[462]</a></span>and one cannot
+help asking: Is that high-handed measure devised for the benefit of
+the sweated or for that of the highly paid workers, represented by Mr.
+Macdonald, who wish to abolish the competition of underpaid
+home-workers? Sweated labour can be abolished and must be abolished,
+and it can be abolished, as I may show in another book, without
+destroying the home. If Mr. Macdonald should have his way, the
+Socialist principle, "Property is robbery," will have to be
+supplemented with the principle "Liberty is tyranny."</p>
+
+<p>The unchecked absolutism of a Socialist State will hardly be palatable
+to Socialist workers who have been told that Socialism means freedom,
+and these see the only solution in the establishment of Anarchism:
+"The damnable idea of being marshalled and drilled or numbered and
+docketed like any other merchandise in a state of glorified capitalism
+is not the Socialist's ideal, but its antithesis, no matter what the
+capitalists and their protagonists, the pseudo-Socialists, choose to
+name it. We don't want to be driven to the gate of the municipal or
+other factory to hustle and elbow our fellows out of the way so that
+we may catch the official's eye in the mad and sordid scramble for
+mere belly food, for a mere animal subsistence. With the advent of
+Socialism, the whole of the capitalist State and its superstructure
+will collapse, with its cant of living wages, its Brotherhoods of Man,
+and the rest of its nauseous humbug."<a name="FNanchor_1252_1252" id="FNanchor_1252_1252"></a><a href="#Footnote_1252_1252" class="fnanchor">[1252]</a> "If the worker continues
+to be paid in wages, he necessarily will remain the slave or the
+subordinate of the one to whom he is forced to sell his labour force;
+be the buyer a private individual or the State&mdash;it would still be an
+odious tyranny."<a name="FNanchor_1253_1253" id="FNanchor_1253_1253"></a><a href="#Footnote_1253_1253" class="fnanchor">[1253]</a> "Socialism will entail compulsory service on
+all able-bodied members of the community, or rather the State. For
+that is what we shall have; the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_463" id="Page_463">[463]</a></span>State with its hosts of
+functionaries, its big pots and its little pots, and its never-ending
+officialism and petty tyrannies. Organisation must either be
+compulsory or free. If compulsory, you have the military spirit with
+all its attendant evils; if free, you have the Anarchist spirit with
+all the advantages that arise when the fetters that hinder individual
+initiative and development are removed."<a name="FNanchor_1254_1254" id="FNanchor_1254_1254"></a><a href="#Footnote_1254_1254" class="fnanchor">[1254]</a></p>
+
+<p>The foregoing should suffice to show that the Socialist State could
+organise work only by relying on forced labour and by creating the
+most unbearable despotism which the world has seen, or by "organising"
+the chaos of Anarchism, and it is difficult to say which of the two
+would be the more hideous solution.</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc">How will the Socialist State Be Governed?</h4>
+
+<p>Socialists tell us rather vaguely: "Socialism means the elevation of
+the struggle for existence from the material to the intellectual
+plane. Socialism will raise the struggle for existence into a sphere
+where competition shall be emulation, where the treasures are
+boundless and eternal, and where the abundant wealth of one does not
+cause the poverty of another."<a name="FNanchor_1255_1255" id="FNanchor_1255_1255"></a><a href="#Footnote_1255_1255" class="fnanchor">[1255]</a> "State employment, when the State
+itself is only an organised democracy and class distinctions cease,
+means not slavery, but freedom."<a name="FNanchor_1256_1256" id="FNanchor_1256_1256"></a><a href="#Footnote_1256_1256" class="fnanchor">[1256]</a> "Freedom and equality will then
+be no longer empty and cheap phrases, but will have a meaning; when
+all men are really free and equal, they will honour and advance one
+another."<a name="FNanchor_1257_1257" id="FNanchor_1257_1257"></a><a href="#Footnote_1257_1257" class="fnanchor">[1257]</a> "In Socialistic administrations there are no
+employers, no superiors, no oppression; all are equals and enjoy equal
+rights."<a name="FNanchor_1258_1258" id="FNanchor_1258_1258"></a><a href="#Footnote_1258_1258" class="fnanchor">[1258]</a> "Under Socialism <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_464" id="Page_464">[464]</a></span>all the work of the nation would be
+managed by the nation."<a name="FNanchor_1259_1259" id="FNanchor_1259_1259"></a><a href="#Footnote_1259_1259" class="fnanchor">[1259]</a> "Under Socialism the State, as we have
+known the State in the past, will have disappeared; for under
+Socialism there will be no classes, but all the people will form one
+class, and the Government and organisation will be democratic, each
+individual having an equal voice in directing the affairs of the
+common life."<a name="FNanchor_1260_1260" id="FNanchor_1260_1260"></a><a href="#Footnote_1260_1260" class="fnanchor">[1260]</a> "The State will no longer be the bureaucratic
+State of to-day, but a democratic State assisted directly by the whole
+people."<a name="FNanchor_1261_1261" id="FNanchor_1261_1261"></a><a href="#Footnote_1261_1261" class="fnanchor">[1261]</a> "All adult members of the commune, without distinction
+of sex, take part in the necessary elections, and determine to what
+persons the conduct of affairs shall be entrusted. There is no such
+thing as a hierarchical system."<a name="FNanchor_1262_1262" id="FNanchor_1262_1262"></a><a href="#Footnote_1262_1262" class="fnanchor">[1262]</a> "Appointments will be made from
+below. In the Post Office Department, for example, the letter carriers
+will elect their immediate superiors; these, we will say, the
+post-masters; and these, in their turn, the Post-Master
+General."<a name="FNanchor_1263_1263" id="FNanchor_1263_1263"></a><a href="#Footnote_1263_1263" class="fnanchor">[1263]</a></p>
+
+<p>In other and plainer words, the Socialist State would, according to
+the authorities quoted, be ruled by the same system by which it is
+ruled at present, although elections might be more numerous, and
+although the suffrage might be given a wider basis. Now if the system
+of government remains the same as it is at present, is there any
+reason for anticipating better results than those obtained at present?
+Will the elected administrators no longer place personal and party
+interests above national ones? And will not the infinitely greater
+range of administrative functions make it more difficult to exercise
+control and to allocate responsibilities, and thus make
+irresponsibility, favouritism, dishonesty, and the evasion of
+punishment more easy and more frequent? Is a larger number of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_465" id="Page_465">[465]</a></span>voters
+likely to pick out abler administrators than a small one? Does not the
+elective system, according to the Socialists themselves, cause the
+scum to rise to the top, and result in the election of plausible
+windbags?<a name="FNanchor_1264_1264" id="FNanchor_1264_1264"></a><a href="#Footnote_1264_1264" class="fnanchor">[1264]</a> Are the people's votes never won by any other means
+than the testimony of results? Will there no longer be the fascination
+of eloquence, the attraction of boundless promises, the glamour of
+prejudice, the tie of party, the pressure put by an Association upon
+its members? If amateurs show now little ability in administering a
+few comparatively simple things, is it likely that results will be
+better when they have to administer everything? Will not amateur
+government prove an absolute failure?</p>
+
+<p>Most thinking Socialists clearly foresee that the Socialist State of
+the future could not possibly be administered by amateurs; that it
+would have to be administered by experts, by permanent officials; that
+Socialism would mean the death-knell of elected governors, and
+therefore of democracy, as may be seen in Chapter XV. of this book.
+The philosopher of British Socialism tells us: "Socialism aims at the
+supersession of democracy, as of every other form of government. The
+will of the majority of an ideal democracy, a social democracy, must,
+as regards its special expressions, be subordinate to the general
+moral canon of a Socialist Commonwealth. That in affairs of
+management, of tactics, of administration, or in decisions requiring
+special knowledge, authority, in its nature dictatorial, is necessary,
+all must admit. There must be a controlling, an authoritative voice in
+direction; so much must be clear, one would think, to all practical or
+reasonable persons when once stated. The real point to determine is
+the nature and limits of that amount of dictatorial power which, we
+must admit, is essential in any organised community of which we can at
+present conceive. <i>Social Democracy</i>, while it means all <i>for</i> the
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_466" id="Page_466">[466]</a></span>people, does not mean the impossible absurdity that everything should
+be directly regulated <i>by</i> the people, <i>i.e.</i> by a direct popular
+vote."<a name="FNanchor_1265_1265" id="FNanchor_1265_1265"></a><a href="#Footnote_1265_1265" class="fnanchor">[1265]</a> These views seem irrefutable, and it follows that not
+only for economic reasons, but for political reasons as well, the
+establishment of the Socialist State will lead to the establishment of
+a "dictatorial authority."</p>
+
+<p>If Socialism be introduced, the fall of democracy and the
+establishment of absolutism cannot possibly be avoided. Democratic
+States are ruled by public opinion. The voice of an individual does
+not carry very far. Therefore public opinion can be formed only by
+means of an independent Press. An independent Press is the strongest,
+one might almost say the only, guarantee of national liberty. As long
+as there are numerous independent papers owned by private people,
+papers which represent all shades of opinion, everyone who has
+something to say can always freely express his opinion in one set of
+papers or the other. A striking speech is read the next day by the
+whole nation; a striking injustice to a single individual, or a
+Government blunder, may be taken up by the whole nation. The
+disappearance of private property will necessarily mean the
+disappearance of the free Press, and therefore of public opinion. All
+newspapers would be owned, edited, and printed by the Government, and
+is any Government likely to assist a hostile opposition by printing
+its views, and to assist in bringing about a revolution, probably
+accompanied by bloodshed and its own destruction? Such a thing has
+never been. Such a thing will never be. People might be dissatisfied
+and be ill-treated by the Socialist Government; they might be starved
+to death or shot by the thousand; there might be risings and
+rebellions and civil war in some parts of the country; the fleet might
+be <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_467" id="Page_467">[467]</a></span>defeated and the colonies lost&mdash;yet not a word need appear in the
+Socialist Government Press.</p>
+
+<p>Some Socialists are childish enough to argue: "Though the printing
+press will be a collective institution, it will be available to all.
+Anyone, whatever unpopular opinions he may entertain, however hostile
+to the administrators he may be, will be entitled to have anything
+decent printed, provided he is ready to pay for the work done, or to
+guarantee, or induce his friends to guarantee, that the cost will be
+defrayed."<a name="FNanchor_1266_1266" id="FNanchor_1266_1266"></a><a href="#Footnote_1266_1266" class="fnanchor">[1266]</a> "It would always be open to individuals or to groups
+of individuals to publish anything they pleased on covering the cost
+of publication. With the comparative affluence which would be enjoyed
+by each member of the community, anyone who really cared to reach the
+public ear would be able to do so by diminishing his expenditure in
+other directions."<a name="FNanchor_1267_1267" id="FNanchor_1267_1267"></a><a href="#Footnote_1267_1267" class="fnanchor">[1267]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Government would certainly neither print, nor circulate through
+its post-office and newsagents, matter which it would consider to be
+dangerous to its existence or seditious. The assertion that a private
+individual in the Socialist Commonwealth might at his own expense
+circulate his views throughout the country&mdash;there would be no more
+millionaires but only wage-earners&mdash;is like asserting that a
+bricklayer might with his savings pay off the British National Debt.</p>
+
+<p>Lacking an independent public opinion, elections could be managed by
+the officials through the official Press in their own interest;
+elections would become a sham, and would no doubt soon fall into
+disuse. The official class would become a caste of hereditary rulers
+governing millions of serfs.</p>
+
+<p>The foregoing makes it clear that in political as in economic matters
+the Socialist State must fall a prey to the most complete absolutism
+which the world has <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_468" id="Page_468">[468]</a></span>known, an absolutism which probably, through a
+series of revolutions and civil wars, would at last end in anarchy. At
+present a dissatisfied worker can change his employer, he can get
+justice in the Law Courts, and in extreme cases he can put his
+grievances before the nation. In the Socialist State there would be
+only one authority&mdash;the all-controlling and all-powerful State, or
+rather an all-controlling and all-powerful bureaucracy. The nation
+would be composed of two classes: permanent officials possessing
+absolute power, and ordinary citizens possessing neither power nor
+right; overseers and workers; slave-drivers and slaves; and the only
+way of escaping the tyranny of the State&mdash;for absolute and unchecked
+power has always led, and will always lead, to tyranny&mdash;would be by
+committing suicide. As in Rome under the rule of Nero and Caligula,
+suicide would be the only way to liberty.</p>
+
+<p>A leading Socialist wrote with unconscious humour: "The Utopist needs
+no knowledge of facts. Indeed such a knowledge is a hindrance. For him
+the laws of social evolution do not exist. He is a law unto himself;
+and his men are not the wayward, spasmodic, irregular organisms of
+daily life, but automata obeying the strings he pulls. In a word, he
+creates, he does not construct. He makes alike his materials and the
+laws within which they work, adapting them all to an ideal end. In
+describing a new Jerusalem the only limits to its perfection are the
+limits of the writer's imagination.... Humanity will rise to heights
+undreamed of now; and the most exquisite Utopias, as sung by the poet
+and idealist, shall to our children seem but dim and broken lights
+compared with their perfect day. All that we need are Courage,
+Prudence, and Faith. Faith above all."<a name="FNanchor_1268_1268" id="FNanchor_1268_1268"></a><a href="#Footnote_1268_1268" class="fnanchor">[1268]</a> Every reader of this book
+will no doubt heartily agree with the latter <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_469" id="Page_469">[469]</a></span>remark. Socialists are
+wise to appeal rather to blind faith than to plain common-sense.</p>
+
+<p>The philosopher of British Socialism tells us: "Socialism is the great
+modern protest against <i>un</i>reality, against the delusive shams which
+now masquerade as verities."<a name="FNanchor_1269_1269" id="FNanchor_1269_1269"></a><a href="#Footnote_1269_1269" class="fnanchor">[1269]</a> Another Socialist leader asserts:
+"Socialism is a scientific scheme of national government entirely
+wise, just, and practical."<a name="FNanchor_1270_1270" id="FNanchor_1270_1270"></a><a href="#Footnote_1270_1270" class="fnanchor">[1270]</a> A third leader affirms: "Socialism
+is neither more nor less than the science of Sociology."<a name="FNanchor_1271_1271" id="FNanchor_1271_1271"></a><a href="#Footnote_1271_1271" class="fnanchor">[1271]</a> The
+"Socialist Catechism" asks: "How may Socialists reply to the taunt
+that their scheme is impracticable? By quoting the opinion of John
+Stuart Mill that the difficulties of Socialism are greatly overrated;
+and they should declare that, so far from being an impracticable
+Utopian scheme, it is the necessary and inevitable result of the
+historical evolution of society."<a name="FNanchor_1272_1272" id="FNanchor_1272_1272"></a><a href="#Footnote_1272_1272" class="fnanchor">[1272]</a></p>
+
+<p>Socialism stands condemned, not so much by the criticism of its
+opponents as by the doctrines and proposals of its leaders, and these
+are the men who aspire to rule the universe and who claim: "We mean
+the establishment of a political power in place of the present
+class-State, which shall have for its conscious and definite aim the
+common ownership and control of the <i>whole</i> of the world's industry,
+exchange, &amp;c."<a name="FNanchor_1273_1273" id="FNanchor_1273_1273"></a><a href="#Footnote_1273_1273" class="fnanchor">[1273]</a></p>
+
+<p>I think the readers of the foregoing pages will be inclined to believe
+that Socialism is methodised insanity.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1203_1203" id="Footnote_1203_1203"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1203_1203"><span class="label">[1203]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>Social Revolution</i>, p. 41.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1204_1204" id="Footnote_1204_1204"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1204_1204"><span class="label">[1204]</span></a> Socialism, <i>For and Against</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1205_1205" id="Footnote_1205_1205"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1205_1205"><span class="label">[1205]</span></a> Clemenceau, in Jaur&egrave;s' <i>Practical Socialism</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1206_1206" id="Footnote_1206_1206"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1206_1206"><span class="label">[1206]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1207_1207" id="Footnote_1207_1207"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1207_1207"><span class="label">[1207]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 42.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1208_1208" id="Footnote_1208_1208"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1208_1208"><span class="label">[1208]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1209_1209" id="Footnote_1209_1209"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1209_1209"><span class="label">[1209]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism and Society</i>, p. 126.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1210_1210" id="Footnote_1210_1210"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1210_1210"><span class="label">[1210]</span></a> Ethel Snowden, <i>The Woman Socialist</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1211_1211" id="Footnote_1211_1211"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1211_1211"><span class="label">[1211]</span></a> Ford, <i>Woman and Socialism</i>, p. 2.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1212_1212" id="Footnote_1212_1212"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1212_1212"><span class="label">[1212]</span></a> Macdonald, <i>Socialism and Society</i>, pp. 122, 123.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1213_1213" id="Footnote_1213_1213"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1213_1213"><span class="label">[1213]</span></a> Sir Oliver Lodge, <i>Public Service</i> v. <i>Private
+Expenditure</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1214_1214" id="Footnote_1214_1214"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1214_1214"><span class="label">[1214]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Not Guilty</i>, p. 37.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1215_1215" id="Footnote_1215_1215"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1215_1215"><span class="label">[1215]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 251.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1216_1216" id="Footnote_1216_1216"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1216_1216"><span class="label">[1216]</span></a> See <i>ante</i>, Chapter XXIII.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1217_1217" id="Footnote_1217_1217"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1217_1217"><span class="label">[1217]</span></a> Herbert Spencer, <i>The Man versus the State</i>, p. 43.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1218_1218" id="Footnote_1218_1218"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1218_1218"><span class="label">[1218]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1219_1219" id="Footnote_1219_1219"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1219_1219"><span class="label">[1219]</span></a> Ben Tillett, <i>Trades Unionism and Socialism</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1220_1220" id="Footnote_1220_1220"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1220_1220"><span class="label">[1220]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism</i>, p. 30.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1221_1221" id="Footnote_1221_1221"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1221_1221"><span class="label">[1221]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, p. 43.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1222_1222" id="Footnote_1222_1222"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1222_1222"><span class="label">[1222]</span></a> Joynes, <i>The Socialist Catechism</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1223_1223" id="Footnote_1223_1223"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1223_1223"><span class="label">[1223]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 11.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1224_1224" id="Footnote_1224_1224"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1224_1224"><span class="label">[1224]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1225_1225" id="Footnote_1225_1225"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1225_1225"><span class="label">[1225]</span></a> Ward, <i>Religion and Labour</i>, pp. 7, 8.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1226_1226" id="Footnote_1226_1226"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1226_1226"><span class="label">[1226]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 77.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1227_1227" id="Footnote_1227_1227"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1227_1227"><span class="label">[1227]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Republic</i>, p. 32.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1228_1228" id="Footnote_1228_1228"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1228_1228"><span class="label">[1228]</span></a> Hazell, <i>Summary Marx's Capital</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1229_1229" id="Footnote_1229_1229"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1229_1229"><span class="label">[1229]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman in the Past, Present, and the Future</i>,
+p. 193.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1230_1230" id="Footnote_1230_1230"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1230_1230"><span class="label">[1230]</span></a> Sir Oliver Lodge, <i>Public Service versus Private
+Expenditure</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1231_1231" id="Footnote_1231_1231"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1231_1231"><span class="label">[1231]</span></a> <i>New Age</i>, November 21, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1232_1232" id="Footnote_1232_1232"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1232_1232"><span class="label">[1232]</span></a> See <i>ante</i>, p. 61 ff.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1233_1233" id="Footnote_1233_1233"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1233_1233"><span class="label">[1233]</span></a> Bax, <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint</i>, p. 81.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1234_1234" id="Footnote_1234_1234"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1234_1234"><span class="label">[1234]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 163, 164.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1235_1235" id="Footnote_1235_1235"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1235_1235"><span class="label">[1235]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, p. 91.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1236_1236" id="Footnote_1236_1236"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1236_1236"><span class="label">[1236]</span></a> Davidson, <i>The Old Order and the New</i>, p. 170.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1237_1237" id="Footnote_1237_1237"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1237_1237"><span class="label">[1237]</span></a> Morris, <i>Communism</i>, pp. 14, 15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1238_1238" id="Footnote_1238_1238"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1238_1238"><span class="label">[1238]</span></a> <i>Independent Labour Party Song Book</i>, p. 40.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1239_1239" id="Footnote_1239_1239"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1239_1239"><span class="label">[1239]</span></a> <i>Forward</i>, October 12, 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1240_1240" id="Footnote_1240_1240"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1240_1240"><span class="label">[1240]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman in the Past, Present, and Future</i>, pp.
+183, 184.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1241_1241" id="Footnote_1241_1241"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1241_1241"><span class="label">[1241]</span></a> Kautsky, <i>The Social Revolution</i>, pp. 16, 17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1242_1242" id="Footnote_1242_1242"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1242_1242"><span class="label">[1242]</span></a> Sidney Webb, <i>Socialism True and False</i>, pp. 17, 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1243_1243" id="Footnote_1243_1243"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1243_1243"><span class="label">[1243]</span></a> <i>Socialism and Labour Policy</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1244_1244" id="Footnote_1244_1244"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1244_1244"><span class="label">[1244]</span></a> <i>The Economics of Direct Employment</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1245_1245" id="Footnote_1245_1245"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1245_1245"><span class="label">[1245]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, pp. 102, 103.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1246_1246" id="Footnote_1246_1246"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1246_1246"><span class="label">[1246]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 169.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1247_1247" id="Footnote_1247_1247"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1247_1247"><span class="label">[1247]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 194.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1248_1248" id="Footnote_1248_1248"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1248_1248"><span class="label">[1248]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 167.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1249_1249" id="Footnote_1249_1249"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1249_1249"><span class="label">[1249]</span></a> Ward, <i>The Ideal City</i>, p. 7.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1250_1250" id="Footnote_1250_1250"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1250_1250"><span class="label">[1250]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 167.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1251_1251" id="Footnote_1251_1251"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1251_1251"><span class="label">[1251]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, p. 91.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1252_1252" id="Footnote_1252_1252"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1252_1252"><span class="label">[1252]</span></a> <i>Socialist</i>, December 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1253_1253" id="Footnote_1253_1253"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1253_1253"><span class="label">[1253]</span></a> Kropotkin, <i>Anarchism, its Philosophy and Ideal</i>, p.
+15.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1254_1254" id="Footnote_1254_1254"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1254_1254"><span class="label">[1254]</span></a> <i>Freedom</i>, October 1907.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1255_1255" id="Footnote_1255_1255"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1255_1255"><span class="label">[1255]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 1.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1256_1256" id="Footnote_1256_1256"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1256_1256"><span class="label">[1256]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Socialism and Slavery</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1257_1257" id="Footnote_1257_1257"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1257_1257"><span class="label">[1257]</span></a> Sorge, <i>Socialism and the Worker</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1258_1258" id="Footnote_1258_1258"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1258_1258"><span class="label">[1258]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 199.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1259_1259" id="Footnote_1259_1259"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1259_1259"><span class="label">[1259]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Real Socialism</i>, p. 14.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1260_1260" id="Footnote_1260_1260"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1260_1260"><span class="label">[1260]</span></a> Snowden, <i>The Individual under Socialism</i>, p. 12.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1261_1261" id="Footnote_1261_1261"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1261_1261"><span class="label">[1261]</span></a> Jaur&egrave;s, <i>Practical Socialism</i>, p. 6.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1262_1262" id="Footnote_1262_1262"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1262_1262"><span class="label">[1262]</span></a> Bebel, <i>Woman</i>, p. 181.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1263_1263" id="Footnote_1263_1263"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1263_1263"><span class="label">[1263]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 126.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1264_1264" id="Footnote_1264_1264"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1264_1264"><span class="label">[1264]</span></a> Thompson, <i>Hail Referendum</i>, pp. 3, 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1265_1265" id="Footnote_1265_1265"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1265_1265"><span class="label">[1265]</span></a> Bax, <i>Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 75, 76.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1266_1266" id="Footnote_1266_1266"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1266_1266"><span class="label">[1266]</span></a> Gronlund, <i>Co-operative Commonwealth</i>, p. 135.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1267_1267" id="Footnote_1267_1267"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1267_1267"><span class="label">[1267]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, p. 159.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1268_1268" id="Footnote_1268_1268"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1268_1268"><span class="label">[1268]</span></a> <i>Fabian Essays in Socialism</i>, pp. 149, 169.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1269_1269" id="Footnote_1269_1269"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1269_1269"><span class="label">[1269]</span></a> Bax, <i>Religion of Socialism</i>, p. ix.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1270_1270" id="Footnote_1270_1270"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1270_1270"><span class="label">[1270]</span></a> Blatchford, <i>Merrie England</i>, p. 100.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1271_1271" id="Footnote_1271_1271"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1271_1271"><span class="label">[1271]</span></a> Hyndman, <i>Socialism and Slavery</i>, Preface.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1272_1272" id="Footnote_1272_1272"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1272_1272"><span class="label">[1272]</span></a> Joynes, <i>The Socialist Catechism</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1273_1273" id="Footnote_1273_1273"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1273_1273"><span class="label">[1273]</span></a> Bax and Quelch, <i>A New Catechism</i>, p. 9.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="CHAPTER_XXXVII" id="CHAPTER_XXXVII"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_470" id="Page_470">[470]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CHAPTER XXXVII<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>CONCLUSION</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">The leading Socialists claim that Socialism is at the same time a
+scientific doctrine and a practical policy. A perusal of this book
+should suffice to prove that it is neither the one nor the other. On
+its scientific side it consists of twenty catch-phrases which are very
+effective for propaganda purposes, but which are contrary to general
+experience and to common-sense. On its practical side it consists of a
+number of fantastic proposals which are likewise contrary to general
+experience and to common-sense.</p>
+
+<p>Socialism has two faces. The one which is turned towards the cultured
+and towards the non-Socialists of the middle class constantly asserts
+that Socialism is a scientific and perfect system of well-ordered
+government and co-operation, which will evolve order and harmony out
+of the chaos of individualism and of competition, and which will raise
+men to the highest level of perfection. The other, which is turned
+towards the masses, and which is by far the more important, is purely
+predatory in character. It appeals to all the passions of the
+multitude. It denounces law, religion, charity, thrift, temperance,
+and all existing institutions. It preaches envy, hatred, greed,
+selfishness, violence, civil war, and general plunder. It sets class
+against class, and creates among its supporters a frame of mind which
+makes not for harmony, order, and co-operation, but for disorder,
+revolution, and anarchy.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_471" id="Page_471">[471]</a></span>The followers of Socialism do not see in it a science. "With the
+speculative side of Socialism the average man has but a small concern;
+it is its common-sense which appeals to him. By inherited instinct we
+are all communists at heart."<a name="FNanchor_1274_1274" id="FNanchor_1274_1274"></a><a href="#Footnote_1274_1274" class="fnanchor">[1274]</a> The attraction of Socialism to the
+masses lies in its promise of the spoliation of the rich and of the
+general division of their wealth. It is true that Socialists
+habitually and very emphatically protest that Socialism is not a
+system of robbery and of general division. It is true that Socialists
+merely propose that all private property should be transferred to the
+State by expropriation&mdash;which is a euphemism for confiscation&mdash;and
+that the State should manage it for the general good of the masses.
+However, that is a distinction without a difference. Property is
+valuable because of the income which it yields. Therefore it comes for
+all practicable purposes to the same, whether the Socialist leaders
+propose dividing all the private property or all the income derived
+from that property. A prominent Socialist writer has asked: "Is not
+honesty&mdash;the sense of right of possession in the fruits of our
+labour&mdash;the very basis of Socialism?"<a name="FNanchor_1275_1275" id="FNanchor_1275_1275"></a><a href="#Footnote_1275_1275" class="fnanchor">[1275]</a> Regretfully one must
+answer that question with a very emphatic "No."</p>
+
+<p>Socialism is not a system of organisation and of national
+co-operation, but merely a plan of spoliation and of general division.
+That may clearly be seen from the fact that the Socialist leaders have
+not the slightest desire to create a Socialistic model commonwealth,
+and thus demonstrate the practical value of their highly speculative
+doctrines, in a new country where Socialism could be introduced
+peacefully, easily, and without a revolution, where co-operation and
+exchange would be comparatively simple because wants are simple, the
+commodities produced are few, and the opposition of vested <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_472" id="Page_472">[472]</a></span>interests
+would be <i>nil</i>. In spite of all these great advantages, the Socialist
+leaders prefer introducing Socialism into old countries where the
+confiscation of the existing property seems a shorter way to wealth
+than work, and where confiscation will have the most satisfactory
+results to the despoilers.</p>
+
+<p>We have seen that the various Socialistic organisations agree on
+hardly one point in their constructive policy. However, they
+absolutely agree in their main purpose&mdash;spoliation. On that point
+there is absolute unanimity among all the British Socialists, and they
+condemn State Socialism (see Chapter XXXII.) because State Socialism
+would not mean confiscation and general division. Besides, it would
+not enable the Socialist leaders to overturn the State and to seize
+the reins of Government. British Socialism is purely destructive in
+character, and if Socialism should ever be established in Great
+Britain it would lead not to national co-operation, but to civil war
+among the various Socialistic sections for the spoils, and to a series
+of sanguinary <i>coups d'&eacute;tat</i> similar to those which arose out of the
+great French Revolution.</p>
+
+<p>The "scientific" proposal of transferring all private property to the
+State, and of using that property for the common good, merely
+circumscribes the word and act of confiscation and of general
+division. Therefore we may say that Socialism has no scientific basis,
+unless we choose to call science a collection of fallacies expressed
+in involved terms so as to deceive the simple. Karl Marx was not a
+scientist but a professional demagogue and revolutionist, and his
+merit from the Socialists' point of view consists only in this, that
+he elaborated a formula of roundabout spoliation and general division,
+which he took from his Anarchist predecessors, and gave it a much
+needed, though rather transparent, cloak of scientific respectability.</p>
+
+<p>Socialism is, in the first place, a business proposition. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_473" id="Page_473">[473]</a></span>Therefore,
+if it were practical, it should appeal particularly to business men.
+However, it is noteworthy that the loudest champions of British
+Socialism are not business men, of whom but few are to be found in the
+Socialist ranks, but pushing writers in search of self-advertisement,
+whose special domain is the highly spiced and the sensational, writers
+who, knowing that many people mistake eccentricity for genius and
+paradoxical absurdity for brilliancy, have discarded common-sense, let
+their imaginations run riot, and outbid one another for notoriety.</p>
+
+<p>The complaints of the Socialists about the unequal distribution of
+wealth are as old as is humanity itself. Since the earliest times
+demagogues have endeavoured to obtain a following by working upon the
+misery, envy, short-sightedness, and passions of the poor, by
+promising them equality and boundless wealth to be obtained by the
+simple process of seizing and dividing up the property of the
+well-to-do. The identical arguments and proposals which are now put
+forward in the name of Marx, and of modern "scientific" Socialism, as
+something new and original may be found throughout literature since
+the very dawn of history.<a name="FNanchor_1276_1276" id="FNanchor_1276_1276"></a><a href="#Footnote_1276_1276" class="fnanchor">[1276]</a> However, history teaches us that,
+although countless Socialistic experiments have been made, all
+attempts at enriching the poor by spoliation and at creating an
+artificial equality among men have proved a failure. They have
+invariably ended in national ruin, and have left the masses poorer and
+more miserable than ever. The reason of this universal failure is
+obvious. Man cannot reconstruct Nature. He may violate, but cannot
+alter, the laws of Nature. Inequality rules throughout Nature, and it
+seems as little possible to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_474" id="Page_474">[474]</a></span>equalise the fortunes, as it is to
+equalise the bodily and mental powers, of men. We all are the slaves
+of Nature. The inequality of natural gifts and the division of labour
+are the principal causes of the division of men into classes and of
+the unequal distribution of wealth. Nature is only governed by obeying
+her. We can certainly diminish poverty, but we cannot, for any length
+of time, maintain an artificial equality among naturally unequal men.</p>
+
+<p>The first duty of the State, as of the individual, is
+self-preservation. British Socialism, being by those teachings which
+it addresses to its supporters a revolutionary doctrine in the worst
+sense of the term, and therefore a purely destructive factor, must
+unconditionally be resisted and combated. However, at the same time
+all that can be done must be done to alleviate the distress of the
+British masses, which is undoubtedly very great, and which makes them
+exceedingly receptive to the revolutionary doctrines of Socialism. As
+it would require too much space to deal with the social problem in
+Great Britain in its entirety, only a few of the most important points
+can be touched upon.</p>
+
+<p>The greatest scourge of the British worker is no doubt irregular and
+ill-paid employment. The first step to improve his position is
+therefore to improve employment. Hence the most urgent reform is the
+revision of Great Britain's economic policy. Great Britain's present
+economic policy, Free Trade, was based upon the supposition that Great
+Britain, as Cobden prophesied, was, and always would remain, the
+workshop of the world; that other countries were compelled to buy
+British manufactures because British manufactures were as necessary to
+them as foreign foodstuffs are now to Great Britain. In 1846, when
+Free Trade was introduced, there was some reason for that supposition.
+Before the advent of electricity manufacturing was based exclusively
+upon coal. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_475" id="Page_475">[475]</a></span>Great Britain's absolute predominance in manufacturing for
+the markets of the whole world immediately before the introduction of
+Free Trade may therefore best be seen from the following table:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">Production of Coal in 1845<a name="FNanchor_1277_1277" id="FNanchor_1277_1277"></a><a href="#Footnote_1277_1277" class="fnanchor">[1277]</a></h4>
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="45%" summary="Production of Coal in 1845">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="36%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="32%">Quantity produced.<br />Tons</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="32%"> Percentage of<br />world's production</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Great Britain</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">31,500,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">64.2</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Belgium</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">4,960,077</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">10.1</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">United States</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">4,400,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">8.9</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">France</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">4,141,617</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">8.4</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Prussian States</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">3,500,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">7.0</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">Austrian States</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bb">659,340</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bb">1.4</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bt">49,161,034</td>
+  <td class="tdr3 bt">100</td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p>The above table shows that Great Britain produced two-thirds of the
+world's coal, and the coal of most other countries was supposed to be
+unsuitable for manufacturing purposes. However, Great Britain produced
+not only two-thirds of the world's coal, but she produced likewise
+two-thirds of the world's iron, she consumed two-thirds of the world's
+cotton, and she possessed two-thirds of the world's shipping. Her
+railway mileage was greater than that of the whole Continent of
+Europe.<a name="FNanchor_1278_1278" id="FNanchor_1278_1278"></a><a href="#Footnote_1278_1278" class="fnanchor">[1278]</a></p>
+
+<p>Times have changed. Great Britain is no longer the workshop of the
+world. British manufactures are no longer indispensable to foreign
+countries. In the present age of steel, the production of steel is the
+best index of a nation's manufacturing eminence, and how greatly
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_476" id="Page_476">[476]</a></span>conditions have changed, and are still changing, to England's
+disadvantage may be seen from the following figures:</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4 class="sc">Output of Steel</h4>
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="50%" summary="Output of Steel">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl" width="34%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="22%">United States.<br /> Tons</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="22%">Germany.<br /> Tons</td>
+  <td class="tdc" width="22%">Great Britain.<br /> Tons</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1890</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">4,277,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">2,127,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">3,679,000</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdl">1906</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">23,246,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">11,135,000</td>
+  <td class="tdr3">6,462,000</td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+
+<p class="noin">Great Britain, which formerly produced nine-tenths of the world's
+steel, produces now little more than one-tenth of the world's steel.</p>
+
+<p>As Great Britain has to buy vast quantities of food and raw material
+from foreign countries, she must sell to foreign countries vast
+quantities of manufactured goods. However, market after market is
+being closed to her industries by ever-rising tariff walls, and the
+profits from her exports have been greatly diminished through foreign
+competition. Her home market has been reduced through the decay of her
+agriculture and the shrinkage of her agricultural population, and it
+is systematically spoiled by combinations of foreign manufacturers.
+Foreign syndicates determine not only the price of British wheat and
+meat, but of British iron and other manufactures too, and they
+endeavour to ruin the British industries completely. Great Britain,
+far from being the world's manufacturer, has become the world's
+dumping ground. From the richest country in the world she is rapidly
+becoming one of the poorer countries of the world. Her industries are
+suffering, and the result is bad times, low wages, irregular
+employment, unemployment, poverty, and distress. It is noteworthy
+that, on an average, unemployment among the skilled workers in
+free-trade Great Britain is always five times greater than it is in
+protectionist Germany;<a name="FNanchor_1279_1279" id="FNanchor_1279_1279"></a><a href="#Footnote_1279_1279" class="fnanchor">[1279]</a> that British emigration per million is
+eleven times larger than German emigration; that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_477" id="Page_477">[477]</a></span>German savings-banks
+deposits are four times larger than British savings-banks deposits,
+and that the former increase ten times faster than the latter.<a name="FNanchor_1280_1280" id="FNanchor_1280_1280"></a><a href="#Footnote_1280_1280" class="fnanchor">[1280]</a></p>
+
+<p>What can be done to improve the position of the British workers?
+Emigration on the largest scale has proved a palliative, but no
+remedy. During the last twenty years almost five million people have
+left Great Britain. Yet the labour market is as over-stocked, and
+unemployment and poverty are as great, as ever. Besides, the United
+States and the British colonies may not always be able to absorb the
+vast and ever-growing numbers of British unemployed workers.
+Employment and wages depend upon the prosperity of industries, and the
+prosperity of industries depends on a sufficiency of markets. The
+British industries have not a sufficiency of markets. Therefore the
+British population suffers from irregular employment, unemployment,
+and consequent want and misery; and want and misery among the British
+masses are likely to continue increasing and ever increasing until
+Great Britain adapts her economic policy to the altered circumstances
+of the time, protects the industries by which her workers live, and
+secures a sufficient outlet for their productions by preferential
+arrangements with the self-governing Dominions. Under the shelter of
+Protection at home and with the aid of preferential arrangements
+throughout the empire, Great Britain will be able vastly to extend her
+manufacturing industries. Great Britain has unrivalled facilities for
+manufacturing. Whilst the manufacturing centres of the United States,
+Germany, France, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Italy, and other countries
+lie far inland near their coalfields, Great Britain has the unique
+advantage of being able to manufacture on the seashore, where coal,
+iron, great manufacturing towns, and excellent harbours lie in close
+proximity. The potentialities of the British industries <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_478" id="Page_478">[478]</a></span>under fair
+conditions and under the wise care of a fostering Government are
+boundless.</p>
+
+<p>Under the shelter of Protection the rural industries of Great Britain
+may be revived, especially if the British peasantry be re-created. A
+hundred years ago the great agricultural authority, Arthur Young,
+wrote: "The magic of property turns sand into gold. Give a man a bleak
+rock, and he will turn it into a garden. Give him a nine years' lease
+of a garden, and he will convert it into a desert." Since the time
+when these words were written most European countries have created a
+freehold peasantry by buying out the landed proprietors and settling
+the rural labourers on the land, and Great Britain will be wise in
+following their example.</p>
+
+<p>The tripartite question of Fiscal Protection for the home market, of
+an Imperial Customs Union, and of Imperial Federation is not a party
+question. It is a question of life or death for Great Britain. It may
+soon become a question of prosperity or starvation for the masses.
+Great Britain stands at the parting of the ways. She must either
+protect and re-create her industries, federate with her colonies, and
+make the British Empire a reality, or sink into insignificance, and
+history knows no instance of a great nation becoming a small one
+without the most intense suffering to the masses of the people. Great
+Britain must either adopt that constructive and protective national
+policy which the greatest statesmen and Empire builders of modern
+times&mdash;Richelieu, Cromwell, Colbert, Lord Chatham, George Washington,
+Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, Stein, and Bismarck&mdash;have
+pursued, or she will share the fate of the great commercial world
+empires of the past, from Ph&oelig;nicia to the Netherlands. She must
+either follow the policy of Mr. Chamberlain, build up the Empire and
+make it strong and prosperous, or that of revolutionary demagogues,
+who will wreck the Empire <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_479" id="Page_479">[479]</a></span>and drag Great Britain through plunder and
+ruin to destruction and anarchy.</p>
+
+<p>The experience of other industrial nations allows us to conclude that
+a wisely framed protective tariff will save the British industries and
+improve employment and wages. But better wages alone will not improve
+the position of the workers. A large part of the British working class
+must alter their personal habits, and especially their drinking
+habits. At present every rise in wages leads immediately to a great
+increase in the Drink Bill, and therefore benefits rather the brewer
+than the worker. "The strongest answer to the theory that poverty
+causes drink is the statistical fact that as wages rise general
+drunkenness follows, insanity increases, and criminal disorders due to
+drink keep pace with all three. Wherever one seeks for information
+dispassionately, one sees that drink does cause poverty to a greater
+extent, overwhelmingly so, than that poverty causes drink. Poverty is
+due to intemperance in varying degrees from twenty-five to fifty-one
+per cent, of cases and areas investigated."<a name="FNanchor_1281_1281" id="FNanchor_1281_1281"></a><a href="#Footnote_1281_1281" class="fnanchor">[1281]</a> "The Committee on
+Physical Deterioration in 1904 declared that if the drink question
+were removed three-fourths of the difficulty with regard to poverty
+and deterioration would disappear with it."<a name="FNanchor_1282_1282" id="FNanchor_1282_1282"></a><a href="#Footnote_1282_1282" class="fnanchor">[1282]</a> The drinking section
+of the working class spends 18<i>l.</i> 15<i>s.</i> 4<i>d.</i> per family on
+drink,<a name="FNanchor_1283_1283" id="FNanchor_1283_1283"></a><a href="#Footnote_1283_1283" class="fnanchor">[1283]</a> a sum much larger than that spent on rent. "There are two
+great causes of physical deterioration&mdash;these are dirt and drink. The
+former is responsible for nearly every form of disease. The latter is
+the direct cause of the vast number of defects."<a name="FNanchor_1284_1284" id="FNanchor_1284_1284"></a><a href="#Footnote_1284_1284" class="fnanchor">[1284]</a> "The most
+urgently needed public health reform of the present day <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_480" id="Page_480">[480]</a></span>is not so
+much one of environment as one of personal life."<a name="FNanchor_1285_1285" id="FNanchor_1285_1285"></a><a href="#Footnote_1285_1285" class="fnanchor">[1285]</a></p>
+
+<p>Many British workmen are incredibly wasteful. When one visits
+public-houses and working-men's clubs, when one goes to racecourses,
+football or other matches, and music-halls, the British workers seem
+to be the richest in the world. When one looks at their homes, their
+clothes, and especially their savings, they seem to be the poorest in
+the world. British working men drink, waste, and gamble to a much
+greater extent than foreign working men. Therefore not only the higher
+paid American workers, but also the lower paid French, German, and
+Swiss workers, are better housed, better clothed, and better fed&mdash;and
+are therefore better off and healthier&mdash;than British workers.<a name="FNanchor_1286_1286" id="FNanchor_1286_1286"></a><a href="#Footnote_1286_1286" class="fnanchor">[1286]</a>
+Besides, as their savings are much larger they are better able to
+stand a short spell of ill-luck or of bad times. Whether a working man
+is prosperous or poor, happy or unhappy, depends&mdash;under fair
+conditions of employment, which Protection should create&mdash;perhaps more
+on his personal habits and on those of his wife than on the actual
+amount he receives in wages. Social reform, to be effective, must be
+assisted in the home. The worker must aid the social reformer. Outside
+assistance alone will little benefit wasteful and improvident men who
+refuse to help themselves.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1274_1274" id="Footnote_1274_1274"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1274_1274"><span class="label">[1274]</span></a> Keir Hardie, <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>, pp. 33, 34.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1275_1275" id="Footnote_1275_1275"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1275_1275"><span class="label">[1275]</span></a> Leatham, <i>Socialism and Character</i>, p. 96.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1276_1276" id="Footnote_1276_1276"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1276_1276"><span class="label">[1276]</span></a> See Mencius' Works in Legge's <i>Chinese Classics</i>;
+Euripides, <i>The Suppliants</i>; Aristotle, <i>Politics</i>, vii. 5;
+Aristophanes, <i>Ecclesiazusae</i> and <i>Plutus</i>; Plutarch, <i>Tiberius
+Gracchus</i>, 9; Livius, ii. 32; Sallust, <i>Catiline's Conspiracy</i>, 20,
+23, 37-39; Virgil, <i>Georgics</i>, i. 125; Tibullus, i. 3, 35 Propertius,
+ii. 13, iii. 5, 11; Seneca, <i>Epistles</i>, 90, &amp;c.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1277_1277" id="Footnote_1277_1277"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1277_1277"><span class="label">[1277]</span></a> Taylor, <i>Statistics of Coal</i>, p. xxi.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1278_1278" id="Footnote_1278_1278"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1278_1278"><span class="label">[1278]</span></a> See <i>Encyclop&aelig;dia Britannica</i>, 8th edition, 1853-1860,
+articles: Cotton, Iron, Railways; Meyer, <i>Konversations Lexikon</i>,
+1839-1855, article: Grossbritannien; Porter, <i>Progress of the Nation</i>,
+1847; MacCulloch, <i>British Empire</i>, 1846; MacCulloch, <i>Dictionary of
+Commerce</i>, 1847; Macgregor, <i>Commercial Statistics</i>, 1844-1850, &amp;c.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1279_1279" id="Footnote_1279_1279"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1279_1279"><span class="label">[1279]</span></a> See <i>Board of Trade Labour Gazette</i> and <i>Reichs
+Arbeitsblatt</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1280_1280" id="Footnote_1280_1280"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1280_1280"><span class="label">[1280]</span></a> Ellis Barker, <i>Modern Germany</i>, 546 ff.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1281_1281" id="Footnote_1281_1281"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1281_1281"><span class="label">[1281]</span></a> Burns, <i>Labour and Drink</i>, pp. 15, 18.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1282_1282" id="Footnote_1282_1282"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1282_1282"><span class="label">[1282]</span></a> Newman, <i>The Health of the State</i>, p. 189.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1283_1283" id="Footnote_1283_1283"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1283_1283"><span class="label">[1283]</span></a> Whittaker, <i>Drink Problem</i>, p. 10.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1284_1284" id="Footnote_1284_1284"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1284_1284"><span class="label">[1284]</span></a> McMillan, <i>The Child and the State</i>, p. 4.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1285_1285" id="Footnote_1285_1285"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1285_1285"><span class="label">[1285]</span></a> Newman, <i>Health of the State</i>, p. 194.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1286_1286" id="Footnote_1286_1286"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1286_1286"><span class="label">[1286]</span></a> See <i>Reports of the Mosely Industrial Commission to
+the United States</i>; <i>The Brassworkers of Berlin and of Birmingham</i>;
+<i>The Gainsborough Commission, Life and Labour in Germany</i>; Horsfall,
+<i>The Improvement of the Dwellings&mdash;The Example of Germany</i>; Marr,
+<i>Housing Conditions in Manchester</i>; <i>City of Birmingham, Report of the
+Housing Committee</i>; Steele, <i>The Working Classes in France</i>; Rowntree
+and Sherwell, <i>The Temperance Problem</i>; Rowntree, <i>Poverty</i>; the
+publication of Charles Booth, &amp;c.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="APPENDIX" id="APPENDIX"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_481" id="Page_481">[481]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>APPENDIX<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>OFFICIAL PROGRAMMES OF THE SOCIALISTIC ORGANISATIONS</h4>
+<br />
+
+<h4>SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC FEDERATION</h4>
+
+<div class="block"><p class="hang"><i>Programme and Rules as revised previous to the Annual
+Conference held at the Labour Institute, Bradford, Easter
+1906</i></p></div>
+
+<p><i>Object.</i>&mdash;The Social-Democratic Federation is a part of the
+International Social-Democracy. It believes:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>1. That the emancipation of the working class can only be achieved
+through the socialisation of the means of production, distribution,
+and exchange, and their subsequent control by the organised community
+in the interests of the whole people.</p>
+
+<p>2. That, as the proletariat is the last class to achieve freedom, its
+emancipation will mean the emancipation of the whole of mankind,
+without distinction of race, nationality, creed, or sex.</p>
+
+<p>3. That this emancipation can only be the work of the working class
+itself,<a name="FNanchor_1287_1287" id="FNanchor_1287_1287"></a><a href="#Footnote_1287_1287" class="fnanchor">[1287]</a> organised nationally and internationally into a distinct
+political party, consciously striving after the realisation of its
+ideals: and, finally,</p>
+
+<p>4. That, in order to ensure greater material and moral facilities for
+the working class to organise itself and to carry on the class war,
+the following reforms must immediately be carried through:&mdash;</p>
+
+<br />
+<h4 class="sc"><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_482" id="Page_482">[482]</a></span>Immediate Reforms</h4>
+
+<p><i>Political.</i>&mdash;Abolition of the Monarchy.</p>
+
+<p>Democratisation of the Governmental machinery, viz. Abolition of the
+House of Lords, Payment of Members of Legislative and Administrative
+bodies. Payment of Official Expenses of Elections out of the Public
+Funds, Adult Suffrage, Proportional Representation, Triennial
+Parliaments, Second Ballot, Initiative, and Referendum. Foreigners to
+be granted rights of citizenship after two years' residence in the
+country, without any fees. Canvassing to be made illegal. All
+elections to take place on one day, such day to be made a legal
+holiday and all premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquors
+to be closed.</p>
+
+<p>Legislation by the people in such wise that no legislative proposal
+shall become law until ratified by the majority of the people.</p>
+
+<p>Legislative and Administrative independence for all parts of the
+Empire.</p>
+
+<p><i>Financial and Fiscal.</i>&mdash;Repudiation of the National Debt.</p>
+
+<p>Abolition of all indirect taxation and the institution of a cumulative
+tax on all incomes and inheritances exceeding 300<i>l.</i></p>
+
+<p><i>Administrative.</i>&mdash;Extension of the principle of Local
+Self-Government.</p>
+
+<p>Systematisation and co-ordination of the local administrative bodies.</p>
+
+<p>Election of all administrators and administrative bodies by Equal
+Direct Adult Suffrage.</p>
+
+<p><i>Educational.</i>&mdash;Elementary education to be free, secular, industrial,
+and compulsory for all classes. The age of obligatory school
+attendance to be raised to 16.</p>
+
+<p>Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher education,
+both general and technical, and all such education to be free.</p>
+
+<p>State Maintenance for all attending State schools.</p>
+
+<p>Abolition of school rates; the cost of education in all State schools
+to be borne by the National Exchequer.</p>
+
+<p><i>Public Monopolies and Services.</i>&mdash;Nationalisation of the land and the
+organisation of labour in agriculture and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_483" id="Page_483">[483]</a></span>industry under public
+ownership and control on co-operative principles.</p>
+
+<p>Nationalisation of the Trusts.</p>
+
+<p>Nationalisation of Railways, Docks, and Canals, and all great means of
+transit.</p>
+
+<p>Public ownership and control of Gas, Electric Light, and Water
+supplies, as well as of Tramway, Omnibus, and other locomotive
+services.</p>
+
+<p>Public ownership and control of the food and coal supply.</p>
+
+<p>The establishment of State and municipal banks and pawnshops and
+public restaurants.</p>
+
+<p>Public ownership and control of the lifeboat service.</p>
+
+<p>Public ownership and control of hospitals, dispensaries, cemeteries,
+and crematoria.</p>
+
+<p>Public ownership and control of the drink traffic.</p>
+
+<p><i>Labour.</i>&mdash;A legislative eight-hour working day, or 48 hours per week,
+to be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to be
+inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law.</p>
+
+<p>Absolute freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee
+against any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or
+infringe it.</p>
+
+<p>No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until 16 years of
+age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law.</p>
+
+<p>Public provision of useful work at not less than trade union rates of
+wages for the unemployed.</p>
+
+<p>Free State Insurance against sickness and accident, and free and
+adequate State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers.
+Public assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights.</p>
+
+<p>The legislative enactment of a minimum wage of 30<i>s.</i> for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work.</p>
+
+<p><i>Social.</i>&mdash;Abolition of the present workhouse system, and reformed
+administration of the Poor Law on a basis of national co-operation.</p>
+
+<p>Compulsory construction by public bodies of healthy dwellings for the
+people; such dwellings to be let at rents to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_484" id="Page_484">[484]</a></span>cover the cost of
+construction and maintenance alone, and not to cover the cost of the
+land.</p>
+
+<p>The administration of justice and legal advice to be free to all;
+justice to be administered by judges chosen by the people; appeal in
+criminal cases; compensation for those innocently accused, condemned,
+and imprisoned; abolition of imprisonment for contempt of court in
+relation to non-payment of debt in the case of workers earning less
+than 2<i>l.</i> per week; abolition of capital punishment.</p>
+
+<p><i>Miscellaneous.</i>&mdash;The disestablishment and disendowment of all State
+Churches.</p>
+
+<p>The abolition of standing armies, and the establishment of national
+citizen forces. The people to decide on peace and war.</p>
+
+<p>The establishment of international courts of arbitration.</p>
+
+<p>The abolition of courts-martial; all offences against discipline to be
+transferred to the jurisdiction of civil courts.</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4>INDEPENDENT LABOUR PARTY</h4>
+
+<p class="cen"><i>Constitution and Rules. 1907-8</i></p>
+
+<p><i>Object.</i>&mdash;An Industrial Commonwealth founded upon the Socialisation
+of Land and Capital.</p>
+
+<p><i>Methods.</i>&mdash;The education of the community in the principles of
+Socialism.</p>
+
+<p>The Industrial and Political Organisation of the Workers.</p>
+
+<p>The Independent Representation of Socialist Principles on all elective
+bodies.</p>
+
+<p><i>Programme.</i>&mdash;The true object of industry being the production of the
+requirements of life, the responsibility should rest with the
+community collectively, therefore:</p>
+
+<p>The land, being the storehouse of all the necessaries of life, should
+be declared and treated as public property.</p>
+
+<p>The capital necessary for industrial operations should be owned and
+used collectively.</p>
+
+<p>Work, and wealth resulting therefrom, should be equitably distributed
+over the population.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_485" id="Page_485">[485]</a></span>As a means to this end, we demand the enactment of the following
+measures:</p>
+
+<p>1. A maximum of 48 hours working week, with the retention of all
+existing holidays, and Labour Day, May 1, secured by law.</p>
+
+<p>2. The provision of work to all capable adult applicants at recognised
+trade union rates, with a statutory minimum of sixpence per hour.</p>
+
+<p>In order to remuneratively employ the applicants, Parish, District,
+Borough, and County Councils to be invested with powers to:</p>
+
+<div class="block2"><p class="hang">(<i>a</i>) Organise and undertake such industries as they may
+consider desirable.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">(<i>b</i>) Compulsorily acquire land; purchase, erect, or
+manufacture buildings, stock, or other articles for
+carrying on such industries.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">(<i>c</i>) Levy rates on the rental values of the district, and
+borrow money on the security of such rates for any of the
+above purposes.</p></div>
+
+<p>3. State pensions for every person over 50 years of age, and adequate
+provision for all widows, orphans, sick, and disabled workers.</p>
+
+<p>4. Free secular, moral, primary, secondary, and university education,
+with free maintenance while at school or university.</p>
+
+<p>5. The raising of the age of child labour, with a view to its ultimate
+extinction.</p>
+
+<p>6. Municipalisation and public control of the drink traffic.</p>
+
+<p>7. Municipalisation and public control of all Hospitals and
+Infirmaries.</p>
+
+<p>8. Abolition of indirect taxation and the gradual transference of all
+public burdens on to unearned incomes with a view to their ultimate
+extinction.</p>
+
+<p>The Independent Labour Party is in favour of adult suffrage, with full
+political rights and privileges for women, and the immediate extension
+of the franchise to women on the same terms as granted to men; also
+triennial Parliaments and second ballot.</p>
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_486" id="Page_486">[486]</a></span><br />
+
+<h4>THE LABOUR PARTY</h4>
+
+<p class="noin">has no official programme. A semi-official programme, contained in a
+statement of its Secretary, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., will be found
+on page 425 of this book.</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4>THE FABIAN SOCIETY</h4>
+
+<p><i>Basis.</i>&mdash;The Fabian Society consists of Socialists.</p>
+
+<p>It therefore aims at the reorganisation of Society by the emancipation
+of Land and Industrial Capital from individual and class ownership,
+and the vesting of them in the community for the general benefit. In
+this way only can the natural and acquired advantages of the country
+be equitably shared by the whole people.</p>
+
+<p>The Society accordingly works for the extinction of private property
+in Land and of the consequent individual appropriation, in the form of
+Rent, of the price paid for permission to use the earth, as well as
+for the advantages of superior soils and sites.</p>
+
+<p>The Society, further, works for the transfer to the community of the
+administration of such industrial Capital as can conveniently be
+managed socially. For, owing to the monopoly of the means of
+production in the past, industrial inventions and the transformation
+of surplus income into Capital have mainly enriched the proprietary
+class, the worker being now dependent on that class for leave to earn
+a living.</p>
+
+<p>If these measures be carried out, without compensation (though not
+without such relief to expropriated individuals as may seem fit to the
+community), Rent and Interest will be added to the reward of labour,
+the idle class now living on the labour of others will necessarily
+disappear, and practical equality of opportunity will be maintained by
+the spontaneous action of economic forces with much less interference
+with personal liberty than the present system entails.</p>
+
+<p>For the attainment of these ends the Fabian Society looks to the
+spread of Socialist opinions, and the social and political <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_487" id="Page_487">[487]</a></span>changes
+consequent thereon, including the establishment of equal citizenship
+for men and women. It seeks to achieve these ends by the general
+dissemination of knowledge as to the relation between the individual
+and Society in its economic, ethical, and political aspects.</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4>THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF GREAT BRITAIN</h4>
+
+<p><i>Object.</i>&mdash;The establishment of a system of society based upon the
+common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments
+for producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of the
+whole community.</p>
+
+<p class="cen sc">Declaration of Principles</p>
+
+<p>The Socialist Party of Great Britain holds that society as at present
+constituted is based upon the ownership of the means of living (<i>i.e.</i>
+land, factories, railways, &amp;c.) by the capitalist or master class, and
+the consequent enslavement of the working class, by whose labour alone
+wealth is produced.</p>
+
+<p>That in society, therefore, there is an antagonism of interests,
+manifesting itself as a class struggle, between those who possess but
+do not produce, and those who produce but do not possess.</p>
+
+<p>That this antagonism can be abolished only by the emancipation of the
+working class from the domination of the master class, by the
+conversion into the common property of society of the means of
+production and distribution, and their democratic control by the whole
+people.</p>
+
+<p>That as in the order of social evolution the working class is the last
+class to achieve its freedom, the emancipation of the working class
+will involve the emancipation of all mankind, without distinction of
+race or sex.</p>
+
+<p>That this emancipation must be the work of the working class itself.</p>
+
+<p>That as the machinery of government, including the armed forces of the
+nation, exists only to conserve the monopoly by <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_488" id="Page_488">[488]</a></span>the capitalist class
+of the wealth taken from the workers, the working class must organise
+consciously and politically for the conquest of the powers of
+government, national and local, in order that this machinery,
+including these forces, may be converted from an instrument of
+oppression into the agent of emancipation, and the overthrow of
+privilege, aristocratic and plutocratic.</p>
+
+<p>That as all political parties are but the expression of class
+interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically
+opposed to the interests of all sections of the master class, the
+party seeking working-class emancipation must be hostile to every
+other party.</p>
+
+<p>The Socialist Party of Great Britain, therefore, enters the field of
+political action determined to wage war against all other political
+parties, whether alleged labour or avowedly capitalist, and calls upon
+the members of the working class of this country to muster under its
+banner to the end that a speedy termination may be wrought to the
+system which deprives them of the fruits of their labour, and that
+poverty may give place to comfort, privilege to equality, and slavery
+to freedom.</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4>PLATFORM OF THE SOCIALIST LABOUR PARTY</h4>
+
+<p>The Socialist Labour Party is a political organisation seeking to
+establish political and social freedom for all, and seeing in the
+conquest by the Socialist Working Class of all the governmental and
+administrative powers of the nation the means to the attainment of
+that end.</p>
+
+<p>It affirms its belief that political and social freedom are not two
+separate and unrelated ideas, but are two sides of the one great
+principle, each being incomplete without the other.</p>
+
+<p>The course of society politically has been from warring but democratic
+tribes within each nation to a united government under an absolutely
+undemocratic monarchy. Within this monarchy again developed revolts
+against its power, revolts at first seeking to limit its prerogatives
+only, then demanding the inclusion of certain classes in the
+governing <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_489" id="Page_489">[489]</a></span>power, then demanding the right of the subject to criticise
+and control the power of the monarch, and finally, in the most
+advanced countries this movement culminated in the total abolition of
+the monarchical institution, and the transformation of the subject
+into the citizen.</p>
+
+<p>In industry a corresponding development has taken place. The
+independent producer, owning his own tools and knowing no master, has
+given way before the more effective productive powers of huge capital,
+concentrated in the hands of the great capitalist. The latter,
+recognising no rights in his workers, ruled as an absolute monarch in
+his factory. But within the realm of capital developed a revolt
+against the power of the capitalist. This revolt, taking the form of
+trade unionism, has pursued in the industrial field the same line of
+development as the movement for political freedom has pursued in the
+sphere of national government. It first contented itself with protests
+against excessive exactions, against all undue stretchings of the
+power of the capitalist; then its efforts broadened out to demands for
+restrictions upon the absolute character of such power, <i>i.e.</i>, by
+claiming for trade unions the right to make rules for the workers in
+the workshop; then it sought to still further curb the capitalist's
+power by shortening the working day, and so limiting the period during
+which the toiler may be exploited. Finally, it seeks by Boards of
+Arbitration to establish an equivalent in the industrial world for
+that compromise in the political world by which, in constitutional
+countries, the monarch retains his position by granting a parliament
+to divide with him the duties of governing, and so hides while
+securing his power. And as in the political history of the race the
+logical development of progress was found in the abolition of the
+institution of monarchy, and not in its mere restriction, so in
+industrial history the culminating point to which all efforts must at
+last converge lies in the abolition of the capitalist class, and not
+in the mere restriction of its powers.</p>
+
+<p>The Socialist Labour Party, recognising these two phases of human
+development, unites them in its programme, and seeks to give them a
+concrete embodiment by its demand for a Socialist Republic.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_490" id="Page_490">[490]</a></span>It recognises in all past history a preparation for this achievement,
+and in the industrial tendencies of to-day it hails the workings out
+of those laws of human progress which bring that object within our
+reach.</p>
+
+<p>The concentration of capital in the form of trusts at the same time as
+it simplifies the task we propose that society shall undertake, viz.
+the dispossession of the capitalist class, and the administration of
+all land and instruments of industry as social property, of which all
+shah be co-heirs and owners.</p>
+
+<p>As to-day the organised power of the State theoretically guarantees to
+every individual his political rights, so in the Socialist Republic
+the power and productive forces of organised society will stand
+between every individual and want, guaranteeing that right to life
+without which all other rights are but mockery.</p>
+
+<p>Short of the complete dispossession of the capitalist class which this
+implies there is no hope for the workers.</p>
+
+<p class="cen">SPEED THE DAY.</p>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<h4>THE CHRISTIAN SOCIAL UNION</h4>
+
+<p>The Union consists of members of the Church of England who have the
+following objects at heart:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>1. To claim for the Christian law the ultimate authority to rule
+social practice.</p>
+
+<p>2. To study in common how to apply the moral truths and principles of
+Christianity to the social and economic difficulties of the present
+time.</p>
+
+<p>3. To present Christ in practical life as the living Master and King,
+the enemy of wrong and selfishness, the power of righteousness and
+love.</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4>THE CHURCH SOCIALIST LEAGUE</h4>
+
+<p><i>Principles.</i>&mdash;The Church has a mission to the whole of human life,
+Social and Individual, Material and Spiritual.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_491" id="Page_491">[491]</a></span>2. The Church can best fulfil its social mission by acting together in
+its corporate capacity.</p>
+
+<p>3. To this end the members of the League accept the principles of
+Socialism.</p>
+
+<p><i>Object.</i>&mdash;To secure the corporate action of the Church on these
+principles.</p>
+
+<p><i>Method.</i>&mdash;1. To cultivate by the regular use of prayer and sacraments
+the life of brotherhood.</p>
+
+<p>2. Members undertake to help each other in fulfilling the object of
+the League by speaking and lecturing and in other ways.</p>
+
+<p>3. Members shall co-operate as far as possible to secure the
+consideration of social questions at their various Ruridecanal and
+Diocesan Conferences and the election of Socialists on these and other
+representative bodies.</p>
+
+<p>4. Members shall work for the disestablishment of the patron and the
+substitution of the Church in each parish in conjunction with the
+Church in the diocese in the patron's place.</p>
+
+<p>5. To secure the representation of the wage-earning classes upon all
+the representative bodies of the Church.</p>
+
+<br />
+
+<h4>GUILD OF ST. MATTHEW</h4>
+
+<p><i>Objects.</i>&mdash;1. To get rid, by every possible means, of the existing
+prejudices, especially on the part of "Secularists," against the
+Church, her sacraments and her doctrines: and to endeavour to "justify
+God to the people."</p>
+
+<p>2. To promote frequent and reverent worship in the Holy Communion, and
+a better observance of the teaching of the Church of England as set
+forth in the Book of Common Prayer.</p>
+
+<p>3. To promote the study of social and political questions in the light
+of the Incarnation.</p>
+
+<br />
+<hr style="width: 15%;" />
+<br />
+
+<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p class="noin"><a name="Footnote_1287_1287" id="Footnote_1287_1287"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1287_1287"><span class="label">[1287]</span></a> This paragraph is not to be understood as debarring
+individual members of the possessing classes from participating in the
+work of the movement.</p></div>
+
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_492" id="Page_492">[492]</a></span>
+<a name="BIBLIOGRAPHY" id="BIBLIOGRAPHY"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_493" id="Page_493">[493]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>BIBLIOGRAPHY<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>OF BOOKS, PAMPHLETS, PERIODICALS, REPORTS, AND PAPERS QUOTED IN THIS
+VOLUME</h4>
+<br />
+
+<div class="block2"><p class="hang"><i>Abolition of Poor Law Guardians.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Adams, Francis</span>: "<i>The Mass of Christ.</i>" Labour Press
+Society. Manchester.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Advance of Socialism.</i> (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>After Bread&mdash;Education.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Allotments, and How to Get Them.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1894.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>An Appeal to Soldiers.</i> (Leaflet.) Social Democratic Federation.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Are You a Socialist?</i> (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.
+1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Aveling, E.M.</span>: <i>The Working-class Movement in England.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bakounine</span>: <i>Dieu et l'&Eacute;tat.</i> Paris. 1895.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Ball, John, Priest and Prophet of the Peasants' Revolt.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ball, Sydney</span>: <i>The Moral Aspects of Socialism.</i> Fabian
+Society. London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Barker, J. Ellis</span>: <i>Modern Germany.</i> Smith, Elder &amp; Co.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Battersea Vanguard.</i> (Monthly Newspaper.) Battersea Socialist
+Council, Battersea. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bax, E. Belfort</span>: <i>Essays in Socialism.</i> Grant Richards.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bax, E. Belfort</span>: <i>Ethics of Socialism.</i> Swan Sonnenschein.
+London. 1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bax, E. Belfort</span>: <i>Outlooks from the New Standpoint.</i> Swan
+Sonnenschein. London. 1903.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bax, E. Belfort</span>: <i>The Religion of Socialism.</i> Swan
+Sonnenschein. London. 1902.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_494" id="Page_494">[494]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bax, E. Belfort</span>: <i>A Short History of the Paris Commune.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bax, E. Belfort</span>, and <span class="sc">H. Quelch</span>: <i>New Catechism of
+Socialism.</i> Twentieth Century Press. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bebel, August</span>: <i>Woman in the Past, Present, and Future.</i>
+William Reeves. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Benson, T.D.</span>: <i>Socialism.</i> Independent Labour Party.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Benson, T.D.</span>: <i>Socialism and Service.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Benson, T.D.</span>: <i>Woman, the Communist.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>A Bill to Provide Work through Public Authorities for Unemployed
+Persons.</i> Independent Labour Party. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Birmingham Housing Committee, Report.</i> Jones Ltd. Birmingham. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>Britain for the British.</i> Clarion Press.
+London. 1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>Clarion Ballads.</i> Clarion Newspaper Co.
+London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>"Competition": a Plain Lesson for the
+Workers.</i> Clarion Press. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>God and My Neighbour.</i> Clarion Press.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>Land Nationalisation.</i> Clarion Press.
+London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>Merrie England.</i> Clarion Office. London.
+1894.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>Not Guilty: a Defence of the Bottom Dog.</i>
+Clarion Press. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>The Pope's Socialism.</i> Clarion Office.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>Real Socialism: What it Is, and what it is
+Not.</i> Clarion Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>Socialism: a Reply to the Encyclical of
+the Pope.</i> Clarion Office. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>Some Tory Socialisms.</i> Clarion Newspaper.
+London. 1895.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Blatchford, R.</span>: <i>What is this Socialism.</i> London Clarion
+Scouts. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Bliss</span>: <i>Encyclopedia of Social Reform.</i> Funk &amp; Wagnalls
+Company. New York. 1897.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Block</span>: <i>Dictionnaire G&eacute;n&eacute;ral de la Politique.</i> O. Lorenz.
+Paris. 1863.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Brockhaus</span>: <i>Konversations-Lexikon.</i> Brockhaus. Berlin.
+1901-1903.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_495" id="Page_495">[495]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Brassworkers, The, of Berlin and of Birmingham.</i> King &amp; Son.
+London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Burns, John</span>: <i>Labour and Drink.</i> Lees and Raper Memorial
+Trustees. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Burns, John, and the Unemployed.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Burns, John</span>: <i>The Man with the Red Flag.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Capital and Land.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Case for an Eight Hours Bill.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1891.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Case for a Legal Minimum Wage.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">"<span class="sc">Casey</span>": <i>Who are the Bloodsuckers?</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Christliche Arbeiterpflichten.</i> Buchhandlung Vorw&auml;rts. Berlin.
+1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Church and Socialism.</i> The Church Family Newspaper. London.
+1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Clarion</i>. (Weekly Paper.) Clarion Newspaper Co. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Clarion Song Book.</i> Clarion Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Class War.</i> (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Clerk.</i> (Monthly Paper.) Speaight &amp; Sons. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Clifford</span>, Rev. <span class="sc">John</span>: <i>Socialism and the Teaching
+of Christ.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1897 and 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Commercialism and Child Labour: an Indictment and Some Remedies.</i>
+Independent Labour Party. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Connell, John</span>: <i>Socialism and the Survival of the Fittest.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Cottage Plans and Common Sense.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Cox, Harold</span>: <i>Socialism in the House of Commons.</i> Longmans,
+Green &amp; Co. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Daily Mail Year Book.</i> Associated Newspapers, Ltd. London. 1908.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J. Morrison</span>: <i>Book of Lords.</i> Henderson's.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J. Morrison</span>: <i>Christ, State, and Commune.</i> C.W.
+Daniel. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J.M.</span>: <i>The Democrat's Address.</i> William Reeves.
+London. 1892.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J.M.</span>: <i>Free Rails and Trams.</i> William Reeves.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J.M.</span>: <i>Free Trade versus Fettered Transport.</i>
+Francis Riddell Henderson, London. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J.M.</span>: <i>Gospel of the Poor.</i> 4th edit. Francis
+Riddell Henderson. London.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_496" id="Page_496">[496]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J.M.</span>: <i>New Book of Kings.</i> Francis Riddell
+Henderson. London. 1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J.M.</span>: <i>The Old Order and the New.</i> 7th edit.
+Francis Riddell Henderson. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Davidson, J.M.</span>: <i>Useless, Dangerous, Ought to be
+Abolished.</i> William Reeves. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Daw, George W.</span>, M.N.S.: <i>Socialism, Unmasked.</i>
+Anti-Socialist Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">"<i>The Deadly Parallel.</i>" (Monthly Paper.) Henderson. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Dearmer</span>, Rev. <span class="sc">Percy</span>: <i>Socialism and Christianity.</i>
+Fabian Society. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Debate, April 17, 1884</i>: <i>Will Socialism Benefit the English
+People?</i> Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Debs, E.V.</span>: <i>Industrial Unionism.</i> Socialist Labour Press.
+Edinburgh. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">De Leon, Daniel</span>: <i>Reform or Revolution.</i> Socialist Labour
+Press. Edinburgh. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Deputation of Unemployed to the Right Hon. A.J. Balfour on November
+6, 1905.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Diack, W.</span>: <i>Socialism and Current Politics.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Dodd, F. Lawson</span>: <i>Municipal Milk and Public Health.</i> Fabian
+Society. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Economics of Direct Employment.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1900
+and 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Eight Hours by Law.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1893 and 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Eltzbacher, Paul</span>: <i>Der Anarchismus.</i> Guttentag. Berlin.
+1899.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Engels, Frederick</span>: <i>Socialism Utopian and Scientific.</i> Swan
+Sonnenschein. London. 1892.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>English Progress towards Social Democracy.</i> Fabian Society. London.
+1892 and 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Fabian Election Manifesto, 1892.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1892.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Fabian Essays in Socialism.</i> Walter Scott. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Fabian Society, Twenty-fourth Annual Report.</i> Fabian Society.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Fabianism and the Fiscal Question: an Alternative Policy.</i> Fabian
+Society. London. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Facts for Socialists.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Fisher, F. Victor</span>: "<i>The Babies' Tribute.</i>" Twentieth
+Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ford</span>, Miss I.O.: <i>Women and Socialism.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_497" id="Page_497">[497]</a></span>"<i>Forward.</i>" (Weekly Newspaper.) Glasgow.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>"Freedom": a Journal of Anarchist Communism.</i> (Monthly Newspaper.)
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Free Feeding of School Children.</i> Reprinted from "The Lancet."
+Offices of "The Lancet." London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Gainsborough Commission: Report on Life and Labour in Germany.</i>
+Simpkin, Marshall. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Glasier, Katherine Bruce</span>: <i>Socialism for Children.</i>
+Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Glasier, Lizzie</span>, and <span class="sc">Russell, Alfred</span>: <i>Socialist
+Sunday Schools and Our Methods</i>. Civic Press. Glasgow. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Glyde</span>, Councillor: <i>Britain's Disgrace</i>. Wadsworth &amp; Co.,
+Rydal Press. Keighley.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Glyde</span>, Councillor: <i>Liberal and Tory Hypocrisy</i>. Wadsworth
+&amp; Co., Rydal Press. Keighley.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Glyde</span>, Councillor: <i>The Misfortune of being a Working Man</i>.
+Wadsworth &amp; Co., Rydal Press. Keighley.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Glyde</span>, Councillor: <i>A Peep behind the Scenes on a Board of
+Guardians</i>. Wadsworth &amp; Co., Rydal Press. Keighley.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Griffin, T.H.</span>: <i>A Municipal Bread Supply</i>. Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Gronlund, Laurence</span>: <i>The Co-operative Commonwealth</i>. Edited
+by George Bernard Shaw. William Reeves. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Guyot, Yves</span>: <i>La Banqueroute du Socialisme Scientifique</i>.
+F&eacute;lix Alcan. Paris. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Guyot, Yves</span>: <i>Les Principes du Collectivisme</i>. Bureau de
+l'Acacia. Paris. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Guyot, Yves</span>: <i>Pretensions of Socialism</i>. Liberty and
+Property Defence League. London. 1895.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hall, Leonard</span>: <i>Land, Labour, and Liberty</i>. Clarion
+Newspaper Co. London. 1899.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hall, Leonard</span>: <i>Old and New Unionism</i>. Labour Press
+Society. Manchester. 1894.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Handbuch f&uuml;r Sozialdemokratische W&auml;hler</i>. Buchhandlung Vorw&auml;rts.
+Berlin. 1903.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hardie, Keir</span>: <i>Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?</i>
+Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hardie, Keir</span>: <i>The Citizenship of Women: a Plea for Women's
+Suffrage</i>. Independent Labour Party. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hardie, Keir</span>: <i>From Serfdom to Socialism</i>. George Allen.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hardie, Keir</span>: <i>John Bull and His Unemployed</i>. Independent
+Labour Party. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hare, W.L.</span>: <i>Famine in India: its Causes and Effects.</i> P.S.
+King &amp; Son. London.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_498" id="Page_498">[498]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hazell, A.P.</span>: <i>The Red Catechism for Socialist Children.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hazell, A.P.</span>: <i>A Summary of Marx's "Capital."</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Headlam, Stewart D.</span>: <i>Christian Socialism.</i> Fabian Society.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Headlam, Stewart D.</span>: <i>The Socialist's Church.</i> George
+Allen. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hird, Dennis</span>: <i>From Brute to Brother.</i> Clarion Press.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hobart, H.W.</span>: <i>Social-Democracy.</i> Twentieth Century Press.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Horsfall, T.C.</span>: <i>The Improvement of the Dwellings and
+Surroundings of the People.</i> University Press. Manchester. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Houses for the People.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>How to Finance Municipal Enterprises.</i> Co-operative Brotherhood
+Trust, Limited. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>How to Lose and How to Win an Election.</i> (Fabian Tract.) Fabian
+Society. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>How Trade Unions Benefit Workmen.</i> Fabian Society. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyder, Joseph</span>: <i>The Case for Land Nationalisation.</i> Land
+Nationalisation Society. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: <i>Colonies and Dependencies.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: <i>Darkness and Dawn of May Day.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: <i>The Historical Basis of Socialism in
+England.</i> Paul. London. 1883.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: "<i>Real Reform.</i>" Nuttall &amp; Co. Burnley.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: <i>Social Democracy: The Basis of its
+Principles and the Causes of its Success.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: <i>Socialism and Slavery.</i> William Reeves.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: <i>The Transvaal War and the Degradation of
+England.</i> London. 1899.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: <i>Unrest in India.</i> Twentieth Century Press.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Hyndman, H.M.</span>: <i>Will Socialism Benefit the English People?</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_499" id="Page_499">[499]</a></span><i>Imperialism: its Meaning and its Tendency.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Independent Labour Party Report.</i> Independent Labour Party. London.
+May 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Independent Labour Party Song Book.</i> Independent Labour Party.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Independent Labour Party: a Statement of Principles.</i> (Leaflet.)
+Independent Labour Party. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Independent Labour Party Year Book.</i> Independent Labour Party.
+London. 1908.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Irving, Dan</span>: <i>The Municipality, from a Worker's Point of
+View.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Jackson, Holbrook</span>: <i>Bernard Shaw.</i> Grant Richards. London.
+1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Jameson, William</span>: <i>Land Lessons for Town Folk.</i> Clarion
+Newspaper Co. London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Jaur&egrave;s, Jean</span>: <i>Practical Socialism.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Jaur&egrave;s, Jean</span>: <i>Studies in Socialism.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Johnston, Thos.</span>, and <span class="sc">Hugh Adam</span>: <i>The Railway
+Difficulty, and How to Solve it.</i> Forward Printing and Publishing
+Co., Limited. Glasgow.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Jones, T.I.</span>: <i>Mining Royalties and all about Them.</i>
+Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Jowett, F.W.</span>: <i>The Socialist and the City.</i> George Allen.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Joynes, J.L.</span>: <i>The Socialist Catechism.</i> W. Reeves. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Justice.</i> (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Social-Democratic
+Federation. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kautsky, Karl</span>: <i>The Class Struggle.</i> Socialist Labour
+Press. Edinburgh. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kautsky, Karl</span>: <i>The Socialist Republic.</i> Socialist Labour
+Press. Edinburgh. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kautsky, Karl</span>: <i>The Social Revolution, and on the Morrow of
+the Social Revolution.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kessack, J.O. Connor</span>: <i>The Capitalist Wilderness and the
+Way Out.</i> Glasgow Clarion Scouts. Glasgow. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kirtlan</span>, Rev. E.J.B.: <i>Socialism for Christians.</i>
+Northampton Pioneer and Publishing Co. Northampton. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kropotkin, Peter</span>: <i>Anarchism: its Philosophy and Ideal.</i>
+T.H. Keell. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kropotkin, Peter</span>: <i>La Conqu&eacute;te du Pain.</i> Paris. 1895.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_500" id="Page_500">[500]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kropotkin, Peter</span>: <i>Paroles d'un R&eacute;volt&eacute;.</i> Paris.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Kropotkin, Peter</span>: <i>Wage System.</i> T.H. Keell. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Labour Church Hymn Book.</i> Labour Church Union. Bradford. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Labour Gazette.</i> (Official Monthly.) Board of Trade. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Labour Leader.</i> (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Independent</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Labour Party.</i> Labour Leader, Limited. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>A Labour Policy for the Public Authorities.</i> Fabian Society.
+London. 1899.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Lafargue, Paul</span>: <i>Right to Leisure.</i> Labour Literature
+Society. Glasgow. 1893.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Lansbury, George</span>: <i>The Principles of the English Poor Law.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London. 1897.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">L'Auton, J.T.</span>: <i>The Nationalisation of Society.</i> Modern
+Press. London. 1887.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Leakey, James</span>: <i>Co-operators and the Labour Platform.</i>
+Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Leatham, James</span>: <i>The Class War.</i> Twentieth Century Press.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Leatham, James</span>: <i>Commune of Paris: its Story and Meaning.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Leatham, James</span>: <i>The Evolution of the Fourth Estate.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Leatham, James</span>: <i>Lives of the Chicago Martyrs.</i> Leatham.
+Aberdeen. 1891.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Leatham, James</span>: <i>Socialism and Character.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1897.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Leatham, James</span>: <i>An Up-to-date View of the French
+Revolution.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Leatham, James</span>: <i>Was Jesus a Socialist?</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Lee, H.W.</span>: <i>First of May: The International Labour Day.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Lister</span>, The Hon. C.A.: <i>Riches and Poverty.</i> Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Local Government in Ireland.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Lodge</span>, Sir <span class="sc">Oliver</span>: <i>Competition versus
+Co-operation.</i> Liverpool Fabian Society. Liverpool. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Lodge</span>, Sir <span class="sc">Oliver</span>: <i>Public Service versus Private
+Expenditure.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">McClure, W.S.</span>: <i>Socialism.</i> Socialist Labour Press.
+Edinburgh. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">McCulloch</span>: <i>British Empire.</i> Longman, Brown. London. 1846.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_501" id="Page_501">[501]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">McCulloch</span>: <i>Dictionary of Commerce.</i> Longman, Brown.
+London. 1847.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">MacDonald, J.R.</span>: <i>Labour and the Empire.</i> George Allen.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">MacDonald, J.R.</span>: <i>The New Unemployed Bill of the Labour
+Party.</i> Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">MacDonald, J.R.</span>: <i>Socialism.</i> T.C. &amp; E.C. Jack. London.
+1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">MacDonald, J.R.</span>: <i>Socialism and Society.</i> Independent
+Labour Party. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Macgregor, John</span>: <i>Commercial Statistics.</i> Charles Knight.
+London. 1844-1850.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">McLachlan, J.M.</span>: <i>The Tyranny of Usury.</i> McLachlan.
+Manchester.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">McMillan, Margaret</span>: <i>The Child and the State.</i> Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">McMillan, Margaret</span>: <i>Child Labour and the Half-time
+System.</i> Clarion Newspaper. London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain.</i> Socialist Party
+of Great Britain. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Mann, Tom</span>: <i>The International Labour Movement.</i> Clarion
+Office. London. 1697.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Marr</span>: <i>Housing Conditions in Manchester and Salford.</i>
+Sherratt &amp; Hughes. Manchester. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Martyn, Caroline E.D.</span>: <i>Co-operation.</i> Labour Press
+Society. Manchester.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Marx, Karl</span>: <i>Capital.</i> Swan Sonnenschein. London. 1888.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Marx, Karl</span>: <i>A Discourse on Free Trade.</i> W. Reeves. London.
+1889.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Marx, Karl</span>: <i>Wage-labour and Capital.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Marx, Karl</span>, and <span class="sc">Engels, F.</span>: <i>Manifesto of the
+Communist Party.</i> W. Reeves. London. 1888.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Menger, Anton</span>: <i>L'&Eacute;tat Socialiste.</i> Soci&eacute;t&eacute; Nouvelle de
+Librairie. Paris. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Mill, J. Stuart</span>: <i>Political Economy.</i> Routledge. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Millar, F.</span>: <i>Socialism, its Fallacies and Dangers.</i> Watts &amp;
+Co. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Minority Report of the Royal Commission on Labour, 1891-1894.</i>
+Labour Press Society. Manchester. 1894.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Morris, William</span>: <i>Art, Labour, and Socialism.</i> Socialist
+Party of Great Britain. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Morris, William</span>: <i>Communism.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1903
+and 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Morris, William</span>: <i>A Factory as it Might Be.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1907.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_502" id="Page_502">[502]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Morris, William</span>: <i>Monopoly: or How Labour is Robbed.</i> W.
+Reeves. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Morris, William</span>: <i>Useful Work versus Useless Toil.</i> W.
+Reeves. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Morris</span> and <span class="sc">Bax</span>: <i>Socialism, its Growth and
+Outcome.</i> Swan Sonnenschein. London. 1897.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Mosely Industrial Commission Reports.</i> Cassell &amp; Co. London. 1903.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipal Bakeries.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipal Bread Supply.</i> Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipal Drink Traffic.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipal Fire Insurance.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipal Slaughter-houses.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1899.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipal Socialism: a Series of Articles.</i> "The Times." London.
+1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipal Steamboats.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipalisation by Provinces.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Municipalisation of the Gas Supply.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Muse, C.E.</span>: <i>Poverty and Drunkenness.</i> Clarion Office.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Nation in Arms.</i> (Monthly Paper.) National Service League. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>National Union Gleanings.</i> (Monthly.) Simpkin, Marshall. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Neil</span>: <i>Songs of the Social Revolution.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Neue Gesellschaft, Die.</i> (Monthly Magazine.) Verlag der Neuen
+Gesellschaft. Berlin.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>New Age.</i> (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Fabian Society. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Newman, George</span>, M.D.: <i>The Health of the State.</i> Headley
+Brothers. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Nordhoff</span>: <i>Communistic Societies of the United States.</i>
+John Murray. London. 1875.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Norman, C.H.</span>: <i>Empire and Murder.</i> Twentieth Century Press.
+London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Norman, C.H.</span>: <i>Our Factory Workers.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Nouvelle Biographie G&eacute;n&eacute;rale.</i> Paris. 1853-1865.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Noyes, J.</span>: <i>History of American Socialism.</i> Philadelphia.
+1870.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Oakeshott, J.F.</span>: <i>Humanising of the Poor Law.</i> Fabian
+Society. London. 1894.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_503" id="Page_503">[503]</a></span><i>Overcrowding in London.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Palgrave</span>: <i>Dictionary of Political Economy.</i> Macmillan.
+London. 1891-1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Parish Council Cottages, and How to get them.</i> Fabian Society.
+London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Parish and District Councils: What they are and What they can do.</i>
+Fabian Society. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Pearson, Karl</span>: <i>The Ethic of Free Thought.</i> A. &amp; C. Black.
+London. 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Pearson, Karl</span>: <i>Socialism and Sex.</i></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Pedder, D.C.</span>: <i>The Secret of Rural Depopulation.</i> Fabian
+Society London. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Penny, John</span>: <i>The Political Labour Movement.</i> Clarion
+Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Platform, Constitution, Rules, and Standing Orders of the Socialist
+Labour Party of Great Britain.</i> Glasgow.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Plechanoff, George</span>: <i>Anarchism and Socialism.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Poems for Socialists.</i> James Leatham. Aberdeen. 1891.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Porter, G.R.</span>: <i>Progress of the Nation.</i> Murray. London.
+1847.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Programme and Rules, Social-Democratic Federation.</i>
+Social-Democratic Federation. London, 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Protect the Home.</i> (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Proudhon</span>: <i>What is Property?</i> William Reeves. London. 1899.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Public Control of Electric Power and Transit.</i> Fabian Society.
+London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Quelch, H.</span>: <i>Economics of Labour.</i> Twentieth Century Press.
+London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Quelch, H.</span>: <i>Social Democracy and the Armed Nation.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Quelch, H.</span>: <i>The Social-Democratic Federation: its Objects,
+its Principles, and its Work.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.
+1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Quelch, H.</span>: <i>Trade Unionism, Co-operation, and Social
+Democracy.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Reformers' Year Book.</i> London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Reichs Arbeitsblatt.</i> (Monthly Paper.) Carl Heyman's Verlag.
+Berlin.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Reid, W.</span>: <i>Socialism and the Drink Traffic.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Report of 27th Annual Conference (1907) of the Social-Democratic
+Federation.</i> Social-Democratic Federation. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_504" id="Page_504">[504]</a></span><i>Report on Fabian Policy.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Revival of Agriculture.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Rich and Poor.</i> Independent Labour Party. Blackburn.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Richardson, J.</span>: <i>How it Can be Done; or, Constructive
+Socialism.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Ritual, A Socialist.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London. 1893.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Rogers, Thorold</span>: <i>Six Centuries of Work and Wages.</i> Swan
+Sonnenschein. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Roscher</span>: <i>Politik.</i> Cotta. Stuttgart. 1893.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Roscher</span>: <i>System der Volkswirtschaft.</i> Cotta. Stuttgart.
+1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Rothstein, Th.</span>: <i>Socialist Annual.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Rowntree, S.</span>: <i>Poverty.</i> Macmillan &amp; Co. London. 1903.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Rowntree</span> and <span class="sc">Sherwell</span>: <i>The Temperance Problem.</i>
+Hodder &amp; Stoughton. London. 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Sch&auml;ffle</span>: <i>The Impossibility of Social Democracy.</i> Swan
+Sonnenschein. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Sch&auml;ffle</span>: <i>The Quintessence of Socialism.</i> Swan
+Sonnenschein. 1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>S.D.F. Song-Book.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Shaw, Bernard</span>: <i>The Fabian Society and its Early History.</i>
+Fabian Society. London. 1892.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Shaw, Bernard</span>: <i>The Impossibilities of Anarchism.</i> Fabian
+Society. London. 1893.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Shaw, Bernard</span>: <i>Socialism for Millionaires.</i> Fabian
+Society. 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Short, A.W.</span>: <i>Municipal Milk Supply.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Should the Working Class Support the Liberal Party?</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Simkhowitsch</span>: <i>Die Feldgemeinschaft.</i> 1898.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>S.L.P. Bulletin.</i> (Periodical.) Socialist Labour Press. Edinburgh.
+1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Smart, H. Russell</span>: <i>The Right to Work.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Smart, H. Russell</span>: <i>Socialism and the Budget.</i> Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Snell, Harry</span>: <i>Secular Education the Only Way.</i> Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Snowden, Ethel</span>: <i>The Woman Socialist.</i> George Allen.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Snowden, Philip</span>: <i>The Christ that is to be.</i> Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Snowden, Philip</span>: <i>The Individual under Socialism.</i>
+Independent Labour Party. London.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_505" id="Page_505">[505]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Snowden, Philip</span>: <i>Old Age Pensions.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Snowden, Philip</span>: <i>A Straight Talk to Ratepayers.</i>
+Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Snowden, Philip</span>: <i>The Socialists' Budget.</i> George Allen.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Social Crusade.</i> (Periodical.) Bradford.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Social Democrat.</i> (Monthly Magazine.) Twentieth Century Press.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Social-Democratic Federation Annual Conference.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London. 1906 and 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Social-Democratic Federation Programme and Rules.</i>
+Social-Democratic Federation. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialism: a Cancerous Growth.</i> Coventry Clarion Fellowship.
+Coventry. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialism: For and Against.</i> Independent Labour Party. Stockport.
+1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialism and Labour Policy.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialism and the Single Tax: a Debate between Mr. W.C. Wright and
+H. Quelch.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialism and Trade Unionism: Wherein do they Differ?</i> Issued by
+Socialistic Group of the London Society of Compositors. Twentieth
+Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialism made Plain, and the Unemployed.</i> Twentieth Century Press.
+London. 1895.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialist, The.</i> (Monthly Paper.) Organ of the Socialist Labour
+Party. Edinburgh.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialist Annual, The.</i> Social-Democratic Federation. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialist Party of Great Britain: Manifesto and Declaration of
+Principles.</i> Socialist Party of Great Britain. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialist Ritual, A.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London. 1893.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Socialist Standard.</i> (Monthly Newspaper.) Organ of the Socialist
+Party of Great Britain. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Some Objections to Socialism Considered and Answered.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Some Socialistic Proposals: a Brief Analysis.</i> London Municipal
+Society. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Songs of the Social Revolution.</i> Twentieth Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Sorge, F.A.</span>: <i>Socialism and the Worker.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Sowerby, W.</span>: <i>The Agricultural Deadlock.</i> Clarion Newspaper
+Co. London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_506" id="Page_506">[506]</a></span><i>Sozialistische Monatshefte.</i> (Monthly Review.) Berlin.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Spencer, George</span>: <i>Nationalisation of the Land.</i> Henderson.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Spencer, Herbert</span>: <i>The Man versus The State.</i> Williams &amp;
+Norgate. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Squire, Jack C.</span>: <i>Socialism and Art.</i> Twentieth Century
+Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>State Maintenance of Children.</i> (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic
+Federation. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>State Railways for Ireland.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1899.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Steele, Henry</span>: <i>The Working Classes in France.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Stegmann</span> und <span class="sc">Hugo</span>: <i>Handbuch des Sozialismus.</i>
+Zurich. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Stirner</span>: <i>Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum.</i> Leipzig. 1845.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Suthers, R.B.</span>: <i>"Killed by High Rates"&mdash;Or Rent?</i> Clarion
+Press. London. 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Suthers, R.B.</span>: <i>Mind Your Own Business.</i> Clarion Press.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Suthers, R.B.</span>: <i>Municipal Debt and its Dangers.</i> Clarion
+Newspaper CO. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Suthers, R.B.</span>: <i>My Right to Work.</i> Clarion Press. London.
+1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Taylor, R.C.</span>: <i>Statistics of Coal.</i> John Chapman. London.
+1848.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Thompson, Alex. M.</span>: <i>Hail, Referendum</i>! Clarion Newspaper.
+London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Thompson, A.M.</span>: <i>Internationalism and Peace.</i> Clarion
+Press. London. 1903.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Thompson, A.M.</span>: <i>The Only Way to Democracy.</i> Clarion
+Newspaper Co. London. 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Thompson, A.M.</span>: <i>The Referendum, and Initiative in
+Practice.</i> Clarion Newspaper Co. London. 1899.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Thompson, A.M.</span>: <i>That Blessed Word "Liberty."</i> Clarion
+Newspaper Co. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Tillett, Ben</span>: <i>Trades Unionism and Socialism.</i> Clarion
+Newspaper. London. 1897.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">"<span class="sc">The Times</span>": <i>Municipal Socialism.</i> "The Times." London.
+1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>To the Man in the Street.</i> (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Twentieth Century Politics.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Unemployed.</i> (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Vandal, A.</span>: <i>Av&eacute;nement de Bonaparte.</i> Plon-Nourrit et Cie.
+Paris. 1903.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Vandervelde, Emil</span>: <i>Drink and Socialism.</i> Central
+Temperance Book Room. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Veritas</span>: <i>Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?</i> P. Lindley.
+Manchester.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Vorw&auml;rts.</span> (Daily Paper.) Berlin.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_507" id="Page_507">[507]</a></span></p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ward, W.</span>: <i>All Things in Common.</i> Exeter Publishing Co.
+London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ward, W.</span>: <i>Are All Men Brothers?</i> E. Dalton. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ward, W.</span>: <i>Ideal City.</i> Exeter Publishing Co. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ward, W.</span>: <i>Our Own Native Land.</i> Exeter Publishing Co.
+London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ward, W.</span>: <i>Prevention is Better than Cure.</i> E. Dalton.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ward, W.</span>: <i>Religion and Labour.</i> Exeter Publishing Co.
+London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Ward, W.</span>: <i>The War Drum Shall Throb No Longer.</i> Exeter
+Publishing Co. London. 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Washington, S.</span>: <i>A Corner in Flesh and Blood.</i> Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Washington, S.</span>: <i>Milk and Postage Stamps.</i> Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Washington, S.</span>: <i>A Nation of Slaves.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Washington, S.</span>: <i>Simple Division.</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Washington, S.</span>: <i>Whose Dog Art Thou?</i> Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Watts, J. Hunter</span>: <i>State Maintenance for Children.</i>
+Twentieth Century Press. London. 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers.</i> (Leaflet.) Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Webb, Beatrice</span> and <span class="sc">Sidney</span>: <i>Industrial Democracy.</i>
+Printed by the Authors. London. 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Webb, Sidney</span>: <i>Difficulties of Individualism.</i> Fabian
+Society. London. 1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Webb, S.</span>: <i>Labour in the Longest Reign</i>, 1837-1897. Fabian
+Society. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Webb, S.</span>: <i>The London Programme.</i> Swan Sonnenschein &amp; Co.
+London. 1892.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Webb, S.</span>: <i>Socialism: True and False.</i> Fabian Society.
+London 1894.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Wells, H.G.</span>: <i>Socialism and the Middle Classes, in
+"Fortnightly Review," November 1906.</i> London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Wells, H.G.</span>: <i>This Misery of Boots.</i> Fabian Society.
+London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Wemyss, Earl of</span>: <i>Socialist Spectre.</i> Watts &amp; Co. London.
+1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>What Socialism Is.</i> Fabian Society. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_508" id="Page_508">[508]</a></span><i>What Socialism Means.</i> (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>What Socialism Means for Women.</i> (Leaflet.) Independent Labour
+Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>What the Farm Labourer Wants.</i> Fabian Society. London. 1894.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>What Use is a Vote?</i> (Leaflet.) Social Democratic Federation.
+London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Wheatley, John</span>: "<i>How the Miners are Robbed.</i>" Reformers'
+Bookstall. Glasgow. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">White, J.D.</span>: <i>Island Economy.</i> F.R. Henderson. London.
+1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Whittaker, T.P.</span>: <i>Economic Aspect of the Drink Problem.</i>
+Lees and Raper Memorial Trustees. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Who are the Bloodsuckers?</i> Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Why Labour Men should be on Town Councils.</i> (Leaflet.) Independent
+Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Widdup, J.R.</span>: <i>What Political Economy Teaches.</i> Twentieth
+Century Press. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Wilde, Oscar</span>: <i>The Soul of Man under Socialism, in
+"Fortnightly Review" February 1891.</i> London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Williams, T.R.</span>: <i>The Difficulties of Socialism.</i>
+Independent Labour Party. London.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>Will Socialism Benefit the English People?</i> (Debate.) Twentieth
+Century Press. London. 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Wilson</span>, Rev. <span class="sc">J. Stitt</span>: <i>The Social Crusade.</i>
+(Periodical.) Bradford.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class="sc">Woodworth</span>: <i>Christian Socialism in England.</i> Swan
+Sonnenschein &amp; Co. London. 1903.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><i>The Workers' Burden.</i> (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="ANALYTICAL_INDEX" id="ANALYTICAL_INDEX"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_509" id="Page_509">[509]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>ANALYTICAL INDEX<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+<br />
+
+<div class="block1"><p class="noin"><span class="sc">Note.</span>&mdash;<i>The abbreviation "f." following a page
+number signifies "and following page"; "ff." "and following
+pages."</i></p></div>
+
+<br />
+
+<ul><li><span class="sc">Absolutism</span>, Socialism makes for, <a href="#Page_460">460 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Abstinence</span>, Co-operation, and Thrift denounced by Socialists, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Administration</span>, Imperial, Socialist views regarding, <a href="#Page_179">179 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>National, Socialist views regarding, <a href="#Page_213">213 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Adult</span> suffrage demanded, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Adulteration</span>, cause of, <a href="#Page_84">84 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Agitators</span>, Socialistic, appeal to passions, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialist wish to govern themselves, <a href="#Page_411">411</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Agriculture</span>, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_261">261 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Aims</span> and policy of Socialists, <a href="#Page_92">92 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Alcoholic drink</span>, expenditure of British workers on, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_479">479</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Allotments</span>, <a href="#Page_262">262 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Ananias</span>, the story of, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Anarchism</span> and Socialism, similarity of views and aims of, and connection between them, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Anarchists</span>, Chicago, and Socialists, <a href="#Page_401">401 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Anglo-French</span> agreements, views of Socialists on, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Antwerp Dock</span> strike, <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Appropriation</span> without adequate compensation is theft, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Arbitration</span>, international, Socialists on, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Armed</span> nation, why many Socialists are in favour of, <a href="#Page_193">193 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Armies</span>, standing, are to be dissolved, <a href="#Page_194">194 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Army</span> reform of Mr. Haldane, condemned by Socialists, <a href="#Page_197">197 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialist propaganda to undermine discipline and cause revolt in, <a href="#Page_200">200 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>Socialist proposals regarding the, <a href="#Page_192">192 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Assignats</span>, history of the, <a href="#Page_283">283 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Atheism</span>, Socialism and, <a href="#Page_354">354 ff.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Banks</span> and banking, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Barricades</span>, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Barter</span>, international, proposed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_279">279</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Beneficence</span>, sense of, relied on by Socialists as principal motive in men, <a href="#Page_458">458 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Betting</span>, expenditure of working men on, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Blacklegs</span>, British, in Antwerp and Hamburg, <a href="#Page_295">295 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Bremen</span>, Socialism in, <a href="#Page_440">440</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">British Empire</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Empire, British</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Brotherhood of Man</span> promised and proclaimed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_25">25 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_510" id="Page_510">[510]</a></span></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Budget</span>, national, Socialist proposals regarding, <a href="#Page_160">160 ff.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Cade, Jack</span>, <a href="#Page_326">326 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Capital</span> is theft, <a href="#Page_81">81 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>national growth of, owing to savings of capitalists, <a href="#Page_64">64 f.</a></li>
+  <li>private, cannot leave the country, <a href="#Page_153">153 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>is immoral, <a href="#Page_80">80 ff.</a></li>
+    <li>is not to be tolerated, <a href="#Page_152">152 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>why its constant increase is necessary, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Capitalists</span> and landowners are thieves, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and workers, division of national income between, <a href="#Page_40">40 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>relations between, <a href="#Page_30">30 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>are the managers and trustees of the national wealth, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li>
+  <li>employ labour only at a profit, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li>
+  <li>exploit the poor, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>greatest, were originally working men, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
+  <li>live in idleness, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>maintain the workers, not the workers the capitalists, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
+  <li>private, are responsible for commercial crises, <a href="#Page_67">67 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>are responsible for unemployment, <a href="#Page_65">65 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125 f.</a></li>
+    <li>useless and unnecessary, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
+    <li>benefit from unemployment, <a href="#Page_69">69 f.</a></li>
+    <li>have no rights and no claims to consideration, <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li>
+    <li>their disappearance would be a blessing, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
+    <li>usefulness of, <a href="#Page_64">64 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Carnegie, Andrew</span>, on drink, <a href="#Page_321">321 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Catechism</span> for the mob, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>the Red, <a href="#Page_372">372 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Cheapness</span>, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_290">290 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Chicago</span> Anarchists and Socialists, <a href="#Page_401">401 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Children</span>, free maintenance of, demanded, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>free meals for&mdash;<i>see</i> Free Maintenance</li>
+  <li>production of, to be regulated by the State, <a href="#Page_347">347 f.</a></li>
+  <li>will belong not to parents but to society, <a href="#Page_345">345 f.</a></li>
+  <li>will belong to parents, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Christ</span>, name of, used for electioneering purposes, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Christian</span> Socialism, <a href="#Page_375">375 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>programmes of, <a href="#Page_490">490 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Christianity</span> and religion, Socialist attitude towards, <a href="#Page_354">354 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Civilisation</span>, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_11">11 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>"<span class="sc">Clarion</span>," circulation of, <a href="#Page_437">437</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Class</span> war doctrine, the, <a href="#Page_72">72 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Classes</span> of society, are there only two? <a href="#Page_72">72 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Clergy</span>, Socialist views on the, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Coal</span>, production of, in 1845, <a href="#Page_475">475</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Cobden</span>, Socialists on, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Code Napol&eacute;on</span>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Coin</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Money</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Commandments</span>, the capitalists' ten, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>the Socialist ten, <a href="#Page_371">371 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Commons</span>, House of, Socialist views on the, <a href="#Page_209">209 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Commune</span> of Paris, Socialists and the insurrection of the, <a href="#Page_407">407 ff.</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_511" id="Page_511">[511]</a></span></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Communism</span> and Socialism, <a href="#Page_381">381 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>early Christian, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li>
+  <li>in Sparta, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li>
+  <li>of Fourier, <a href="#Page_392">392 f.</a></li>
+  <li>Socialist recommendations of, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>why it is impossible, <a href="#Page_393">393</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Communist</span> manifesto quoted, <a href="#Page_77">77 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Community</span> of women, <a href="#Page_331">331 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Compensation</span> has no place in Socialist ethics, <a href="#Page_100">100 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>or no compensation in expropriating private property? <a href="#Page_95">95 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Competition</span> and co-operation, <a href="#Page_82">82 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Complaints</span>, the, of Socialists, <a href="#Page_30">30 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Compulsory</span> labour, necessity of, in Socialist commonwealth, <a href="#Page_455">455 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Confiscation</span>, plans of, <a href="#Page_95">95 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>probable result of, <a href="#Page_168">168 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Contract</span>, freedom of, useless to workers, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Co-operation</span> and competition, <a href="#Page_82">82 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>cannot benefit British worker, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
+  <li>greatly benefits British worker, <a href="#Page_315">315 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>is opposed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>thrift and abstinence denounced by Socialists, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Co-operative</span> societies, record and statistics of the British, <a href="#Page_315">315 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Courts-martial</span>, Socialist agitation against, <a href="#Page_201">201 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Crime</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Justice, Theft</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Crimes</span>, sexual, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_340">340 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Crises</span> caused by private capitalists, <a href="#Page_67">67 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>could they be prevented by Socialists? <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Crown</span>, the&mdash;<i>see</i> also Monarchy
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is unfit to administer the Empire, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Currency</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Money<br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Debt</span>, Local, huge increase and danger of, <a href="#Page_246">246 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Local, will it be repudiated? <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li>
+  <li>National, repudiation of, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Demonetisation</span> of gold and silver&mdash;see Money</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Desertion</span> of family, frequency of, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Disarmament</span>, Socialists and, <a href="#Page_189">189 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Distribution</span>, alteration of, will abolish misery, <a href="#Page_65">65 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is more important than production, <a href="#Page_65">65 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Division</span>, general, of existing property disclaimed, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is the principal aim of Socialists, <a href="#Page_471">471 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Doctrines</span>, fundamental, of Socialism, <a href="#Page_50">50 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Downing Street</span>, Socialist views regarding government from, <a href="#Page_179">179 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Drink</span>, expenditure of workers on, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_479">479</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Drunkenness</span>, condemned and combated by foreign Socialists, <a href="#Page_322">322 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>excused and encouraged by British Socialists, <a href="#Page_319">319 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Duties</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Budget<br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Economic</span> policy of Great Britain, <a href="#Page_474">474 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Education</span>, Socialist views and proposals on, <a href="#Page_302">302 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Emigration</span>, <a href="#Page_476">476 f.</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_512" id="Page_512">[512]</a></span></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Empire</span>, British, federation of, opposed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_173">173 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>federation of, is necessary, <a href="#Page_478">478</a></li>
+  <li>German Socialists' views on the, <a href="#Page_181">181 f.</a></li>
+  <li>has been a failure, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li>
+  <li>Socialists and the, <a href="#Page_170">170 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Employers</span> and capitalists benefit from unemployment, <a href="#Page_69">69 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and workers' interests are opposed, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>identical, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>are useless, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">England</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Great Britain</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Enterprise</span>, Governmental and municipal, inefficiency and wastefulness of, <a href="#Page_85">85 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>municipal, <a href="#Page_240">240 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>is undertaken regardless of cost and profit, <a href="#Page_252">252 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Equality</span> of all races proclaimed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_185">185 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Esperanto</span>, why studied by Socialists, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Estate</span> Duty&mdash;<i>see</i> Budget</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Expenditure</span>, local, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Expropriation</span> of private property without compensation, <a href="#Page_95">95 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149 f.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Fabian Society</span>, details regarding, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_418">418 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>programme of, <a href="#Page_486">486 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Family</span>, desertion of, very frequent, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Karl Marx on, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li>
+  <li>Socialism and the, <a href="#Page_330">330 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Fatalism</span> of Socialists, <a href="#Page_327">327 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Federation</span>, Imperial, opposed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_173">173 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>why necessary, <a href="#Page_478">478</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Feeding</span> of school-children&mdash;<i>see</i> Free Maintenance</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Fiscal</span> policy, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_285">285 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>reform, why it is necessary, <a href="#Page_474">474 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Food</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Agriculture and Protection</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Forced</span> labour, necessity of, in Socialist Commonwealth, <a href="#Page_455">455 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Foreign</span> policy, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_183">183 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Fourier</span>, Communism of, <a href="#Page_392">392 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">France</span>, aspect of, before the Revolution, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Franchise</span> and suffrage in Great Britain and other countries, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Freedom</span> of contract useless to workers, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Free</span> love, <a href="#Page_330">330 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>maintenance for children, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>trade and protection, Karl Marx on, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_285">285 ff.</a></li>
+    <li>why it must be abandoned, <a href="#Page_474">474 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Frontiers</span> are to be abolished, <a href="#Page_184">184 ff.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Gambling</span> spirit in Englishmen, <a href="#Page_459">459</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">German</span> and British Socialism compared, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialists' patriotic and imperial attitude, <a href="#Page_181">181 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>views on colonial policy, <a href="#Page_181">181 f.</a> <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a>
+      <ul class="nest3">
+      <li>Great Britain, <a href="#Page_181">181 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a></li>
+      </ul>
+    </li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Germany</span>, composition of electorate in, <a href="#Page_440">440</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Glasgow</span>, vast Socialist plans regarding, <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">God</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Religion<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_513" id="Page_513">[513]</a></span></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Gold</span> and silver money are to be abolished, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Government</span>&mdash;<i>see also</i> Administration
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>complaints about, <a href="#Page_11">11 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>of Socialist State, <a href="#Page_463">463 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Great Britain</span>, aspect of, resembles pre-Revolution France, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>changed economic position of, <a href="#Page_475">475 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>dangerous position of, <a href="#Page_484">484 f.</a></li>
+  <li>German Socialists' views on, <a href="#Page_181">181 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Grievances</span> of Socialists, <a href="#Page_30">30 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Gronland</span> advises Socialists to appeal to the passions, <a href="#Page_10">10</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Haldane</span>, Mr., and Woolwich Arsenal dismissals, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Hamburg Dock</span> strike, <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">History</span>, all, is untrue, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Home</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Family</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Home Rule</span>, Socialists and, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">House of Commons</span>, Socialist views on the, <a href="#Page_209">209 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">House of Lords</span>, Socialist views on the, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>to be abolished, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a> i.</li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Human</span> nature and Socialism, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Hungry</span> children&mdash;<i>see</i> Free Maintenance<br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Idling</span>, how it is to be prevented, <a href="#Page_457">457 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Immorality</span>, sexual, Socialist views regarding, <a href="#Page_336">336 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Imperial</span> federation opposed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_173">173 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Income</span>, national, how divided between capitalists and workers, <a href="#Page_40">40 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>of workers and capitalists compared, <a href="#Page_40">40 ff.</a> <a href="#Page_75">75 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Income-tax</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Budget</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Increasing</span> misery, law of, <a href="#Page_56">56 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_57">57 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Indebtednes</span>, local, <a href="#Page_246">246 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Independent Labour Party</span>, details regarding, <a href="#Page_417">417 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>programme of, <a href="#Page_485">485 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">India</span>, Socialist views and aims regarding, <a href="#Page_174">174 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Inheritance</span>, right of, <a href="#Page_103">103 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Intemperance</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Drink, Drunkenness, Temperance</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Interest</span>, profit and rent are theft, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialist objections to, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">International</span> Arbitration, Socialists on, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>relations, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_183">183 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Intoxicating</span> drink&mdash;<i>see</i> Drink, Drunkenness, Temperance</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Iron</span> law of wages, <a href="#Page_53">53 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_54">54 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li>
+  </ul>
+<br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Judges</span>, English, Socialists on, <a href="#Page_325">325 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Justice</span> and Law, Socialist Views regarding, <a href="#Page_100">100 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396 f.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Keir Hardie</span> resembles John the Baptist, <a href="#Page_28">28</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Labour Church</span>, the, and its teaching, <a href="#Page_369">369</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_514" id="Page_514">[514]</a></span>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>fewer hours of, promised by Socialists, <a href="#Page_117">117 f.</a></li>
+  <li>forced, would be necessary in Socialist commonwealth, <a href="#Page_455">455 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>is the only source of wealth, <a href="#Page_50">50 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>organisation of, in Socialist commonwealth, <a href="#Page_455">455 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>Party, details regarding, <a href="#Page_424">424 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>informal programme of, <a href="#Page_425">425 f.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>representation committee, details regarding, <a href="#Page_424">424</a></li>
+  <li>remuneration of, in Socialist commonwealth, <a href="#Page_450">450 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>sweated, proposals regarding, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li>
+  <li>time theory, <a href="#Page_450">450 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Labourer</span> is entitled to entire product of labour, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_451">451</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>absurdity of demand, <a href="#Page_62">62 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_451">451 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>receives only from one-third to one-fifth of his rightful wage, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Labourers</span>, rural, <a href="#Page_266">266 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Land</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> also Agriculture
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and Landlords and Socialists, <a href="#Page_145">145 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>belongs to all, <a href="#Page_102">102 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>individual men have no right to, <a href="#Page_102">102 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>is to be had rent free from Socialist State, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li>
+  <li>is not to be had rent free from Socialist State, <a href="#Page_146">146 f.</a></li>
+  <li>is to be seized without compensation to owners, <a href="#Page_95">95 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_486">486</a></li>
+  <li>property in, is robbery, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Land</span> settlement policy of Socialists, <a href="#Page_262">262 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Land</span> Tax&mdash;<i>see</i> Budget</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Landowners</span> and capitalists are thieves, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Law</span> and Justice, Socialist views regarding, <a href="#Page_100">100 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>iron, of wages, <a href="#Page_53">53 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_54">54 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a> t, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>of increasing misery, <a href="#Page_56">56 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_57">57 f.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Laziness</span>, how it is to be prevented, <a href="#Page_457">457 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Liberal Party</span>, Socialist dissatisfaction with, <a href="#Page_233">233 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>views of and attitude towards the, <a href="#Page_226">226 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Literature</span>, Socialist, increase of sales of, <a href="#Page_435">435 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Loafers</span> and tramps, ideal conditions for, to be created by Socialists, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Local</span> expenditure, <a href="#Page_245">245 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Government, Socialist views and proposals regarding, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>indebtedness, <a href="#Page_246">246 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">London</span>, fantastic schemes regarding, <a href="#Page_249">249 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Lords</span>, abolition of the House of, demanded, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>House of, views of Socialists on the, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Love</span>, free, <a href="#Page_330">330 ff.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Magdeburg</span>, Socialism in, <a href="#Page_440">440</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Maintenance</span>, free, for children, demanded, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>why demanded, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Man</span>, brotherhood of, promised and proclaimed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_25">25 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>has no right to himself, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li>
+  <li>is not responsible for his actions, <a href="#Page_327">327 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Man</span>, nature of, and Socialism, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_515" id="Page_515">[515]</a></span></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Marriage</span>&mdash;<i>see also</i> Family, Women
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is akin to prostitution, <a href="#Page_335">335 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Marx</span> and Engels, Communists' manifesto quoted, <a href="#Page_77">77 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Marx, Karl</span>, appreciation of, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>on Christianity and religion, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li>
+  <li>on Free Trade and Protection, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li>
+  <li>on women and the family, <a href="#Page_332">332 f.</a></li>
+  <li>political programme of, <a href="#Page_107">107 f.</a></li>
+  <li>unmerited praise of, <a href="#Page_88">88 f.</a></li>
+  <li>was not a scientist, but a demagogue and a revolutionary, <a href="#Page_472">472</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Meals</span>, free, for school children&mdash;<i>see</i> Free Maintenance</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Members</span> of Parliament, payment of, advocated, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Middle Class</span>, importance of strengthening the, <a href="#Page_441">441 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialistic attempt to permeate the, <a href="#Page_442">442 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Middleman</span>, promised suppression of, by Socialists is illusory, <a href="#Page_241">241 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Military Law</span>, Socialist agitation against, <a href="#Page_201">201 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Millionaires</span> are criminals, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Mines</span> and minerals to be taken over without compensation, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Mir</span>, the, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Mirabeau</span> on paper money, <a href="#Page_283">283 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Misery</span>, law of, increasing, <a href="#Page_56">56 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_57">57 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Monarchy</span>, abolition of, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialism and the, <a href="#Page_207">207 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Money</span>, abolition of gold and silver proposed, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;consequences of, <a href="#Page_279">279 f.</a></li>
+  <li>banks and banking, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Morality</span>, sexual. Socialist views regarding, <a href="#Page_336">336 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Municipal</span> and national enterprise, inefficiency and wastefulness of, <a href="#Page_85">85 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>enterprise, <a href="#Page_240">240 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>enterprises are undertaken regardless of cost and profit, <a href="#Page_252">252 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>Socialism, <a href="#Page_240">240 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+<br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">National</span> budget, Socialist views regarding, <a href="#Page_160">160 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>debt, repudiation of, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>enterprise, inefficiency and wastefulness of, <a href="#Page_85">85 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>income, how divided between capitalists and workers, <a href="#Page_40">40 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Nationalisation</span> of land&mdash;<i>see</i> Land</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Nature</span>, human, and Socialism, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Offences</span>, sexual, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_340">340 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Old-age</span> pensions, Socialist plans regarding, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Opinion</span>, public, under Socialism, <a href="#Page_466">466 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Organisation</span> of work proposed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a> I, <a href="#Page_455">455 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>fallacies regarding, <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Organisations</span>, Socialist, and their policy, <a href="#Page_415">415 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Over-production</span>, complaints as to, <a href="#Page_66">66 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;are not justified, <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a></li>
+  <li>can it be prevented by Socialists? <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124 f.</a></li>
+  <li>is not the cause of crises and unemployment, but ill-balanced production, <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_516" id="Page_516">[516]</a></span></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Overwork</span>, complaints of, <a href="#Page_16">16</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Paper</span> money, unlimited issues of, proposed, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>consequences of, <a href="#Page_279">279 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Paris</span> Commune, Socialists and the insurrection of the, <a href="#Page_407">407 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Parliament</span>, Socialism and, <a href="#Page_209">209 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialist spirit in, <a href="#Page_437">437 f.</a></li>
+  <li>unofficial Socialists in, <a href="#Page_438">438</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Parliamentary</span> Government to be abolished, <a href="#Page_218">218 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Parties</span>, Socialist attitude towards the, <a href="#Page_225">225 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>the Socialist and their policy, <a href="#Page_415">415 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Passions</span>, Socialists appeal to the, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Patriotism</span>, Socialism is destructive of, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Pauperism</span> and distress, growth of, under Socialist r&eacute;gime, <a href="#Page_242">242 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Payment</span> of Members of Parliament advocated, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Peace</span> conference, <a href="#Page_189">189 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Peasant</span> proprietors are everywhere hostile to Socialism, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialists object to, <a href="#Page_262">262 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Peasantry</span>, importance of re-creating the, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Pensions</span> to workers, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Policy</span>, agricultural, of Socialists&mdash;<i>see</i> Agriculture
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and aims of Socialists, <a href="#Page_92">92 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>fiscal, of Socialists&mdash;<i>see</i> Free Trade and Protection</li>
+  <li>foreign, of Socialists&mdash;<i>see</i> Foreign Policy</li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Poplar</span>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Postage</span>, Socialist proposals regarding, <a href="#Page_166">166 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Post Office</span>, British, praised by Socialists, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;condemned by Socialists, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li>
+  <li>fallacies regarding business aptitude of, <a href="#Page_85">85 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>servants, Socialist proposals regarding, <a href="#Page_166">166 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Poverty</span> and drink and gambling, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_479">479 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>extravagant Socialist estimates of, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302 f.</a></li>
+  <li>complaints about, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li>
+  <li>of the poor is caused by wealth of the rich, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Press</span>, the, under Socialism, <a href="#Page_466">466 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Private</span> trader to be abolished, <a href="#Page_242">242 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Production</span>, ill-balanced, causes crises and unemployment, <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is carried on for the profit of a class, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li>
+  <li>is less important than distribution, <a href="#Page_65">65 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>is more important than distribution, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Profit</span>, what it is and why it is necessary, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>interest and rent are theft, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li>
+  <li>the working at a, objected to, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>sharing in Socialist commonwealth, <a href="#Page_459">459</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Programme</span>, political, of Karl Marx, <a href="#Page_107">107 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Programmes</span> of Socialism, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_481">481 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Property</span>&mdash;<i>see also</i> Capital, Land, Mines
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>instinct of, is as old as humanity, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li>"<span class="sc">Property</span> is theft," <a href="#Page_81">81 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Property</span>, private, general division of, disclaimed, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is the real object of Socialism, <a href="#Page_471">471 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>private, is immoral, <a href="#Page_80">80 ff.</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_517" id="Page_517">[517]</a></span>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>is to be acquired without compensation, <a href="#Page_95">95 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_486">486</a></li>
+    <li>ought to be abolished, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li>
+    <li>Socialist plans regarding, <a href="#Page_95">95 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149 f.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>right to, denned by Socialists, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Prostitution</span>, <a href="#Page_339">339 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is akin to marriage, <a href="#Page_335">335 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Protection</span>, why it must be adopted, <a href="#Page_474">474 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and Free Trade, Karl Marx on, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_285">285 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Proudhon</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Providence</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Thrift</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Public</span> opinion under Socialism, <a href="#Page_466">466 f.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Railway</span> rates, preferential to foreigners denounced, <a href="#Page_269">269 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Railways</span> and shipping, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_269">269 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>nationalisation of, demanded, <a href="#Page_271">271 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>seems too speculative an undertaking, <a href="#Page_277">277</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>should be run free of charge to all, <a href="#Page_272">272 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>wastefulness and inefficiency of, <a href="#Page_269">269 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Rates</span>, alarming increase of, <a href="#Page_245">245 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>increase of, means increase of rent, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Red Catechism</span>, the, <a href="#Page_372">372 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Referendum</span> demanded by Socialists, <a href="#Page_217">217 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>opposed by Socialists, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Reform</span>, fiscal, why it is necessary, <a href="#Page_474">474 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>social, the true, <a href="#Page_480">480</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Religion</span> and Christianity, Socialist attitude towards, <a href="#Page_354">354 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialism is a, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>Socialist views on present, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>the, of Socialism, <a href="#Page_364">364 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Rent</span>, interest and profit are theft, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Revolution</span>, French, parallels furnished to Socialist proposals by the, <a href="#Page_168">168 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_283">283 f.</a> <a href="#Page_352">352 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>aspect of France before the, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li>
+  <li>Socialists and, <a href="#Page_404">404 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Revolutionary</span> aims and plans of Socialists, <a href="#Page_77">77 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Revolutions</span> always cause depravity of morals, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Rich</span>, the, are the managers and trustees of the national wealth, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>are thieves, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370 f.</a></li>
+  <li>cause poverty of the poor, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Riches</span> of the rich are the cause of poverty, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Right</span> to work, sinister aim of Socialists in proclaiming, <a href="#Page_128">128 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>disregarded by Socialists, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Rights</span> of individual defined, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Robbery</span> encouraged by Socialists, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Rochdale</span> Pioneers, history of the, <a href="#Page_315">315 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Rural</span> labourers, <a href="#Page_266">266 f.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Saving</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Thrift</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Savings</span>, contemplated confiscation of, <a href="#Page_157">157 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Savings</span> banks deposits, <a href="#Page_46">46</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_518" id="Page_518">[518]</a></span></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Selfishness</span> and Socialism, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Sexual</span> crimes. Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_340">340 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>offences and crimes, <a href="#Page_340">340 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Small</span> holdings, <a href="#Page_262">262 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Social</span>-Democratic Federation, details regarding, <a href="#Page_415">415 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>programme of, <a href="#Page_481">481 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Socialism</span> and Anarchism, similarity of views and aims of, and connection between, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and Christianity and religion, <a href="#Page_354">354 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and Communism, <a href="#Page_381">381 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and education, <a href="#Page_302">302 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and Free Trade and Protection, <a href="#Page_285">285 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and law and justice, <a href="#Page_325">325 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and the monarchy, <a href="#Page_207">207 f.</a></li>
+  <li>and Parliament, <a href="#Page_209">209 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and revolution, <a href="#Page_395">395 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>appeals to passions, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a></li>
+  <li>British and German compared, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li>
+  <li>Christian, <a href="#Page_375">375 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>definitions of, I ff., <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li>
+  <li>flourishes on dissatisfaction and misery, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li>
+  <li>fundamental doctrines of, <a href="#Page_50">50 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>growth and danger of, <a href="#Page_431">431 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>is a religion, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>is a science, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li>
+  <li>is based, not on science, but on deception, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li>
+  <li>is destructive of patriotism, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>is it possible? <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>is merely a plan of spoliation and of general division, <a href="#Page_471">471 f.</a></li>
+  <li>is not a science, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>means absolutism, <a href="#Page_460">460 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>municipal, <a href="#Page_240">240 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disregards cost and profit, <a href="#Page_252">252 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>presupposes perfect men, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>principal demand of, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li>
+  <li>programme of, <a href="#Page_92">92 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>progress of, how it may be checked, <a href="#Page_440">440 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>promises to alter human nature, <a href="#Page_448">448 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>to abolish war, <a href="#Page_186">186 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li>
+    <li>to make all races equal, <a href="#Page_185">185 ff.</a></li>
+    <li>why it is impossible, <a href="#Page_390">390 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Socialist</span> and Anarchist doctrines compared, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Labour Party, details regarding, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>programme of, <a href="#Page_488">488 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>literature, increase of sales of, <a href="#Page_435">435 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>organisations, the, and their policy, <a href="#Page_415">415 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>Party of Great Britain, details regarding, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>programme of, <a href="#Page_487">487 f.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>spirit in Parliament, <a href="#Page_437">437 f.</a></li>
+  <li>State, how will it be governed? <a href="#Page_463">463 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>of the future, <a href="#Page_5">5 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a></li>
+    <li>-enterprise, will it be more efficient than private enterprise? <a href="#Page_85">85 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>Sunday schools, <a href="#Page_369">369 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Socialists</span>, aims and policy of, <a href="#Page_92">92 ff.</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_519" id="Page_519">[519]</a></span>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and Chicago Anarchists, <a href="#Page_401">401 f.</a></li>
+  <li>and land and landlords, <a href="#Page_145">145 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and revolution, <a href="#Page_395">395 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and rural labourers, <a href="#Page_266">266 f.</a></li>
+  <li>and terrorist outrages, <a href="#Page_402">402 f.</a></li>
+  <li>and the Empire, <a href="#Page_170">170 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and the two Parties, <a href="#Page_225">225 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and the working masses, <a href="#Page_115">115 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>and Trade Unionists, official connection between, <a href="#Page_141">141 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>relations between, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434 f.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>are antagonistic to providence, thrift, and temperance, <a href="#Page_312">312 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>are hostile to the Empire, <a href="#Page_170">170 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>to their own country, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186 f.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>assert that all history is garbled, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li>
+  <li>assert that man has no right to himself, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li>
+  <li>condemn imperial administration, <a href="#Page_179">179 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>national administration, <a href="#Page_213">213 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411 ff.</a></li>
+    <li>State Socialism, <a href="#Page_411">411 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>consist of two classes, revolutionaries and visionaries, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li>
+  <li>demand free maintenance for children, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>Government purchase of all British railways and shipping, <a href="#Page_271">271 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>denounce co-operation, thrift, and abstinence, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>desire the destruction of the State, <a href="#Page_381">381 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>different aims, proposals, and views of, <a href="#Page_6">6 f.</a></li>
+  <li>disregard right to work, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li>
+  <li>encourage theft, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li>
+  <li>excuse and encourage drunkenness, <a href="#Page_319">319 ff.</a>,</li>
+  <li>grievances of the, <a href="#Page_30">30 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>numbers of, in various countries, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li>
+  <li>on Free Trade and Protection, <a href="#Page_285">285 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>oppose co-operation, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li>
+  <li>promise brotherhood of man, <a href="#Page_25">25 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>equal wages for all, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li>
+    <li>gratis amusements, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>
+      <ul class="nest3">
+      <li>baths, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li>
+      <li>clothing, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
+      <li>concerts, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li>
+      <li>food, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
+      <li>fuel, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
+      <li>libraries, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li>
+      <li>lodging, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
+      <li>travel and transport on railways and tramways, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a> S.</li>
+      <li>on ships, <a href="#Page_275">275 f.</a></li>
+      <li>wash-houses, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li>
+      <li>working men's clubs, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li>
+      </ul>
+    </li>
+    <li>to transform the world into a paradise, <a href="#Page_19">19 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>propose issuing paper money in unlimited quantities, <a href="#Page_258">258 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>revolutionary aims and plans of, <a href="#Page_77">77 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li>
+  <li>try to destroy discipline in the army and so cause it to revolt, <a href="#Page_200">200 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>unofficial in Parliament, <a href="#Page_438">438</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_520" id="Page_520">[520]</a></span></li>
+  <li>wish for an international language, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>to abolish parliamentary government, <a href="#Page_218">218 ff.</a>,
+      <ul class="nest3">
+      <li>the army, <a href="#Page_192">192 ff.</a></li>
+      <li>the existing languages, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li>
+      <li>the monarchy, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207 f.</a></li>
+      </ul>
+    </li>
+    <li>to capture or abolish Parliament, <a href="#Page_209">209 ff.</a></li>
+    <li>to conquer Parliament, <a href="#Page_238">238 f.</a></li>
+    <li>to dissolve the army, <a href="#Page_192">192 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>German, on Peace Conferences, disarmament, and international arbitration, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>patriotic and imperial attitude of, <a href="#Page_181">181 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li>
+    <li>views of, on colonial policy, <a href="#Page_181">181 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a>
+      <ul class="nest3">
+      <li>regarding Great Britain, <a href="#Page_181">181 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190 f.</a></li>
+      </ul>
+    </li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Society</span>, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_10">10 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Sparta</span>, Communism in, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Spencer</span>, Herbert, <a href="#Page_447">447 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Spoliation</span>, plans of, <a href="#Page_95">95</a> if., <a href="#Page_149">149 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>probable result of, <a href="#Page_168">168 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Stamp</span> duties, proposals regarding, <a href="#Page_166">166 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">State</span> enterprise usually inefficient, <a href="#Page_85">85 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Socialism, Socialist attitude towards, <a href="#Page_411">411 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>Socialist, of the future, <a href="#Page_5">5 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>how will it be governed? <a href="#Page_463">463 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>Socialists are hostile to the, and desire its destruction, <a href="#Page_381">381 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Stocks</span>, Municipal, are no longer first-class investments, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Stuttgart</span>, International Socialist Congress at, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Suffrage</span>, adult, demanded, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and franchise in Great Britain and other countries, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li>
+  <li>reform demanded, <a href="#Page_213">213 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Sunday</span>, will it be abolished? <a href="#Page_365">365</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>schools, Socialist, <a href="#Page_369">369 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Surplus-value</span> doctrine, <a href="#Page_58">58 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_59">59 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Sweated</span> labour proposals of Socialists, <a href="#Page_461">461</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Tariff</span> reform, Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_285">285 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Taxation</span>, indirect, condemned by Socialists, <a href="#Page_165">165 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>leading Socialist principle of, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li>
+  <li>local&mdash;<i>see</i> Rates</li>
+  <li>national&mdash;<i>see</i> Budget</li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Taxing</span> private property out of existence, plans for, <a href="#Page_99">99 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Temperance</span> condemned by British Socialists, <a href="#Page_319">319 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>praised and encouraged by foreign Socialists, <a href="#Page_322">322 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>providence, and thrift are antagonistic to Socialism, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>Socialistic views on, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Ten Commandments</span>, the capitalists', <a href="#Page_368">368</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>the Socialist, <a href="#Page_371">371 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Terrorist</span> outrages. Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_402">402 f.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Theft</span> encouraged by Socialists, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Thrift</span> denounced by Socialists, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311 ff.</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_521" id="Page_521">[521]</a></span>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is immoral, <a href="#Page_314">314 f.</a></li>
+  <li>is theft, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li>
+  <li>providence, and temperance are antagonistic to Socialism, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Trade</span> Unionists and Socialists, official connection between, <a href="#Page_141">141 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;relations between, <a href="#Page_131">131 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434 f.</a></li>
+  <li>Unions and unemployed problem, <a href="#Page_127">127 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>have become Socialistic, <a href="#Page_141">141 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_471">471</a></li>
+    <li>secretaries are to administer the Empire, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Trader</span>, private, to be abolished, <a href="#Page_242">242 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Tramps</span> and loafers, ideal conditions for, to be created by Socialists, <a href="#Page_254">254</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Underfeeding</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Free Maintenance</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Unemployed</span>, the, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_474">474 ff.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and agriculture, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Unemployment</span> benefits employers, <a href="#Page_69">69 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>could it be prevented by Socialists? <a href="#Page_124">124 f.</a></li>
+  <li>is due to private capital, <a href="#Page_65">65 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_126">126 f.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>real causes of, <a href="#Page_70">70 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_474">474 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>sinister aims of Socialists regarding, <a href="#Page_128">128 f.</a></li>
+  <li>Socialist plans regarding, <a href="#Page_123">123 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>views on, <a href="#Page_67">67 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Usury</span>&mdash;<i>see</i> Interest<br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Votes</span> for women, <a href="#Page_222">222 ff.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><span class="sc">Wages</span>, amount and purchasing-power of, depends on production, <a href="#Page_120">120 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>are to be abolished, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
+  <li>  are not to be abolished, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>  are to be equal for all, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>  are not to be equal for all, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>  different views of Socialists regarding, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>  factors determining amount of, <a href="#Page_54">54 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313 f.</a></li>
+  <li>  great increase of, in Socialist State promised by Socialists, <a href="#Page_118">118 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>doubted by German Socialists, <a href="#Page_120">120</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>iron law of, <a href="#Page_53">53 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_54">54 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>rise in, <a href="#Page_57">57 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">War</span> will be abolished by Socialists, <a href="#Page_186">186 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Wealth</span> creates poverty, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;disproved, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li>
+  <li>is a crime, <a href="#Page_80">80 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>labour is the only source of, <a href="#Page_50">50 ff.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>disproved, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>love of, will disappear, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_448">448</a></li>
+  <li>various sources of, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
+  <li>why unequally distributed, <a href="#Page_473">473</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">West Ham</span>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Woman</span>, the family, and the home. Socialism and, <a href="#Page_330">330 ff.</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_522" id="Page_522">[522]</a></span>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>will be given the vote, <a href="#Page_222">222 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li>
+  <li>will be made equal to man, <a href="#Page_349">349 f.</a></li>
+  <li>will be made free, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li>
+  <li>will have to work for a living, <a href="#Page_349">349 f.</a></li>
+  <li>will her privileges be abolished? <a href="#Page_350">350 f.</a></li>
+  <li>will receive wages for childbearing, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Women</span>, community of, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Karl Marx on, <a href="#Page_332">332 f.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Women's</span> Freedom League, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>Social and Political Union, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>split in, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>suffrage. Socialist views on, <a href="#Page_222">222 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Woolwich</span> Arsenal dismissals, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>.</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Work</span>, fewer hours of, promised by Socialists, <a href="#Page_117">117 f.</a>
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>is a curse, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
+  <li>organisation of, in Socialist Commonwealth, <a href="#Page_455">455 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>remuneration of, in Socialist Commonwealth, <a href="#Page_450">450 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>Socialist views regarding, <a href="#Page_115">115 ff.</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Workers</span> and capitalists, division of national income between, <a href="#Page_40">40 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75 f.</a>.
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;relations between, <a href="#Page_30">30 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>are entitled to entire produce of their labour, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_451">451</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>absurdity of demand, <a href="#Page_62">62 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_451">451 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>are most prosperous where capitalists are richest, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li>
+  <li>are swindled out of their earnings, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
+  <li>become capitalists every day, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
+  <li>British, are slaves, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31 f.</a>
+    <ul class="nest2">
+    <li>how to improve conditions of, <a href="#Page_474">474 ff.</a></li>
+    </ul>
+  </li>
+  <li>cannot acquire capital, <a href="#Page_31">31 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>expenditure of, on betting, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_479">479 f.</a></li>
+  <li>on drink, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_479">479 f.</a></li>
+  <li>miserable state of, <a href="#Page_13">13 ff.</a></li>
+  <li>possess absolutely nothing, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li>
+  <li>poverty of, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li>
+  <li>receive only from one-third to one-fifth of their rightful wages, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48 f.</a></li>
+  <li>value of property owned by, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li><span class="sc">Working</span> masses and Socialists, <a href="#Page_115">115 ff.</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<h4>PRINTED BY<br />
+SPOTTISWOODE AND C. LTD., NEW-STREET SQUARE<br />
+LONDON</h4>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+
+<div class="tr">
+<p class="cen"><a name="TN" id="TN"></a>Typographical errors corrected in text:</p>
+<br />
+Page &nbsp;&nbsp;84: &nbsp;reponsible replaced with responsible<br />
+Page &nbsp;&nbsp;89: &nbsp;Britian replaced with Britain<br />
+Page 103: &nbsp;repected replaced with respected<br />
+Page 108: &nbsp;furthur replaced with further<br />
+Page 112: &nbsp;Social-Democrary replaced with Social-Democracy<br />
+Page 157: &nbsp;MacLachlan replaced with McLachlan<br />
+Page 167: &nbsp;interefere replaced with interfere<br />
+Page 178: &nbsp;self-goverment replaced with self-government<br />
+Page 212: &nbsp;parasities replaced with parasites<br />
+Page 217: &nbsp;'which will be be made' replaced with 'which will be made'<br />
+Page 260: &nbsp;Parliamentry replaced with Parliamentary<br />
+Page 279: &nbsp;Co-opervative replaced with Co-operative<br />
+Page 280: &nbsp;irreligous replaced with irreligious<br />
+Page 290: &nbsp;beleagured replaced with beleaguered<br />
+Page 322: &nbsp;democrary replaced with democracy<br />
+Page 328: &nbsp;L'Etat replaced with L'&Eacute;tat<br />
+Page 334: &nbsp;(fn 905) Fornightly replaced with Fortnightly<br />
+Page 337: &nbsp;marrige replace with marriage<br />
+Page 350: &nbsp;L'Etat replaced with L'&Eacute;tat<br />
+Page 406: &nbsp;Parlement replaced with Parliament<br />
+Page 425: &nbsp;indentical replaced with identical<br />
+Page 446: &nbsp;enconomic replaced with economic<br />
+Page 419: &nbsp;Progessives replaced with Progressives<br />
+</div>
+
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<hr class="full" />
+<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BRITISH SOCIALISM***</p>
+<p>******* This file should be named 28361-h.txt or 28361-h.zip *******</p>
+<p>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:<br />
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/6/28361">http://www.gutenberg.org/2/8/3/6/28361</a></p>
+<p>Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.</p>
+
+<p>Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.</p>
+
+
+
+<pre>
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license">http://www.gutenberg.org/license)</a>.
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS,' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook's
+eBook number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII,
+compressed (zipped), HTML and others.
+
+Corrected EDITIONS of our eBooks replace the old file and take over
+the old filename and etext number.  The replaced older file is renamed.
+VERSIONS based on separate sources are treated as new eBooks receiving
+new filenames and etext numbers.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org">http://www.gutenberg.org</a>
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+EBooks posted prior to November 2003, with eBook numbers BELOW #10000,
+are filed in directories based on their release date.  If you want to
+download any of these eBooks directly, rather than using the regular
+search system you may utilize the following addresses and just
+download by the etext year.
+
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext06/">http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext06/</a>
+
+    (Or /etext 05, 04, 03, 02, 01, 00, 99,
+     98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90)
+
+EBooks posted since November 2003, with etext numbers OVER #10000, are
+filed in a different way.  The year of a release date is no longer part
+of the directory path.  The path is based on the etext number (which is
+identical to the filename).  The path to the file is made up of single
+digits corresponding to all but the last digit in the filename.  For
+example an eBook of filename 10234 would be found at:
+
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/1/0/2/3/10234
+
+or filename 24689 would be found at:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/4/6/8/24689
+
+An alternative method of locating eBooks:
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/GUTINDEX.ALL">http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/GUTINDEX.ALL</a>
+
+*** END: FULL LICENSE ***
+</pre>
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/28361.txt b/28361.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cad8879
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28361.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,19824 @@
+The Project Gutenberg eBook of British Socialism, by J. Ellis Barker
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+
+
+
+Title: British Socialism
+       An Examination of Its Doctrines, Policy, Aims and Practical Proposals
+
+
+Author: J. Ellis Barker
+
+
+
+Release Date: March 19, 2009  [eBook #28361]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII)
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BRITISH SOCIALISM***
+
+
+E-text prepared by Jeannie Howse, Carl Hudkins, jnik (media provider), and
+the Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team
+(http://www.pgdp.net)
+
+
+
+   +-----------------------------------------------------------+
+   | Transcriber's note:                                       |
+   |                                                           |
+   | Inconsistent hyphenation in the original document has     |
+   | been preserved.                                           |
+   |                                                           |
+   | This e-book has many unusual words and spelling that have |
+   | been retained.                                            |
+   |                                                           |
+   | Obvious typographical errors have been corrected. For     |
+   | a complete list, please see the end of this document.     |
+   |                                                           |
+   +-----------------------------------------------------------+
+
+
+
+
+
+BRITISH SOCIALISM
+
+An Examination of Its Doctrines, Policy, Aims and Practical Proposals
+
+by
+
+J. ELLIS BARKER
+
+Author of
+'Modern Germany: Her Political and Economic Problems, etc.'
+'The Rise and Decline of the Netherlands'
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+London
+Smith, Elder, & Co.
+New York: Charles Scribner's Sons
+1908
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+CHAPTER                                                           PAGE
+
+     I. INTRODUCTION--WHAT IS SOCIALISM?                             1
+
+    II. SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS OF PRESENT SOCIETY AND OF THE
+        SOCIETY OF THE FUTURE                                       10
+
+   III. THE GRIEVANCES OF THE SOCIALISTS                            30
+
+    IV. THE FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINES OF SOCIALISM                      50
+
+     V. THE AIMS AND POLICY OF THE SOCIALISTS                       92
+
+    VI. THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE WORKING
+        MASSES                                                     115
+
+   VII. THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS TRADE UNIONISTS
+        AND CO-OPERATORS                                           131
+
+  VIII. SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING LAND AND
+        THE LANDLORDS                                              145
+
+    IX. SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING CAPITAL
+        AND THE CAPITALISTS                                        152
+
+     X. SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING TAXATION
+        AND THE NATIONAL BUDGET                                    160
+
+    XI. SOCIALISM AND THE EMPIRE                                   170
+
+   XII. SOCIALIST VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND
+        FOREIGN POLICY                                            183
+
+  XIII. SOCIALISM AND THE ARMY                                     192
+
+   XIV. SOCIALISM AND THE MONARCHY                                 207
+
+    XV. SOCIALIST VIEWS ON PARLIAMENT AND THE NATIONAL
+        ADMINISTRATION                                            209
+
+   XVI. THE ATTITUDE OF THE SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE TWO
+        PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES                                     225
+
+  XVII. SOCIALISM AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT                             240
+
+ XVIII. SOCIALISM AND AGRICULTURE                                  261
+
+   XIX. SOCIALIST VIEWS ON BRITISH RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING           269
+
+    XX. SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON MONEY, BANKS, AND BANKING          278
+
+   XXI. SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON FREE TRADE AND PROTECTION          285
+
+  XXII. SOCIALISM AND EDUCATION                                    302
+
+ XXIII. THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS PROVIDENCE, THRIFT,
+        AND TEMPERANCE                                             311
+
+  XXIV. SOCIALIST VIEWS ON LAW AND JUSTICE                         325
+
+   XXV. SOCIALISM AND WOMAN, THE FAMILY AND THE HOME               330
+
+  XXVI. THE SOCIALIST ATTITUDE TOWARDS CHRISTIANITY AND
+        RELIGION                                                   354
+
+ XXVII. THE RELIGION OF SOCIALISM                                  364
+
+XXVIII. CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM                                        375
+
+  XXIX. SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM                                    381
+
+   XXX. SOCIALISM AND ANARCHISM                                    394
+
+  XXXI. SOCIALISM AND REVOLUTION                                   404
+
+ XXXII. STATE SOCIALISM                                            411
+
+XXXIII. THE SOCIALIST ORGANISATIONS: THEIR MUTUAL RELATIONS
+        AND THEIR POLICY                                           415
+
+ XXXIV. THE GROWTH AND DANGER OF BRITISH SOCIALISM                 431
+
+  XXXV. HOW THE PROGRESS OF SOCIALISM MAY BE CHECKED               440
+
+ XXXVI. IS SOCIALISM POSSIBLE?--A GLANCE INTO THE SOCIALIST
+        STATE OF THE FUTURE                                        444
+
+XXXVII. CONCLUSION                                                 470
+
+APPENDIX--OFFICIAL PROGRAMMES OF THE SOCIALISTIC ORGANISATIONS     481
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                       493
+
+ANALYTICAL INDEX                                                   509
+
+
+
+
+BRITISH SOCIALISM
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+INTRODUCTION--WHAT IS SOCIALISM?
+
+
+What is Socialism?
+
+It is exceedingly difficult to answer that question in a few words,
+for Socialism is exceedingly elusive and bewildering in its doctrines,
+its aims, and its proposals.
+
+Its opponents have described it as "a doctrine of sordid materialism
+and of atheism," they have denounced it as "the gospel of everlasting
+bellyful,"[1] and as "the coming slavery."[2] They have stated that
+Socialism means to abolish religion, that it "would try to put
+laziness, thriftlessness, and inefficiency on a par with industry,
+thrift, and efficiency, that it would strive to break up not merely
+private property, but, what is far more important, the home, the chief
+prop upon which our whole civilisation stands."[3]
+
+The Socialists, on the other hand, claim that "Socialism presents the
+only living ideal of human existence"[4]; that "Socialism is science
+applied with knowledge and understanding to all branches of human
+activity"[5]; that "Socialism is freedom,"[6] and that it is
+exceedingly just, for "the justice of Socialism will see all things,
+and therefore understand all things."[7] One of the Socialist leaders
+has told us "Socialism is much more than either a political creed or
+an economic dogma. It presents to the modern world a new conception of
+society and a new basis upon which to build up the life of the
+individual and of the State."[8] Another informs us "Socialism to
+Socialists is not a Utopia which they have invented, but a principle
+of social organisation which they assert to have been discovered by
+the patient investigators into sociology whose labours have
+distinguished the present century."[9] A third has stated that
+"Socialism is really neither more nor less than the science of
+sociology."[10] A fourth asserts that "it is a scientific scheme of
+national government entirely wise, just, and practical."[11] A fifth
+states "Socialism to me has always meant not a principle, but certain
+definite economic measures which I wish to see taken."[12]
+
+Other Socialists have taught that "Socialism is an ethical system
+founded on justice and truth; it is a heartfelt, soul-inspiring
+religion, resting upon the love of God."[13] "Socialism is a theory of
+social organisation, which reconciles the individual to society. It
+has discovered how the individual in society can attain to a state of
+complete development."[14] "Socialism is the right of the community,
+acting in its corporate capacity, to intervene in the lives and
+labours of men and women."[15] "Socialism is nothing but the
+extension of democratic self-government from the political to the
+industrial world."[16] "Socialism is an endeavour to substitute for
+the anarchical struggle or fight for existence an organised
+co-operation for existence."[17] "Socialism may be described as an
+endeavour to readjust the machinery of industry in such a way that it
+can at once depend upon and issue in a higher kind of character and
+social type than is encouraged by the conditions of ordinary
+competitive enterprise."[18] "Socialism is the development of policies
+concerning the welfare of society."[19] "It is not arbitrary
+destruction and reconstruction, but a natural process of
+development."[20] "The idea of Socialism will conquer the world, for
+this idea is nothing but the real, well understood interest of
+mankind."[21] "Its principles will carry the whole human race to a
+higher state of perfection."[22] "It is the great modern protest
+against unreality, against the delusive shams which now masquerade as
+verities."[23] "Socialism is of the character of a historical
+discovery."[24] "Socialism, the inspiring principle of all Labour
+Parties, whether they know it or not, is the next world movement--the
+movement of the constructive intellect."[25]
+
+Socialism is rich in promises, and its claims to our consideration and
+support are manifold. Are these claims justified or not? Are the
+Socialists or the Anti-Socialists right in their conception of
+Socialism?
+
+The Socialists maintain that all opposition to Socialism is based
+either on self-interest or ignorance, and principally upon the
+latter. Therefore one of the Socialist leaders wrote: "Those who wish
+to understand Socialism will be wise to study Socialist books and
+papers. One does not expect a true and fair account of any theory or
+cause from its enemies. The man who takes his ideas of Trade-Unionism
+from the Free Labour League, his ideas of Liberalism from the Tory
+papers, his ideas of South African affairs--or any other affairs--from
+the Yellow Press, will be misled into all manner of absurdities and
+errors. The statements of party politicians and party newspapers on
+most controversial subjects are prejudiced and inaccurate; but there
+is no subject upon which the professional misleaders of the people are
+so untrustworthy and so disingenuous as they are upon the subject of
+Socialism."[26] A leading Socialist organ complained: "Our opponents
+decline to deal with the fundamental principles of Socialism--its
+unanswerable indictment of the capitalist system, with all its
+concomitants of wage-slavery and slumdom; prostitution and child
+murder--and prefer instead to indulge in calumniation and
+misrepresentation of Socialism. We need not complain about that. It is
+a tribute to the soundness of the Socialist position, to the
+irrefutability of its principles, the impregnability of the rock of
+economic truth upon which it is based, that our enemies dare not
+oppose the principles of Socialism, dare not attempt to meet the
+charge Socialism levels against the existing order."[27]
+
+There is much truth in these complaints. The general public and most
+writers and speakers know very little about Socialism, because this
+most interesting subject has been very inadequately treated in the
+existing books.
+
+The existing books on Socialism describe, analyse, and criticise the
+Socialist doctrines only in the abstract as a rule. However,
+Socialism is not only an elaborate economic doctrine, it is at the
+same time a complete system of practical politics. Hence it does not
+suffice to study the doctrines of Socialism by themselves. In order to
+understand Socialism we must also investigate its practical proposals.
+
+Following the methods of our political economists, most writers on
+Socialism have, unfortunately, treated Socialism rather as a
+scientific abstraction than as a business proposition. Consequently
+the most important practical details of Socialism, such as: What are
+the views of the Socialist with regard to the Monarchy, the Army, the
+Banks, the National Currency, the Law, Education? what are their
+practical aims as regards Parliamentary Representation, Foreign
+Policy, Agriculture, Taxation, Old-age Pensions, Fiscal Policy? what
+are their relations with the Parliamentary Parties, the Trade-Unions,
+the Co-operators, etc? what is their attitude towards International
+Communism and Anarchism? is English Socialism an Evolutionary or a
+Revolutionary Movement?--these and many other questions are touched
+but lightly or are not touched at all.
+
+It is somewhat difficult to deal fully with the practical proposals of
+the Socialists, because the Socialists are very averse from
+formulating their aims and disclosing their plans. An English
+Socialist wrote: "To dogmatise about the form which the Socialist
+State shall take is to play the fool."[28] Another one stated: "It is
+quite impossible, at this time, nor would it be desirable, if
+possible, to lay down any hard and fast line as to the development of
+the details of Socialist organisation. Broad principles are all that
+can with any degree of confidence be spoken about. The details will
+arrange themselves, as the time arrives when it becomes necessary to
+settle them."[29] Gronlund, perhaps the most prominent American
+Socialist, stated: "Socialists do not profess to be architects. They
+have not planned the future in minute detail."[30] Herr Bebel, the
+leader of the German Social-Democratic Party, said on February 3,
+1893, in the Reichstag, replying to the Roman Catholics, "We do not
+ask from you the details of the future life of which you speak so
+incessantly. Why, then, do you ask us about the future society?"[31]
+Although we are told that "Socialism claims the consideration of
+mankind, because it comes forward and offers a complete scheme to
+improve the conditions of human life,"[32] Socialists carefully
+abstain as a rule from giving us the details of that scheme.
+
+The Socialists of all countries have very excellent reasons for
+keeping to themselves the details of their plans for the future.
+Nevertheless, a careful search through their numerous writings will
+enable us to obtain a fairly clear and comprehensive view of their
+political and economic plans and intentions.
+
+Great Britain does not as yet possess a great Socialist party but only
+a number of Socialist groups and factions which are totally at
+variance as regards their aims, policy, and tactics. "They differ as
+to the best means of getting what they want, and as to the best ways
+of managing the work, and as to the proper way of sharing the
+earnings. Some Socialists still believe that Socialism will have to be
+got by force. I think there are not many. Some are in favour of buying
+the land, the railways, the machinery, and other things; and some are
+in favour of taking them, by force, or by new laws. Then some say that
+there should be no wages paid at all, but that everyone should do an
+equal share of work, and take whatever he needed from the nation's
+goods. Others say that all men should do an equal share of work, and
+have an equal share of the goods, or of the earnings. Others say it
+would be better to pay wages, as now, but to let the wages be fixed by
+the Government, or by corporations, or other officials, and that all
+wages should be equal. Others, again, say that wages should be paid,
+that the wages should be fixed as above stated, and that different
+kinds of work should be paid for at different rates. In one kind of
+Socialism the civil engineer, the actor, the general, the artist, the
+tram guard, the dustman, the milliner, and the collier would all be
+paid the same wages. In another kind of Socialism there would be no
+wages, but all would be called upon to work, and all who worked would
+'take according to their needs.' In another kind of Socialism the
+civil engineer would be paid more than the navvy, the opera singer
+more than the milliner, the general more than the sergeant, and the
+editor more than the scavenger."[33]
+
+Notwithstanding these numerous and important differences, of which
+more will be learned in the course of this book, British Socialists
+are absolutely united in certain important respects. "The policies of
+Socialism are a changeable quantity, though the principle is as fixed
+as the Northern Star."[34] "Socialism is as flexible in its form as it
+is definite in its principles."[35]
+
+A superficial study of Socialism reveals to us not a single and
+generally accepted plan, but a confused and confusing mass of mutually
+contradictory plans and doctrines. Therefore he who wishes to know
+what Socialism is, must study the many-headed movement in its entirety
+and give an impartial hearing to all its advocates. We can understand
+Socialism only if we are acquainted with practically its entire
+literature.
+
+Unfortunately the literature of Socialism is very vast. A complete
+collection of modern Socialist literature would embrace at least
+thirty thousand items. Therefore a full analysis of international
+Socialism based upon the study of the original sources is a forbidding
+undertaking. I have consequently limited myself to the investigation
+of the British Socialist movement, although I have cast a cursory
+glance upon foreign Socialism whenever it seemed necessary to do so.
+
+I have consulted altogether about a thousand books and pamphlets, and
+have given representative extracts from four hundred or five hundred
+of those which seemed most proper to elucidate the subject of this
+book. Having given space to the views of all the Socialist groups,
+this book is a summary of the whole literature of British Socialism
+and a key to it. It is based exclusively on first-hand evidence, and
+every statement contained in it can instantly be verified by reference
+to the original sources indicated in the footnotes. In the
+Bibliography at the end of this volume the full title, publisher's
+address, and date of publication of all sources drawn upon are given,
+so that readers will have no difficulty in procuring any Socialist
+books they may want for further study.
+
+Most of the books quoted are unknown to booksellers, and are not in
+public libraries. Even the British Museum Library possesses only part
+of the publications used in this book, which is the first to exploit
+fully the whole Socialist party literature. Whilst most books on
+Socialism take note only of Socialist text-books addressed to
+students, the present volume considers chiefly the propaganda
+literature which is educating the Socialist rank and file and shaping
+its political views. For all practical political purposes the
+propaganda literature is undoubtedly by far the more important of the
+two to the statesman and the citizen.
+
+The present volume is the only book of its kind, and I hope that the
+Socialist movement in Germany, France, and the United States will be
+treated with similar completeness by writers of these countries. The
+perusal of the present volume will enable us to form an opinion of the
+merits or demerits of the Socialistic theories and practical plans,
+and make it possible for us to separate the grain from the chaff, the
+wisdom from the folly, in the teachings of the Socialists. Thus we
+shall be able to see which of their complaints and proposals are
+justified and practical, and which are unjustified and unpractical.
+
+Popular dissatisfaction, Socialistic and non-Socialistic, points to
+the existence of ills in the body politic, and the Socialistic
+agitation is exceedingly valuable inasmuch as it draws general
+attention to these ills. Some complaints of the Socialists will be
+found to be imaginary, others are very real.
+
+It would be a sterile undertaking merely to analyse and criticise
+Socialism and the Socialistic proposals. Therefore, after having
+described the policy, ideals, and aims of the Socialists, I mean to
+analyse the disease of which Socialism is a consequence and a symptom,
+and to propose practical measures for curing it.
+
+In the course of this book I shall show that Socialism seems likely to
+become a very great danger in this country--a far greater danger than
+is generally realised. Therefore its opponents will be wise not to
+sneer at Socialism, but to study it and to try to understand it. That
+task will be found worth our while, and only after it shall we be able
+to further Socialism if it is beneficial, to combat it if it is
+pernicious, and to correct it if it is only the misguided expression
+of genuine suffering and want. Indifference to a great and dangerous
+political movement such as Socialism may have the gravest
+consequences. Idlers do not make history. They suffer it.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1] Millar, _Socialism_, p. 21.
+
+[2] Herbert Spencer, _The Man versus the State_, p. 18 ff.
+
+[3] Roosevelt, Presidential Message, December 1907.
+
+[4] Walter Crane in Squire, _Socialism and Art_, Foreword.
+
+[5] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 256.
+
+[6] Kessack, _Capitalist Wilderness_, p. 2.
+
+[7] Ford, _Woman and Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[8] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 1.
+
+[9] Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 3.
+
+[10] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, Preface.
+
+[11] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[12] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 3.
+
+[13] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 1.
+
+[14] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[15] _Labour Record_, February 1907.
+
+[16] Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 15.
+
+[17] _Will Socialism benefit the British People?_ p. 4.
+
+[18] Ball, _The Moral Aspects of Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[19] Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[20] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 257.
+
+[21] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 13.
+
+[22] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[23] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. ix.
+
+[24] Lafargue, in Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 1264.
+
+[25] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 108.
+
+[26] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[27] _Justice_, October 19, 1907.
+
+[28] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 96.
+
+[29] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 44.
+
+[30] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 126.
+
+[31] Guyot, _Pretensions of Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[32] Hird, _From Brute to Brother_, p. 1.
+
+[33] Robert Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 15.
+
+[34] Williams, _Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 4.
+
+[35] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 1265.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS OF PRESENT SOCIETY AND OF THE SOCIETY OF THE
+FUTURE
+
+
+"We are not indebted to reason," wrote the greatest American
+Socialist, "for the landmarks of human progress, for the introduction
+of Christianity, the institution of the monastic orders, the Crusades,
+the Reformation, the American Revolution, or the abolition of slavery.
+Man is only irresistible when he acts from passion. The masses of men
+are never moved except by passions, feelings, interests."[36]
+"Socialism has the advantage of appealing to the interests as well as
+to the enthusiasm of all except the few who think the world good
+enough as it is.... It is, of course, to the discontented wage-workers
+that the Socialist can appeal with the greatest chance of
+success."[37] These indiscreet words, which might have been written by
+the most implacable of Anti-Socialists, sum up and explain the
+Socialistic agitation and tactics. They are a proclamation and an
+avowal, and the worst enemy of Socialism would have found it difficult
+to pen a more damaging statement. Socialists rely not on reason or
+justice, but on unreason and passion, for the victory of their cause;
+and that fact is very much to be regretted, for it is bound to create
+prejudice and suspicion, and to greatly weaken their case.
+
+The British Socialists, seeking to rouse the passions of men,
+habitually rely on exaggeration and misrepresentation. They do not
+tire of painting the present state of society in the darkest colours
+and of describing with an unbounded but hardly justifiable optimism
+and enthusiasm the advantages which will accrue to society when
+Socialism has come to rule. It will be seen that in describing society
+of the present and society of the future, Socialists let their
+imagination run riot in the most astounding fashion.
+
+To the Socialist modern civilisation is worse than a failure. "Our
+civilisation seems all so savage and bestial and filthy and
+inartistic; all so cowardly and devilish and despicable. We fight by
+cheatery and underselling, and adulteration and bribery, and unmanly
+smirking for our bone of a livelihood; all scrambling and biting round
+the platter when there is abundance for all, if we were orderly and
+courteous and gentlemanly; all crushing the weaker; all struggling to
+the platter-side for the privilege of wearing tall hats and of giving
+good advice to the poor dogs outside. We, the well-fed, shout lordily
+to the hungry and cheer them with legends to the effect that though
+the poor are juggled out of earth, they may be masters in Heaven. Our
+civilisation is barbarous."[38]
+
+    Where'er we go, to east or west
+      North or south, 'tis all the same;
+    Civilisation at it's best
+      Is savagery's newer name.
+    For we see on every hand
+      'Midst the whirr and noise of trade
+    The toilers, crushed and trampled, and
+      Into beasts of burden made.[39]
+
+"The one reality of the nineteenth century is the scramble for wealth;
+politics, literature, science, religion, art, are, apart from
+money-getting, mere lifeless wraiths."[40] Government in general, and
+British Government in particular, is vicious, tyrannous, and
+neglectful, and deserves the utmost contempt. "National Government is
+devised for other objects than the adjustment of essential, economic,
+and hygienic arrangements for the redemption of human life; to use it
+for such a purpose is gross tyranny and a deadly blow at the very
+foundations of morality and religion! Governments exist for quite
+other purposes than this--to pay a million pounds yearly to one family
+and its immediate parasites, to supply power of life and death over
+the people to the exploiting class and fat places to their satellites
+and creatures, to squander hundreds of millions on gunpowder and
+armaments, to use the whole socialised power of the nation to overawe,
+exploit, rob, and ruin the so-called lower races--all these are the
+proper objects of government according to our orthodox wiseacres, but
+to use the same obvious instrument adequately to protect human life at
+home, and that life, to quote Mr. Burns, 'the weakest, the smallest,
+and the dearest to us all,' is to undermine the foundations of British
+manliness and to poison the fountain of British liberty and greatness.
+Such is the curious _melange_ of selfishness, hypocrisy, prejudice,
+ignorance, and incoherence which passes muster for argument amongst
+our anti-Socialist opponents."[41]
+
+British social legislation has been a failure. Never was the lot of
+the workers worse than it is now. "Your legislation for the past
+hundred years is a perpetual and fruitless effort to regulate the
+disorders of your economic system. Your poor, your drunken, your
+incompetent, your sick, your aged, ride you like a nightmare. You have
+dissolved all human and personal ties. The salient characteristic of
+your civilisation is its irresponsibility. The making of dividends is
+the universal preoccupation; the well-being of the labourer is no
+one's concern. You depend on variations of supply and demand which
+you can neither determine nor anticipate. The failure of a harvest,
+the modification of a tariff in some remote country dislocates the
+industry of millions, thousands of miles away. You are at the mercy of
+a prospector's luck, an inventor's genius, a woman's caprice--nay, you
+are at the mercy of your own instruments. Your capital is alive and
+cries for food."[42]
+
+Virtue has disappeared, religion is a fraud, clergy and priesthood are
+mercenary, cowardly, and interested time-servers. "The priests and the
+parsons are salary-slaves as much as the workers are wage-slaves. The
+majority of them dare not preach the Gospel of Humanity, Justice, and
+Socialism from their pulpits owing to their fear of their paymasters.
+Religion is divorced from business, politics, the administration of
+public authorities, the treatment of the aged worker, and written
+across the actions of the professing Christians is 'Self-interest;
+every man for himself and the Workhouse take the hindmost.'"[43]
+
+Life is hell, and only Socialism can regenerate the world.
+
+    Things are all wrong, and we must put them right
+    So say all Socialists, and truly too.
+    Man does not get the chance here to subdue
+    The brute in self; and hence the fearful blight
+    Which makes one sicken at the dreadful sight
+    Of all society in one hell stew.[44]
+
+Apparently all British workers spend their lives in terrible misery
+and constant privation. Hunger and despair are their constant
+companions, and they will see in Socialism their only salvation even
+if Socialism should destroy individual liberty, for to them individual
+liberty is a word without meaning. One of the most prominent British
+Socialists, Mr. Philip Snowden, M.P., in a pamphlet addressed to
+working men, writes: "Let those who fear that Socialism will destroy
+individual liberty and hinder intellectual development go with their
+talk to the machine-workers of our great northern towns, who are
+chained for eleven hours a day to a monotonous toil, with the eye of
+the overseer and the fear of dismissal spurring them on to an exertion
+which leaves them at the end of their day's work physical wrecks, with
+no ambition but to restore their wasted energies at the nearest
+public-house. Let them go with their talk of the blessings of
+civilisation to the pottery and chemical workers, whose systems are
+poisoned, whose sight is destroyed, where, through the bodies of the
+parents being saturated with poison, half the children are born dead,
+and of the rest not one in four lives to be five--tell them to hold
+fast to their share of the blessings of our glorious civilisation. Or
+go to the sweaters' victims, living, eating, working, dying in one
+room, for which a vampire landlord will take in rent one-half of all
+the family can earn by working day and night--talk to them of
+individual liberty and warn them of the tyranny of the coming
+Socialism. Or go on a bitterly cold winter morning to the dock gates
+of one of our great ports and see thousands of men waiting in the hope
+of a day's job, and watch how a few here and there of the strongest
+are selected, and the rest left to another day of hunger and despair;
+or, wait still, and see how a few remain behind in the hope that their
+mate may meet with an accident and 'they can snatch at the work he
+had.' Why, to talk of individual freedom and equality of opportunity
+under a system of cannibalistic competition like this is like the
+mocking laughter of a raving maniac gloating over the torture of the
+victim it holds in its murderous grip."[45] In another popular
+pamphlet the worker is told: "After all, John, does it not strike you
+that there is some foul iniquity in a system which allows one part of
+the community to do another portion of it to death and to rob and
+enslave those it is pleased to let live? Do you not see that those
+your capitalists find it convenient and profitable to employ may live;
+and that those they do not choose to employ must die? Do you not see
+that these are hurried and driven hither and thither in haggard,
+destitute misery; are thrust into festering heaps in your foul slums;
+into your gaols, and penitentiaries, and workhouses; that they wander
+in hopeless misery, hungering within sight of food, penniless amid
+plenty, enforcedly idle, and work to which they can have no access
+lying upon every hand of them, as though the world were under an
+enchantment and God were dead!"[46]
+
+The British working man, as he is generally known, is a manly and very
+independent personage. As a rule his master is more afraid of him than
+he is of his master. Yet, according to the picture drawn of him by the
+Socialists, he is a timorous, cowardly, whining, pitiful creature who
+has to cringe to his tyrannic employers:
+
+    See the toiler, how he slaves
+      For a trifle of his toil.
+    How disease and death he braves,
+      Yet the masters take the spoil;
+    And how often, cap in hand,
+      Trembling, pleading piteously,
+    He is forced to take his stand
+      In the mart of slavery.
+
+    Oh! ye tyrants of the earth,
+      Who make others' ruin your trade,
+    'Midst licentious love and mirth
+      Fashion, pomp, and church parade.
+    Do you never think, oh, tell
+      Of the hideous crime and shame
+    That has made this earth a hell
+      Of commercial fraud and shame?[47]
+
+During the week the British workers work at most five and a half days
+out of seven, and as a rule they work during from eight to ten hours a
+day. Generally speaking, the pace at which British workmen work is not
+forced. Except in a few special industries overwork among the working
+men is practically unknown. Besides, the pace at which work is
+performed is as a rule determined not by the employer, but by the
+employees. Nevertheless we read, "It is monstrous that, while some
+half million of men are vainly seeking employment, millions of their
+fellows should have no respite from arduous ill-requited toil and
+should be hastening to a premature death through overwork."[48] In
+prose and verse the British workers are constantly told that they are
+slaves[49] who are driven into starvation and suicide:
+
+    Let them brag until in the face they are black
+      That over oceans they hold their sway,
+    Of the flag of Old England, the Union Jack,
+      About which I have something to say.
+    'Tis said that it floats o'er the free; but it waves
+      Over thousands of hard-worked, ill-paid British slaves,
+    Who are driven to pauper and suicide graves--
+      The starving poor of Old England.
+
+        _Chorus._
+
+        'Tis the poor, the poor the taxes have to pay,
+        The poor who are starving every day,
+        Who faint and die on the King's highway--
+        The starving poor of Old England.
+
+    There's the slaves of the needle and the slaves of the mine,
+      The postmen, and the sons of the plough,
+    And the hard-worked servants on the railway line,
+      Who get little by the sweat of their brow.
+    'Tis said that the labourer is worthy of his hire;
+      But of whom does he get it? we'd like to enquire.
+    Not of any mill-owner, or farmer, or squire,
+      Who grind down the poor of Old England.[50]
+
+Now let us cast a glance at the Socialist picture of the society of
+the future under Socialistic rule.
+
+The first thing which Socialism would do would be to organise work,
+for "practical Socialism is a kind of national scheme of co-operation,
+managed by the State."[51] There would be no more employers, for
+"under Socialism all the work of the nation would be managed by the
+nation for the nation,"[52] and all would have plenty to eat, because
+"Socialism would leave no man to starve."[53] "All the work of the
+nation would be organised--that is to say, it would be ordered or
+arranged so that no one need be out of work, and so that no useless
+work need be done, and so that no work need be done twice where once
+would serve."[54]
+
+It is expected that the national organisation and administration of
+all the industries would prove more efficient than private enterprise.
+We are assured that "under Socialism the efficiency of production
+developed by Capitalism will not only be preserved but improved.
+Mechanical invention will be encouraged and utilised to the
+utmost."[55] Compulsory labour, State regulation of work, and
+increased production would lead to increased consumption and increased
+comfort. "Who would deny that, if it is everybody's duty to work, if
+the production of unnecessary--nay, even of injurious--articles is
+abolished, if production is organised in conformity with the real
+wants and pleasures of mankind--who would deny, I ask, that the
+standard of life of the whole human race might be raised infinitely
+above its present grade?"[56]
+
+Although Socialism would make work compulsory to all, and place every
+man, woman, and child under the direction of the great Socialist
+organisation with its army of officials, and although it would destroy
+individual liberty as at present understood, by placing the daily life
+of every citizen under Government regulations and restrictions, it
+would bring with it a greater liberty. Unfortunately the Socialists
+fail to say what that liberty consists in, and we must take their
+assurances in lieu of details. "Those who fear that Socialism will
+destroy individual liberty fail to distinguish between liberty and
+licence. Individualism is licence--it is the freedom of the individual
+to do as he likes without regard to the effect of his action on
+others, or even without regard to his own best welfare. Socialism is
+liberty; for it will restrict the freedom of the individual to inflict
+injury upon others or to do what is morally injurious to himself."[57]
+
+Socialism will release the British slaves out of their slavery, and
+restore them to everlasting freedom. "Such Socialism as we champion
+means for all future generations not slavery, but full and
+never-ending freedom."[58] "Socialism declares it to be the duty of
+man to remove all artificial barriers to the improvement of
+circumstances, in order that humanity, as a whole, may have freedom
+and all possible assistance to attain to its full stature, physically,
+mentally, and spiritually."[59]
+
+With the introduction of the Socialist _regime_ the earth would, as by
+a magician's wand, be transformed into a paradise. Over-population,
+bad harvests, the maladjustment of international demand and supply,
+and individual folly, laziness, wastefulness, improvidence, and
+passion would apparently no longer have the same unfortunate
+consequences which they have now. "The struggle for individual
+existence disappears...."[60] "The words 'poor' and 'charity' will be
+expunged from the dictionary as relics of a barbarous past."[61]
+"There would be no starvation, there would be no pauperism, there
+would be no sweaters; there would be no barefooted children in the
+streets; there would be no fraudulent trustees, no bankrupts; there
+would be no slums, no annual massacre of innocents by preventable
+disease; there would be hardly such a thing known as ignorance, there
+would be scarcely any drunkenness, and crime would shrink to
+microscopic dimensions."[62]
+
+"Practical Socialism would educate the people. It would provide cheap
+and pure food. It would extend and elevate the means of study and
+amusement. It would foster literature and science and art. It would
+encourage and reward genius and industry. It would abolish sweating
+and jerry-work. It would demolish the slums and erect good and
+handsome dwellings. It would compel all men to do some kind of useful
+work. It would recreate and nourish the craftsman's pride in his
+craft. It would protect women and children. It would raise the
+standard of health and morality; and it would take the sting out of
+pauperism by paying pensions to honest workers no longer able to
+work."[63]
+
+"There is something in Socialism to kill ignorance and to destroy
+vice. There is something in it to shut up the gaols, to do away with
+prostitution, to reduce crime and drunkenness, and wipe out for ever
+the sweater and the slums, the beggars and the idle rich, the useless
+fine ladies and lords, and to make it possible for sober and willing
+workers to live healthy, and happy, and honourable lives."[64]
+
+The Socialist Government would apparently be all-powerful and
+all-wise. At any rate, it would improve the character of the people.
+"Socialism would teach and train all children wisely; it would foster
+genius and devotion to the common good; it would kill scamping, and
+loafing, and jerrymandering; it would give us better health, better
+homes, better work, better food, better lives, and better men and
+women."[65]
+
+When Socialism is introduced and private capital abolished, the golden
+age of the world will begin:
+
+    When all mankind are workers,
+      And no drones in the hive;
+    Oh, what a happy, glorious time
+      They'll have who are alive.
+    This world will be a garden,
+      An Eden full of bliss;
+    Oh, brother--sister--won't you strive
+      For such a state as this?
+
+    There will be no starving children, no;
+      Nor tramps, nor beggars then;
+    No workhouses, nor prisons, and
+      No slums, nor sweater's den.
+    The land-grabber and the vampire,
+      And the fleecer of our toil,
+    Will all have ceased to crush us
+      In their vile rush for the spoil.[66]
+
+So far we have looked chiefly at the economic consequences which the
+introduction of Socialism is going to bring about. However, according
+to the Socialists, it is not true that "Socialism is merely sordid and
+material, and has no regard for the more ideal side of human
+interests. The Socialist recognises, far more than others, the higher
+ideals of human life as being its true end."[67] Therefore "Socialism
+seeks to improve the physical, mental, and spiritual environment of
+every man, woman, and child, so that all mankind may be purer,
+healthier, happier, stronger, nobler, and that each generation may be
+nearer perfection than the one immediately preceding."[68] In other
+words, "the creation of a higher type of mankind than the modern man
+will be the result of Socialism. Men will have no need to think, day
+in, day out, where to get the bread for to-morrow."[69] "Material
+conditions form the fundamental basis of human existence. When these
+become common property, free to all and abundant for all, they will
+cease to have that importance they now possess. The sordid struggle
+for mere material things will disappear; free play will be given to
+man's higher faculties, and the struggle, competition, or emulation
+between man and man will be for the realisation of his highest
+conceivable aspirations."[70]
+
+According to many Socialists, money and wages would disappear. Food,
+clothing, lodging, &c., would be given gratis to the citizens. "Under
+ideal Socialism there would be no money at all and no wages. The
+industry of the country would be organised and managed by the State,
+much as the Post Office now is; goods of all kinds would be produced
+and distributed for use, and not for sale, in such quantities as were
+needed; hours of labour would be fixed, and every citizen would take
+what he or she desired from the common stock. Food, clothing,
+lodging, fuel, transit, amusements, and all other things would be
+absolutely free, and the only difference between a prime minister and
+a collier would be the difference of rank and occupation."[71]
+
+Not only food, clothing, and shelter would be supplied gratis by a
+bountiful State to the people. In order to banish _ennui_ from among
+the workers, entertainments and amusements also would be provided,
+free of charge. Gratis travel on the railways would make life a
+permanent holiday, and the last cause of dissatisfaction would be
+removed by transferring the surroundings of the gratuitously
+maintained and amused people into a garden of Eden. "I would have the
+towns rebuilt with wide streets, with detached houses, with gardens
+and fountains and avenues of trees. I would make the railways, the
+carriage of letters, and the transit of goods as free as the roads and
+bridges. I would make the houses loftier and larger, and clear them of
+all useless furniture. I would institute public dining-halls, public
+baths, public washhouses on the best plans, and so set free the hands
+of those slaves--our English women. I would have public parks, public
+theatres, music-halls, gymnasiums, football and cricket fields, public
+halls and public gardens for recreation and music and refreshment. I
+would have all our children fed and clothed and educated at the cost
+of the State. I would have them all taught to play and to sing. I
+would have them all trained to athletics and to arms. I would have
+public halls of science. I would have the people become their own
+artists, actors, musicians, soldiers, and police. Then, by degrees, I
+would make all these things free."[72] In the words of the Socialist
+poet--
+
+    We'll grow up true men and women
+    And enjoy life from our birth.[73]
+
+Men, being no longer compelled to work hard for a living, will lose
+the desire for wealth and all that wealth supplies and will devote
+themselves more and more to the culture of their mind. "Under
+Socialism the possession of riches will cease to be a ruling passion,
+for honest labour will be a guarantee against want, and riches will no
+longer be the passport to social position. Under such conditions the
+possession of riches will be a superfluous burden which no sane man
+will wish to bear."[74] "When land and capital are the common property
+of all the people, class distinctions, as we know them at present,
+will no longer exist. The Mind will then be the standard by which a
+man's place among his fellows will be determined."[75] Hence
+"Socialism means the elevation of the struggle for existence from the
+material to the intellectual plane. Socialism will raise the struggle
+for existence into a sphere where competition shall be emulation,
+where the treasures are boundless and eternal, and where the abundant
+wealth of one does not cause the poverty of another."[76]
+
+The poet has described in a vision this phase of the golden age of
+Socialism as follows:
+
+    A strain of distant music
+      Floats on the gentle breeze,
+    Its captivating sweetness
+      Bends e'en the proudest knees;
+    Now soft as angel whispers,
+      Then, loud as trumpet's blast
+    It sounds the knell of sorrows
+      And pains for ever past.
+
+    Now sweeter and more varied,
+      The music doth appear;
+    Ten thousand harps Aeolian
+      Seem to be drawing near.
+    Ten thousand angels' voices
+      Are mingled with the strain,
+    Chanting the song of Freedom--
+      Justice has come to reign;
+
+    Telling of bounteous harvests,
+      Of waving golden corn,
+    Waiting the reaper's sickle,
+      And asking to be shorn;
+    Lands rich with milk and honey
+      Promised in days of yore;
+    Asking all those that hunger
+      To eat and faint no more.
+
+    The song grows loud and mighty
+      As thunder in the storm,
+    The tyrant quakes and trembles,
+      And hides his guilty form;
+    And stronger and still stronger
+      The joyous chorus grows--
+    Rejoice! all ye that labour,
+      Ye triumph o'er your foes.[77]
+
+"Socialism, being at the same time the sublimest science, art, and
+religion, will naturally elevate man. The British people will become a
+nation of scientists and philosophers who, throwing natural enjoyments
+aside, will lead a life of pure intellectual happiness. Mortal men
+will become demi-gods. Socialism will justify God's way to man."[78]
+"Socialism comes as the Angel of Light bearing to mankind this message
+of truth. Socialism, equipped with all the learning of the ages, takes
+up the ripest teaching of the poet, the philosopher, the economist,
+the scientist, the historian, and joins the conclusion of each
+together into one harmonious whole. Now we know that suffering,
+misery, and poverty are a violation of God's will. Now we know that
+the fulness of time has come for us to cast the last relic of our
+fallen nature from us and to follow the beckoning angel who is waiting
+to lead us back through the gates of Paradise into an Eden of
+intellectual joys."[79]
+
+    These things shall be! a loftier race
+      Than e'er the world hath known shall rise
+    With flame of freedom in their souls,
+      And light of science in their eyes.
+
+    They shall be gentle, brave, and strong,
+      To spill no drop of blood, but dare
+    All that may plant man's lordship firm
+      On earth, and fire, and sea, and air.
+
+    Nation with nation, land with land,
+      Unarmed shall live as comrades free;
+    In every heart and brain shall throb
+      The pulse of one fraternity.
+
+    New arts shall bloom of loftier mould,
+      And mightier music thrill the skies,
+    And every life shall be a song
+      When all the earth is paradise.
+
+    These things--they are no dreams--shall be
+      For happier men when we are gone.
+    These golden days for them shall dawn,
+      Transcending aught we gaze upon.[80]
+
+All men will be brothers. The difference among nations and races will
+disappear by the rule of love and justice. "Justice is to be the
+foundation on which we must build: not the kind of justice we have
+hitherto considered as sufficient for us, and which many countries
+pride themselves is their watchword and standard, but a justice that
+demands freedom for all."[81]
+
+    Equal rights it gives, my brothers,
+      To the eagle and the dove;
+    Right to air, and light, and knowledge,
+      Right to rise your toil above--
+    Hearken! hearken! O, my brothers,
+      For this new great Right is Love.[82]
+
+Wars will be abolished.
+
+    There's a good time coming, boys,
+      A good time coming;
+    The pen shall supersede the sword,
+    And right, not might, shall be the lord
+      In the good time coming.
+    Worth, not birth, shall rule mankind,
+      And be acknowledged stronger;
+    The proper impulse has been giv'n--
+      Wait a little longer.[83]
+
+Being a religion of peace and love, and preaching the brotherhood of
+man, Socialism will conquer the world. "Socialism with its promise of
+freedom, its larger hope for humanity, its triumph of peace over war,
+its binding of the races of the earth into one all-embracing
+brotherhood, must prevail."[84] "We mean the establishment of a
+political power which shall have for its conscious and definite aim
+the common ownership and control of the _whole_ of the world's
+industry, exchange, &c."[85]
+
+According to many Socialists, Socialism is not an original religion,
+but it is the most sublime form of Christianity. "Socialism is in
+accordance with the revealed will of God."[86] "Karl Marx was an
+utter pagan, but there is not an essential proposition in 'Das
+Kapital' that Jesus of Nazareth did not inculcate. Is it a question of
+rent? You are as much entitled to immunity from it as the birds of the
+air, or the grass of the fields. Is it a question of usury or
+interest? Lend, hoping for nothing again. Is it a question of profit
+or inequitable exchange? Do unto others as ye would that they should
+do unto you."[87] "Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism? Unless we are
+prepared to deny the truth of the Gospel, there can be but one
+answer--Yes. And Socialism naturally evolves from Christianity."[88]
+Socialism will mean the establishment of the rule of Christ upon
+earth. "The political democracy, dominated by the social ideal, will
+be the coming of Christ to rule the nations in righteousness."[89] The
+Socialist leaders see visions. "I do sometimes dream dreams, and I see
+a vision of what the world will be when this spirit of love and
+sacrifice which has actuated some noble spirits in all ages and which
+shone with the glory of full perfection in the life and example of
+Jesus of Nazareth--I sometimes see, as through a glass darkly, a
+vision of what the world will be when this spirit of love and
+sacrifice shall animate all men. I see our modern towns swept away,
+and in their place beautiful cities whose buildings reflect the pride
+of the community in their common life, and whose healthy homes show
+the value society attaches to the individual life. I see everywhere a
+change come over the face of the landscape; every meadow smiles with
+plenty, every valley blossoms as the rose, every hill is green with
+the glory of Lebanon. I see a revived art and a revived literature. I
+see a people healthy, happy, cultured, contented, whose wealth is
+life, full and free, 'whose ways are ways of pleasantness, whose
+flowery paths are paths of peace.' And my vision extends, though more
+dimly, beyond the confines of my own dear land, and I see this spirit
+of brotherhood among the nations has broken down international
+barriers, and international hatred is no more. The sword is beaten
+into a ploughshare, the spear into a pruning-hook, and the peoples of
+all lands are one, each freely sharing of its special bounties to add
+to the comforts of all."[90]
+
+The new Christian religion, like the old one, demands its saints and
+its martyrs, if not the reincarnation of Christ. "The only way to
+regain the earthly paradise is by the old, hard road to
+Calvary--through persecution, through poverty, through temptation, by
+the agony and bloody sweat, by the crown of thorns, by the agonising
+death, and then the resurrection to the New Humanity--purified by
+suffering, triumphant through Sacrifice."[91]
+
+The new Christ also has his forerunner and herald. "Mr. Keir Hardie,
+M.P., the leader of the Labour Party, resembles John the Baptist,"[92]
+and the Socialist leaders will do even greater things than did Christ.
+We are told: "When Christ told His disciples that it was possible for
+them to do greater things than they had seen Him do they must have
+been fairly staggered. Just think for a moment of the nature of the
+works He had done, most of them in their very presence. Those who are
+striving to obtain a better social order and provide a fairer
+distribution of the good gifts of God among the sons of men, these men
+I say, in so far as their efforts are successful, are doing greater
+things than Christ did when He performed the miracle of feeding the
+hungry."[93]
+
+"Man is only irresistible when he acts from passion. The masses of men
+are never moved except by passions feelings, interests. It is of
+course to the discontented wage-earners that the Socialist can appeal
+with the greatest chance of success."[94] All Socialists agree in
+depicting to the workers life in present society as hell incarnate and
+in giving a picture of life in the Socialist State of the future which
+resembles the descriptions found in the "Arabian Nights" tales. They
+only disagree in this: that some promise him heaven, whilst those
+possessed of less enthusiasm promise him only an earthly paradise.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[36] Gronlund, _The Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 187.
+
+[37] _Ibid._ p. 184.
+
+[38] _Forward_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[39] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 22.
+
+[40] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 140.
+
+[41] Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 6.
+
+[42] Glyde, _The Misfortune of being a Working Man_, p. 1.
+
+[43] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[44] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 1.
+
+[45] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, pp. 4-5.
+
+[46] Washington, _A Corner in Flesh and Blood_, p. 15.
+
+[47] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 29.
+
+[48] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 7.
+
+[49] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 18.
+
+[50] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 32.
+
+[51] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[52] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 7.
+
+[53] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 96.
+
+[54] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ pp. 5, 6.
+
+[55] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 74.
+
+[56] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 13.
+
+[57] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, pp. 12, 13.
+
+[58] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, p. 13.
+
+[59] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 1.
+
+[60] Engels, _Socialism: Utopian and Scientific_, p. 81.
+
+[61] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 170.
+
+[62] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[63] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 102.
+
+[64] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 89.
+
+[65] _Ibid._ p. 89.
+
+[66] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 8.
+
+[67] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 43.
+
+[68] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 1.
+
+[69] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 43.
+
+[70] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 44.
+
+[71] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 103.
+
+[72] _Ibid._ pp. 43, 44.
+
+[73] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 8.
+
+[74] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[75] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 24.
+
+[76] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[77] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 18.
+
+[78] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[79] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[80] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 14.
+
+[81] Ford, _Women and Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[82] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 31.
+
+[83] _Ibid._ p. 25.
+
+[84] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 104.
+
+[85] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[86] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 15.
+
+[87] Davidson, _The Gospel of the Poor_, p. 153.
+
+[88] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 16.
+
+[89] Snowden, _The Christ that is to be_, p. 13.
+
+[90] Snowden, _The Christ that is to be_, pp. 13, 14.
+
+[91] _Ibid._ p. 14.
+
+[92] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 4.
+
+[93] Ward, _Prevention is Better than Cure_, pp. 2, 5, and 6.
+
+[94] Gronlund, _The Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 184.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+THE GRIEVANCES OF THE SOCIALISTS
+
+
+"Socialism is not only a theory of another and better system of
+society: it is an indictment of the existing order."[95] The Socialist
+conception of society as at present constituted, given in the
+preceding chapter, will have prepared the reader to some extent for
+the Socialist grievances. These grievances are three in number, and
+may be summed up as follows:
+
+(1) The workers are for all practical purposes slaves who are kept in
+chains and forced to work by the capitalist class.
+
+(2) The rich men cause the poverty of the poor by defrauding them of
+the largest part of their wages.
+
+(3) The workers receive only from one third to one fourth of the wage
+which is their rightful due.
+
+Let us look into these grievances.
+
+According to the Socialist leaders, the workers--
+
+    Helots in hunger nursed
+    Slaves of their reign accursed[96]--
+
+keep the rich in affluence. Nevertheless they themselves are kept in
+poverty, degradation, and slavery by the capitalists whom they nourish
+by their labour. "The landlord owns the raw material and can live in
+idleness. The capitalist owns the machinery and can live in idleness.
+The worker has nothing, except his ability to work, and he cannot
+work without the consent of the landlord and the capitalist.
+Therefore, he is virtually a slave. He cannot control his own
+life."[97]
+
+As a matter of fact the position of the worker is worse than was that
+of the slave. "It did not always pay to starve a slave, because if he
+died you might have to buy another one. Therefore the lot of the slave
+under a good master was in many respects better than that of the
+proletariat in our great cities."[98] "Poverty rather than property is
+the reward of labour to-day."[99] "Poverty is our reward for creating
+plenty, and the class that lives in luxury by exploiting our labour
+contemptuously informs us that the law of supply and demand condemns
+us to suffer the most hideous privation whenever our excessive
+industry has created a glut of all the things that satisfy human
+needs."[100]
+
+The workers are unfree, being enslaved by the capitalists. It is true
+that they possess freedom of contract, but freedom of contract, like
+individual liberty, is an illusion, because the workers, being
+penniless, are compelled to accept whatever work is obtainable, and to
+be satisfied with whatever wages are offered. "The right to sell in
+the markets is now well established, but the chief difficulty with the
+majority of workers lies in the fact that they have nothing but their
+labour to sell, and a market is not easy to find even for that."[101]
+
+Although co-operation has made millions of workers in Germany, France,
+Belgium, and other countries prosperous and independent, independence
+is, according to the Socialists, for some unspecified reason,
+unobtainable for the workers of Great Britain, and co-operation is a
+failure. "The chance of the great bulk of the labourers ever coming to
+work upon their own land and capital in associations for co-operative
+production, has become even less hopeful than it ever was."[102]
+"Everywhere the workman is coming to understand that it is practically
+hopeless for him, either individually or co-operatively, to own the
+constantly growing mass of capital by the use of which he lives."[103]
+The advent of the great industry has not benefited but harmed him.
+"The supersession of the small by the great industry has given the
+main fruits of invention and the new power over Nature to a
+comparatively small proprietary class, upon whom the mass of the
+people are dependent for leave to earn their living."[104] "The worker
+is now a mere item in a vast industrial army over the organisation and
+direction of which he has no control. He is free, but free only to
+choose to which master he will sell his labour--free only to decide
+from which proprietor he will beg that access to the new instruments
+of production without which he cannot exist."[105]
+
+As the capitalist class owns the factories, workshops, &c., the worker
+has become to that class a slave in the full and generally accepted
+meaning of the word. "The effect of private property in land and
+capital is in all essential respects the same as was the effect of
+private property in human beings. In each case slavery is the result.
+The form may have changed, but the substance remains."[106] "The
+labourer to-day is a slave, and labour has become a mark of
+bondage."[107] Except for a slight difference in outward form, the
+British wage-slaves are no better off than were the black slaves on
+the sugar plantations in the past. "Much as the 'free-born Briton' may
+dislike to hear the painful truth recited, it is a fact, not to be
+controverted, that four-fifths of our total population are bound as
+completely and as miserably as ever was a black African slave to a
+Western planter. There is no real freedom which is not economic
+freedom. He is a slave who depends for his bread upon the will or the
+whim of a man like himself, or of a number of such masters."[108] In
+other words, capitalism and slave-owning are for all practical
+purposes synonymous words, as may be seen from the Socialist
+Catechism: "Q. What constitutes the chief difference between
+capitalism and slave-owning? A. The fact that the capitalist goes
+through the form of bargaining with the labourer as to the amount of
+the portion of the produce that shall be returned to him.--Q. What is
+this farce called? A. Freedom of contract.--Q. In what sense is it
+free? A. In this sense--that the labourer is free to take what is
+offered or nothing.--Q. Has he anything to fall back upon? A. He has
+absolutely nothing in countries where the tyranny of capitalism is
+untempered by any form of Socialism."[109]
+
+To those working men who might object that it is a gross exaggeration
+to say that the British worker is a slave, and that he is penniless,
+the Socialist agitator answers: "What? You are a free man and not a
+slave? There are no slaves in this country? What is a slave? One who
+works at the bidding of another, and only by permission of another,
+and for the profit of that other. Does not that fit your case exactly?
+Do you work when you like and idle when you like? Not you! You work
+when the capitalist requires your labour, when your services will be
+useful in making a profit for him. When that is not the case you can
+starve in the gutter, although there may be all the necessaries of
+life in profusion around you. These things do not belong to you,
+although you and your class have made them; they are so much wealth
+which your masters have acquired from your unpaid labour, things which
+you have produced, but for which you have never been paid, out of
+which you have been swindled by the natural operation of the system of
+wage-slavery of which you are the unconscious victim. From this
+condition of things there is no escape while the whole of the people
+do not own the means of production. Nothing but the abolition of the
+class ownership of the means of life, and the substitution of
+ownership of the whole people, will abolish this form of
+slavery."[110]
+
+The foregoing grievance is absurd. If regular work for a regular wage,
+agreed upon by contract, is slavery, then all salaried men from the
+Prime Minister and the Lord Chancellor downward are also
+"wage-slaves."
+
+The Socialist agitator, after having told the working men that they
+are no better off than negro slaves, then asks his hearers, as a rule:
+"Why is it that the producers in this country are the poorest of the
+population? Why is it that those who do not produce are the
+richest?"[111] The manner in which this question is put suggests the
+reply. Indeed, all Socialists agree in holding the rich responsible
+for the poverty of the poor, as the following utterances will show:
+"Socialism contends that the poverty of the poor is caused by robbery
+on the part of the rich. The mansion explains the hovel. Belgravia has
+its counterpart in Shoreditch. The factory, the foundry, the
+ship-building yard account for the shooting lodge, the yacht, and the
+tours in foreign lands. The long day's toil of one class renders
+possible the life-long play of the other."[112] "If you have no
+unemployed at the top of the social ladder you will have none at the
+bottom."[113]
+
+"The riches of the rich class are the cause of the poverty of the
+masses."[114] "You make the automobile, he rides in it. If it were not
+for you, he would walk; and if it were not for him, you would
+ride."[115] "Colossal poverty is the foundation of colossal wealth; he
+who would eliminate the poverty of the masses assails the wealth of
+the few."[116]
+
+The foregoing arguments, or rather assertions, may sound very
+convincing and may be exceedingly useful for propaganda purposes, but
+they are disproved by facts. If the existence of the rich were the
+cause of the poverty of the masses, the workers in countries which
+possess few rich capitalists, such as Ireland, Spain, Italy, Servia,
+and Bulgaria, should be exceedingly well off; the workers in the
+countries where the richest millionaires live, such as the United
+States, should be the poorest. In reality, the American workmen are
+the most prosperous, whilst the workers in Ireland and other
+millionaire-less countries are the poorest. Rich men are not the
+consumers, but merely the trustees and managers, of the national
+wealth which is invested chiefly in reproductive undertakings--mills,
+railways, mines, &c.--which supply comforts and conveniences to all.
+
+The capitalists, the employers, British Socialists say, have become
+rich by defrauding the worker of his wages. The worker must starve so
+that a few rich people may live in luxury, and things will become
+better for the worker only when there are no more rich men. "The gains
+of the capitalist are simply the losses of labour! The partly or
+wholly unearned incomes of the rich consist of the unpaid, withheld
+wages of the industrious poor."[117] "Only by living off another man's
+labour and denying another man the fruits of his toil can riches be
+acquired. Riches are directly responsible for poverty, and the art of
+being rich is the art of keeping one's neighbour poor. When there are
+no rich there will be no poor. To the wealth of the few, acquired at
+the expense of the many, and not to drink or want of thrift, are all
+the evils of our social life to be ascribed."[118] "Production is
+carried on to-day purely in the interest and for the profit of the
+class which owns the instruments of production."[119]
+
+    There are ninety-and-nine who live and die
+      In want and hunger and cold,
+    That one may revel in luxury,
+      And be wrapped in its silken fold;
+    The ninety-and-nine in their hovels bare,
+    The one in a palace with riches rare.[120]
+
+    Ye poor of wealthy England,
+      Who starve and sweat and freeze
+    By labour sore to fill the store
+      Of those who live at ease;
+    'Tis time to know your real friends,
+      To face your real foe,
+    And to fight for your right
+      Till ye lay your masters low;
+    Small hope for you of better days
+      Till ye lay your masters low.[121]
+
+The working men are, according to the Socialist agitators, "excluded"
+from property by the capitalist class which owns all the land,
+factories, machinery, &c. The capitalist class has thus reserved for
+itself a monopoly of all the instruments of production. Consequently,
+"the only means by which the excluded class can live is by working for
+the capitalist class--by getting some one or other of the capitalist
+class to allow them access to the tools and materials in his
+possession, and pay them wages in return for their labour."[122]
+However, the capitalists do not grant to the workers access to the
+instruments of production free of charge. They exact a toll from them,
+and employ them only if, by so doing, they can secure a profit for
+themselves. In the fact that an employer will engage workmen only if
+he can make a profit by their labour, the Socialists see a cruel
+injustice. "Your capitalist class draw upon this excluded horde of
+landless, toolless, foodless lack-alls, and do actually find work for
+as many as they can employ at a profit to themselves. This excluded
+class have no rights--not even the elementary right to exist. What God
+meant by creating them when He knew, or might have known, that
+everything belonged to the capitalists, nobody can understand."[123]
+"The whole of our industrial system is founded on a principle existing
+nowhere else in Nature, the principle of production and distribution
+for profit. If no employer can make a profit out of the worker's
+labour he is cast into the unemployed army."[124] "Seven out of every
+eight persons in your community, 37,500,000 of the men, and women, and
+children who form your nation, can lay no claim to any right to
+exist--exist only on sufferance. If one or other of the irresponsible
+persons who own the country can be induced to allow them to earn their
+bread, well and good; if not, they must die. At the present moment
+there are 700,000 persons shut out in this manner from any chance of
+obtaining food to eat. You call it being 'out of work,' and can see
+the spectral army, 700,000 strong, hungry and in want. They are not
+kept idle and hungry because there is no 'work.' The earth is there
+with all its boundless store that their 'work' would turn into wealth
+if they could but get at it. They are kept idle because those who own
+the country cannot find them employment at a profit to themselves,
+because the blind, fatuous insanity of your 'system of trade' makes no
+provision even for keeping its slaves in work."[125]
+
+According to the Socialists, the employer of labour has no right to
+work at a profit, and the capitalist has no right to demand rent or
+interest. "The great central truth of Socialistic economy, ever to be
+kept in mind, is Adam Smith's definition of wages: 'The produce of
+labour is the natural recompense or wages of labour.' From this
+'natural recompense' rent and profit are, in Socialist eyes,
+unnatural, illegitimate abstractions, to be recovered and added to
+wages as speedily as possible."[126] "Profit is the result of unpaid
+labour; it is the produce of the working man, for which the latter
+receives no equivalent. If he received his proper and just share, if
+the capitalist could not deprive him of this, then the capitalist
+could make no profit."[127]
+
+Not only are "rent" and "profit" illegitimate abstractions, but they
+are downright theft. Every landowner, every banker, every
+manufacturer, every shopkeeper is a thief. All business for profit is
+swindling. "Land-rent and capital-rent are thefts from the produce of
+labour."[128] "The manufacturer aims primarily at producing, by means
+of the labour he has stolen from others, not goods, but profits."[129]
+"What is successful business but cheating? What is the whole basis of
+capitalist industry but the use of the means of production, not for
+the legitimate end of producing wealth for use, but for the purpose of
+making profit for the few by despoiling, sweating, pillaging, and
+murdering the many?"[130]
+
+Even the more moderate Socialists complain that work is carried on by
+the employers only "at a profit to themselves," and they wish to
+abolish this state of affairs, which, they argue, is demoralising to
+the working men, and is the cause of low wages and unemployment. "The
+workman is called into the workshop when capital can profitably employ
+him, and turned adrift again the moment capital finds it can no longer
+turn his services to profitable account. He is not consulted as to
+when he shall be employed or when cast adrift. His necessities and
+those of his dependents are no concern of anyone save himself. He has
+no right to employment, no one is under obligation to find him work,
+nor is he free to work for himself, since he has neither the use of
+land nor the command of the necessary capital."[131] "So long as
+industry is carried on for profit instead of for use, for gain instead
+of for need, so long must the evils of low wages and no wages go
+on."[132]
+
+The grievance that the manufacturers manufacture "not for use but for
+profit" is ridiculous. The manufacturers manufacture things which the
+public will buy and use. There is consequently no distinction between
+manufacturing for use and manufacturing for profit, except this, that
+no manufacturer will give his time and trouble, and run considerable
+risks, without adequate compensation. The complaint must therefore be
+limited to the fact that the employer of labour makes a profit. The
+question now arises: "What does the manufacturer do with his
+earnings?" In the vast majority of cases he will use by far the larger
+part of his profits for renewing machinery and enlarging his works,
+and thus increase the national capital and the national power of
+production, spending privately only a director's salary which he would
+also receive as a director-employee of the Socialist commonwealth.
+"The employer who works without a profit breaks himself,"[133] and in
+breaking himself he breaks up the factory. Universal production
+regardless of profit would lead to universal bankruptcy, whilst the
+curtailing of profits may lead to a proportionate curtailment in the
+expansion of industry and in the production of articles for use, and
+to general poverty. It has the same effect whether the workers destroy
+the capitalist's capital or whether they break the machinery and
+devastate the corn-fields.
+
+The complaints of the Socialists as to the way in which the workers
+are exploited by the capitalist class are founded not only on
+arguments such as those given in the foregoing but on figures as well,
+and these are exceedingly curious and interesting. Under titles such
+as "How the Worker is Robbed,"[134] statements are made every day, and
+by all Socialists, which are to prove that the national income is
+inequitably divided between capitalists and workers. These statements
+are calculated to make every workman's blood boil, and they seem to
+confirm the contention of the Socialists that the capitalists
+inhumanely plunder the working masses. However, these figures are so
+palpably false and so grossly misleading that attention cannot
+sufficiently strongly be drawn to the deception which is constantly
+being practised upon the workers. I hope, therefore, that my readers
+will patiently and carefully consider the following.
+
+The figures relating to the yearly income of the "capitalist class"
+and the "working class" which are given in innumerable Socialistic
+writings, and which are brought forward at almost every Socialist
+meeting and lecture, are usually taken from a pamphlet entitled
+"Facts for Socialists from the Political Economists and
+Statisticians," published by the Fabian Society. The copy lying before
+me bears the notice, "Tenth Edition (Revised), 111th thousand, 1906."
+That pamphlet furnishes the statistical basis of fact to the Socialist
+agitation. Its effect may be measured by its enormous circulation. It
+contains a vast number of quotations from Blue-books, political
+economists, and statisticians; and a certain show of learning, of
+thoroughness, and of conscientiousness gives it at first sight the
+appearance of being a reliable and honest production. However,
+appearances are proverbially deceptive.
+
+According to "Facts for Socialists," the whole national income amounts
+to _1,800,000,000l._ per year (page 3), and is derived from the
+following sources:
+
+
+"I.--RENT
+
+"The total profits from the ownership of lands, houses, tithes, &c.,
+the rents of mines, quarries, ironworks, gasworks, waterworks, canals,
+fishings, shootings, markets, tolls, &c., must amount to at least
+_290,000,000l._[135]
+
+
+"II.--INTEREST ON CAPITAL
+
+"The profits of public companies, foreign investments, railways, &c.,
+assessed to income tax in the United Kingdom, the interest payable
+from British public funds and from Indian, Colonial, and Foreign
+Governments' funds, and the interest on capital employed in private
+undertakings of manufacture or trade cannot be less than
+_360,000,000l._ Adding hereto the rent (_290,000,000l._), we have a
+total of _650,000,000l._ for rent and interest together. This
+represents the proportion of the nation's income claimed from the
+workers, _not in return for any service rendered to the community, but
+merely as the payment for permission to use the land and the already
+accumulated capital of the country_.[136]
+
+
+"III.--PROFITS AND SALARIES
+
+"The numbers and total income of this large class cannot be exactly
+ascertained. It includes workers of all grades, from the exceptionally
+skilled artisan to the Prime Minister, and from the city clerk to the
+President of the Royal Academy. It is convenient for statistical
+purposes to include in it all those who do not belong to the 'manual
+labour class.' If we take the 'rent of ability' to have increased in
+the same proportion as the assessments to income tax, this prosperous
+body may be estimated to receive for its work as profits and salaries
+about _460,000,000l._ annually.[137]"
+
+Adding up the income from "Rent," "Interest and Capital," and "Profits
+and Salaries," the pamphlet continues:
+
+
+"THE CLASSES
+
+"The total drawn by the legal disposers of what are sometimes called
+the 'three rents' of land, capital, and ability amounts at present to
+about _1,110,000,000l._ yearly, or just under two-thirds of the total
+produce.
+
+
+"AND THE MASSES
+
+"Allowing for the increase since these estimates were made, we may
+safely say that the manual labour class receives for all its millions
+of workers only some _690,000,000l._"[138]
+
+In a short table the distribution of the national income is then given
+as follows:
+
+  Rent                                       L290,000,000
+  Interest                                    360,000,000
+  Profits and Salaries                        460,000,000
+                                            -------------
+
+    Total (that is, the income of the
+    legal proprietors of the three
+    natural monopolies of land, capital,
+    and ability)                            1,110,000,000
+  Income of manual labour class               690,000,000
+                                            -------------
+  Total produce                            L1,800,000,000[139]
+
+At first sight it seems outrageous that "the income of the legal
+proprietors of the three natural monopolies of land, capital, and
+ability" should come to _1,110,000,000l._ per annum, and the income of
+the manual labour class only to _690,000,000l._ per annum, about
+one-third of the whole, especially as we learn on page 4 of the
+pamphlet that the "idle rich" are only a small fraction of the
+community. This statement would prove the assertion that the idle rich
+are causing the poverty of the poor to be correct if it were honest
+and fair, but it is neither the one nor the other.
+
+In the first place the foregoing statement divides the nation into two
+classes "the masses" and "the classes": manual labourers and "the
+legal proprietors of the three natural monopolies." As the pamphlet is
+addressed to the uncritical body of general readers, and especially to
+working men, these will naturally divide, owing to the artful wording
+of the phrase, the national income between manual labourers and
+capitalist monopolists. According to this pamphlet everyone who is not
+a labourer is a capitalist monopolist. Therefore the capitalist
+monopolist class includes all lawyers and doctors, all parsons and
+clerks, all officers and salaried officials. Every business man, every
+farmer, every fisherman, every greengrocer, every baker, every
+butcher, every sailor, every cobbler, every chimney-sweep, every
+clerk, being not a wage-earning labourer, is "one of the legal
+proprietors of the three natural monopolies," or in plainer language,
+a monopolist. At least, the income of this very large class has
+barefacedly been credited to the capitalist class, whilst its members
+have been utilised (on page 4 of the pamphlet) to swell the ranks of
+the workers. This is dishonesty number one.
+
+The income of the exceptionally skilled artisans, who also form a very
+large class, is credited on page 7 to the "classes" under the heading
+"profits and salaries." They also are included among the
+"monopolists," although their number has likewise been utilised (on
+page 4) to swell the number of the workers. This is dishonesty number
+two.
+
+Let us now look at the result of the dishonest Fabian juggling with
+figures by comparing the statement regarding the national income
+contained in the Fabian pamphlet with a recent statement of Mr.
+Chiozza Money, M.P., who is a Socialist, and who divides the national
+income as follows:
+
+  Income of working class (33,000,000 people)
+                                        about        L650,000,000
+
+  Income of middle class (all except manual
+   labourers and the rich--small business
+   men, managers, clerks, public servants,
+   &c., with incomes up to L700--9,750,000
+   people)                              about         475,000,000
+
+  Income of rich (with incomes L700 and
+   above) (1,250,000 people)            about         600,000,000
+                                                   --------------
+  Total                                 about      L1,725,000,000[140]
+
+From the foregoing statement it appears that the rich draw not
+two-thirds, but only one-third, of the national income, and this fact
+should be carefully borne in mind in view of the contents of the
+following pages.
+
+The pamphlet states on page 6 that _650,000,000l._ per annum are paid
+in the shape of rent and interest, "not in return for any service
+rendered to the community, but merely as the payment for permission to
+use the land and the already accumulated capital of the country." The
+national capital is invested chiefly in perishable objects such as
+houses, factories, railways, steamships, mines, &c., which depreciate
+unless kept in proper repair. There is wear and tear in capital as in
+everything else. Capital is lost and destroyed every day. Lastly, the
+national capital is growing, and must continue growing, in accordance
+with the growing capital requirements of the time and the growing
+number of its inhabitants, or the country will decay. New houses, new
+factories, new railways, new steamships must be built and new mines be
+opened to increase the comfort of all. From _200,000,000l._ to
+_300,000,000l._ are thus reinvested every year in Great Britain, and
+only by this constant process of reinvestment is it possible to
+maintain and increase the productive power of the country for the
+benefit of all. The _200,000,000l._ to _300,000,000l._ which are
+yearly reinvested in reproductive undertakings are found by the
+capitalists, the trustees, directors and managers, not the consumers,
+of the national industry and of the national wealth. This sum comes
+out of their earnings, which thus benefit not only the capitalists but
+the whole nation. Much irrelevant statistical matter is given in the
+pamphlet, but this large item is left out. That is dishonesty number
+three.
+
+On page 6 the profits of public companies are treated as "Interest on
+capital," and interest on capital is disparagingly called "unearned
+income" on page 7. Most British industries are carried on by limited
+companies, and limited companies are as a rule formed in this way,
+that the partners in the former private enterprise become directors.
+As directors they receive a purely nominal salary. They work as much
+as they did whilst the business was a private concern, and their
+income depends on their usually very large holding of shares. The
+large director-shareholders, and their number is very great, earn
+their dividends by hard work. Nevertheless their whole income is
+included in the item "interest on capital," and called "unearned
+income." This is dishonesty number four.
+
+On page 7 the property of the "manual labour class," or the poor, in
+land and capital is given as follows:--
+
+In 1901 the deposits in P.O. Savings Bank were       L140,392,916
+    The deposits in Trustee Savings Banks were         51,966,386
+    Consols purchased for small holders were           14,450,877
+
+In 1900 the capital of Building Societies was          46,775,143
+    The funds of Trade-Unions, Co-operative,
+      Friendly, and Provident Societies were           72,219,991
+    The funds of Industrial Life Assurance
+      Societies were                                   22,998,793
+                                                     ------------
+              Total                                  L348,804,106[141]
+
+In reality the property of the "manual labour class" in land and
+capital amounts not to _348,804,106l._, but to at least
+_1,000,000,000l._[142] This is dishonesty number five.
+
+The imports of Great Britain are larger than the exports by about
+_150,000,000l._ The larger part of the money paid for these imports
+goes in wages paid to foreigners, and is paid away by the British
+capitalist class out of their earnings. British wage-earners surely
+cannot expect to be paid wages in respect of articles made abroad.
+However, no allowance for this large item has been made in comparing
+the appropriation of the national income between capital and labour.
+This is dishonesty number six.
+
+Between one hundred and two hundred million pounds of the national
+income is derived from foreign investments. The income derived from
+foreign investments should in fairness either be left out of the
+account or the income of foreign labour, received in respect of these
+investments, be added to the British labour income. In comparing the
+income of capital and labour, the pamphlet takes note of the earnings
+of British capital on all five continents and on the sea, and compares
+with it only the income of British labour--although foreign, not
+British labour, produces the foreign income of British capital.
+
+Giving as authority an ancient Board of Trade Return, and wishing to
+magnify the difference in the earnings of the idle rich and the
+industrious poor, the average yearly income of "those of the manual
+labour class who are best off" is given at _48l._ per adult. This
+means _18s._ per week. In view of the fact that most British workers
+earn between _1l._ and _2l._ per week, that in many Trade-Unions the
+_average_ wage is about _35s._ per week, the figures given are
+palpably wrong unless the female workers are included. Whether this is
+the case or no is not stated, but even if the wages of both sexes
+should be joined together they appear to be very considerably
+understated. This is dishonesty number seven.
+
+There are many more unfair, misleading, and dishonest statements in
+this pamphlet which it would lead too far to enumerate.
+
+Most of the important pamphlets issued by the Fabian Society are
+signed by their authors. The fact that the most effective, "Facts for
+Socialists," is unsigned seems to indicate that the author--apparently
+a well-known leader of the Fabians--had some sense of shame, and it is
+to be hoped that the Fabian Society will immediately, and publicly,
+repudiate this dishonest pamphlet.
+
+The statements contained in the pamphlet "Facts for Socialists," may
+be misleading and utterly dishonest, but they are very useful for
+propaganda purposes. Nothing is more likely to inflame the masses than
+to be told that the "idle rich" take more than two-thirds of the
+national income. The practical effect of this pamphlet may be seen in
+utterances such as the following: "It has been estimated that in our
+country of the wealth produced, one-third is enjoyed by those who earn
+it and two-thirds by those who have not laboured for it. To put it in
+other words, of every three pounds earned by labour, one pound goes to
+him who earned it and two pounds to others who have done nothing
+towards its production."[143] "For two-thirds of his time the worker
+is a slave, labouring not for himself but for others."[144] "On the
+average at the present time the workers produce nearly four times as
+much as they consume."[145] "Nearly two-thirds of the wealth produced
+is retained by an eighth of the population."[146] "The great mass of
+the people, the weekly wage-earners, four out of five of the whole
+population, toil perpetually for less than a third of the aggregate
+product of labour, at an annual wage averaging at most _40l._ per
+adult, and are hurried into unnecessarily early graves by the severity
+of their lives."[147] "Out of the wealth which his labour creates, the
+worker receives but one-third. He is paid one-third the value of his
+labour, and when he seeks to lay it out he is robbed of one-half its
+purchasing power, and all this is done by a Christian people."[148]
+"Q. How does the capitalist act? A. He extorts from those labourers
+who are excluded from the land a share of all that they produce, under
+threat of withholding from them the implements of production and thus
+refusing to let them work at all.--Q. On what terms does the
+capitalist allow the labourers to work? A. The capitalist agrees to
+return to them as wages about a quarter of what they have produced by
+their work, keeping the remaining three-quarters for himself and his
+class.--Q. What is this system called? A. The capitalist system."[149]
+"By analysing the returns of the income-tax, various economists show
+that the value received by the working class and the superintendents
+of labour amount to a third or less of the wealth produced. The
+income-tax returns, however, are not a very reliable test of the
+degree of exploitation, though, of course, they afford us valuable and
+incontestable evidence that the worker does not receive more than a
+third of what he produces. One to four, or one to five, in my opinion,
+expresses more accurately the rate of exploitation."[150]
+
+I am not prepared to give an estimate how the national income is
+distributed between hand workers, brain workers, and men who live on
+their income without doing any useful work, because such an estimate
+could be arrived at only by guesswork. However, it is quite clear that
+it is untrue that the wage-earners receive only one-third, one-fourth,
+or one-fifth of the wages which they ought to receive, as is
+constantly stated.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[95] _Justice_, October 19, 1907.
+
+[96] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 13.
+
+[97] _The Worker's Burden_, p. 1.
+
+[98] Hyndman, _Social Democracy_, p. 9.
+
+[99] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[100] _Protect the Home_, p. 1.
+
+[101] _John Ball_, p. 10.
+
+[102] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 12.
+
+[103] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 15.
+
+[104] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[105] _Ibid._ p. 12.
+
+[106] Keir Hardie, _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_ p.
+12.
+
+[107] McClure, _Socialism_, p. 27.
+
+[108] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 11.
+
+[109] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 5.
+
+[110] _To the Man in the Street_, Social-Democratic Federation
+Leaflet.
+
+[111] Hyndman in Debate, _Will Socialism Benefit the English People?_
+p. 5.
+
+[112] Leatham, _The Class War_, p. 4.
+
+[113] _Socialism, For and Against_, p. 6.
+
+[114] Snowden, _Socialists' Budget_, p. 11.
+
+[115] Debs, _Industrial Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[116] Kautsky, _Class Struggle_, p. 10.
+
+[117] Hall, _The Old and New Unionism_, p. 4.
+
+[118] Lister, _Riches and Poverty_, pp. 13, 14.
+
+[119] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[120] _Poems for Socialists_, p. 8.
+
+[121] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 25.
+
+[122] Washington, _A Corner in Flesh and Blood_, p. 14.
+
+[123] _Ibid._
+
+[124] Benson, _Socialism_, p. 5.
+
+[125] Washington, _Nation of Slaves_, p. 11.
+
+[126] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 30.
+
+[127] _Some Objections to Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[128] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 45.
+
+[129] Morris, _Useful Work and Useless Toil_, p. 30.
+
+[130] _Some Objections to Socialism_, p. 20.
+
+[131] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 52.
+
+[132] Hall, _The Old and New Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[133] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 6.
+
+[134] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 16 f.
+
+[135] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 5.
+
+[136] _Facts for Socialists_, pp. 6, 7.
+
+[137] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[138] _Ibid._ p. 8.
+
+[139] _Facts for Socialists_, pp. 8, 9.
+
+[140] See _Daily News_, November 28, 1907.
+
+[141] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 7.
+
+[142] See Mr. Quail's paper in the _Contemporary Review_ for August
+1907.
+
+[143] Ward, _The Ideal City_, pp. 5, 6.
+
+[144] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 15.
+
+[145] Quelch, _Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 5.
+
+[146] _Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 8.
+
+[147] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 8.
+
+[148] Keir Hardie, _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_ p. 7.
+
+[149] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 2.
+
+[150] Hazell, _Summary of Marx's "Capital,"_ p. 9.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+THE FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINES OF SOCIALISM
+
+
+In describing the doctrines of Socialism I do not mean to state in
+detail the whole of the Socialistic theories. Such a statement would
+fill a volume, it would be excessively tedious to most readers, and it
+is for all practical purposes quite unnecessary. A statement of the
+leading doctrines on which the activity of the Socialists is
+based--the doctrines which are constantly asserted and which are the
+fundamental dogmas of the Socialist faith--will enable us to obtain a
+clear view of the foundations upon which the theoretic fabric of
+Socialism is built, and to judge whether that foundation is scientific
+and sound, or unscientific and unsound.
+
+The basic doctrine of Socialism, upon which the great edifice of
+Socialistic theory has been reared, may be summed up in the phrase
+
+     "LABOUR IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF WEALTH"
+
+Therefore we read in the celebrated pamphlet "Facts for Socialists,"
+of which some important extracts were given in the preceding chapter:
+"Commodities are produced solely by the 'efforts and sacrifices'
+(Cairns), whether of muscle or of brain, of the working portion of the
+community, employed upon the gifts of Nature. Adam Smith 'showed that
+labour is the only source of wealth.... It is to labour, therefore,
+and to labour only, that man owes everything possessed of
+exchangeable value (McCulloch's 'Principles of Political Economy,'
+Part II., section 1). 'No wealth whatever can be produced without
+labour' (Professor Henry Fawcett (Cambridge), 'Manual of Political
+Economy,' p. 13),"[151]
+
+This statement is scarcely honest, for it quotes opinions of Adam
+Smith and others which are erroneous, as will be seen in the
+following, and which have been generally abandoned. This statement may
+impose upon the simple by its show of learning, but it is somewhat
+vague, for it only suggests, but does not distinctly assert, that
+manual labour is the only source of wealth. However, in most--one
+might say in nearly all--Socialist books, pamphlets, and declarations
+of policy we find the basic doctrine of Socialism asserted in a form
+which leaves no doubt that according to the Socialist theories the
+manual labour of the labourer is the only source of wealth.
+
+The founder of modern Socialism declared, "Labour is the only source
+of wealth,"[152] and his disciples--at least his British
+disciples--support that declaration. "All wealth is due to labour;
+therefore, to the labourers all wealth is due."[153] "Labour applied
+to natural objects is the source of all wealth."[154] The Socialist
+Party of Great Britain declares: "Wealth is natural material converted
+by labour-power to man's use, and as such is consequently produced by
+the working class alone."[155] The Independent Labour party asserts:
+"No man or class of men made the first kind of wealth, such as land,
+minerals, and water. Therefore no man or class of men should be
+allowed to call these things their own, or to prevent others from
+using them (except on certain conditions), as the landowners and
+mine-owners do now. The only class of human beings who make the
+second kind of wealth are the workers. Working men and women produce
+and prepare for us all those things which we use or consume, such as
+food, clothing, houses, furniture, instruments and implements, trams,
+railways, pictures, books, gas, drains, and many other things. They
+produce all the wealth obtained by toil from the land."[156]
+
+Those who maintain that labour, or, as some Socialists assert, the
+labourer's labour, is the only source of wealth, look merely at the
+mechanical factor, but omit the force which directs and controls it.
+The Socialistic argument "We can run the mills without the
+capitalists, but they cannot run them without us"[157] is misleading.
+Labour is certainly an indispensable ingredient in production, but it
+is no more indispensable than is direction, invention, and thrift.
+Hence it is as absurd to assert "All wealth is due to labour" as to
+say "All wealth is due to invention," or "All wealth is due to
+thrift." As the brain is more important than the hand, at least in a
+highly organised state of production, so invention, organisation,
+management, and thrift are more important than manual labour, because
+invention, organisation, management, and thrift alone enable manual
+labour, working with modern machinery, to be highly productive. In
+fact, it may be asserted that wealth is created not so much by labour
+as by the saving of labour. A factory-owner who is dissatisfied with
+the profits of his factory or with its products does not get better
+workers, but gets a better manager or better machinery, keeping his
+workers. This fact proves that labour is the least important factor in
+modern production. The doctrine "Labour is the only source of wealth"
+is untenable and absurd.
+
+Another fundamental doctrine of Socialism is that of
+
+     "THE IRON LAW OF WAGES"
+
+According to that law, "wages under competition can never be higher
+than that which will just support the labourer and enable him to renew
+his kind."[158] In the words of Lassalle, the inventor of the Iron Law
+of Wages, "the wages of the labourer are limited to the exact amount
+necessary to keep him alive."[159]
+
+The British Socialist writers tell us: "The average price of
+wage-labour is the minimum wage--_i.e._ that quantum of the means of
+subsistence which is absolutely requisite to keep the labourer in bare
+existence."[160] "The labourer cannot as a rule command more than his
+cost of subsistence in return for his labour. This principle, that the
+return to labour is determined by the cost of subsistence of the
+labourer, is generally known as 'The Iron Law of Wages.' But has not
+this law been discarded even by some Socialists? There have been
+attempts in some quarters to demonstrate that this law does not
+actually operate with the rigidity at first claimed for it; but in
+truth, it stands as firmly to-day as when insisted upon by
+Lassalle."[161] "Capitalism always keeps the wages down to the lowest
+standard of subsistence which the people will accept,"[162] for "the
+basis of wages is the cost of subsistence of the labourer. This is
+called the 'Iron Law of Wages.'"[163] "By the Iron Law of Wages the
+recompense of the workers always tends to the minimum on which they
+are willing to subsist. If they are content with water to drink and
+cabbage to eat, they may be sure that the means of buying whisky or
+roast beef will very soon be taken from them. Messrs. Rentmonger,
+Interestmonger, and Profitmonger will speedily scent additional swag,
+and they will have it, too."[164] "The 'Iron Law of Wages' reduces the
+wages to as near the level of the means of subsistence as local
+circumstances will admit of."[165] If these arguments were correct it
+would follow that the workers could cause their wages to rise by
+drinking wine instead of whisky, and by smoking Havana cigars instead
+of pipe-tobacco.
+
+This theory of wages is called the "Iron Law of Wages" because of its
+absolute and pitiless rigidity. For instance, the Iron Law of Wages
+will prevent lower prices of food benefiting the workman in any way.
+"If the working class is enabled to buy cheap bread, the operation of
+the 'Iron Law of Wages' will secure all the advantage for the
+capitalists, as it did in the days of the saintly Bright, when the
+corn laws were repealed. Capital is always the same in its effect on
+the working-class, whether manipulated by an individual capitalist,
+joint-stock enterprise, municipality, or government, and with each
+step in concentration the working-class gets relatively less and the
+master class gets richer, more corrupt, and more bestial, as recent
+events in Berlin and elsewhere show."[166] The "Iron Law of Wages" is
+irrefutable and irresistible. "Economists have come to talk about the
+'Iron Law of Wages' with as much assurance as if it were an
+irreversible law of Nature."[167]
+
+The Iron Law of Wages exists chiefly in the imagination of British
+Socialists. The general wage of British workmen living in towns ranges
+from, say _18s._ to more than _2l._ per week, and its amount does not
+depend on the cost of subsistence, but on the working skill and
+various other factors. If the Iron Law of Wages were correct, wages
+would be almost uniform. The Iron Law of Wages can possibly apply only
+to one small class of workers, the lowest and least skilled labourers,
+provided that unemployment is so great among them that they abandon
+collective bargaining and underbid one another down to the level of
+subsistence. When workers are organised, the Iron Law of Wages does
+not apply. The level of wages depends, broadly speaking, on supply and
+demand. Wages rise when two employers run after one workman; wages
+fall when two workmen run after one employer. An employer who engages
+a workman does not ask, "How much do you eat?" but "What can you do?"
+and he proportions the worker's remuneration not to his appetite, but
+to his ability and his value as a producer. The wages paid to married
+men and to unmarried men are identical in the same trade. If there was
+an "Iron Law of Wages," the wages of married men should be about twice
+as large as those of unmarried men.
+
+The Iron Law of Wages is manifestly absurd. It has therefore been
+officially abandoned by the German Socialists at the Halle Congress of
+1890 "as being scientifically untenable."[168] "German Social
+Democracy no longer recognises the Iron Law of Wages."[169] The
+British Socialists have not abandoned it, probably not because they
+believe it to be scientifically correct--no one can believe that--but
+because it is a plausible and effective means of poisoning the minds
+of the people.
+
+As regards the factors which determine wages, one of the foremost
+Socialist authorities says: "Thoughtful workmen in the staple trades
+have become convinced by their own experience, no less than by the
+repeated arguments of the economists, that a rising standard of wages
+and other conditions of employment must depend ultimately on the
+productivity of labour, and therefore upon the most efficient and
+economical use of credit, capital, and capacity."[170] In other words,
+productivity and profit determine wages, and it is ridiculous that
+Socialists argue: "Over 90 per cent. of our women do not drink, back
+horses, smoke, attend football or cricket matches, they do not stop
+off their work to watch England and Australia play at cricket, and the
+result is they are paid less wages than men in our factories for doing
+the same work."[171] Does Councillor Glyde really believe that women's
+wages would rise as soon as they took to smoking and drinking?
+
+
+THE LAW OF INCREASING MISERY
+
+According to this law the improvements in machinery, the increase of
+capital and increase of production do not benefit the worker. They
+only lead to a decline in wages and thus increase the workers' misery.
+"In proportion as the use of machinery and division of labour
+increases, in the same proportion the burden of toil also increases
+whether by prolongation of the working hours, by increase of the work
+exacted in a given time, or by increased speed of the machinery,
+&c."[172] "The faster productive capital increases, the more does the
+division of labour and the employment of machinery extend. The more
+the division of labour and the employment of machinery extend, so much
+the more does competition increase among the labourers and so much the
+more do their average wages dwindle. And thus the forest of arms
+outstretched by those who are entreating for work becomes ever denser
+and the arms themselves grow ever leaner."[173] "The more the worker
+labours the less reward he receives for it; and that for this simple
+reason, that he competes against his fellow-workmen and thus compels
+them to compete against him and to offer their labour on as wretched
+conditions as he does, and that he thus, in the last result, competes
+against himself as a member of the working-class."[174] "The worker in
+the factory gets, as a worker, absolutely no advantage from the
+machinery which causes the product of his labour to be multiplied a
+hundredfold."[175] "John Stuart Mill, it will be remembered,
+questioned whether mechanical invention had lightened the labours of a
+single human being."[176] "With increasing powers of production, the
+worker's share, and therefore his purchasing power, grows less."[177]
+"Wage-labour rests exclusively on competition between the
+labourers."[178] "The iron law of competition means, and must mean,
+continued degradation for the workers, even though their physical
+condition in youth may be improved."[179] "The worker in the factory
+is now seen to work no shorter hours or gain no higher wages merely
+because the product of his labour is multiplied a hundredfold by
+machinery which he does not own. 'The remuneration of labour as such,'
+wrote Cairnes in 1874, 'skilled or unskilled, can never rise much
+above its present level.'"[180]
+
+The celebrated "Doctrine of Increasing Misery" stands in diametrical
+opposition to those facts with which nowadays every child is
+acquainted. During the time when our Socialists have been preaching
+the "Doctrine of Increasing Misery" working hours have been very
+greatly diminished and wages have not been reduced, but have risen by
+about 100 per cent. During the same time working hours in Germany have
+also been reduced and wages have risen up to 400 per cent.[181] The
+German Socialists have been honest enough to abandon the Doctrine of
+Increasing Misery under the guidance of Bernstein; the French have
+dropped it under the guidance of Sorel; the Dutch have seen its
+absurdity, guided by Vandervelde, their foremost leader. The British
+Socialists, on the other hand, have not abandoned it, though they must
+see its absurdity, probably because, though palpably and ridiculously
+false, the Doctrine of Increasing Misery is considered to be a useful
+and effective part of the Socialist agitator's stock-in-trade.
+
+The next doctrine to be considered is
+
+
+THE SURPLUS-VALUE DOCTRINE
+
+The Socialists argue that the position of the worker cannot improve
+because the capitalist, possessing the monopoly of property, pockets
+all that the worker produces except the mere cost of his subsistence,
+which, owing to the "Iron Law of Wages," is given to the workman in
+the form of wages. "The amount of wealth which the labourer produces
+in the time for which he has sold his labour-force is out of all
+proportion to what it costs to produce and maintain his labour-force
+for that time. This, the difference between what he produces and his
+own cost of production, is surplus-value, and is taken and divided up
+by the capitalist into rent, interest, profit. This surplus-value,
+then, this profit, is so much robbery effected by taking advantage of
+the necessity of the proletarian--the naked propertyless
+labourer."[182] "All that the worker produces beyond what is
+absolutely necessary to keep himself and his offspring in life, this
+surplus beyond subsistence--this difference between the recompense of
+labour and its products--this unrighteous subtrahend, this swag, is
+the booty alike of slavelord, serflord, and drudgelord, or
+capitalist."[183] The question now arises: "How does the capitalist
+secure this surplus-value of labour without paying for it? If the
+workman is free, why cannot he insist on receiving, not the mere
+exchange-value of his commodity--'labour-power'--but the full value of
+the labour he expends for the capitalist? The capitalist obtains this
+surplus-value owing to his monopoly of the means of production. The
+labourer cannot, as a rule, command more than his cost of subsistence
+in return for his labour--although his wages, like the prices of all
+commodities, sometimes rise above this and sometimes fall
+below--because, although apparently free, he is really not free. He
+must sell his labour-power in order to live; he has no other commodity
+to dispose of. Consequently he must accept the terms that the
+purchaser will offer, subject only to two conditions--his own cost of
+subsistence and the fluctuations of the market."[184] "Owing to the
+monopoly of the means of production in the past, industrial inventions
+and the transformation of surplus income into capital have mainly
+enriched the proprietary class, the worker being now dependent on that
+class for leave to earn a living."[185]
+
+The Surplus-Value Doctrine, like the preceding doctrines, is founded
+rather upon imagination than upon fact. In the first place, it is
+absurd to speak of a "capitalist class" which, having a "monopoly of
+the means of production," exploits "the naked and propertyless
+labourer." This picture is a fancy picture. In the second place,
+"class" is not synonymous with "caste." The population is not divided
+into two rigidly defined and limited castes of capitalists and
+wage-earners. There is neither a monopoly of capital nor a monopoly of
+labour. Capital is founded by thrift. Most respectable workmen are
+capitalists to a greater or lesser extent. Every day workmen become
+capitalists. It should not be forgotten that many of the wealthiest
+men, such as Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Krupp, the first
+Rothschild, Sir Thomas Lipton, Passmore Edwards, and many others, have
+risen from the ranks and were working men--and every day capitalists
+lose their money and become workmen. Workmen may become capitalists by
+thrift. Co-operating workmen in England, France, Germany, and other
+countries own vast industrial undertakings, banks, &c. In those
+districts where thrift and co-operation are general (France,
+Switzerland, Holland) the "naked and propertyless labourers"
+disappear, whilst in equally prosperous districts where improvidence
+is general, they are many. The prosperity of the working classes in
+France, Switzerland, Holland, and other countries disproves the
+assertion that the workman is condemned to everlasting poverty because
+of the Surplus-Value Doctrine.
+
+Assertions in support of the "Surplus-Value Doctrine" such as
+"Carnegie and other millionaires have wrung their wealth literally out
+of the bodies of the underfed"[186] are as malicious as they are
+untrue. Men like Carnegie and Krupp have not "wrung their wealth out
+of the bodies of the underfed," but out of Nature. They have created
+vast industries in barren places, and the industries which they have
+created nourish now tens of thousands of working men. Men like Krupp
+and Carnegie have diminished misery, not increased it. Their capital,
+created by their brains with the assistance of labour out of Nature,
+has rather enriched labour than that labour has enriched Carnegie and
+Krupp. Their wealth is not dead wealth; it produces wages and articles
+of use. The "Surplus-Value Doctrine" is a grotesque distortion of, and
+an unjustified protest against, the fact that manufacturers and other
+organisers and directors of labour will not work for nothing.
+
+We have seen in the foregoing that, according to the fundamental
+Socialist doctrines, "labour is the only source of wealth." We have
+also seen that, according to the "Iron Law of Wages" and the "Law of
+Increasing Misery," the workmen are condemned to great, permanent, and
+constantly increasing misery. Further, we have learned that, according
+to the "Surplus-Value Doctrine," all the fruit of their labour, minus
+the cost of their bare subsistence, is taken from the workers by the
+capitalists. Hence it is only natural and logical that the assertion
+of the fundamental doctrines, namely--
+
+  1. Labour is the only source of wealth,
+  2. Wages maintains mere animal existence,
+  3. The misery of the workers is constantly increasing,
+  4. The position of the worker is hopeless,
+
+has led to this fifth doctrine:
+
+
+THE LABOURER IS ENTITLED TO THE ENTIRE PRODUCT OF HIS LABOUR
+
+This doctrine is put forth by practically all British Socialists, not
+only as a doctrine but also as a demand. For instance "the New School
+of Trades-Unionists declare themselves in open and uncompromising
+revolt against the established relations between capital and labour;
+and they expound a new political economy which says that nothing less
+than the full fruits of industry shall be reckoned the fair reward of
+the producing class. They want the whole four-fourths of their
+earnings, instead of the one-fourth at present doled back in
+wages."[187] This demand must have precedence over all other measures
+whatsoever, for "until you have settled the material question as to
+how the producers of wealth are to get for themselves the full value
+of what they produce by their labour, it is impossible to settle
+anything else."[188]
+
+According to many Socialists, Socialism would immediately abolish
+their grievances and give to the worker the entire produce of his
+labour. "At present the frugal workman only gets about one-third of
+his earnings. Under Socialism he would get all his earnings."[189]
+"Under the new order all will be productive workers, receiving an
+equivalent for what they produce--not merely one-half of it as now
+under the wage-system--in some form."[190] Under the heading "Basis of
+the Fabian Society," the Fabian Society publishes a statement of the
+fundamental principles of that Society in which we read: "If these
+measures" (confiscation of all private property) "be carried out,
+without compensation (though not without such relief to expropriated
+individuals as may seem fit to the community), rent and interest will
+be added to the reward of labour, the idle class now living on the
+labour of others will necessarily disappear, and practical equality of
+opportunity will be maintained by the spontaneous action of economic
+forces with much less interference with personal liberty than the
+present system entails."
+
+The absurdity of the demand for "the entire product of labour," which
+is raised by Socialists on behalf of the labourer is clear even to the
+most superficial thinker. The majority of Socialists know quite well
+that writing off, repairs, renewals, the replacing of machinery, the
+enlargement of factories, &c., cannot be done gratis, that the
+distribution of the whole produce of labour to the workers can be
+effected only by neglecting and destroying the means of production.
+
+The impossibility of giving to the worker the "whole product of his
+labour" by abolishing the private capitalist is clearly recognised and
+honestly admitted by the German Socialists. Kautsky, for instance,
+writes: "If the income of the capitalists were added to that of the
+workers, the wages of each would be doubled. Unfortunately, however,
+the matter will not be settled so simply. If we expropriate
+capitalism, we must at the same time take over its social
+functions--among these the important one of capitalist accumulation.
+The capitalists do not consume all their income; a portion of it they
+put away for the extension of production. A proletarian _regime_ would
+also have to do the same in order to extend production. It would not
+therefore be able to transfer, even in the event of a radical
+confiscation of capital, the whole of the former income to the working
+class. Besides, a portion of the surplus value which the capitalists
+now pocket, they must hand over to the State in the shape of taxes.
+For these reasons our Socialists are guilty of wilful deception if
+they tell the workers that under a Socialist _regime_ their wages
+would be doubled and trebled."[191] Nevertheless, the doctrine and the
+demand that "the labourer is entitled to the entire product of his
+labour" is not abandoned by British Socialists, apparently because it
+is extremely useful for arousing the passions of the workers against
+the capitalists in accordance with Gronlund's advice,[192] and for
+bringing new adherents to the Socialist camp.
+
+Only the Fabian Society, the more scientific section of the English
+Socialists, has mildly protested against this absurd doctrine and
+demand, but that protest has not been heeded. In a little-read
+pamphlet of that Society, the following statement may be found: "The
+Fabian Society steadfastly discountenances all schemes for securing
+to any person or any group of persons the entire product of their
+labour. It recognises that wealth is social in its origin and must be
+social in its distribution" (which means in plain English, must be
+preserved by the thrifty few, official or non-official, for the use of
+the unthrifty many), "since the evolution of industry has made it
+impossible to distinguish the particular contribution that each person
+makes to the common product, or to ascertain the value."[193]
+Notwithstanding these emphatic statements, the Fabian Society
+preserves with characteristic duplicity[194] the statement in its
+programme that "rent and interest, will be added to the reward of
+labour."
+
+Most British Socialist writers are not aware, or rather pretend not to
+be aware, of the necessity of preserving and increasing the national
+capital. In "Land, Labour, and Liberty," we read: "Whilst in 1845 the
+total wealth of this country was estimated at _4,000,000,000l._, it is
+now estimated at over _12,000,000,000l._ The monopolist classes,
+without denying themselves anything, and whilst producing
+comparatively nothing, have piled up an additional eight thousand
+millions. The superfluous handful of mere possessors remain the
+flowers and foliage of society; the three-quarters of the nation of
+indispensable producers remain the manure."[195] This writer, like
+most Socialists, though acknowledging the enormous growth of the
+national capital of Great Britain, pretends that the "monopolist
+classes" have not denied themselves anything. If that were true, the
+national capital would still amount to only _4,000,000,000l._ as in
+1845. Great Britain would have few factories, no new machinery, no
+steamships, and but a very few miles of railway. But for the
+self-denial, the thrift of the "superfluous handful of mere
+possessors," Englishmen would still live in the Hungry Forties and
+Great Britain would be able to nourish only about 20,000,000 people as
+she did in 1845. National capital and the comforts and conveniences
+which it supplies to all are at least as much the result of thrift,
+inventiveness, enterprise, and wise direction as of manual labour.
+
+The foregoing shows that, to say the least, the grievances of the
+Socialists are greatly--one might almost say grotesquely--exaggerated,
+and that they are largely founded on a perversion of facts; a
+perversion which can be easily explained by the desire of the
+Socialist leaders to arouse the blind passions of the discontented
+wage-earners in accordance with Gronlund's advice, quoted on page 10.
+
+The next doctrine which should be considered may be summed up in the
+words:
+
+
+"THE EXISTING MISERY CAN BE ABOLISHED, NOT BY INCREASING PRODUCTION,
+BUT BY ALTERING THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE WEALTH PRODUCED"
+
+"The Socialist emphatically denies the assertion that the poor must
+always be with us. The productive capacity of society is now so great
+that none need want, and all are able to earn their livelihood, and
+more, except where they are prevented from doing so by sickness,
+infirmity, or by the existence of laws and customs which the individual
+cannot himself, acting alone, remove."[196] "There is a demand for the
+labour of every man under any well-ordered social system. If there is a
+waste of men now, it is the fault of the wage system."[197] "Sufficient
+wealth is produced in this country to-day which would, under a
+well-ordered state of society, enable every man, woman, and child to
+have a sufficiency of all things essential to a healthy human life.
+To-day the people produce this wealth, and, after they have produced
+it, quite two-thirds of it is taken from them by a very small section
+of the people. Consequently we have a very few rich, and many that are
+poor."[198] "We may claim to have solved the problem of how to produce
+enough, and the question which confronts us is how to bring
+distribution into line with the productive capacity of our
+people."[199] "The old argument that there is not enough work to do
+cannot be seriously listened to by anyone who has walked through a
+London or Manchester slum. There is work in the world for all, just as
+there is wealth in the world for all, and every man has a right to
+work, just as he has a right to wealth."[200] "The chief problem is not
+the production of more wealth, but its equitable distribution."[201]
+
+The increase of production and therefore of reproductive capital in
+the form of machinery, mines, railways, ships, &c., in which most of
+the "Surplus-Value" is invested, is explained to be a matter of
+secondary consideration and importance, and it is stated that the
+world suffers rather from over-production than from under-production.
+"The tendency of the conditions of employment under present
+circumstances, under the capitalist system, always is for production
+to outstrip consumption."[202] "Our power to produce has always, since
+the beginnings of capitalism, shown a tendency to grow more rapidly
+than our power to consume."[203] "Then because there is a plethora of
+goods and a dearth of purchasers, the workshops are closed and Hunger
+lashes the working population with his thousand-thonged whip. The
+workers, stupefied by the dogma of work, do not understand that the
+cause of their present misery is the overwork that they have inflicted
+on themselves during the time of sham prosperity."[204] "For some
+insane reason the capitalist has thought of nothing but
+production."[205] "If, by a fiat from heaven, the wealth of the world
+were doubled to-morrow and the present system of capitalistic monopoly
+and commercial competition were allowed to continue, the social misery
+would, in a very short time, reappear in a form even still more
+accentuated, were that possible. Individualism, commercialism,
+capitalism--call it what we may--has demonstrably produced the
+evil."[206]
+
+
+THE EXISTING CAPITALIST SYSTEM IS RESPONSIBLE FOR POVERTY, WANT, AND
+UNEMPLOYMENT
+
+Unemployment is largely caused by commercial crises, commercial crises
+are caused by over-production, over-production is caused by the fact
+that the national industries are divided and the industrial output is
+regulated not by the nation in accordance with the national demand but
+by irresponsible private individuals whose aim is profit, not the
+fulfilment of a national demand. "The causes of commercial depression
+lie in the non-consumption of the incomes of our millionaires."[207]
+Another Socialist writer asserts: "Our era is cursed with crises
+occurring far more frequently than plagues and causing as much misery.
+Economists say that these crises are caused by over-production.
+Private enterprise compels every producer to produce for himself, to
+sell for himself, to keep all his transactions to himself, without
+regard to anybody else in the wide world. Merchants have got no
+measure at hand by which they can, even approximately, either
+estimate the effective demand of their customers or ascertain the
+producing capacity of their rivals. Production by all these
+manufacturers is, and must necessarily be, absolutely planless. This
+planless production must end in the market being overstocked with
+commodities of one kind or another; that is, that it must end in
+'over-production.' In the trade which has been thus overdone, prices
+fall and wages come down; or a great manufacturer fails and a smaller
+or greater number of workmen are discharged. Crises are therefore the
+direct result of private enterprise."[208] "Why are men--men that is
+who are able and willing, nay, eager and anxious, to work--unemployed?
+Because, it is said, there is nothing for them to do. Nothing for them
+to do? Is all the necessary work of the world, then, already finished,
+so that there is nothing more remaining for anyone to do? No; it is
+not because all the necessary and useful work is done that men are
+unemployed, it is because all the means of production--all the
+machines, tools, and implements of labour and all the raw
+material--are owned by a class, and may only be used by permission of
+that class, and when that class can make a profit out of their
+use."[209] "It is indisputable that modern poverty is artificial. It
+is neither the result of divine anger nor the niggardliness of Nature.
+It is the product of the private ownership of land and capital by
+which men are prevented from earning their living unless the
+proprietary class can make profit from their labour. The inevitable
+result of this system is that in all industries and at all times there
+are more men seeking employment than there is employment for.[210]"
+"Your system of private ownership, in conferring the possession and
+control of the nation's storehouse of wealth and of the instruments by
+which all further wealth must be obtained from it, upon your
+capitalist class, has reduced the nation at large into nothing more
+nor less than an elaborate machine which your capitalists use for
+extracting wealth from the earth for their own benefit.... It is not
+well that by a foolish and wicked system of government, one small
+class of the community should be enabled to organise its production in
+such a manner that the full stream of wealth is diverted into their
+own possession whilst the mass of the nation by whose labour it is
+obtained are defrauded of it, and brought into a state of subtle
+slavery worse both in kind and degree than could be possible under any
+system of direct and open slavery."[211] "Unemployment is an
+inevitable feature of capitalism, and is impossible of removal without
+at the same time abolishing the capitalist system that produces it.
+That is a fact known to any Socialist with the most elementary
+knowledge of the economics of capitalism. Unemployment is caused by
+the exactions of the capitalist class. The prime cause of unemployment
+is the robbery of the workers by which the capitalist class
+appropriate the whole of the wealth produced by the workers, returning
+to them just as much on the average as will keep them physically fit
+to continue working. The difference between the quantities produced
+and consumed by the working class (a difference continually increasing
+with every increase in the productivity of labour) represents a
+surplus which all the waste and all the luxury of its owners cannot
+absorb, with the result that the markets are glutted with an excess of
+commodities. Thus the 'over-production,' the crisis, and the
+slackening of production involving an increase of unemployment."[212]
+
+Employers of labour profit directly from unemployment, and will
+therefore presumably do all they can to bring it about. "Employers and
+other well-to-do people have no interest in finding work for the
+workless. They benefit from the unemployment of the poor."[213] The
+foregoing statement is as malicious as it is absurd. Employers do not
+desire unemployment, partly from humanitarian reasons, partly because
+it is a loss to them. The father of English Socialism taught: "The
+labourer perishes if capital does not employ him. Capital perishes if
+it does not exploit labour."[214] In other words, unemployed labour
+means unemployed capital; besides, those business men who do not
+actually dismiss their workers suffer also through unemployment,
+because the unemployed are supported by the rates.
+
+The doctrines that "the existing misery can be abolished, not by
+increased production but by altering the distribution of the wealth
+produced," and that the "capitalist system is responsible for want,
+poverty, and unemployment," are manifestly unsound. A larger
+consumption of food, clothing, &c., can be effected only by a larger
+production. Gluts and crises, with consequent unemployment, occur, not
+through general over-production, which would benefit all, but by
+ill-balanced production, as the following example will prove: Imagine
+an island off the African coast on which there are two villages, the
+inhabitants of which require only two commodities, loin-cloths and
+mealies. One village manufactures loin-cloths, the other raises
+mealies, and these are exchanged against each other. These villages
+fulfil the Socialistic ideal. There are no capitalists and no
+middlemen, and production is only "for use," not "for profit."
+Balanced over-production will result in this, that every native will
+have a superabundance of loin-cloths and food. But supposing that the
+agriculturists go in for loin-cloth making, finding that occupation
+more congenial, and that they abandon much agriculture; or supposing
+that inclement weather, or a plague of grasshoppers, should seriously
+curtail the harvest, then there will soon be a glut of loin-cloths and
+a crisis. The cry of over-production will arise among the loin-cloth
+makers, but that cry will be unjustified and absurd. The more the
+people make the more they will have, provided production is properly
+balanced. The doctrine that we suffer from over-production and that
+the capitalist system is at fault, that altered distribution rather
+than increased production will abolish misery, and that Socialism can
+prevent want and unemployment by a scientific organisation of
+production, is wrong.
+
+Socialists may, of course, argue, "In the Socialist State production
+would be organised, and controlled, and properly balanced and
+harmonised," an argument which is irrelevant with regard to the
+over-production doctrine, and which besides is unsound, although it
+may be found in most Socialistic writings. As production is
+world-wide, the Socialists' control of production would also have to
+be world-wide. It would involve not only the control of all human
+energy throughout the world, but also the control of the seasons, of
+the weather, of insect plagues, of fashions, of appetite, &c.
+
+The foregoing proves that "men can never become richer till the
+produce of their labour increases. The more they produce the richer
+they will be, provided there be a demand for the produce of their
+labour. If a shoemaker makes four pairs of shoes in a day he will be
+twice richer than he would be if he made only two pairs in a day,
+provided that an increased demand is co-existing. The question,
+therefore, 'How can we become richer?' is reduced to this one, 'How
+can we increase the produce of labour and at the same time maintain an
+equivalent demand for that produce?'"[215] The doctrines that want and
+unemployment are due to over-production and to the capitalist system
+are wrong.
+
+We now come to the
+
+
+DOCTRINE OF THE CLASS WAR
+
+Having, by the fundamental doctrines enumerated in the foregoing,
+proved that all misery of the working masses is caused by the
+existence of a capitalist class which has enslaved the workers, the
+Socialists conclude that there is a natural antagonism between capital
+and labour; that social life is dominated by the Class War.
+
+"The Socialists say that the present form of property-holding divides
+society into two great classes."[216] "Capitalist society is divided
+into two classes: owners of property and owners of no property."[217]
+"Society is to-day divided into two classes with opposing interests,
+one class owning the means of life, and the other nothing but their
+power to work. Never in the history of society was the working-class
+so free from all traces of property as to-day."[218] "There are in
+reality but two classes, those who live by labour and those who live
+upon those who labour, the two classes of exploiter and
+exploited."[219] "Society has been divided mainly into two economic
+classes, a relatively small class of capitalists who own tools in the
+form of great machines they did not make and cannot use, and a great
+body of many millions of workers who did make these tools and who do
+use them, and whose very lives depend upon them, yet who do not own
+them."[220]
+
+It is usually said that society has three classes, but Socialists
+maintain that there are in reality only two classes. William Morris
+still divided society into three groups, which, however, at closer
+inspection will be found to form but two classes. According to Morris,
+"Civilised States consist of (1) the class of rich people doing no
+work, who consume a great deal while they produce nothing. Therefore,
+clearly they have to be kept at the expense of those who do work, just
+as paupers have, and are a mere burden on the community. (2) The
+middle class, including the trading, manufacturing, and professional
+people of our society. It is their ambition and the end of their whole
+lives to gain, if not for themselves, yet at least for their children,
+the proud position of being obvious burdens on the community. Here
+then is another class, this time very numerous and all-powerful, which
+produces very little and consumes enormously, and is therefore
+supported, as paupers are, by the real producers. (3) The class that
+remains to be considered produces all that is produced and supports
+both itself and the other classes, though it is placed in a position
+of inferiority to them, real inferiority, mind you, involving a
+degradation both of mind and body. To sum up, then, civilised States
+are composed of three classes--a class which does not even pretend to
+work, a class which pretends to work but which produces nothing, and a
+class which works."[221] In other words, William Morris divided
+society into two classes: propertied non-producers and non-propertied
+toilers.
+
+According to practically all living English Socialists, there are but
+two classes in society. "Modern society is divided into two
+classes--the possessors of property and the non-possessors: the
+dominant class and the subject class; the class which rules and the
+class which has to obey. He who possesses sufficient wealth to
+exercise control over the labour of others, to exploit that labour for
+his own profit, belongs to the one class; he who possesses nothing but
+the power to labour contained in his own body, and who is therefore
+compelled to sell that labour power in order to live, belongs to the
+other. It is this struggle and conflict between these two classes
+that Socialists call the class war, a recognition of which is
+essential to a clear conception of what the Socialist movement
+involves."[222] "Society is divided into two opposite classes, one,
+the capitalists and their sleeping partners the landlords and
+loanmongers, holding in their hands the means of production,
+distribution, and exchange, and being therefore able to command the
+labour of others; the other, the working class, the wage-earners, the
+proletariat, possessing nothing but their labour power, and being
+consequently forced by necessity to work for the former."[223] "In
+society there is an antagonism of interests, manifesting itself as a
+class struggle between those who possess but do not produce, and those
+who produce but do not possess."[224] "The people of this unfortunate
+country have been aptly divided by Mr. Gladstone into the 'masses' and
+the 'classes'--that is to say, into those who live by their own labour
+and those who live on the labour of others. Among the latter tribe of
+non-producers are included all manner of thieves, pick-pockets,
+burglars, sharpers, prostitutes, Peers of Parliament, their families
+and menials, all, or nearly all, the 'six hundred and odd scoundrels
+of the House of Commons,' the twenty thousand State parsons, who every
+Sunday shamelessly travesty the Christian religion in the interest of
+the 'classes.'"[225]
+
+The theory of dividing society into two classes, capitalists and
+workers, or as others put it, "exploiters and exploited," is
+manifestly absurd, and its absurdity has been pointed out by a few
+Socialists. "It is not true that there are only two great economic
+classes in the community. The Communist Manifesto, even in its day,
+admitted as much, but made no place for the fact in its theories.
+There is an economic antagonism between landlords and capitalists as
+well as between capitalists and workmen."[226] Besides, most
+capitalists are workers, and probably the great majority of English
+workers are capitalists to a larger or smaller extent.
+
+Now let us study the Socialists' description of the hostile forces
+which are engaged in the Class War.
+
+According to the Socialist teaching, the property-owners as a class
+are useless idlers who impoverish the workers and who shamelessly
+spend their whole income on demoralising luxuries. "The idlers and
+non-workers produce no wealth and take the greater share. They live on
+the labour of those who work. Nothing is produced by idleness; work
+must be done to obtain a thimble, a pin, and even a potato for dinner.
+The non-workers get the greater share of the wealth, and the greater
+part of this share is wasted. Therefore it is not good to have any
+people in the land who do not work. Only those who are old or sick
+should be kept by the toil of the rest."[227] Taking their figures
+from the pamphlet "Facts for Socialists," of which details have been
+given on pp. 41-48, the Independent Labour party states under the
+heading of "Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers": "The total incomes of
+persons in the United Kingdom amount in round figures to
+_1,800,000,000l._ How is this wealth distributed? 250,000 persons
+actually receive a total of _585,000,000l._--that is, one-thirtieth of
+the population receive one-third of the national income. Nearly the
+whole of these large incomes are unearned--_i.e._ they are made up of
+rents, interest, dividends, &c. This small class of rent and interest
+receivers perform no useful function. We may describe these people as
+social parasites, absolutely useless, yet levying toll to the extent
+of _6s. 8d._ in every _20s._ value of wealth created."[228] "At
+present more than _600,000,000l._ of the national income goes in the
+form of unearned rent and interest to support an idle class who spend
+it mainly on profitless and demoralising luxuries."[229]
+
+The foregoing extracts make it clear that, in the eyes of Socialists,
+practically all citizens, manual labourers excepted, are "drones and
+parasites." Directors, managers, doctors, chemists, ships' captains,
+teachers, &c., and even workmen of exceptional ability also, rob the
+general body of workers of half their wages and subsist only owing to
+the monopoly of property-holders who control the distribution of
+wealth. Upon these curious premisses are based the conclusions: "The
+profits and salaries of the class who share in the advantages of the
+monopoly of the instruments of production, or are endowed by Nature
+with any exceptional ability of high marketable value, amount
+according to the best estimate that can be formed, to about
+_460,000,000l._ annually, while out of a national income of some
+_1,800,000,000l._ a year the workers in the manual labour
+class--four-fifths of the whole population--obtain in wages not more
+than _690,000,000l._ It may be safely said that the workers from top
+to bottom of society pay a fine of one-half the wealth they produce to
+a parasitic class before providing for the maintenance of themselves
+and their proper dependents."[230] "It is this robbery and waste on
+the part of the minority which keeps the majority poor."[231] "So long
+as the instruments of production are in unrestrained private
+ownership, so long must the tribute of the workers to the drones
+continue, so long will the toiler's reward inevitably be reduced by
+their exactions."[232]
+
+"Socialism regards the capitalist proper not as a useful captain of
+industry, but as a mere share-holding, dividend-drawing parasite upon
+labour, and the Socialist party presses forward to his elimination
+from the field of production."[233] "The workers who have produced all
+this wealth only get a part--the smallest part at that--of the wealth
+they produce. Now we Socialists say that this wealth produced by the
+labour of the workers should belong to them, and not to the
+capitalists who produce nothing. Seeing that the interest of the
+worker is to get as much of this wealth, and on the other hand the
+capitalist wants as much of this wealth, as he can get, therefore we
+say that the interests of the workers and of the capitalists are not
+identical, but opposite."[234] "The interest of the working class can
+only be served even in the smallest degree by the curtailment of the
+power of the master class; that every material advance is useless
+except in so far as it helps to effect other achievements, and that
+the realisation of Labour politics, the well-being of the working
+class, can only be accomplished by its complete emancipation from
+capitalism."[235] In other words, the Socialist writers quoted agree
+in this: that the lot of the wage-earners can be improved only by
+taking the wealth from the rich. In order to introduce Socialism the
+present social order must be overturned. With this object in view they
+have addressed declarations of war to the owners of property.
+
+We owe to Marx not only the Class War doctrine, but also a declaration
+of war to the propertied class: "The Communists everywhere support
+every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political
+order of things. In all these movements they bring to the front, as
+the leading question in each, the property question, no matter what
+its degree of development at the time. Finally they labour everywhere
+for the union and agreement of the democratic parties of all
+countries. The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims.
+They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the
+forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling
+classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have
+nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working
+men of all countries, unite!"[236]
+
+Marx's disciples have issued similar declarations. For instance, in
+the official programme of the Social Democratic Federation we read:
+"The Social Democratic Federation is a militant Socialist organisation
+whose members, men and women, belong almost entirely to the working
+class. Its object is the realisation of Socialism, the emancipation of
+the working class from its present subjection to the capitalist class.
+To this end the Social Democratic Federation proclaims and preaches
+the Class War."[237] "There is no way in which the Class War can be
+avoided. You cannot have the reward of your labour and the idler have
+it too. There is just so much wealth produced every day. It may be
+more, it may be less; but there is always just so much, and the more
+the capitalist gets the less you will get, and _vice versa_. We preach
+the gospel of hatred, because in the circumstances it seems the only
+righteous thing we can preach. The talk about the 'Gospel of Love' is
+simply solemn rubbish. It is right to hate stealing, right to hate
+lying, it is right to hate meanness and uncleanness, right to hate
+hypocrisy, greed, and tyranny. Those who talk of the Gospel of Love
+with landlordism and capitalism for its objects want us to make our
+peace with iniquity."[238] "The Class War is inevitable under the
+present form of property-holding, and for it there can be neither
+truce, quarter, nor ending, save by the extinction of the class
+system itself. The identity of interests between capitalism and
+labour is a shibboleth that can only be given any sane meaning at all
+in the cynical sense that the interests of the wolf and the lamb are
+also 'identical' when the wolf has got the lamb inside him."[239]
+
+The doctrine of the Class War is a holy faith, the expropriation of
+property-owners is a divine task. "Unless we hate the system which
+prevents us from being what we otherwise might have been, we will not
+be able to strive against it with the patient, never-flagging zeal
+which our work, to be well done, requires. And to keep alive and
+undimmed this flame of hatred, divine not diabolical, we require to
+not only look around us, but especially to look back upon the world as
+it has been and to the example of those who have fought the good
+fight. To Socrates, to Savonarola, to John Ball, Wat the Tyler, and
+Jack Cade, in our land the first forerunners of Socialism; to Bruno
+and Vanini, to Cromwell, Milton, Hampden, and Pym, to John Eliot,
+Harry Vane; to Defoe, Mure, and Thomas Spence; to Ernest Jones,
+Bronterre O'Brien, and Robert Owen; to Wolfe Tone and Robert Emmet; to
+Allen, Larkin, and O'Brien; to Vera Sassoulitch, Marie Spiridonova,
+Sophia Perovsky; to Karl Marx."[240] The company of reformers and
+revolutionists seems somewhat mixed.
+
+The doctrine that the interests of employers and employees are
+irreconcilably opposed, not identical, is false, Socialist rhetoric to
+the contrary notwithstanding. As soon as a calamity threatens
+capital--for instance, a rise in raw cotton or a cotton
+famine--masters and men are seen to be in the same boat and devise
+combined measures for meeting the difficulty. The doctrine of the
+Class War is opposed to common experience and to common-sense.
+
+Let us now take note of the doctrine
+
+
+PRIVATE PROPERTY IS IMMORAL AND PRIVATE WEALTH IS A CRIME
+
+In the Class War right is, according to the Socialists, on the side of
+the propertyless. Not only are the owners of property objectionable in
+their persons, being "drones and parasites" who squander the earnings
+of the poor on riotous living, as we have learned in the foregoing
+pages, but private property as an institution is immoral in itself and
+ought to be abolished. No man has a right to be rich; no man can
+become rich honestly. Hence it follows that all rich men are robbers,
+thieves, and swindlers. "The poor owe no duty to the rich, unless it
+be the duty which an honest man owes to the thief who has robbed him.
+The rich have no right to any of their possessions, for there is but
+one right, and that is the right of the labourer to the fruits of his
+labour, and the rich do not labour. No man has any right to be rich.
+No man ever yet became rich by fair means. No man ever became rich by
+his own industry."[241] "No man or class of men made the first kind of
+wealth, such as land, minerals, and water. Therefore no man or class
+of men should be allowed to call these things their own."[242] As
+private property is immoral in itself, it is doubly immoral to lend
+out such property and to charge rent or interest for the use of it.
+Mr. G.J. Wardle, M.P., said, in a recent speech at Glasgow, that rent
+"was social immorality, and the State or society which allowed crimes
+of that kind to go on unpunished could never be a moral society. The
+same thing applied to interest on money. From the moral standpoint
+interest is unearned by the man who gets it, and it does not matter
+how that is cloaked over, that is the fact. Nowadays it was counted
+the greatest virtue to lend at so much per cent. That was a socially
+immoral proceeding, and because it was socially immoral it ate like a
+canker into the heart of society. As Socialists they objected to
+profit."[243]
+
+There are Socialists who preach the same doctrine of immorality and
+criminality of private property in more decided terms. They assert
+that it is criminal and immoral to make a profit as a compensation for
+the work of directing and taking heavy capital risks in productive
+business because such profits are opposed to the principle, "The
+labourer is entitled to the whole product of his labour" (see page
+61). "A man has a 'right' to that which he has produced by the unaided
+exercise of his own faculties; but he has not a right to that which is
+not produced by his own unaided faculties; nor to the whole of that
+which has been produced by his faculties aided by the faculties of
+another man."[244] "Everyone who pockets gains without rendering an
+equivalent to society is a criminal. Every millionaire is a criminal.
+Every company-chairman with nominal duties, though his salary be but
+_400l._, is a criminal. Everyone who lends his neighbour _5l._ and
+exacts _5l. 5s. 0d._ in return, is a criminal."[245] "When Proudhon
+advanced the somewhat startling proposition, 'Property is theft,' he
+merely stated positively what good, orthodox Adam Smith, in his
+'Wealth of Nations' set forth more urbanely when he wrote, 'The
+produce of labour (it is clear from the context that he meant the
+whole produce), is the natural recompense or wages of labour.'"[246]
+"'Property' is theft, said Proudhon, and surely private property in
+the means of production is not only theft, but the means of more
+theft."[247]
+
+Starting from the premiss that profit is immoral, the philosopher of
+British Socialism logically concludes: "The cheapest way of obtaining
+goods is not to pay for them, and if a buyer can avoid payment for the
+goods he obtains, he has quite as much right to do so as the seller
+has to receive for them double or treble their cost price and call it
+profit."[248]
+
+Private property being, according to the Socialist doctrines, immoral
+and criminal, it follows that
+
+
+"PRIVATE PROPERTY OUGHT TO BE ABOLISHED"
+
+Let us take note of an utterance in support of that doctrine: "If the
+life of men and women were a thing apart from that of their
+neighbours, there would be no need for a Socialist party nor any call
+for social reform. But man is not an entity; he is only part of a
+mighty social organism. Every act of his has a bearing upon the like
+of his fellow. It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the
+moral title to private property in anything. Private property exists
+entirely on sufferance. Private property therefore cannot be justly
+allowed when it interferes with the law of our social life or
+intercepts the progress of social development."[249]
+
+Let us now consider the doctrine
+
+
+"COMPETITION SHOULD BE REPLACED BY CO-OPERATION"
+
+Socialists teach: "Under Socialism you would have all the people
+working together for the good of all. Under non-Socialism you have all
+the persons working separately (and mostly against each other), each
+for the good of himself. So we find Socialism means co-operation and
+non-Socialism means competition."[250] "Socialism is constructive as
+well as revolutionary, and Socialists propose to replace competition
+by co-operation."[251]
+
+The question now arises: "On what ground do capitalists defend the
+principle of competition? A. On the ground that it brings into play a
+man's best qualities.--Q. Does it effect this? A. This is occasionally
+its result, but it also brings out his worst qualities by stimulating
+him to struggle with his fellows for the relative improvement of his
+own position rather than for the absolute advancement of the interests
+of all."[252]
+
+"Apart altogether from its injustice, competitive capitalism, regarded
+as a system of serving the community, is a business bungle. What the
+party of the Fourth Estate objects to in the existing commercial and
+industrial system is, not merely the stealages which go on under the
+guise of rent, profit, and interest, but the enormous waste arising
+from lack of consolidation and co-operation in the processes of
+production and distribution."[253] "During the last half-century we
+have lost more by our 'business principle' of dividing up our national
+work into competing one-man and one-company speculations, and
+insisting on every separate speculation paying its own separate way,
+than by all the tariffs and blockades that have been set up against
+us."[254] "In our age there is, as we have seen, throughout our whole
+economic sphere, no social order at all. There is absolute social
+anarchy. Against this anarchy Socialism is a protest."[255] "There is
+only one remedy for both the waste and the stealages, and that is the
+substitution of public enterprise with organisation for private
+enterprise with competition."[256] "Socialism means the socialising of
+the means and instruments of production, distribution, and exchange.
+For the individual capitalist it would substitute, as the director and
+controller of production and distribution, the community in its
+organised capacity. The commercial and industrial chaos and waste
+which are the outcome of monopolistic competition would give place to
+the orderliness of associated effort, and under Socialism society
+would for the first time in history behave like an organism."[257]
+Private capitalism and consequent competition are responsible not only
+for waste and muddle, but also for the adulteration of food and other
+necessaries of life. "Every man who knows anything of trade knows how
+general is the knavish practice of adulteration. Now all adulteration
+is directly due to competition. Did not Mr. John Bright once say that
+adulteration is only another form of competition?"[258]
+
+There is much truth in the contention of the Socialists that
+co-operation is mightier, and often better, than free competition.
+However, that is no new discovery, and the introduction of Socialism
+is not needed to bring about co-operation. In Germany, Switzerland,
+and Denmark national and private co-operation are far more developed
+than in Great Britain, and waste, muddle, and stealages are rare in
+those countries, although none of these is ruled by a Socialist
+Government. Co-operation, national as well as private, is developing
+also in Great Britain, and it will continue to develop as its value
+becomes more and more understood. It is a curious fact that
+Socialists, though they recommend co-operation in the abstract, oppose
+it in the concrete for similar reasons. They fear that satisfied and
+prosperous co-operators will oppose Socialism.[259]
+
+The assertion that adulteration is due to competition is not founded
+upon fact. Adulteration springs from many causes, and would continue
+to flourish even under the Socialistic _regime_. If all cowkeepers
+were salaried officials of the Socialist State or municipality, they
+might nevertheless mix water with the milk to obtain milk for their
+own consumption and that of their families, and to diminish the labour
+of milking. Adulteration may be abolished by efficient supervision and
+well-devised and rigorously enforced sanitary laws.
+
+Let us now glance at the doctrine
+
+
+"THE SOCIALIST STATE WILL ARISE BY NATURAL DEVELOPMENT, AND IT WILL
+HANDLE BUSINESS MORE EFFICIENTLY THAN DO PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS"
+
+"The State now registers, inspects, and controls nearly all the
+industrial functions which it has not yet absorbed. The inspection is
+often detailed and rigidly enforced. The State, in most of the larger
+industrial operations, prescribes the age of the worker, the hours of
+work, the amount of air, light, cubic space, heat, lavatory
+accommodation, holidays, and meal-times; where, when, and how wages
+shall be paid; how machinery, staircases, lift-holes, mines, and
+quarries are to be fenced and guarded; how and when the plant shall be
+cleaned, repaired, and worked."[260] "Step by step political power and
+political organisation have been used for industrial ends, until a
+Minister of the Crown is the largest employer of labour in the
+country, and at least 200,000 men, not counting the army and navy, are
+directly in the service of the community, without the intervention of
+the profit of any middleman."[261]
+
+From the fact that the State inspects many things and carries on some
+business, it does not by any means follow that the State should
+inspect all things and could efficiently carry on all business.
+Questions such as "If the State can build battleships and make
+swords, why not also trading ships and ploughshares,"[262] are
+ridiculous. One might as well ask, "If Messrs. Whiteley or Marshall
+Field can supply furniture, houses, dresses, and funerals, being
+universal providers, why not also battleships, armies, and colonies?"
+It is also not true that the State or municipal corporations have more
+business ability than private business men. As an example of
+successful business management Socialists are fond of pointing to the
+Post Office, and of asserting that no private company could work as
+efficiently and as cheaply. These statements are erroneous. The
+success of the British Post Office, as of every post office, is due
+not to ability but to monopoly, as the following example will prove.
+Private individuals in Germany discovered some years ago a flaw in the
+legislation regarding the Post Office which enabled them to compete
+with the Imperial Post Office, not in postal business between
+different towns, but in local delivery. Private post offices sprang up
+in many towns and began to deliver letters at the rate of two pfennigs
+(one farthing) each. Although the German Post Office is the most
+efficient Post Office in Europe, it could not compete with these
+private post offices, and, after lengthy competition, steps had to be
+taken to extend the postal monopoly to town deliveries. The British
+Post Office, like most public offices, is a most conservative
+institution. Every progress and every reform had to be forced upon it
+by outside agitation. Services such as money delivery at private
+residences, cash on delivery parcels, &c., which other countries have
+enjoyed during several decades, are stubbornly denied to England.
+Private competition would probably have furnished these conveniences
+long ago. In London the Messenger Boy Company competes with the Post
+Office in the carrying of express letters, and various private
+carriers compete with it in delivering parcels, and in both instances
+the private trader supplies a better and cheaper service than the
+Government Post Office. A comparison of the Post Office telephone in
+England and the private telephone in America shows the great
+superiority of the latter. The slow and ultra-conservative British
+Post Office supplies no proof that the Government would handle
+production and distribution better than private enterprise. On the
+contrary.
+
+British Socialists claim unanimously that their theories and demands
+are founded upon science. "The Socialist doctrine systematises the
+industrial changes. It lays down a law of capitalist evolution. It
+describes the natural history of society. It is not, therefore, only a
+popular creed for the market-place, but a scientific inquiry for the
+study. Like every theory in Sociology, it has a political bearing, but
+it can be studied as much detached from politics as is Darwinism."[263]
+Do the fundamental doctrines of British Socialism bear out the claims
+of its champions? The foregoing pages prove that the scientific basis
+of Socialism, or rather of British Socialism, consists of a number of
+doctrines which cannot stand examination and which are disproved by
+daily experience and by common-sense.
+
+The question now suggests itself: "How is it that the British
+Socialists base their demands on pseudo-scientific doctrines of
+obvious absurdity?"
+
+British Socialism has been imported from Germany. Marx, Engels,
+Lassalle, Rodbertus, and various other Germans are the fathers of
+modern scientific Socialism. "To German scholars is largely due the
+development of Socialism from the Utopian stage to the scientific.
+Universality is its distinguishing feature."[264] "Karl Marx and
+Frederick Engels in 1847 laid, through the 'Communist Manifesto,' the
+scientific foundation of modern Socialism."[265] "And 'Capital,' Karl
+Marx's great work, has become the loadstar of modern economic
+science."[266] Karl Marx's "Manifesto" appeared in 1847; the first
+volume of his "Capital" was published in 1867. Since the appearance of
+the former sixty years, and since the publication of the latter forty
+years, have passed by. Much has changed in the world, but the Marxian
+doctrines have remained unchanged.
+
+The worst about speculative doctrines is that time is apt to disprove
+them.
+
+Whilst the German Socialists have thinkers in their ranks who have
+adapted the older Communist theories to present conditions, leaving
+out those theories which are palpably false, English Socialists have
+stood still and are satisfied to repeat those ancient doctrines which
+the Germans have abandoned long ago. English Socialists try to impose
+upon an uncritical public by parading the worn-out stage properties of
+the forties. Marx is to the vast majority of British Socialists still
+an oracle and the fountain head of all wisdom. "Marx is the Darwin of
+modern sociology."[267] "All over the world his brain is put on pretty
+much the same level as Aristotle's."[268] "Modern Socialism is based,
+nationally and internationally, theoretically and to a large extent
+practically, on the writings of Karl Marx. These writings have been
+expounded, and where necessary applied, extended, and amplified, to
+meet conditions which have developed since his death nearly a quarter
+of a century ago, in every civilised country. It is safe to say that
+no one who does not understand and accept in the main the views set
+forth by Marx, comprehends the real position of capitalist Society,
+nor, what is even more important, can fully master the problems of
+the coming time."[269] "The Social-Democratic Federation, which is by
+far the oldest and still the most active Socialist organisation in
+this country, bases its teaching to-day, as it has always done, upon
+the words of Karl Marx."[270]
+
+Most active Socialists in Great Britain think Marx and Lassalle
+infallible. It is true that the Fabian Society has pointed out "the
+necessity of maintaining as critical an attitude towards Marx and
+Lassalle, some of whose views must by this time be discarded as
+erroneous or obsolete,"[271] but that protest appears to have been
+left unheeded by most British Socialists. In fact, the abandonment of
+revolutionary Marxianism has caused the Fabians to be treated with
+open hostility by the other Socialist sections. The reasons for that
+hostility are obvious. The doctrines of Marx and Lassalle, though they
+are, to say the least, erroneous and obsolete, are admirably fitted to
+inflame the passions of the masses. Their doctrines may not be true,
+but they are useful to professional agitators. Independent Socialists
+in all countries have not disguised their opinion of Marx's "Capital,"
+which, in the words of an English Socialist, "is not a treatise on
+Socialism; it is a jeremiad against the bourgeoisie, supported by such
+a mass of evidence and such a relentless Jewish genius for
+denunciation as had never been brought to bear before."[272]
+
+British Socialism is neither scientific nor sincere. Its leaders know
+that the Iron Law of Wages (see p. 53), the Law of Increasing Misery
+(see p. 56), and other doctrines, which are exceedingly useful to the
+agitator who wishes to poison the mind of the masses, have been thrown
+into the lumber room in Germany and most other countries (see the
+writings of Bernstein, Jaures, and others), but they do not abandon
+them. Apparently it is their policy rather to create strife and
+confusion than to alleviate existing misery. That attitude must have
+covered English Socialists with ignominy in the eyes of foreign
+Socialists. The very humiliating treatment which the English
+Socialists received at the International Socialist Congress in
+Stuttgart of 1907 from their Continental comrades suggests that the
+curious attitude and the not very estimable tactics of British
+Socialists have not found the approval of their Continental
+colleagues.
+
+The doctrines of the English Socialists with regard to property are
+identical with those of most Anarchists (see Eltzbacher, "Der
+Anarchismus"). For instance, Proudhon taught: "We rob (1) by murder on
+the highway; (2) alone, or in a band; (3) by breaking into buildings,
+or scaling walls; (4) by abstraction; (5) by fraudulent bankruptcy;
+(6) by forgery of the handwriting of public officials, or private
+individuals; (7) by manufacture of counterfeit money; (8) by cheating;
+(9) by swindling; (10) by abuse of trust; (11) by games and lotteries;
+(12) by usury; (13) by farm rent, house rent, and leases of all kinds;
+(14) by commerce, when the profit of the merchant exceeds his
+legitimate salary; (15) by making profit on our product, by accepting
+sinecures, and by exacting exorbitant wages."[273] "What is property?
+It is robbery."[274] "Property, after having robbed the labourer by
+usury, murders him slowly by starvation."[275] Practically the
+identical doctrines are propounded by British Socialists. Further
+instances of the resemblance between Socialism and Anarchism will be
+found in Chapter XXX, "Socialism and Anarchism."
+
+Society is at present based upon individualism. In their anxiety to
+prove the failure of modern civilisation British Socialists deny that
+the world has progressed under individualism. "Not by individual
+selfishness, or national selfishness, has the progress of the human
+race been advanced."[276] And they boldly declare that all history,
+having been written by men of the dominant class, is a deception. "Are
+we then to understand that the whole of history, so far, has been
+written from the point of view of the dominant class of every age?
+Most assuredly so; and this applies to well-nigh the whole of the
+sources of past history."[277]
+
+The foregoing should suffice to make it clear that the Socialist
+agitation is not based on irrefutable scientific doctrines, as
+Socialists pretend, but on deception. It may be said that no agitation
+is free from deception, that the end justifies the means, that
+Socialism means for the best. We have been told "Socialism is a
+religion of humanity. Socialism is the only hope of the race.
+Socialism is the remedy--the only remedy--which Lord Salisbury could
+not find."[278] We must look into the practical proposals of British
+Socialism in order to be able to judge its character.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[151] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 3.
+
+[152] Hazell, _Summary of Marx's "Capital,"_ p. 1; Macdonald,
+_Socialism_, p. 54.
+
+[153] _Socialism made Plain_, p. 8.
+
+[154] Hobart, _Social-Democracy_, p. 7.
+
+[155] _Manifesto_, Socialist Party of Great Britain, p. 8.
+
+[156] _What Socialism Means_: Independent Labour Party Leaflet, No. 8,
+p. 3.
+
+[157] Debs, _Industrial Unionism_, p. 20.
+
+[158] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, 1368.
+
+[159] _Ibid._ 807.
+
+[160] _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, p. 17.
+
+[161] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 15.
+
+[162] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 163.
+
+[163] Quelch, _Economics of Labour_, p. 13.
+
+[164] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 107.
+
+[165] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 99.
+
+[166] _Socialist Standard_, December 1907.
+
+[167] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 32.
+
+[168] Stegman und Hugo, _Handbuch_, p. 473.
+
+[169] _Christliche Arbeiterpflichten_, p. 15.
+
+[170] Webb, _Industrial Democracy_, p. 548.
+
+[171] Councillor Glyde, _A Peep behind the Scenes on a Board of
+Guardians_, p. 5.
+
+[172] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, p. 12.
+
+[173] Marx, _Wage, Labour, and Capital_, pp. 23, 24.
+
+[174] Marx, _Wage, Labour, and Capital_, p. 22.
+
+[175] _English Progress towards Social-Democracy_, p. 12.
+
+[176] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 99.
+
+[177] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, p. 8.
+
+[178] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[179] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, p. 12.
+
+[180] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 9.
+
+[181] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 528.
+
+[182] Quelch, _Economics of Labour_, p. 18.
+
+[183] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 3.
+
+[184] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 15.
+
+[185] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 19.
+
+[186] _Clarion_, November 29, 1907.
+
+[187] Hall, _The Old and New Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[188] _Socialism and the Single Tax_, p. 6.
+
+[189] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 189.
+
+[190] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 86.
+
+[191] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, pp. 7, 8.
+
+[192] See _ante_ p. 10.
+
+[193] _Report on Fabian Policy_, p. 8.
+
+[194] See Chapter XXXIII.
+
+[195] Hall, _Land, Labour, and Liberty_, p. 5.
+
+[196] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 66.
+
+[197] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 86.
+
+[198] _Rich and Poor_, Introd.
+
+[199] Martyn, _Co-operation_, p. 3.
+
+[200] Lister, _Riches and Poverty_, p. 12.
+
+[201] Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 16.
+
+[202] _Socialism and the Single Tax_, p. 7.
+
+[203] Kessack, _The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way Out_, p. 9.
+
+[204] Lafargue, _Right to Leisure_, p. 11.
+
+[205] Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[206] Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 16.
+
+[207] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 67.
+
+[208] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, pp. 32, 33.
+
+[209] Social-Democratic Federation, _The Unemployed_, leaflet.
+
+[210] Smart, _The Right to Work_, p. 3.
+
+[211] Washington, _A Corner in Flesh and Blood_, p. 12.
+
+[212] _The Socialist Standard_, December 1907.
+
+[213] _Why Labour Men should be on Town Councils_, p. 2.
+
+[214] Marx, _Wage-Labour and Capital_, p. 12.
+
+[215] L'Auton, _The Nationalisation of Society_, p. 4.
+
+[216] Jaures, _Studies in Socialism_, p. 1.
+
+[217] _Handbuch fuer Sozialdemokratische Waehler_, 1903, p. 233.
+
+[218] _Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 7.
+
+[219] _The Socialist Standard_, December 1907.
+
+[220] Debs, _Industrial Unionism_, p. 4.
+
+[221] Morris, _Useful Work_ versus _Useless Toil_, pp. 22, 25.
+
+[222] _The Class War_, p. 1.
+
+[223] _Programme and Rules, Social-Democratic Federation._
+
+[224] _Socialist Standard_, October 1, 1907.
+
+[225] Davidson, _The New Book of Kings_, p. 115.
+
+[226] Macdonald, _Socialism and Society_, pp. 111, 112.
+
+[227] _What Socialism Means_, p. 3.
+
+[228] _Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers_, p. 2.
+
+[229] _After Bread, Education_, p. 12.
+
+[230] _Capital and Land_, p. 13.
+
+[231] Morris, _Useful Work versus Useless Toil_, p. 26.
+
+[232] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 8.
+
+[233] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 4.
+
+[234] _The Socialist_, October 1907.
+
+[235] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 42.
+
+[236] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, pp. 30, 31.
+
+[237] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 1.
+
+[238] Leatham, _The Class War_, p. 10.
+
+[239] Hall, _The Old and the New Unionism_, p. 4.
+
+[240] Leatham, _The Class War_, p. 11.
+
+[241] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[242] _What Socialism Means_, p. 3.
+
+[243] _Forward_, November 23, 1907.
+
+[244] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 58.
+
+[245] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 166.
+
+[246] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 4.
+
+[247] McClure, _Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[248] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 98.
+
+[249] Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, pp. 3, 4.
+
+[250] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[251] Hyndman, _Social-Democracy_, p. 24.
+
+[252] Joynes, _The Socialists' Catechism_, p. 13.
+
+[253] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 3.
+
+[254] _Fabianism and the Fiscal Question_, p. 19.
+
+[255] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 41.
+
+[256] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 3.
+
+[257] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 4.
+
+[258] Blatchford, _Competition_, p. 15.
+
+[259] See Chapters VII & XXIII.
+
+[260] _English Progress towards Social-Democracy_, p. 14.
+
+[261] _Ibid._ p. 13.
+
+[262] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 15.
+
+[263] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[264] McClure, _Socialism_, p. 13.
+
+[265] Kautsky, _The Class Struggle_, p. 24.
+
+[266] Kautsky, _The Socialist Republic_, p. 21.
+
+[267] Hyndman, _Historic Basis of Socialism_, p. 435.
+
+[268] _Justice_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[269] _Justice_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[270] _The Social Democrat_, November 1907, p. 676.
+
+[271] _Report on Fabian Policy_, 1896, p. 6.
+
+[272] G.B. Shaw, quoted in Jackson, _Bernard Shaw_, p. 100.
+
+[273] Proudhon, _What is Property?_ pp. 252-256.
+
+[274] _Ibid._ p. 37.
+
+[275] _Ibid._ p. 184.
+
+[276] Snowden, _The Christ that is to be_, p. 6.
+
+[277] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 32.
+
+[278] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 11.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+THE AIMS AND POLICY OF THE SOCIALISTS
+
+
+Those people who formerly called themselves Communists now call
+themselves Socialists. Marx and Engels wrote in their celebrated
+"Manifesto": "The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the
+single sentence: Abolition of private property."[279] The policy of
+modern British Socialism may be summed up in the identical words.
+Indeed, we are told by one of its most eager champions that "The
+programme of Socialism consists essentially of one demand--that the
+land and other instruments of production shall be the common property
+of the people, and shall be used and governed by the people for the
+people."[280] "We suggest that the nation should own all the ships,
+all the railways, all the factories, all the buildings, all the land,
+and all the requisites of national life and defence."[281]
+
+According to the Socialist doctrines which have been given in Chapter
+IV, private property is the enemy of the workers. Therefore they quite
+logically demand that all private property must be abolished. "The
+problem has to be faced. Either we must submit for ever to hand over
+at least one-third of our annual product to those who do us the favour
+to own our country without the obligation of rendering any service to
+the community, and to see this tribute augment with every advance in
+our industry and numbers, or else we must take steps, as
+considerately as may be possible, to put an end to this state of
+things."[282] "The modern form of private property is simply a legal
+claim to take a share of the produce of the national industry year by
+year without working for it. Socialism involves discontinuance of the
+payment of these incomes and addition of the wealth so saved to
+incomes derived from labour. The economic problem of Socialism is thus
+solved."[283]
+
+A general division of the existing private property among all the
+people is not intended, because it is considered to be impracticable.
+"Socialism does not consist in violently seizing upon the property of
+the rich and sharing it out amongst the poor."[284] "Plans for a
+national 'dividing up' are not Socialism. They are nonsense. 'Dividing
+up' means individual ownership. Socialism means collective
+ownership."[285] "It is obvious that, in the present stage of economic
+development, individual ownership is impossible. All the great means
+of production are collectively owned now. Individual liberty based
+upon individual property is therefore out of the question, and the
+emancipation of the working class can only be achieved in social
+freedom, based upon social property, through the transformation of
+privately owned collective property into publicly owned collective
+property."[286]
+
+Starting from these premisses, the Socialists arrive at the demand
+that "all the means of production and distribution, all the machinery,
+all the buildings, everything that is necessary to provide the
+fundamental necessaries of life, must be common property."[287] "We
+want all the instruments for the purposes of trade to be the property
+of the State. With that will have come at the same time the abolition
+of power permitting any individual to exact rent or interest for the
+loan of land or of the implements of production. The abolition of all
+private property will mean the extinction of the parasite."[288] "The
+overthrow of capitalism and the establishment of a system of society
+based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means
+and instruments for producing and distributing wealth, by and in the
+interest of the whole community: That is Socialism."[289] "The Fabian
+Society aims at the reorganisation of society by the emancipation of
+land and industrial capital from individual and class ownership, and
+the vesting of them in the community for the general benefit. The
+Society accordingly works for the extinction of private property in
+land, and of the consequent individual appropriation, in the form of
+rent, of the price paid for permission to use the earth, as well as
+for the advantages of superior soils and sites. The Society, further,
+works for the transfer to the community of the administration of such
+industrial capital as can conveniently be managed socially."[290]
+"Here in plain words is the principle, or root idea, on which all
+Socialists agree--that the country and everything in the country shall
+belong to the whole people (the nation), and shall be used by the
+people and for the people. That principle, the root idea of Socialism,
+means two things: (1) That the land, and all the machines, tools, and
+buildings used in making needful things, together with all the canals,
+rivers, roads, railways, ships, and trains used in moving, sharing
+(distributing) needful things, and all the shops, markets, scales,
+weights, and money used in selling or dividing needful things, shall
+be the property of (belong to) the whole people (the nation). (2) That
+the land, tools, machines, trains, rivers, shops, scales, money, and
+all the other things belonging to the people, shall be worked,
+managed, divided, and used by the whole people, in such way as the
+greater number of the whole people shall deem best."[291]
+
+A perusal of the party programmes and other Socialist documents
+contained in the Appendix will show that the abolition of all private
+property, and its transference to the State, is the aim of all the
+Socialist organisations and parties, and no further extracts need be
+given in order to prove the unanimity of the Socialists on this point.
+
+The question now arises: How is this transference of all private
+property to the State to be effected? Will the present holders of
+property be fully compensated, partly compensated, or not compensated
+at all? Do the Socialists aim at purchase or at confiscation of
+existing private property. Will they respect existing rights, or are
+they bent upon open or more or less disguised spoliation?
+
+It is, unfortunately, very difficult to obtain a plain and
+straightforward answer upon this important point. Instead of giving
+this answer, British Socialists loudly protest that it is not their
+aim to destroy or abolish property. As nobody has suspected the
+Socialists to be foolish enough to abolish or destroy property--which
+means the instruments of production, such as factories, machines,
+railways, &c., by the use of which the people live, and thus bring
+starvation upon themselves--their eagerness to explain that they do
+not intend to abolish or destroy property can only be explained by the
+surmise that they hope shallow simpletons will say, "The Socialists
+have no intention to take our capital away from us by force and
+without compensation, for they have declared that they do not intend
+to abolish property." A few of these declarations should here be
+given: "So far from abolishing property, Socialism desires to
+establish it upon the only basis which makes property secure--that of
+service, of creative service."[292] "Socialism does not propose to
+abolish land or capital. Only a genius could have thought of this as
+an objection to Socialism."[293] "Socialism is far from aiming at the
+destruction of private property. Its object is to increase private
+property amongst those whose property is so limited that they have a
+difficulty in keeping themselves alive."[294] Another Socialist makes
+the very irrelevant and unnecessary observation: "It is a firm
+principle of Socialism never to interfere with personal property in
+order to investigate its origin or to arrange it in a different way.
+Never and nowhere! And whoever asserts to the contrary either does not
+know the principles of Socialism or willingly and knowingly asserts an
+untruth. The Socialists deem an investigation into the origin of an
+acknowledged personal property an unnecessary trouble. They consider
+the personal property an accomplished fact and respect it: so much so,
+that they consider stealing a crime."[295] Mr. Blatchford informs us,
+"We do not propose to seize anything. We do propose to get some things
+and to make them the property of the whole nation by Act of Parliament
+or by purchase."[296]
+
+As regards the question whether compensation or no compensation will be
+given, our Socialist leaders give us very vague and unsatisfactory
+replies, which rather contain highly respectable but perfectly
+irrelevant commonplaces than definite proposals. Most Socialists will
+answer the plain question of confiscation or no confiscation with a
+quibble or a conundrum, as the following examples will show: "One view
+of Socialism is that it is a scheme of confiscation of property from
+one class to give it to another class--that Socialists are Dick Turpins
+made respectable by using Acts of Parliament instead of pistols. Now
+the real fact is that the Socialist has come to put an end to Dick
+Turpin methods. Socialism is a rational criticism of our present
+methods of production and distribution. It desires to say to the
+possessors: Show us by what title you possess; and it proposes to pass
+its judgments upon the axiom that whoever renders service to society
+should be able to have some appropriate share in the national
+wealth."[297] In other words, an inquisitorial tribunal with arbitrary
+powers would be empowered to confiscate at will. "Socialism is not a
+plan to despoil the rich: it is a plan to stop the rich from despoiling
+the poor. Socialism is not a thief; it is a policeman."[298] "Do any
+say we attack private property? We deny it. We attack only that private
+property for a few thousand loiterers and slave-drivers which renders
+all property in the fruits of their own labour impossible for millions.
+We challenge that private property which renders poverty at once a
+necessity and a crime."[299] "Socialism would not rob anyone. It would
+distinguish between the lawful possessor and the rightful possessor,
+and it would compel the 'lawful' possessor to restore to the rightful
+possessor the property of which he had robbed him."[300] "We do not
+propose to rob the rich man of his wealth; we deny that it is his
+wealth. Wealth is a social product, and therefore belongs to society.
+It is not an act of brigandage to demand that society shall own and use
+what society has created."[301]
+
+Some Socialists consider the question of compensation or no
+compensation as one of very minor importance. "The question of
+compensation need not greatly worry us. Socialists hold that
+plutocrats owe all their wealth to society; and therefore that society
+has the right at any moment to take it back."[302] The more cautious
+and moderate French and German Socialists are apt to promise
+compensation in terms such as the following: "We declare expressly
+that it is the duty of the State to give to those whose interests will
+be damaged by the necessary abolition of laws which are detrimental to
+the common interest compensation as far as it is possible and
+consistent with the interests of all."[303]
+
+It will be observed that the plain word compensation is circumscribed
+by the phrase, "compensation as far as it is possible and consistent
+with the interests of all." In other and plainer words, compensation
+is to be arbitrarily given, and its proportion to the property
+acquired is apparently to be determined not by its value or by
+fairness and equity, but by the will of those who may be in power.
+
+English Socialists, on the other hand, are apt to recommend a far more
+drastic treatment of property-owners. "We claim that land in country
+and land in towns, mines, parks, mountains, moors, should be owned by
+the people for the people, to be held, used, built over, and
+cultivated upon such terms as the people themselves see fit to ordain.
+The handful of marauders who now hold possession have, and can have,
+no right save brute force against the tens of millions whom they
+wrong."[304] The most moderate school of British Socialism, the Fabian
+Society, favours in its statement of policy given under the heading
+"Basis of the Fabian Society" the expropriation of all private
+capital "without compensation, though not without such relief to
+expropriated individuals as may seem fit to the community." In other
+words, expropriated property-owners may, or may not, be given
+something to protect them from starvation, not as a matter of right,
+but of charity.
+
+Most Socialists who favour compensation recommend that it should be
+given only in the form of consumable articles such as food, clothes,
+&c., or in bonds which are changeable only into consumable articles.
+"Rothschild will be paid in bread and meat and luxury and wine and
+theatre tickets."[305] "When capitalistic property shall have been
+socialised, the holders of compensation deeds will not be able to
+purchase either fresh means of production or producers; they will only
+be able to buy products."[306]
+
+Some Socialists suggest that the bonds given in exchange for property
+acquired by the State might be cancelled later on. The property-owners
+could be deprived of their possessions without any difficulty, either
+gradually by taxation or at one blow by confiscation at the option of
+the men in power. "When the entire capitalistic property takes the
+form of State bonds, the property which it is impossible to ascertain
+to-day would then be known to everybody. It would only be necessary to
+decree that all bonds are to be registered in the name of the owner,
+and it would be possible to estimate exactly the capitalist income and
+the property of everyone. It would then also be possible to screw up
+the taxes to any extent without fear of their being evaded by any
+concealments. It would then be also impossible to escape them by
+emigration, since it is the public institutions of the country, and in
+the first place the State, from which all interest comes, and the
+latter can deduct the tax from the interest before it is paid out.
+Under these circumstances it would be possible to raise the
+progressive income and property tax as high as necessary--if necessary
+as high as would come very near, if not actually amount to,
+confiscation of the large property."[307] The foregoing is a simple
+plan of swindling property-owners out of their holdings.
+
+Some of the more moderate Socialists argue: "There is much to be said
+in favour of the liberal treatment of the present generation of
+proprietors and even of their children. But against the permanent
+welfare of the community the unborn have no rights."[308] On the other
+hand, Bax, the philosopher of British Socialism, quite logically and
+honestly states that the idea of compensation has no room in the
+Socialist code of ethics, that the bourgeois idea of compensation on
+grounds of justice is irreconcilable with the Socialist conception of
+justice. He says: "Between possession and confiscation is a great gulf
+fixed, the gulf between the bourgeois and the Socialist worlds.
+Well-meaning men seek to throw bridges over this gulf by schemes of
+compensation, abolition of inheritance, and the like. But the
+attempts, as we believe, even should they ever be carried out
+practically, must fall disastrously short of their mark and be
+speedily engulfed between the two positions they are intended to
+unite. Nowhere can the phrase 'He that is not for us is against us' be
+more aptly applied than to the moral standpoint of modern
+individualism and of modern Socialism. To the one, individual
+possession is right and justice, and social confiscation is wrong and
+injustice; to the other, individual possession is wrong and injustice,
+and confiscation is right and justice. This is the real issue. Unless
+a man accept the last-named standpoint unreservedly, he has no right
+to call himself a Socialist. If he does accept it, he will seek the
+shortest and most direct road to the attainment of justice rather than
+any longer and more indirect ones, of which it is at best doubtful
+whether they will attain the end at all. For be it remembered the
+moment you tamper with the sacredness of private property, no matter
+how mildly, you surrender the conventional bourgeois principle of
+justice, while the moment you talk of compensation you surrender the
+Socialist principle of justice, for compensation can only be real if
+it is adequate, and can only be adequate if it counterbalances, and
+thereby annuls, the confiscation. It is just, says the individualist,
+for a man to be able to do what he likes with his own. Good; but what
+is his own?"[309] "The great act of confiscation will be the seal of
+the new era; then and not till then will the knell of civilisation,
+with its rights of property and its class society, be sounded; then,
+and not till then, will justice--the justice not of civilisation but
+of Socialism--become the corner-stone of the social arch."[310]
+
+I think the straightforwardness of Bax is preferable to the crooked
+and insincere explanations and proposals of the British and foreign
+Socialist given in the foregoing. Bax's opinion is irrefutable.
+According to the doctrines of Socialism given in Chapter IV., labour
+is the source of all wealth; the greater part of the products of that
+labour is dishonestly abstracted from the labourer by the capitalist
+class, which has converted the result of that labour into property.
+Hence Socialists think with Proudhon, and they very often openly
+declare, that property is theft. Capitalist society will not
+compensate the thief when taking from him his booty. Socialism will
+not compensate property-owners when taking away their property.
+Besides, compensation would be utterly opposed to the root idea of
+Socialist justice. At present expropriation without indemnity is
+called theft, but it would not be called theft under a Socialist
+_regime_. The chapter on "Law and Justice under Socialism" will make
+that quite clear.
+
+Socialism teaches that no man is entitled to anything except that
+which he has made himself. "No man has a right to call anything his
+own but that which he himself has made. Now, no man makes the land.
+The land is not created by labour, but it is the gift of God to all.
+The earth belongs to the people. For the nonce please take the
+statement on the authority of Herbert Spencer, All men 'have equal
+rights to the use of the earth.' So that he who possesses land
+possesses that to which he has no right, and he who invests his
+savings in land becomes a purchaser of stolen property."[311] "No man
+made the land, and laws and lawyers notwithstanding no man has any
+moral right before God to call a solitary strip of God's earth his
+than has the burglar to call his stolen goods his personal property.
+It is therefore evident that the bite named 'rent' given to landlords
+for permission to live upon and use God's free gift to man is as much
+the fruit of robbery, the spoil of plunder, as is the result of a
+burglar's night's marauding, a common pickpocket's day's
+'takings.'"[312] Capital is in the same position as land, for "Land
+and capital are indistinguishable."[313]
+
+The more honest Socialists agree with Bax that compensation for
+property acquired would be inadvisable and impracticable. "In a
+pamphlet called 'Collectivism and Revolution' M. Jules Guesde said,
+'Expropriation with indemnity is a chimera. And whatever regret one
+may feel, however difficult may appear to peaceful natures the last
+method, we have no other way than to retake violently that which
+belongs to all, by--let us say the word--the Revolution.' He added,
+'Capital which it is necessary to take from individuals, such as the
+land, is not of human creation; it is anterior to man, for whom it is
+a _sine qua non_ of existence. It cannot therefore belong to some to
+the exclusion of others, without the others being robbed. And to make
+the robbers deliver up, to oblige them to restore in any and every way
+is not so much a right as a duty, the most sacred of duties."[314] A
+respected English Socialist says bluntly, "How to secure the swag to
+the workers is the problem."[315] A Christian Socialist clergyman
+sarcastically proposes: "If you are a Christian and love your rich
+neighbour as yourself, you will do all you can to help him to become
+poorer. For if you believe in the Gospel, you know that to be rich is
+the very worst thing that can happen to a man. That if a man is rich,
+it is with the greatest difficulty that he can be saved; for 'it is
+easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich
+man to enter into the Kingdom of God' (Mark x. 25). This is startling
+now, but it was not less strange and startling to the disciples who
+'were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can
+be saved?' But the needle's eye has not grown any larger since then,
+and the camels certainly have not grown smaller! All true Christians
+then must desire to relieve the rich man of his excess for his own
+sake, since the inequality that ruins the body of Lazarus ruins the
+soul of Dives; and Dives is the more miserable of the two, because the
+soul is more precious than the body."[316]
+
+The abolition of private property requires also the abolition of the
+right of inheritance, as otherwise capital might again be accumulated
+in the hands of the thrifty and the enterprising. Therefore the
+manifesto of Marx and Engels already demands the "abolition of all
+right of inheritance."[317] Other Socialists say that this right
+should not be abolished. "Socialists used to insist upon the abolition
+of the right of inheritance and bequest. But if what I gain by my own
+labour is rightfully my property--and the Co-operative Commonwealth
+will, as we have seen, declare it to be so--it will be inexpedient in
+that Commonwealth to destroy any of the essential qualities of
+propertyship; and I can hardly call that my property which I may not
+give to whom I please at my death. No man in a Co-operative
+Commonwealth could acquire so much more wealth than his fellows as to
+make him dangerous to them."[318] "Socialists do not object to
+property; they are not opposed to private property. They are therefore
+not opposed to inheritance. The right to acquire and hold involves the
+right to dispose by will or by gift. We only object to such a use of
+property as enables classes for generation after generation to live on
+the proceeds of other people's labour without doing any useful service
+to society."[319] This very diplomatic sentence may be explained in a
+variety of ways. Probably it means that holders of property of large
+size could summarily be deprived of their possessions by order of the
+Government, as has been indicated by that writer in another passage
+(see page 97). Such a power would make the right to hold and to
+bequeath property a farce. Property could be held then only on the
+same terms on which, I believe, it is held by Central African negroes.
+Another Socialist states, "If I am entitled to what I produce, then it
+follows that I am entitled to dispose of all that I produce;" and then
+denies the right to personal property by continuing: "The Socialists
+say, 'Not thine or mine, but ours.'"[320]
+
+It would be only logical that the Socialist State, after abolishing
+private property by following the principle "not thine but ours,"
+should not allow its re-creation and re-accumulation. "This pernicious
+right (wrong) of inheritance must be abolished. It is the means by
+which the 'classes' perpetuate their robbery of the 'masses' from
+generation to generation and age to age. The disinherited would of
+course have the community to look to for sound education in youth,
+suitable employment in years of maturity, generous pension in old age,
+&c., and to what else can any rational human being lay just
+claim?"[321] Some Socialists argue that in the Socialist State "there
+will be nothing to bequeath, unless we choose to regard household
+furniture as a legacy of any importance. This settles the question of
+the right of inheritance, which Socialism will have no need to abolish
+formally."[322] "Socialism condemns as reactionary and immoral all
+that tends to the debasement of humanity. It condemns our industrial
+and commercial system as a degrading system--degrading both to the few
+who amass wealth and to the many who by their labour enable the few to
+lay up riches. It is degrading to those who rob and to those who are
+robbed; to those who cheat and to those who are cheated; to those who
+swim and to those who sink; to those who revel in luxury and to those
+who, barely sustaining their own lives, are compelled by their toil to
+supply luxuries for others to enjoy."[323] Therefore Socialism means
+to abolish the present system root and branch, and the most
+straightforward Socialists are frankly in favour of the most thorough
+measures for abolishing private property.
+
+Children and poets proverbially speak the truth. Let us see what the
+Socialist poets think of the expropriation of property-owners.
+
+Some of the poets tell the workers that the labourers not only produce
+all the wealth, but are also all-powerful, and, if they wish to, they
+can do what they like with the country.
+
+    Shall you complain who feed the world--
+    Who clothe the world, who house the world?
+    Shall you complain who are the world
+      Of what the world may do?
+    As from this hour you use your power,
+      The world must follow you.
+    As from this hour you use your power.
+      The world must follow you.[324]
+
+Others remind them of their grievances, and urge them to drive the
+rich man out of the country:
+
+        Think on the wrongs ye bear,
+        Think on the rags ye wear,
+    Think on the insults endured from your birth;
+        Toiling in snow and rain,
+        Bearing up heaps of gain,
+    All for the tyrants who grind ye to earth.
+
+    Your brains are as keen as the brains of your masters.
+      In swiftness and strength ye surpass them by far,
+    Ye've brave hearts that teach ye to laugh at disasters,
+      Ye vastly outnumber your tyrants in war.
+        Why, then, like cowards stand.
+        Using not brain or hand,
+    Thankful, like dogs, when they throw ye a bone?
+        What right have they to take
+        Things that ye toil to make?
+    Know ye not, boobies, that all is your own?[325]
+
+    Arise, unite each scattered band,
+    To sweep all masters from our land,
+    Then shall each mine and loom and field
+    Its produce to the workers yield.[326]
+
+Others, again, urge the workers to seize all property and to make the
+rich man work for them.
+
+    They're never done extolling
+        The nobility of work;
+    But the knaves! they always take good care
+        Their share of toil to shirk.
+    Do they send their sons and daughters,
+        To the workshop or the mill?
+    Oh! we'll turn things upside down, my lads;
+        It will change their tune, it will![327]
+
+    We'll drive the robbers from our lands, our meadows and our hills;
+    We'll drive them from our warehouses, our workshops and our mills;
+    We'll make them fare upon their bonds, their bankbooks and their bills,
+        As we go marching to liberty.[328]
+
+Some Socialists believe that they will come to power suddenly and by
+violence, and abolish private capital at a stroke. Others are inclined
+to think that they will only gradually abolish it. Karl Marx was of
+the latter opinion. Therefore he wrote in his "Manifesto": "The first
+step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the
+proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of
+democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest,
+by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all
+instruments of production in the hands of the State--_i.e._ of the
+proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total
+of productive forces as rapidly as possible. Of course in the
+beginning this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads
+on the rights of property and on the conditions of bourgeois
+production: by means of measures therefore which appear economically
+insufficient and untenable, but which in the course of the movement
+outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social
+order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the
+mode of production. These measures will of course be different in
+different countries. Nevertheless in the most advanced countries the
+following will be pretty generally applicable:
+
+1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land
+to public purposes.
+
+2. A heavy progressive or graduated income-tax.
+
+3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
+
+4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
+
+5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State by means of a
+national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
+
+6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the
+hands of the State.
+
+7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the
+State; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the
+improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
+
+8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial
+armies, especially for agriculture.
+
+9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual
+abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more
+equable distribution of the population over the country.
+
+10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of
+children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of
+education with industrial production, &c."[329]
+
+Marx's programme has served as a model to the English Socialists, as
+the following demands of some of our Socialists will show: "The
+things you will be working for will be something like this. Shorter
+hours is the first thing, then a tax on landlords, then abolition of
+the House of Lords and the Monarchy, then more Home-Rule and more
+Local Government, then extension of municipal operations, the
+socialisation of coal stores, dairy farms, bakeries, laundries,
+public-houses, cab-hiring, the slaughter of cattle and the sale of
+butcher meat, the building and letting of houses--in short, the taking
+over by the local bodies of as many departments of production and
+distribution as need be. By this time the Class War will be shaping
+for a last great engagement."[330]
+
+"As stepping stones to a happier period we urge for immediate
+adoption: The compulsory construction of healthy artisans' and
+agricultural labourers' dwellings in proportion to the population,
+such dwellings to be let at rents to cover the cost of construction
+and maintenance alone. Free compulsory education for all classes,
+together with the provision of at least one wholesome meal a day in
+each school. Eight hours or less to be the normal working day in all
+trades. Cumulative taxation upon all incomes above a fixed minimum not
+exceeding _500l._ a year. State appropriation of railways with or
+without compensation. The establishment of national banks which shall
+absorb all private institutions that derive a profit from operations
+in money or credit. Rapid extinction of the National Debt.
+Nationalisation of the land and organisation of agricultural and
+industrial armies under State control on co-operative principles. By
+these measures a healthy, independent, and thoroughly educated people
+will steadily grow up around us, ready to abandon that baneful
+competition for starvation wages which ruins our present workers,
+ready to organise the labour of each for the benefit of all,
+determined, too, to take control finally of the entire social and
+political machinery of a State in which class distinctions and class
+privileges shall cease to be."[331]
+
+The Social-Democratic Federation demands the following immediate
+reforms: "The socialisation of the means of production, distribution,
+and exchange to be controlled by a democratic State in the interests
+of the entire community, and the complete emancipation of labour from
+the domination of capitalism and landlordism with the establishment of
+social and economic equality between the sexes. Abolition of the
+Monarchy. Democratisation of the governmental machinery, viz.
+abolition of the House of Lords, payment of members of legislative and
+administrative bodies, payment of official expenses of elections out
+of the public funds, adult suffrage, proportional representation,
+triennial Parliaments, second ballot, initiative and referendum.
+Foreigners to be granted rights of citizenship after two years'
+residence in the country, on the recommendation of four British-born
+citizens, without any fee. Canvassing to be made illegal. Legislation
+by the people in such wise that no legislative proposal shall become
+law until ratified by the majority of the people. Legislative and
+administrative independence for all parts of the empire.
+
+"Repudiation of the National Debt. Abolition of all indirect taxation
+and the institution of a cumulative tax on all incomes and
+inheritances exceeding _300l._
+
+"Extension of the principle of local self-government. Systematisation
+and co-ordination of the local administrative bodies. Election of all
+administrators and administrative bodies by equal direct adult
+suffrage.
+
+"Elementary education to be free, secular, industrial, and compulsory
+for all classes. The age of obligatory school attendance to be raised
+to sixteen. Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher
+education, both general and technical, and all such education to be
+free. Free maintenance for all attending State schools. Abolition of
+school rates, the cost of education in all State schools to be borne
+by the National Exchequer.
+
+"Nationalisation of the land and the organisation of labour in
+agriculture and industry under public ownership and control on
+co-operative principles. Nationalisation of the trusts, of railways,
+docks, and canals, and all great means of transit. Public ownership
+and control of gas, electric light, and water-supplies, tramway,
+omnibus, and other locomotive services, and of the food and coal
+supply. The establishment of State and municipal banks and pawnshops
+and public restaurants. Public ownership and control of the lifeboat
+service, of hospitals, dispensaries, cemeteries and crematoria, and
+control of the drink traffic.
+
+"A legislative eight-hour working day or forty-eight hours per week to
+be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to be
+inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law. Absolute
+freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee against
+any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or infringe it.
+No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until sixteen years
+of age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law. Public provision of useful work at
+not less than trade-union rates of wages for the unemployed. Free
+State insurance against sickness and accident, and free and adequate
+State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers. Public
+assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights. The
+legislative enactment of a minimum wage of _30s._ for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work.
+
+"Abolition of the present workhouse system, and reformed
+administration of the Poor Law on a basis of national co-operation.
+Compulsory construction by public bodies of healthy dwellings for the
+people, such dwellings to be let at rents to cover the cost of
+construction and maintenance alone, and not to cover the cost of the
+land. The administration of justice to be free to all; the
+establishment of public offices where legal advice can be obtained
+free of charge."[332]
+
+Mr. Blatchford suggests the following: "The public maintenance and the
+public education of children. The public provision of work for all.
+The taxation of the land and of all large incomes. The confiscation of
+unearned increment. Old-age pensions. The minimum wage. Compulsory
+land cultivation. Universal adult suffrage. The second ballot. The
+payment of election expenses. The nationalisation of the railways and
+of the land. The nationalisation or municipalisation of trams, gas,
+water, bread, liquor, milk, coal, and many other things. The abolition
+of hereditary titles and of the House of Lords."[333]
+
+The general policy which the Socialists should follow was summed up by
+Marx in the following way. "The Communists everywhere support every
+revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order
+of things."[334] "Socialism is the only hope of the workers. All else
+is illusion. Workers of all lands, unite! You have nothing to lose but
+your chains. You have a world to win."[335]
+
+"This is the final struggle. The extinction of classes must follow the
+overthrow of the last form of class domination and the emancipation of
+the last class to be set free. Rally then, fellow workers, to the
+standard of the international class-conscious proletariat, the Red
+Flag of Social-Democracy. 'Workers of all countries, unite! You have
+nothing to lose but your chains, you have a world to win!'"[336] "The
+land of England is no mean heritage."[337]
+
+"What has hitherto prevented the workers from combining for
+the overthrow of the capitalist system? A. Ignorance and
+disorganisation.--Q. What has left them in ignorance? A. The system
+itself, by compelling them to spend all their lives upon monotonous toil
+and leaving them no time for education.--Q. What account have they been
+given of the system which oppresses them? A. The priest has explained
+that the perpetual presence of the poor is necessitated by a law of God;
+the economist has proved its necessity by a law of Nature; and between
+them they have succeeded in convincing the labourers of the hopelessness
+of any opposition to the capitalist system.--Q. How is it that the
+labourers cannot see for themselves that they are legally robbed? A.
+Because the present method of extracting their surplus value is one of
+fraud rather than of force, and has grown gradually."[338]
+
+The philosopher of British Socialism well sums up the aims and policy
+of the Socialists. He says: "What is vital in Socialism? In the first
+line, I take it, come
+
+"1. The collectivisation of _all_ the instruments of production by
+_any_ effective means;
+
+"2. The doctrine of the Class War as the general historical method of
+realising the new form of society;
+
+"3. The principle of internationalism, the recognition, _i.e._ that
+distinction of nationality sinks into nothingness before the idea of
+the union of all progressive races in the effort to realise the ideal
+of true society as understood by the Social-Democratic Party;
+
+"4. The utmost freedom of physical, moral, and intellectual
+development for each and all consistent with the necessities of an
+organised social State.
+
+"The Socialist's adhesion to the doctrine of the Class War involves
+his opposition to all measures subserving the interest of any section
+of capitalism. This coupled with his 'Internationalism' leaves him no
+choice but to be the enemy of 'his country' and the friend of his
+country's enemies whenever 'his country' (which means of course the
+dominant classes of his country, who always are for that matter his
+enemies) plays the game of the capitalist. Let us have no humbug! The
+man who cannot on occasion be (if needs be) the declared and active
+enemy of that doubtful entity, 'his country,' is no Social
+Democrat."[339]
+
+"Justice being henceforth identified with confiscation, and injustice
+with the right of property, there remains only the question of 'ways
+and means.' Our bourgeois apologist, admitting as he must that the
+present possessors of land and capital hold possession of them simply
+by right of superior force, can hardly refuse to admit the right of
+the proletariat organised to that end to take possession of them by
+right of superior force. The only question remaining is, How? And the
+only answer is, How you can."[340]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[279] Page 17.
+
+[280] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[281] _Clarion_, October 11, 1907.
+
+[282] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 10.
+
+[283] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 26, 27.
+
+[284] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 99.
+
+[285] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 1.
+
+[286] _Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 39.
+
+[287] Kirtlan, _Socialism for Christians_, p. 15.
+
+[288] Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[289] _Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 9.
+
+[290] _Basis of the Fabian Society._
+
+[291] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 10.
+
+[292] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 103.
+
+[293] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[294] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 3.
+
+[295] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 9.
+
+[296] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[297] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 103.
+
+[298] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[299] _Socialism made Plain_, p. 10.
+
+[300] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[301] Hobart, _Social-Democracy_, p. 7.
+
+[302] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 94.
+
+[303] Jaures, _Practical Socialism_, p. 3.
+
+[304] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 8.
+
+[305] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 105.
+
+[306] Jaures, _Practical Socialism_, p. 5.
+
+[307] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 10.
+
+[308] Sidney Webb, _The Difficulties of Individualism_, p. 10.
+
+[309] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, pp. 75, 76.
+
+[310] _Ibid._ p. 83.
+
+[311] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 6.
+
+[312] Muse, _Poverty and Drunkenness_, p. 9.
+
+[313] _Facts for Socialists_, p. 7.
+
+[314] Guyot, _Pretensions of Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[315] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 9.
+
+[316] Dearmer, _Socialism and Christianity_, pp. 17, 18.
+
+[317] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 22.
+
+[318] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p 105.
+
+[319] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 105.
+
+[320] _Socialism, For and Against_, p. 9.
+
+[321] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 158.
+
+[322] Bebel, _Woman_, pp. 231, 232.
+
+[323] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[324] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 56.
+
+[325] _Ibid._ p. 30.
+
+[326] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 33.
+
+[327] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 43
+
+[328] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 7.
+
+[329] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, pp. 21, 22.
+
+[330] Leatham, _The Class War_, pp. 13, 14.
+
+[331] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 10.
+
+[332] Programme, _Social-Democratic Federation_.
+
+[333] _Clarion_, October 18, 1907.
+
+[334] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 30.
+
+[335] _Motto of The Socialist_, weekly, taken from Marx and Engels'
+_Manifesto_.
+
+[336] _The Class War_, p. 2.
+
+[337] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 10.
+
+[338] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 5.
+
+[339] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, pp. 101, 102.
+
+[340] Bax, _Ethics of Socialism_, p. 82.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE WORKING MASSES
+
+
+Before investigating the attitude of British Socialism towards the
+working masses, it is necessary to take note of its doctrines
+regarding work.
+
+Most thinkers, from the time of King Solomon, Socrates, and Confucius
+down to the present age, have seen in work conscientiously performed a
+blessing; many, probably most, British Socialists declare it to be a
+curse and a vice. The leading English philosopher of Socialism, for
+instance, tells us: "To the Socialist labour is an evil to be
+minimised to the utmost. The man who works at his trade or avocation
+more than necessity compels him, or who accumulates more than he can
+enjoy, is not a hero but a fool from the Socialists' standpoint."[341]
+A leading French Socialist informs us: "Through listening to the
+fallacious utterances of the middle-class economists, the workers have
+delivered themselves body and soul to the vice of work."[342] When Mr.
+Victor Grayson, M.P., a Socialist, in a speech ventured to refer to
+work as "one of the greatest blessings and privileges ever conferred
+on humanity," one of the Socialist papers wrote: "Victor Grayson is
+simply an agent of the capitalist class. Is Mr. Victor Grayson, M.P.,
+trying to allure the capitalist class by picturing work as a blessing,
+or is he trying to get the worker to look upon work through a rosy
+mist conjured from the brains of the capitalist's agent who is
+saturated with capitalist philosophy? It is time the Beatitudes were
+extended or revised. How would this do?--'Blessed is the worker who
+works (for the capitalist), for he shall inherit the kingdom (of
+starvation and misery under capitalism).' 'Blessed is work in itself,
+because it enables (the capitalist) to live in peace and happiness.'
+Since work is a blessing, it follows that whatever saves work is a
+curse. All the beautiful machinery which the working class have shed
+their life blood to produce, to develop which an army of them have
+been sacrificed under capitalism by the capitalists; this which the
+workers of ages and ages have contributed their mite towards; have
+laboured long and suffered silently to create; this is an
+evil!!!"[343]
+
+British Socialists do their utmost to convert the workers into
+shirkers by teaching them not only that work is an evil in itself, but
+by constantly admonishing them, "on scientific grounds," to work as
+little as possible during the time they are employed. "It is the
+interest of the employer to get as much work out of his hands as
+possible for as little wages as possible. It is the interest of the
+workers to get as high a wage as possible for as little labour as
+possible."[344] "The workers have been taught by the practical
+economists of the trade-unions, and have learnt for themselves by
+bitter experience, that every time any of them in a moment of ambition
+or good will does one stroke of work not in his bond, he is increasing
+the future unpaid labour not only of himself, but of his
+fellows."[345]
+
+The Independent Labour Party has issued a leaflet entitled "Are you a
+Socialist?" in which the question occurs, "Do you believe that every
+individual should have sufficient leisure to cultivate his higher
+faculties and enjoy life to the fullest extent?" and the answer is,
+"If you say 'Yes,' join the Independent Labour Party and help to carry
+its principles into effect."[346]
+
+Many Socialists promise the workers that the Socialist State of the
+future will abolish the curse of work by greatly diminishing the hours
+of labour. A leading English Socialist writer says: "It is as plainly
+demonstrable as that twice four make eight that a due system of
+organised effort would enable your 43,000,000 of people to win from
+Nature an overflowing superfluity of all that man desires, without
+one-fourth the effort put forth now to win a beggarly subsistence so
+far short of what your community requires that 13,000,000 of your
+people live continually upon the very verge of starvation."[347] A
+leading American Socialist promises somewhat vaguely, "A few hours of
+work will secure to everybody all necessaries, decencies, and comforts
+of life."[348] William Morris tells us that four hours' work will
+suffice, and that it will not all be "mere machine-tending."[349]
+Morrison-Davidson prophesies that the "hours of labour will probably
+not exceed a minimum of two and a maximum of five daily."[350] Hyndman
+feels quite certain that "two or three hours' labour out of the
+twenty-four by all adult males would be enough to give the whole
+community all the wholesome necessaries and comforts of life,"[351]
+and Bax thinks that "In a perfectly organised Socialist State men
+never worked more than two or three hours a day."[352] Yves Guyot
+wittily says: "There is no reason why their demands should not go
+further. Zero alone can bid them defiance."[353] It is worth noting
+that many Anarchists also promise a great lessening of the hours of
+labour when the State has been destroyed. Kropotkin, for instance,
+requires only from four to five hours' work.[354] Agitators desirous
+to secure the support of the workers cannot be too lavish in their
+promises.
+
+In the Socialist State of the future a few hours' work every day will
+give boundless prosperity to all, for "Wealth may easily be made as
+plentiful as water at the expense of trifling toil."[355] "Under
+Socialism, nineteen-twentieths of the people will be better off
+materially than they are to-day, for they will be equal partners in
+all the productive and distributive wealth of the community."[356]
+"Comparative affluence would be enjoyed by each member of the
+community."[357]
+
+In the Socialist commonwealth of the future "all wages will be
+immediately increased," for "the social community will apply itself to
+raise all salaries of workers and peasants."[358] "In a Socialist
+State you will have everyone paid a living wage. The surplus will be
+dispensed by the State, bringing happiness to the whole
+community."[359]
+
+The British national revenue amounts at present only to a little more
+than _140,000,000l._ By the abolition of the private capitalists and
+landowners the Socialist Government of Great Britain "would at once
+find themselves in possession of a revenue amounting to some
+_900,000,000l._ per annum, and would probably be puzzled for a time
+how to dispose of it and prevent themselves being buried under its
+accumulation."[360] This is neither a joke nor a misprint, for the
+well-known writer, author of countless Socialist pamphlets, continues:
+"After a variety of attempts to dispose of it by dividing into good
+fat salaries among those of your community who had had least to do
+with its production, after the usual custom, I believe means would be
+employed ultimately for inducing them to keep it under by increasing
+the wages of the workers, which is another way of saying that those
+whose labour had produced the wealth would be allowed to enjoy it,
+which would be something quite novel."[361]
+
+The Socialist Government would not only diminish the working hours
+making them from three to five hours a day, but would also double and
+treble wages, partly in order to get rid of the glut of money flowing
+into the National Exchequer, partly because the workers would
+presumably receive the whole produce of their labour (see Chapter IV.)
+in the form of wages as soon as the private capitalists were
+eliminated. Repairs, renewals, replacement of capital losses, and the
+extension of national industry, which are at present effected out of
+the savings of private capitalists, would, under the Socialist
+_regime_, apparently no longer be required, and direction,
+supervision, and distribution would apparently no longer cost
+anything. The workers are quite seriously told by the philosopher of
+British Socialism, collaborating with the editor of "Justice": "Under
+present conditions the total wealth produced would, if equitably
+divided, amount to a value equal to more than _200l._ per year per
+family. But to suppose that any mere distributive readjustment is what
+is meant by Socialism is to entirely misunderstand what Socialism
+really involves. Socialism means the complete reorganisation of
+production as well as distribution. With production scientifically and
+socially organised, the productivity of labour would be quintupled,
+and the amount of wealth would be increased in proportion."[362] In
+other words, there would be _1,000l._ a year for each family. Another
+Socialist more plainly states: "At the present hour it is calculated
+that the wealth of the United Kingdom exceeds 2,000 millions per year.
+This divided among forty millions gives _250l._ per family. It is said
+that the abolition of waste labour and the absorption of the idle
+classes would quadruple the production. One thousand pounds per year
+per family is a very good standard of comfort under a co-operative
+system of living."[363]
+
+The two estimates agree in this, that the Socialist family of five
+should receive in wages _1,000l._ per annum, or about _3l. 10s._ per
+working day. In another chapter we shall learn that in the Socialist
+State only the young and strong would work, and they would work, as we
+have seen in the foregoing pages, between three and four hours a day.
+In other words, the worker who earns now, say, _10d._ an hour, would,
+under the Socialist commonwealth, receive _1l._ per hour. Who would
+not be a Socialist?
+
+A leading German Socialist has endeavoured to gauge the effect of
+Socialism upon the working classes. In making his calculations he has
+borne in mind the necessity of providing for the wear and tear of
+capital, and for other expenditure, and he has arrived at the
+conclusion: "A generous sick insurance will have to be set up, as well
+as an invalid and old-age insurance for all incapacitated workers, &c.
+Thus we see that not much will remain for the raising of the wages
+from the present income of the capitalists, even if capital were
+confiscated at a stroke, still less if we were to compensate the
+capitalists. It will consequently be necessary, in order to be able to
+raise the wages, to raise at the same time the production far above
+its present level."[364]
+
+The value of high wages lies in the produce they buy. It is of course
+quite clear that a nation, in order to consume more, must also produce
+more. It would be interesting to know whether leading Socialists, such
+as Messrs. Bax, Quelch, and Hazell, who must be acquainted with the
+sober estimates of the German Socialists, honestly believe that under
+a Socialist _regime_ _1,000l._ per annum will be available per family,
+or whether these statements have only been made to obtain supporters
+on the not very honourable principle, _Vulgus vult decipi,
+decipiatur_.
+
+Let us now look into the practical proposals of the Socialists to the
+workers.
+
+In the official programme of the Social-Democratic Federation[365] the
+following "Immediate Reforms" concerning the workers are demanded:
+
+"A legislative eight hours' working day, or forty-eight hours per
+week, to be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to
+be inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law. Absolute
+freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee against
+any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or infringe it.
+No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until sixteen years
+of age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law. Public provision of useful work at
+not less than trade-union rates of wages for the unemployed. Free
+State insurance against sickness and accident, and free and adequate
+State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers. Public
+assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights. The
+legislative enactment of a minimum wage of _30s._ for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work."
+
+It will be noticed that imprisonment is to be inflicted upon employers
+who allow their men to work overtime. Would there also be
+imprisonment for workers working undertime? Similar demands have been
+made by other Socialist bodies. Let us look more closely into some of
+those demands which are to be fulfilled forthwith.
+
+
+OLD-AGE PENSIONS
+
+With the same recklessness with which the Socialist leaders promise to
+the working man a large income in return for three or four hours'
+daily work in the golden age of Socialism, they try to dazzle him with
+promises of wonderful old-age pension schemes which are to be carried
+out in the immediate future. Mr. Smart thinks "The smallest sum upon
+which an old man can exist, even when his lodging is provided by his
+friends, is _7s._ a week. The pension, therefore, should not be less
+than this amount, and should be obtainable at sixty years of age. The
+annual cost for a universal system would be, with the necessary
+administrative expenses, about _60,000,000l._"[366] To Councillor
+Glyde the pensionable age of sixty seems to be too high, and the
+pension too low. Therefore he proposes that "Old-age pensions of at
+least _7s. 6d._ per week should be provided for all aged workers over
+fifty-five years of age."[367] But why should a working man have to
+wait till he is fifty-five before receiving a pension? In another
+pamphlet, Mr. Glyde amends his scheme and tells us, "To give a pension
+of _7s. 6d._ per week to all who wished to give up work at fifty years
+of age would have very satisfactory results. In the first place, it
+would make the aged workers happy and comfortable. In the second
+place, it would help to solve the unemployed question by the steady
+withdrawal of the aged workmen from the labour market, give them
+purchasing power, and thus find a home market for the productivity of
+the younger, able-bodied workers. Thirdly, it would prevent the
+competition for jobs, and the playing off against the younger workmen
+by the employers of the cheaper-paid labour of those who cannot as
+they formerly could, so that there would be less strikes, reduction in
+wages, and petty tyranny practised upon the younger generation of
+workers. Fourthly, it would cause the abolition of workhouses, with
+their great army of expensive, well-paid officials. There would be no
+need for workhouses, because cottage homes would be provided for those
+who were infirm and feeble, on the lines of the present homes for
+children; an infirmary for those who were sick and invalids, and
+asylums for the imbecile. Thousands would be cared for by relatives
+and friends. Fifthly, by Imperial funds being used for old-age
+pensions, the Poor rate could be reduced from _6d._ to _1s._ in the
+pound. These reforms could be carried out without a single farthing
+extra taxation, nor anyone being any worse off than formerly, by the
+practice of economy."[368] To pension all workers at fifty would cost
+about _100,000,000l._ a year, and I think it would be very difficult
+to save that amount on a budget of _140,000,000l._ unless army, navy,
+and civil service were abolished. Mr. Morrison Davidson is neither
+satisfied with a pension of _7s. 6d._ a week nor with the pensionable
+ages of sixty, fifty-five, or even of fifty. He proposes, therefore,
+that "Superannuation _on full pay_ will take place at, say, forty-five
+or, at the most, fifty."[369]
+
+
+UNEMPLOYMENT
+
+In the Socialist State of the future there would be no unemployed
+workers. Many Socialist writers make forecasts such as the following:
+"Under Socialism all the work of the nation would be organised--that
+is to say, it would be 'ordered,' or 'arranged,' so that no one need
+be out of work and so that no useless work need be done, and so that
+no work need be done twice where once would serve."[370] "There would
+be a mathematical ordering of production determined by the demands of
+the consumer."[371] "Periods of glut and want of work will be
+impossible in the new community."[372]
+
+It is already difficult enough even for the ablest manager to secure
+constant employment to workers in a moderate-sized manufactory, shop,
+or office. A Socialist Administration composed of fallible men would
+have to control and satisfy the whole national demand and supply. It
+would have to sow and to reap, to dig for coal and ore, to fish, to
+manufacture and to distribute everything wanted and made by all the
+people. At the same time it would have to control the vast
+international trade on the regular flow of which constant employment
+in Great Britain necessarily depends. To satisfy every demand by an
+adequate supply, it would therefore have to direct and control not
+only all British industries, but also the fashions and the seasons in
+Great Britain and in all the countries which stand in commercial
+relations with the United Kingdom. The British Socialist
+Administration would not only have to provide a sufficient cotton crop
+in the United States, a sufficient wool crop in Australia, a
+sufficient wheat crop in Canada, but it would also have to provide an
+adequate demand for British cotton goods in India and China, for
+British coal on the continent of Europe, &c. It would have to provide
+sufficient sun in America to produce an adequate cotton crop and
+sufficient rain in India to enable the natives to buy part of that
+cotton crop in the shape of manufactured articles made in Lancashire.
+Unless the Socialist Administration controls not only all foreign
+tariffs but also Nature the world over, there might be unemployment in
+a socialised Great Britain--and worse.
+
+The doctrines of English Socialism may be summed up in a single
+phrase. Every existing evil is due solely to the capitalistic system,
+and every existing evil can be abolished only by Socialism.
+Unemployment is no exception to the rule. Our Socialists have, for
+reasons which will presently be given, concentrated much energy upon
+convincing the working masses that unemployment is due solely to
+private property in land and capital. The Social-Democratic Federation
+has shown that "The existence of an unemployed class is an essential
+characteristic of the capitalist system."[373] The Fabian Society in
+congress assembled has registered the declaration: "That the existence
+of a class of unemployed willing but unable to find work is a
+necessary result of the present industrial system, in which every
+improvement in machinery throws fresh masses of men out of work"
+[would improved machinery not have the same effect in the Socialist
+commonwealth?] "and the competition of capitalists for the market
+produces recurring commercial crises; that, consequently, unemployment
+can only be abolished with the complete abolition of the competitive
+system, and can only be limited in proportion as order and regulation
+are introduced into the present competitive confusion."[374] Yet the
+same Fabian Society frankly admits in another pamphlet that "No plan
+has yet been devised by which the fluctuations of work could be
+entirely prevented, or safe and profitable employment found for those
+rendered idle by no fault of their own. It is easy enough to demand
+something should be done, and I entirely agree with agitating the
+subject; but something more than agitation is required. It is of no
+use urging remedies which can be demonstrably proved to be worse for
+the patient than the disease itself. I fear that if we were given full
+power to-morrow to deal with the unemployed all over England, we
+should find ourselves hard put to it how to solve the problem."[375]
+At the last Conference (1907) of the Social-Democratic Federation the
+resolution was moved, "That this Conference reasserts its statement
+that unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and
+capital."[376]
+
+The emphatic statements contained in the foregoing declarations that
+unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and capital are
+absurd. If the private ownership of land and capital were the cause of
+unemployment, unemployment should be almost equally great in all
+civilised countries, because in all civilised countries land and
+capital are in private hands. Whilst in Great Britain unemployment is
+a fearful and permanent evil, it has been practically unknown during a
+long time in Germany, where there has been for many years so great a
+scarcity of labour that immigration is greater than emigration.[377]
+Whilst in capitalist Great Britain employment is so bad that from
+200,000 to 300,000 people have to emigrate every year, employment in
+capitalist Germany has been excellent, and in the capitalist United
+States it has been so good that they have absorbed during a number of
+years almost 1,000,000 immigrants per year. These facts prove that
+private ownership of land and capital and over-production have nothing
+to do with unemployment, which is, as a rule, due not to
+over-production but to ill-balanced production, as has been proved on
+page 70 of this book. In the case of a country such as Great Britain,
+unemployment is due principally to the insufficiency and insecurity of
+her markets for her manufactured goods and to the decay of her
+agriculture.
+
+The various Socialist organisations have so constantly preached the
+doctrine that unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and
+capital that the Trade Unions have at last come to believe it. Owing
+to Socialist inspiration, the Trade Union Congresses have passed
+resolutions in favour of the nationalisation of land and of the other
+means of production at most of the meetings since 1888, and a
+Socialist weekly has been able to assert that "Every member of the
+Socialist Labour Party, either by Trade Union Congresses or by
+Independent Labour Party programme, is committed to the
+nationalisation of land and the instruments of production."[378] To
+the delight of the Socialists, resolutions of the Trade Unions urging
+the nationalisation of all land and capital are becoming more and more
+emphatic. In the "Social Democrat" for October 1907 we read, under the
+heading "Trade Unionists and Unemployment," the following: "The
+resolution on unemployment passed at the Bath Trade Union Congress
+shows that the Trade Unionists are falling into line with Social
+Democrats on this question, and that they are beginning to see that
+Trade Unionism alone is no solution for this evil. After referring to
+the failure of the Unemployed Workmen Act, and the niggardly manner of
+doling out the grant of _200,000l._, the resolution goes on to say
+that 'This Congress, recognising that unemployment is now permanent in
+character in busy as in slack seasons, in summer and in winter, and is
+common to all trades and industries; also that this is due to industry
+being unorganised and carried on for private profit and is bound to
+continue, and indeed become more accentuated as the development of
+machinery and other wage-saving methods proceeds, calls the attention
+of the Government to its neglect of the interests of the people in not
+grappling with this social evil, and urges it to at once embark upon
+work of public utility with the object of (a) absorbing the present
+unemployed labour, (b) laying the foundation for a permanent
+reorganisation of industry upon a co-operative basis.'"[379]
+
+The Socialists have been anxious to convince the workers that
+unemployment is due to the private ownership of land and capital, and
+that all unemployed should be relieved by the State because "A really
+adequate system of helping the unemployed will completely alter the
+relation of power between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. It will
+make the proletariat masters in the factory. If the workers sell
+themselves to-day to the employer, if they allow themselves to be
+exploited and oppressed, it is the ghost of unemployment, the whip of
+hunger, which compels them to it. If, on the other hand, the worker is
+secure in his existence, even when not in work, then nothing is easier
+to him than to disable the capitalist. He no longer requires the
+capitalist, while the latter cannot conduct his business without him.
+When the matter has gone so far as that every employer, whenever a
+dispute breaks out, will get the worst of it and be forced to yield,
+the capitalists may certainly continue to be managers of the
+factories, but they will cease to be their masters and exploiters. But
+in that case the capitalists will recognise that they only carry the
+burdens and risks of the undertakings without receiving any advantage,
+and will be the first to give up capitalist production and insist on
+being bought out."[380] "The right to work is a charter of industrial
+freedom, the emancipation of labour from capitalist tyranny. Till it
+is obtained there can be neither social nor moral progress. When it is
+obtained all other things become possible."[381]
+
+The British Labour Party has drafted a Bill which, asserting the right
+to work, makes provision of work for the unemployed compulsory and
+enables the local authorities compulsorily to acquire land with a view
+of setting the unemployed to work.[382] The Annual Conference of the
+Independent Labour Party of 1907, going a step further, demanded the
+erection of a national department for creating work and giving a
+living wage to the unemployed. It resolved:
+
+"This Conference welcomes the news that a Bill to secure the right to
+work is to be introduced into Parliament by the Labour party,
+expresses the hope that every effort will be made to secure its
+passing into law, and declares in favour of the establishment of a
+properly equipped and financed national department for dealing with
+the whole problem of unemployment on the basis of putting useful work
+at a living wage within the reach of every worker, and of training
+such as require to be taught in husbandry, and other forms of work
+upon the land."[383]
+
+There is a great danger in these proposals.[384] Creating work for the
+unemployed may not cure, but may aggravate, the disease which springs
+not from private property in land and capital, but from an
+insufficient outlet for British manufactures. If the disease is
+wrongly treated, the unemployed may become an incubus which will
+cripple both workers and capitalists.
+
+A champion of the policy of _laisser faire_ argues: "The State cannot
+make work, if by work is meant the doing of something that somebody
+wants done. It is of course true that the State can take on new
+functions, and do more of the work that is now left to private
+enterprise. But that would not make additional employment; it would
+only transfer employment from one set of men to another. When the
+State or the municipality, instead of seeking to do the thing that is
+wanted in the most economical and most efficient manner, deliberately
+picks out the least competent workmen and sets them to work on things
+that are not wanted, no new wealth is created, and the previous
+creation of wealth is diminished, because the taxpayer has been
+deprived of the means of employing as many persons as he would have
+employed. Artificial jobs may be created for the unemployed, who will
+be perfectly conscious that these jobs are artificial, and thus the
+independent and self-respecting workman will be arbitrarily deprived
+of his job. It cannot be too often repeated that the so-called 'right
+to work,' on which Socialists are fond of insisting, means in practice
+the right to deprive another man of his job."[385] These arguments are
+fallacious. There is work such as the reclamation of the foreshore,
+draining of bogs, constructing canals, planting of forests, &c., which
+are, as general experience shows, rather the province of the community
+than of the private individual. Unemployment may be relieved by the
+State and the local authorities if discretion be used. Proposals to
+create work of this kind for the genuine unemployed, and to provide
+compulsory labour for idlers and loafers, have been advanced by many
+Socialists and non-Socialists, and these proposals are worth
+considering and adopting.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[341] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 94.
+
+[342] Lafargue, _Right to Leisure_, p. 11.
+
+[343] _The Socialist_, October 1907.
+
+[344] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 13.
+
+[345] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 145,
+
+[346] _Are you a Socialist?_ p. 1.
+
+[347] Washington, _A Nation of Slaves_, p. 5.
+
+[348] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 170.
+
+[349] Morris, _A Factory as it Might Be_, p. 10.
+
+[350] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 170.
+
+[351] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, p. 10.
+
+[352] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 58.
+
+[353] Guyot, _Pretensions of Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[354] Kropotkin, _Conquete du Pain_, p. 239.
+
+[355] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 11.
+
+[356] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 10.
+
+[357] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 159.
+
+[358] Jaures, _Practical Socialism_, p. 6.
+
+[359] _Socialism, For and Against_, p. 11.
+
+[360] Washington, _Milk and Postage Stamps_, p. 5.
+
+[361] _Ibid._ p. 5.
+
+[362] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 17.
+
+[363] A.P. Hazell, _Summary of Marx's "Capital,"_ p. 17.
+
+[364] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 18.
+
+[365] See Appendix.
+
+[366] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, p. 12.
+
+[367] Councillor Glyde, _A Peep Behind the Scenes on a Board of
+Guardians_, p. 27.
+
+[368] Councillor Glyde, _Britain's Disgrace_, pp. 31, 32.
+
+[369] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 170.
+
+[370] Robert Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 13.
+
+[371] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[372] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 192.
+
+[373] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 5.
+
+[374] _Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions_, p. 11.
+
+[375] Webb, _Socialism True and False_, pp. 8, 9.
+
+[376] _Report of 21th Annual Conference, 1907, Social-Democratic
+Federation_, p. 17.
+
+[377] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 546.
+
+[378] _New Age_, November 30, 1907.
+
+[379] _Social Democrat_, October 1907, p. 580.
+
+[380] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 6.
+
+[381] Russell Smart, _The Right to Work_, p. 15.
+
+[382] A Bill to Provide Work through Public Authorities for Unemployed
+Persons.
+
+[383] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference, 1907_, p.
+54.
+
+[384] See Thorold Rogers, _Work and Wages_, p. 557.
+
+[385] Cox, _Socialism_, pp. 37, 39, 40.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS TRADE UNIONISTS AND CO-OPERATORS
+
+
+The British Socialists have during many years attacked and denounced
+the Trade Unionists and the Co-operators, firstly, because the trade
+unionists and co-operators are "capitalists," and therefore traitors
+to the Socialist cause; secondly, because Socialism unconditionally
+condemns providence and thrift among the working men, as will be seen
+in Chapter XXIII.
+
+Although the Socialists pretend that they denounce co-operation and
+thrift, and even abstinence from alcoholic drink, on economic and
+scientific grounds, their real reasons are political. Socialism can
+flourish only if the masses are dissatisfied. The Socialists are
+therefore little interested in improving the position of the worker,
+but very greatly in increasing his poverty, unhappiness, and
+discontent. Socialism is revolutionary, and the Socialists know that
+people who are well off are not revolutionists. For tactical reasons,
+therefore, the Socialists oppose and denounce thrift, co-operation,
+and abstinence, qualities which are found pre-eminently in
+co-operators and trade unionists.
+
+The trade unionists, the aristocracy of British labour, are too
+conservative, too temperate, too cautious, too prosperous, and too
+little revolutionary for the taste of Socialists. The Socialists
+complain: "The British trade union suffers from three fatal defects:
+(1) It is anti-revolutionary. It disavows the fact of the class
+struggle. It accepts the capitalist system as a permanency. The rules
+and constitutions of many unions explicitly refer to the 'just rights
+of the employer,' and those who do not set forth any such statement
+openly, admit it in actual practice. The capitalist class, as voiced
+by the capitalist press, recognise in these unions the bulwark of
+present-day society against the advance of Socialism. (2) The British
+trade union method of organisation is a complete negation of the
+solidarity of labour. Each trade or section of a trade has its own
+particular and autonomous organisation. Even trades which are most
+closely connected are divided into separate unions, each union
+ignoring the interest of the rest, making its own special contracts
+with the capitalists, and assisting them by remaining at work when
+their fellow-workers in a kindred trade are on strike. The most
+noteworthy example of this form of inter-trade treachery was offered
+in the case of the engineers' strike of 1897-8, when the Boilermakers'
+Society by remaining at work were the means of defeating the
+Amalgamated Society of Engineers and of forcing them to return to work
+on the masters' terms. (3) The British trade union refuses to admit to
+its ranks those teeming millions of workers whom it terms
+'unskilled.'"[386]
+
+Other Socialists complain: "Trade unionism recognises the present
+system of society, justifies capitalism, and defends wage-slavery, and
+only seeks to soften the tyranny of the one and assuage the evils of
+the other. Social Democracy aims at destroying the whole system."[387]
+"We are never allowed to forget the splendid incomes earned by these
+aristocrats of labour, a mere tenth of the whole labour class. The
+trade unionist can usually only raise himself on the bodies of his
+less fortunate comrades."[388] "The old-fashioned policy of the
+English trade unions has made them _guilds of privileged_, rather
+than fighting representatives of their class."[389]
+
+Similar complaints are raised against the co-operators. "Co-operation,
+though regarded by the individual trader as an enemy, does not
+necessarily enter into conflict with the capitalist at all. Indeed, so
+far as it transforms workmen into shareholders, it forms a bulwark for
+capitalism, the same as the creation of small landholders or any other
+class of small proprietors would do."[390] "At present the
+co-operative societies in England are very apathetic with regard to
+political affairs."[391] "In spite of abstract resolutions, our trade
+unionists are devoted to the wages system; still our co-operators
+yearn after dividends; still the mass of our producers admire the men
+who rise upon their shoulders to place and pay. The twin curses of
+democracy, slavishness and jealousy, are curiously blended in their
+views of social and political life. They envy capacity; they bow down
+before successful blackguardism."[392]
+
+Some Socialists have called for the unification of all the trades
+unions, arguing "Union has failed to adapt itself to changed
+conditions. Just as budding industrial development called into being
+the shop union, and further industrial expansion meant development of
+the union to the local and then the national organisation, so the
+exigencies of our time demand a working-class union--one union, not
+eleven hundred, as now."[393] Others have bespattered the unions with
+insults, and some do so still. A very violent Socialist organ recently
+wrote: "Our trade union leaders are not so corrupt as those of
+America? Are they not? As a matter of fact, the corruption is tenfold
+greater. The difference is that here it is legalised and respectable.
+In America the corruption takes the form of a wad of dollar notes
+pushed into the fakir's hands in a dark corner. In this country our
+trade union leaders are openly corrupted in the face of day by
+positions on conciliation boards, Justiceships of the Peace, Cabinet
+positions" [this is a hit at Mr. John Burns], "and well-paid jobs in
+the Labour Department of the Board of Trade. Are Shackleton, Bell, and
+Barnes honester men than Gompers, Mitchell, and Tobin? As Dr. Johnson
+very coarsely expressed it: 'It is difficult to settle the question of
+precedence between a bug and a louse.'"[394]
+
+To the more far-sighted Socialists the folly of attacking the powerful
+trade unions, with their 2,000,000 members, was perfectly clear. One
+of the Socialist leaders wrote: "Of all the blind, fatuous policies in
+the world, that of decrying trades unionism by professing Socialists
+is about the worst; and the next worst thing is the trades unionist
+abusing Socialism."[395] Some Socialists recommended changing the
+policy of denunciation for a wiser one: "We have to _convert_ the
+trade unions, not to _antagonise_ them"[396]; and their conversion was
+thought to be all the more easy because, to quote Ben Tillett, "The
+whole of the trades union movement has been tinged with Socialism;
+unconsciously the guides of the working classes have always marched
+towards the goal of Socialism."[397]
+
+With this object in view the trade unionists were urged to reform
+their tactics, to abandon the economic struggle in the form of
+strikes, and to enter upon the more efficacious political struggle
+with the employers of labour in the House of Commons. "To go on
+following the old beaten paths of trade unionism is simply to go on
+exhausting the possibilities of error for an indefinite period. If the
+new unions are simply to play the part of regulators of wages, as
+trade and prices rise and fall, they will be of very slight advantage
+to the workers compared with what they might accomplish if they took a
+broader view of their opportunities and their duties. What they have
+to do, and that now, is to use the power which organisation gives them
+to get control of the political machinery of the country and use it
+for the advancement of their class. By this means they could, if they
+chose, achieve as much in a year or two as would be gained in a
+century by the old methods of trade agitation and strikes."[398] "If
+the Labour party had a tithe of the money that the unions have spent
+upon getting thrashed and starved and defrauded, it would be a party
+to wonder at and be proud of. The miners of Yorkshire have spent
+_212,000l._ on six strikes--all of which have been lost. Do you call
+this industrial warfare? Insanity and suicide--that is what it is. The
+engineers spent three-quarters of a million on the great lock-out.
+That is a sum in itself, the ransom of all the workers from the bonds
+of wage-slavery. What can the engineers show for their money to-day?
+Ask them! We could capture the British Parliament with that sum _plus_
+a little brains and courage."[399] The Fabian Society has issued
+numerous pamphlets in which it has shown how the position of the
+workers might be improved, and in these it has at every opportunity
+urged upon every worker to join a union, and has urged upon the trade
+unions to better the position of the workers by relying upon political
+action.[400]
+
+In pursuance of this policy the railway employees were told by the
+Socialists, when the difference between the British railway companies
+and their workers had been arranged: "You men must cling tight to the
+union and keep fostering the discontent of your fellows, not only with
+the sectional wrongs which affect you personally, but with the brutal
+system of competition of which your own wrongs are but one fractional
+consequence. Stick to the Labour party. You have two representatives
+in Parliament. Run some more. You need not bother now to build up a
+strike fund. Spend the money in politics. The more men you get in the
+House, the better chance you will have of convincing a Government
+arbitrator of the justice of your claims."[401]
+
+Wishing to secure the support of the trade unionists and the
+co-operators, the Socialists began to preach that there was no
+antagonism between Socialists, trade unionists, and co-operators, and
+to stretch out a hand towards them. "Socialist influence makes its way
+in the union. The trade unions generally must sooner or later
+become--they already in some instances are to-day--part and parcel of
+the working-class Socialist movement, or must cease to exist as class
+organisations. Co-operation is in its inception Socialist. That is to
+say, that all co-operation implies co-operative effort and social
+union."[402] Another Socialist writer said: "I am sorry that some
+Socialists used to cry down the co-operative movement. I know it has
+some serious defects, but it has taught the workers of this country
+what they can do when they choose. If any power could induce trade
+unionists, co-operators, and Socialists to unite, a co-operative
+commonwealth would be flourishing in this country before the rich and
+educated classes had rubbed open their drowsy eyes."[403]
+
+The recommendations which the Socialists addressed to the trade
+unionists to increase their political power, and to improve their
+economic position by the use of their political power, became louder
+and louder. They were told that the capitalists were the enemies of
+both trade unionists and Socialists, and that co-operation would be of
+the greatest benefit to both bodies. The Socialist group of the London
+Society of Compositors, for instance, argued:
+
+"It is unfortunate that after some dozen years or more of Socialist
+propaganda there should still be considerable bitterness existing
+between trade unionists and Socialists. The cause of the unpopularity
+of the Socialists was not due to any desire on their part to irritate
+trade unionists, but arose out of the stupid prejudices of the
+spokesmen and leaders of the trade unionists themselves. Socialists
+are staunch trade unionists. The New trade unionism is evidence of
+this, for Socialists are responsible for calling it into existence.
+The movement which is now gaining ground in favour of federation among
+trade unionists generally, is one of Socialist origin. Trade unionists
+look solely to unionism to maintain their miserable standard of
+living, ignorant of the economic laws working against them. Socialists
+accept unionism as only one method to maintain their present standard
+of comfort.
+
+"Both Socialists and trade unionists have a common enemy, a common
+want, and a common economic force which continually and relentlessly
+drives them in one direction. Both are driven to defend attacks
+against their standard of living by the capitalist, and the one point
+of agreement between Socialists and trade unionists, therefore, is
+that they both desire to maintain and increase their present standard
+of living. Trade unionists enter a union to resist the exactions of
+the capitalists, and to baulk attempts on their part to reduce wages.
+Socialists enter a union for precisely the same reason. If they would
+view Parliamentary action from the standpoint of the collective
+welfare of the people, they would soon realise its far-reaching
+effects. A legal forty-eight hour working week, for instance, would
+bring benefit to all and raise the standard of all by giving more
+leisure; thereby affording workers an opportunity of obtaining fresh
+air and following artistic and intellectual pursuits.
+
+"One of the strongest agents which work in favour of the capitalists
+is the necessity of the workers to find food and clothing for their
+families. This evil can be met by the State proposal which is now
+making such headway in England--namely, Free Maintenance for Children.
+The old-fashioned prejudices, fostered by the capitalists and their
+hangers-on, that it is degrading to accept anything from the State, is
+fast dying out in the face of free education, free libraries, free
+maintenance for all sickened with infectious fevers. Free maintenance
+for children would be a tax on that surplus wealth which the
+capitalists and the aristocracy share between them. To the worker,
+free maintenance for his children would be equivalent to an additional
+income. His standard of living would rise. No doubt the capitalist
+would reduce his wages as much as possible, but the worker would then
+be able to fight him on more equal terms. His children being well
+cared for, he would be able to hold out against the capitalist for an
+indefinite period.
+
+"The Housing Question is also worthy of attention. Trade unionism
+should require the State to erect buildings to be let at a sum which
+would cover cost of construction and maintenance alone. This would
+give them a stationary rent, and when locked out by their employers,
+they, as unemployed workers, would not be so liable to be turned into
+the street.
+
+"The workers, unconscious of economic development, unfortunately side
+with one political party or the other, not seeing that the one must
+inevitably be as antagonistic to their interests as the other. Tory
+and Liberal politically represent two classes, who divide the spoils
+between them. One is connected by tradition with the soil, the other
+with commerce. When they have a quarrel, it is as between kites and
+crows for the possession of prey. To assert that a Tory is better than
+a Liberal, or a Liberal better than a Tory, is like affirming that one
+exploiter is less a thief than another. Until trade unionists form
+themselves into an independent party, there can politically be no
+common agreement between them and Socialists, because, while they
+support the capitalist class they are placing power into the hands of
+the exploiting class, who is the common enemy. Co-operation between
+Socialists and trade unionists should be adopted whenever possible,
+and, when occasion offers, an alliance should be entered into for
+common purposes. In America a large section of trade unionists have
+already recognised that the class war is inevitable under the present
+system of exploitation, and they have entered into an active alliance
+with the Socialist party. It is to be hoped that the trade unions of
+Great Britain will ere long see their way to follow the example set by
+their American brethren in the United States."[404]
+
+Another writer urged: "Is it not time that we combined and strove for
+something higher, wider, and more far-reaching? Let the trade unionists
+unite, combine, federate; not for constantly squabbling with the
+capitalist over the spoil which the workers alone create, but to secure
+for the latter, organised, the control of their own tools and raw
+materials--of the mines, the railways, the factories, the shipping, the
+land--of all those things which only have value through their labour.
+Let the co-operators co-operate with each other, with trade unionists,
+and Social Democrats for the same object. Let us all agitate, educate,
+and organise to form the workers of the world into a gigantic Trade
+Union, an International Co-operation, a Social-Democratic
+Commonwealth."[405]
+
+Since the time when these words were written attempts have constantly
+been made by the Socialists to co-operate with the unionists, and, at
+least outwardly, their relations have become intimate. Many Socialists
+have high hopes for a united Socialist Labour party. At a recent
+conference of the Social-Democratic Federation the chairman declared,
+in his opening address: "There can be but one Independent Labour
+Party, and there ought to be a united Socialist party. Not many years
+will pass before the new Labour party will join the Socialist
+movement, but in the meantime everything seems ripening for a united
+Socialist party, consolidating both forces and funds, preventing
+overlapping and removing friction. Never were the times so favourable
+to Socialism. In spite of the boycott, the misrepresentation, the
+influence of the temporal powers against us, the word Socialism is no
+longer unknown or feared. In the workshop, the mine, the train, or the
+tram, men are eagerly discussing Socialism. The workers need grumble
+of their chains no longer; they can fling them off at will; for they,
+and they alone, hold the keys of freedom. This poor blind Samson is
+waking up and groping his way; Socialists must be ready to lead
+him."[406]
+
+Socialism has of late years strongly permeated the unions. Will it
+succeed in capturing them? The Socialists are very optimistic on that
+point. "The outlook is full of promise for the political Labour
+movement. It only requires the adoption of a candidate by the united
+local societies to turn every trade union institute or office, miners'
+lodge and branch meeting-room into a committee-room, and when the call
+is made by the Parliamentary group there will be plenty of voluntary
+workers. The great fact stands out prominently: Labour is moving; and
+that fact points to stirring times and a new phase in the history of
+the nation."[407]
+
+The character of the trade unions has undoubtedly been greatly changed
+through Socialist agitation. The trade unionist has almost ceased to
+be an individualist. "The modern trade unionist is out for a political
+revolution. He has dismissed, as an obsolete absurdity, the idea of
+paying for his benefits, pensions, sick-pay, unemployed relief, out of
+his union subscriptions. He intends to combine with his fellows of all
+trades in a demand for Parliamentary legislation which will provide
+these benefits out of national funds, mainly by way of a graduated
+income-tax. So he demands old-age pensions and an Unemployed Act. He
+has given up the tedious task of bargaining with his master for higher
+wages and shorter hours; he intends to compel him by the more drastic
+method of an eight-hour day and a minimum wage and State Arbitration
+Act."[408] There is much truth in this description. As the real nature
+of the relations between the trades unions and the Socialists is known
+to only a few, the following documents should be of great interest:--
+
+"In consequence of a decision of the International Socialist Bureau
+(June 9, 1907), its secretary sent a circular to the affiliated
+parties in order to obtain from them official notes on the relations
+between the political Parties and trade unions of their country, and
+he received the following replies from the Social-Democratic
+Federation, the Labour party, and the Independent Labour Party:--
+
+"'Although from its formation in March 1881 the Social-Democratic
+Federation has strongly opposed the abstention of the older trade
+unions from politics, and has still more strongly objected to the very
+close alliance which some of its leading members have made with the
+capitalist Liberal party, resulting in high office and even Cabinet
+rank'" [another hit at Mr. John Burns] "'for those who have thus
+deliberately betrayed the interests of their fellows and supporters of
+the working class; nevertheless, we have never at any time failed to
+help in every way possible, personally and pecuniarily, every strike
+which has taken place since 1881 (even in spite of our doubting the
+value of the mere strike as a weapon against organised capitalism),
+and our organisation has invariably agitated in favour of every
+Parliamentary measure accepted by the trade unions which could at all
+help the trade unionists and the workers at large. Our relations with
+the trade unions may therefore be described as friendly whenever they
+take action against capitalism, and appreciative of their increasing
+tendency towards Socialism. We always recommend all workers to join
+the trade union of their trade. No Socialist propaganda is officially
+carried on by the trade unions, but as quite 75 per cent. of the
+members of the Social-Democratic Federation are also trade unionists
+in their respective trades, by their agency Socialist thought is
+steadily permeating the ranks of trade unionism. As also the older
+leaders, brought up entirely in the bourgeois school of thought and
+action, die or are superannuated, there can be no doubt whatever that
+they will be succeeded by Socialists, and in fact they are being so
+replaced at the present time. Trade union Socialist leaders, of
+course, will then use the trade union organisation to spread
+Socialism. So far as they have been elected to executive office, they
+do this even now.--H.W. LEE, Secretary.'
+
+"'The Labour party is a federation of Socialist societies and trade
+union organisations. Trade unions are directly affiliated, their
+membership forming, together with the membership of the Socialist
+organisations, the membership of the Labour party. In some cases
+Socialist propaganda is conducted by the trade unions, several of them
+embracing the Socialist basis in their rules.--J.S. MIDDLETON, for J.
+RAMSAY MACDONALD.'
+
+"'The Independent Labour Party is affiliated to the Labour party,
+which is a federation of trade unions, co-operative societies, and
+Socialist societies, for political action. The Independent Labour
+Party consists of individual members, and not of federated
+organisations. Our membership is only open to Socialists individually.
+Our association with the trade unions comes through the Labour party,
+with which both we and they are affiliated. The trade unions of Great
+Britain do not carry on any specific Socialist propaganda among their
+members, although several of the unions state in their constitution
+that they believe in Socialism. Many Socialist speeches are made from
+trade union platforms and demonstrations held under the auspices of
+trade unions.--FRANCIS JOHNSON, Secretary.'"[409]
+
+The foregoing three letters are most interesting and most important,
+and they should be carefully read because they prove that the forces
+of trade unionism and Socialism are commingling, and that the trade
+unionists may reckon upon the support of the Socialists whenever they
+come into conflict with capitalists. Although in constructive policy
+Socialism and trade unionism are as yet things apart, they possess a
+common working basis as soon as trouble occurs between capital and
+labour.
+
+To increase the intimacy between them and the representatives of
+labour pure and simple, and to accustom them to co-operation, the
+Socialist cannot do anything better than to cause conflicts to arise
+between capital and labour. Therefore it is only natural that the
+Socialists will urge the trade unionists to make great, and ever
+greater, demands upon capital; that every concession will only be
+considered as a stepping-stone to a further concession. Every conflict
+between capital and labour, everything that will increase the
+dissatisfaction of the workers, will serve the Socialists, because it
+will cause the workers to believe in the doctrine of the Iron Law of
+Wages, in the Law of Increasing Misery, and in the promised Socialist
+paradise. Therefore the Socialists will do all they can to embitter
+the relations between capital and labour, and to bring about strikes.
+For instance, at the time when, in the autumn of 1907, the differences
+between the British railway companies and the men were acute,
+practically the whole Socialist press urged the railway servants to
+declare a strike, and the settlement of the difficulty by Mr. Lloyd
+George was greeted with derision and regret. Mr. Bell, who had
+accepted the settlement, was treated with contempt, and the result of
+the Railway Conference was declared to be the Sedan of the British
+trade union movement.[410]
+
+Owing to the persistent agitation of the Socialists, the trade unions
+are becoming permeated with Socialism. Of late years there have been
+few great strikes in Great Britain, but, unless the relations between
+Socialists and trade unionists alter, it seems likely that great and
+violent industrial disputes will occur in the near future.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[386] _S.L.P. Bulletin No. 2, 1907._
+
+[387] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 10.
+
+[388] _English Progress towards Social Democracy_, p. 8.
+
+[389] _S.L.P. Bulletin No. 1, May 1907._
+
+[390] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 16.
+
+[391] John Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 10.
+
+[392] Hyndman, _Darkness and Dawn of May Day, 1907_, p. 2.
+
+[393] J. O'Connor Kessack, _The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way
+Out_, p. 15.
+
+[394] _S.L.P. Bulletin No. 2._
+
+[395] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 1.
+
+[396] Quelch in _The Socialist_, November 1907.
+
+[397] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[398] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 13.
+
+[399] _Clarion_, November 29, 1907.
+
+[400] _The Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, What it Means and How to
+Make Use of it_; _How Trade Unions Benefit Workmen_; _Eight Hours by
+Law: A Practical Solution_; _Cottage Plans and Common Sense_; _Houses
+for the People_; _The Case for a Legal Minimum Wage_.
+
+[401] _Clarion_, November 15, 1907.
+
+[402] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 40.
+
+[403] Dennis Hird, _From Brute to Brother_, p. 14.
+
+[404] _Socialism and Trade Unionism: Wherein do they Differ?_ pp. 2-8.
+
+[405] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 16.
+
+[406] Opening Address, Chairman Hartley at Annual Conference,
+_Social-Democratic Federation Annual Report, 1906_, pp. 3, 4.
+
+[407] John Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 15.
+
+[408] _New Age_, November 30, 1907.
+
+[409] _Social Democrat_, September 1907, pp. 548, 549.
+
+[410] See the _Labour Leader_, _Clarion_, _Justice_, _Socialist
+Standard_, _Socialist_, &c., for November 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING LAND AND THE LANDLORDS
+
+
+British Socialists, as we have learned in Chapter IV.,[411] adopting
+the celebrated formula of Proudhon, have proclaimed "Property is
+theft," and they are of opinion that property in land is a
+particularly heinous form of theft. Therefore they demand the
+restitution of the land to the people, not as a matter of expediency
+but as a matter of right. "Man has a right only to what his labour
+makes. No man 'makes' the land."[412] "Land is the gift of Nature. It
+is not made by man. Now, if a man has a right to nothing but that
+which he has himself made, no man can have a right to the land, for no
+man made it."[413] "The land belongs by inalienable right not to any
+body of individuals but to all."[414]
+
+    O high cliffs looking heavenward,
+      O valleys green and fair.
+    Sea cliffs that seem to gird and guard
+      Our island once so dear,
+    In vain your beauty now ye spread,
+    For we are numbered with the dead;
+      A robber band has seized the land,
+    And we are exiles here.
+
+    The ploughman ploughs, the sower sows.
+      The reaper reaps the ear;
+    The woodman to the forest goes
+      Before the day grows clear,
+    But of our toil no fruit we see;
+    The harvest's not for you and me:
+      A robber band has seized the land,
+    And we are exiles here.[415]
+
+Appealing to the passions, hatred, and greed of their followers, and
+relying on their credulity, Socialist leaders proclaim not only that
+the landlords are useless, but also that the people will have the land
+rent free as soon as the present owners have been expropriated. "The
+landlord, _qua_ landlord, performs no function in the economy of
+industry or of food production. He is a rent-receiver; that, and
+nothing more. Were the landlord to be abolished, the soil and the
+people who till it would still remain, and the disappearance of the
+landowner would pass almost unnoticed."[416] "Rent is brigandage
+reduced to a system. So long as the English people are content to be
+tenants-at-will on their own soil, and to pay for the privilege, they
+will remain virtually slaves."[417] "The tenant earns the rent. The
+landlord spends it. If the tenant had not to pay the rent he could
+spend it himself, and so it would get spent, and get spent by the man
+who earns it and has the best right to spend it."[418]
+
+Whilst some Socialist agitators are unscrupulous enough to make their
+followers believe that in the Socialist State they may have land for
+the asking, others are so unkind as to destroy that pleasing illusion.
+For instance, we learn from a Fabian pamphlet, "A Socialist State or
+municipality will charge the full economic rent for the use of its
+land and dwellings, and apply that rent to the common purposes of the
+community."[419] Another Socialist authority very pertinently remarks:
+"It is of not the least consequence to the person who rents the land
+whether he pays the rent for it to an individual or whether he Pays it
+to the State,"[420] and therefore it is clear that statements such as
+"If the tenant had not to pay the rent he could spend it himself," are
+merely meant to deceive the simple. Tenants, instead of paying their
+rent to a human landlord, would have to pay it to an impersonal State
+or municipality, and the latter might prove as grasping and as
+heartless as rating committees are now.
+
+Others base their demand for the spoliation of landlords upon the
+Bible and upon the ideal of a "Divine brotherhood," forgetting that
+the Bible contains a commandment "Thou shalt not steal," as well as
+many warnings against lying, deceit, cant, and covetousness. One of
+the champion Bible-Socialists, for instance, writes: "If all men are
+brothers, as Christ undoubtedly taught, then the land, the source of
+wealth, the means by which men can earn their livelihood, should not
+be the property of any set of individuals, but should belong to the
+whole community. The fact of a man being born into the world gives him
+the divine right to the opportunity of earning his living, and that
+right cannot be enjoyed so long as there is a single man on earth
+deprived of access to the land from which to earn his bread. When the
+spirit of brotherhood prevails, it will be a simple and a natural
+thing to arrange that these things shall be used not in the interests
+of the few, but for the common good. There are innumerable signs that
+the hearts and minds of men are now turning in this direction, and
+that they are coming to see that the only just and permanent
+arrangement is the divine solution of working on the basis of
+universal brotherhood."[421] There is a fraternity among Sicilian
+bandits. The "Divine brotherhood" of the writer would be based on
+robbery, and have robbery as its object.
+
+Others demand the confiscation of all land by relying upon
+misrepresentation: "If the injustice of the land monopoly is great in
+the country, by robbing the grower of his improvements or scaring him
+from making any, by robbing the nation of its own legitimate
+independent food supply, and by laying waste vast tracts of the
+surface, the injustice is even greater in the towns, if only by reason
+of the greater numbers whose interests are now involved: (1) by
+flooding the town labour markets with surplus labourers, and so--by
+their competition between each other for jobs of any sort at any
+terms, rather than starve--keeping wages down at the privation point;
+(2) by robbing the town workers of that proper and legitimate home
+market which a flourishing and proportionately numerous agricultural
+population would afford; (3) by the bloated rentals in cities, only
+made possible by driving and crowding the people into our unnaturally
+swollen centres; and (4) by the continuous re-investment of those
+enormous rent extortions in all those secondary monopolies of transit,
+finance, and business generally, which can only arise from the primary
+monopoly of the soil, and which complete this devil's chain of the
+subjection of labour and the dependence of the community."[422]
+
+The complaints that land is going out of cultivation, that the British
+home market has been spoiled, and that towns are overgrown and
+overcrowded are unfortunately only too well justified, but these
+phenomena are not due to private property in land. Private property in
+land is universal, but the desertion of the country and overcrowding
+in towns are not universal. These evils are to be found chiefly in
+Great Britain, because British economic policy, whilst fostering trade
+and the manufacturing industries, has deliberately sacrificed to them
+the rural industries. That fact is acknowledged by many Socialists,
+as will be seen in Chapter XXL., "Some Socialist's Views on Free Trade
+and Protection."
+
+The question now arises: How do the Socialists propose to deal with
+the land and the owners of land? Mr. Blatchford informs us: "The
+titled robbers of England have always done their robberies in a legal
+manner. We propose to enforce their cessation in a legal manner. We
+respect the law, and mean to use it. We are not mere brigands. We are
+the new police; our duty is to 'arrest the rogues and dastards'; our
+motto is, 'The law giveth and the law taketh away, blessed be the name
+of the law.'"[423] A leading Christian-Socialist clergyman tells us
+"As for compensation, from the point of view of the highest Christian
+morality, it is the landlords who should compensate the people, not
+the people the landlords. But practically if you carry out this reform
+by taxation, no compensation would be necessary or even
+possible."[424] Mines and mine-owners are to be treated in the same
+way as land and land-owners. "The minerals should be at once taken
+over without compensation; the present owners should think themselves
+well off if they escape paying compensation for previous robbery of
+the people."[425] Views such as those expressed in the foregoing are
+held not only by some unscrupulous agitators. At the last Annual
+Conference of the Independent Labour Party the following resolution
+was carried: "This Conference, being of opinion that the high price of
+coal is a serious menace to the nation, and bears extremely hard upon
+householders and especially upon the working classes of the country,
+declares in favour of the nationalisation of the mines and
+municipalisation of the coal-supply."[426] At the last Annual
+Conference of the Miners' Federation of Great Britain, various
+resolutions urging the nationalisation of all mines were proposed and
+carried. Mr. W.E. Harvey, M.P., for instance, moved "That the members
+of Parliament supported by this federation be instructed to direct the
+attention of the Government to bring in a Bill for the nationalisation
+of land, mines, and mining royalties, as we believe that it is only by
+such reforms that the workers can obtain full value for their
+labours."[427] It will be observed that nothing is said about
+compensation in this resolution, which was passed unanimously.
+
+How is the nationalisation of the land to be effected? "The land of
+every country belongs of natural and inalienable right to the whole
+body of the people in each generation. We say therefore, 'You need not
+kick the landlords out; you must not buy them out; you had better tax
+them out.'"[428] "If the people rose in revolt, took up arms,
+confiscated the lands of the nobles, and handed them over to the
+control of a Parliament, that would not be brigandage; it would be
+revolution. But if the people by the exercise of constitutional means,
+passed an Act through Parliament making the estates of the nobles the
+property of the nation, with or without compensation, that would be
+neither brigandage nor revolution; it would be a legal, righteous, and
+constitutional reform. We propose to be neither revolutionaries nor
+brigands, but legal, righteous, and constitutional reformers."[429]
+Legality implies and presupposes justice, but Socialist law and
+justice are different from that conception of law and justice which
+has been held hitherto. Chapter XXIV. will make that point clear.
+
+The foregoing should suffice to show that the Socialists intend to
+abolish private property in land by "taxing landowners out of
+existence."
+
+They apparently forget that not all the owners of land are rich; that
+many small farmers, shopkeepers, artisans, &c., own freehold land and
+freehold houses; and that the insurance companies have a very large
+proportion of their funds invested in land and on the security of
+land. A confiscation of land would therefore ruin a vast number of
+hard-working people. It would cripple some insurance companies and
+ruin others. Hence the savings of thrifty workers would be confiscated
+or destroyed by the State together with those of the larger
+capitalists.
+
+The Socialists are not entirely agreed as to the way by which the
+abolition of private ownership in land should be effected, but some
+interesting proposals will be found in Chapter X., "Socialist Views
+and Proposals regarding Taxation and the National Budget." The purely
+agricultural aspect of the land question is treated in Chapter XVIII.,
+"Socialism and Agriculture," and in Chapter XXI., "Some Socialist
+Views on Free Trade and Protection."
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[411] Page 81.
+
+[412] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 61.
+
+[413] _Ibid._ p. 60.
+
+[414] Washington, _A Corner in Flesh and Blood_, p. 60.
+
+[415] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 6.
+
+[416] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[417] Davidson, _Book of Lords_, p. 25.
+
+[418] Blatchford, _Land Nationalisation_, p. 9.
+
+[419] Sidney Webb, _Socialism, True and False_, p. 19.
+
+[420] _Socialism and the Single Tax_, p. 7.
+
+[421] Ward, _Are All Men Brothers?_ pp. 14, 15.
+
+[422] Hall, _Land, Labour, and Liberty_, p. 12.
+
+[423] Blatchford, _Some Tory Socialisms_, p. 6.
+
+[424] Headlam, _Christian Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[425] _Forward_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[426] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference, 1907_, p.
+59.
+
+[427] _Times_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[428] Headlam, _Christian Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[429] Blatchford, _Some Tory Socialisms_, p. 3.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING CAPITAL AND THE CAPITALISTS
+
+
+We have seen in Chapter VIII. that Socialists claim that "Man has a
+right to nothing but that which he has himself made," that therefore,
+"No man can have a right to the land, for no man made it." May, then,
+owners of property keep at least that part of their property which is
+not invested in land?
+
+The reply is, of course, in the negative. "As land must in future be a
+national possession, so must the other means of producing and
+distributing wealth."[430] "Supposing we assume it true that land is
+not the product of labour and that capital is; it is not by any means
+true that the rent of land is not the product of labour and that the
+interest on capital is. Since private ownership, whether of land or
+capital, simply means the right to draw and dispose of a revenue from
+the property, why should the landowner be forbidden to do that which
+is allowed to the capitalist, in a society in which land and capital
+are commercially equivalent? Yet land nationalisers seem to be
+prepared to treat as sacred the landlords' claim to private property
+in capital acquired by thefts of this kind, although they will not
+hear of their claim to property in land. Capital serves as an
+instrument for robbing in a precisely identical manner. In England
+industrial capital is mainly created by wage workers--who get nothing
+for it but permission to create in addition enough subsistence to
+keep each other alive in a poor way. Its immediate appropriation by
+idle proprietors and shareholders, whose economic relation to the
+workers is exactly the same in principle as that of the landlords,
+goes on every day under our eyes. The landlord compels the worker to
+convert his land into a railway, his fen into a drained level, his
+barren seaside waste into a fashionable watering-place, his mountain
+into a tunnel, his manor park into a suburb full of houses let on
+repairing leases; and lo! he has escaped the land nationalisers; his
+land is now become capital and is sacred. The position is so glaringly
+absurd and the proposed attempt to discriminate between the capital
+value and the land value of estates is so futile, that it seems almost
+certain that the land nationalisers will go as far as the Socialists.
+Whatever the origin of land and capital, the source of the revenues
+drawn from them is contemporary labour."[431]
+
+Most Socialists think it wiser to tax capital gradually out of
+existence than to confiscate it at one stroke. "The direct
+confiscation of capital affects all, the small and the great, those
+unable to work and the able-bodied, everybody in an equal way. It is
+difficult by this method, often quite impossible, to separate the
+large property from the small invested in the same undertakings. The
+direct confiscation would also proceed too quickly, often at one
+stroke, while confiscation through taxation would permit the abolition
+of capitalist property being made a long-drawn process, working itself
+out further and further in the measure as the new order gets
+consolidated and makes its beneficent influence felt."[432]
+
+The argument that excessive taxation would drive capital out of the
+country is laughed at by Socialists. A Socialist pamphlet says: "It is
+true that the land-sweaters and labour-skinners whom the people keep
+on electing to rule and rob them can still frighten noodles by
+threatening that they will run away from the country and take their
+capital with them; that
+
+    They'll ship the mines and farms to Amsterdam,
+    The houses and the railways to Peru,
+    The canals and docks to Russia,
+    The woods and workshops off to Prussia,
+    And all the enterprise and brains to Timbuctoo.
+
+"We calmly reply that there is not one single service that all the
+landlords, financiers, and their lesser parasites pretend to perform
+for society that could not be performed far more efficiently and
+infinitely more cheaply without them."
+
+    Straightway those rich men started
+      To move their capitals.
+    On board of ships they carted
+      Their railways and canals;
+    With mines mine-owners scurried.
+      The bankers bore their books.
+    With mills mill-owners hurried.
+      The bishops took their crooks.[433]
+
+The despoiled capitalists might leave the country, but they would have
+to leave in the country all their property except perhaps a few
+valuables which they might remove.
+
+Property being theft, capitalists as well as landowners are thieves
+who possess no claim whatever to consideration or even to mercy. "To
+talk about 'the respective claims of capital and labour' is as
+inaccurate as to talk about the 'respective claims' of coals and
+colliers, or of ploughs and ploughmen. Capital has no claims. This is
+not a quibble. The distinction between capital and the capitalists is
+one of vital importance. Capital is a necessary thing. The capitalist
+is as unnecessary as any other kind of thief or interloper. The
+capitalist, though as loud as greedy in his 'claims,' has no rights at
+all."[434]
+
+"Do you mean to say, then, that the capitalist does not perform a
+useful function in running a risk for the profit he receives?--No. In
+so far as he exercises the function of management and receives
+remuneration for this, his remuneration is not profit at all, but
+wages of superintendence, and the functions of management would be
+undertaken by the organised society of the future through its
+appointed representatives. As to any necessary risks, all individuals
+would be relieved from this under Socialism, as it would be borne by
+the whole of society."[435] "If capitalists attempt to justify their
+way of making profit by saying that they have to run risks sometimes,
+that a part of their property might occasionally be lost, we answer
+that labour has nothing to do with that."[436]
+
+Capital large and small is the result of thrift. If capital is theft,
+then thrift also is theft. The thrifty investor, being an immoral
+person, has no right to protest against the confiscation of his
+property. "By capitalist I mean the investor who puts his money into a
+concern and draws profits therefrom without participating in the
+organisation or management of the business. Were all these to
+disappear in the night, leaving no trace behind, nothing would be
+changed."[437] Nothing would be changed for the Socialist agitator,
+the loafer, and the tramp. On the contrary, they would profit from the
+ruin of the industrious and the thrifty. The fact that honest and
+hardworking men who do their duty to their family and who wish to
+leave their children provided for should have the result of the
+economy of a lifetime confiscated matters little to the Socialist
+leaders. According to the Socialist doctrines the industrious and the
+thrifty are thieves and exploiters of those workers who have never
+saved a penny. On the other hand, those men who live from hand to
+mouth, who work only a few days each week and loaf on the remaining
+days, who waste all their earnings in drink, gambling, and
+music-halls, and who possess nothing they can call their own, are
+honest and excellent citizens. They are entitled to the savings of the
+thrifty.
+
+In accordance with the Socialist principles stated in the foregoing,
+all shareholders, being merely exploiters of labour, would be
+expropriated. "Are shareholders in companies useful in organising
+labour?--As a rule they employ others to organise labour, and the work
+done by the company would go on just as well if the shareholders
+disappeared."[438] Besides, "Stocks when analysed, in nine cases out
+of ten simply mean the right to squeeze tribute out of workers who are
+nominally free. By far the greatest part of what is set down as
+national 'capital' is merely slave flesh-and-blood."[439]
+
+Holders of Government stocks would be treated no better than
+landowners and shareholders. Foremost among the "immediate reforms"
+demanded in the programme of the Social-Democratic Federation[440]
+ranges the "Repudiation of the National Debt." The repudiation of the
+National Debt has during many years been demanded, and is still
+demanded, by the Social-Democratic Federation, as may be seen from a
+recent issue of "Justice," its weekly publication, in which we find
+the following statement: "The National Debt is simply a means of
+extracting unearned incomes from the people of this country. It is
+idle to nationalise or municipalise industries by means of loans on
+which interest is paid. Such interest would be only another form of
+rent and profit. When capitalism is abolished, every one of its many
+forms will necessarily have to go."[441]
+
+The repudiation of the National Debt is demanded by many Socialist
+leaders and leading writers. "The National Debt (falsely so-called) has
+already been paid thrice over in usury. All future interest-payments
+should be held as part of the principal."[442] "The few thousand
+persons who own the National Debt, saddled upon the community by a
+landlord Parliament, exact _28,000,000l._ yearly from the labour of
+their countrymen for nothing."[443] "Outside the land monopoly, the
+most infamous source of usury is unquestionably the so-called 'National
+Debt.' There the whole of the capital is absolutely spurious. The real
+capital consisted of the gunpowder and the lead which Sovereigns and
+statesmen expended so liberally about a century ago in attempting to
+murder liberty on the Continents of Europe and America. Our war debt is
+the most stupendous monument of human crime and folly in existence; and
+worst of all, the 'butcher's bill' has already been paid by the unhappy
+toilers thrice over in usury."[444] "The entire national liability has
+been discharged to the moneylenders by the people once during the last
+thirty-seven years. We repay public debts once every thirty-seven years
+without wiping out a penny of the said debts. We pay away in blank
+usury _20,000,000l._ per year on this one head, or enough to provide
+old-age pensions for three-fourths of our aged poor in the United
+Kingdom on the basis of _7s. 6d._ per head per week."[445] "236,514
+blackmailers suck the udder of industry through the convenient teat of
+what, with audacious cynicism, is called the 'National Debt.'"[446]
+
+The largest part of the National Debt was not created by "murdering
+liberty" but by fighting the armies of the French Revolution and of
+Napoleon I. Besides, the defence against the French Revolution and
+Napoleon was not a "crime," but a necessary duty. Furthermore, the
+holders of the National Debt are not "blackmailers" but industrious,
+useful, and thrifty citizens, or the children and descendants of
+industrious, useful, and thrifty citizens.
+
+About one-half of the National Debt is held by thrifty wage-earners,
+as all the money deposited in the savings banks, and most of the
+savings deposited with friendly societies, &c., is invested in
+Consols, and as a very large part of the assets of the industrial and
+other insurance societies consists of Government Stocks. Property
+being theft, and thrift being akin to it, the thrifty workman whose
+savings are invested in Consols has apparently no right to complain of
+being robbed of his savings by the Socialists.
+
+Some Socialist agitators have the audacity to tell the thrifty worker
+that he will not suffer, but benefit, by the confiscation of his
+savings. "Opponents try to scare this man against Socialism by the
+fear of losing his interest. Granting for a moment he would do so,
+would he not gain by the general abolition of interest, &c., which
+would double his wage in common with that of all workers?"[447]--The
+worker is to be indemnified for his positive and certain loss in
+property through the confiscation of his savings, or at the least of
+the interest paid on them, by a problematical rise in general wages
+which would benefit the unthrifty quite as much as the thrifty. But if
+the promised doubling of wages should not take place, what will
+happen? The Socialist agitators will explain that they are sorry to
+have made a mistake, whilst the thriftless are squandering the
+property of the thrifty.
+
+According to the Socialist teachings, the capitalist is a perfectly
+useless being in the national household. "Does he himself want to
+work: to do something useful? Far from it. His money works for him;
+his money makes money, as the saying is."[448] Most capitalists--and I
+think the large majority of wage-earners are capitalists to some
+extent--are engaged in useful productive work of hand or brain.
+However, the capitalist of the Socialist imagination, the wealthy man
+who lives without any work, who studies the money market and Stock
+Exchange quotations, and who is occupied solely in investing and
+reinvesting his money to the best advantage, is an extremely useful
+member of society. It is of the utmost consequence to all workers, and
+to the whole nation, that the national capital should grow, that
+mines, railways, ships, machinery, houses, &c., should multiply and be
+constantly improved. Now the thrifty, not the wasteful, preserve and
+increase the national capital. Wise and cautious capitalists in
+enriching themselves will enrich the nation. Careless ones will lose
+their money and impoverish the nation. The wealth of France has, to a
+very large extent, been created by cautious and far-seeing _rentiers_,
+and thus France has become the banker among nations.
+
+Socialists teach that the wealth of the few causes the poverty of the
+many; that therefore the private capitalist should be destroyed. Why,
+then, are the workers most prosperous in those countries which possess
+the wealthiest capitalists, such as France and the United States, and
+why are they poorest in countries, such as Turkey and Servia, where
+wealthy capitalists do not exist? And may not the destruction of the
+capitalists reduce Great Britain to the level of Turkey and Servia?
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[430] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 9.
+
+[431] _Capital and Land_, pp. 5, 6.
+
+[432] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 11.
+
+[433] Blatchford, _The Clarion Ballads_, p. 9.
+
+[434] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[435] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 17.
+
+[436] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 11.
+
+[437] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[438] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 3.
+
+[439] Davidson, _The Gospel of the Poor_, p. 54.
+
+[440] See Appendix.
+
+[441] _Justice_, October 19, 1907.
+
+[442] Davidson, _The Democrat's Address_, p. 5.
+
+[443] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 8.
+
+[444] Davidson, _The Gospel of the Poor_, p. 49.
+
+[445] McLachlan, _Tyranny of Usury_, p. 13.
+
+[446] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 76.
+
+[447] _Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers_, p. 1.
+
+[448] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 10.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS AND PROPOSALS REGARDING TAXATION AND THE NATIONAL
+BUDGET
+
+
+To Socialists taxation is chiefly a means for impoverishing the rich
+and the well-to-do. It is their object to transfer by taxation the
+wealth from the few to the many, as they believe that the
+impoverishment of the rich will mean the enrichment of the poor.
+Therefore they do not aim at economy in national and local
+expenditure. On the contrary, they wish to spend as much as possible.
+As money is to be obtained solely from the rich, "An increase in
+national taxation has no terrors for Socialists."[449] Every increase
+in expenditure is greeted by them with joy, and wastefulness in
+national and local undertakings is rather encouraged than condemned.
+"Socialists look to the Budget as a means not only of raising revenue
+to meet unavoidable expenditure, but as an instrument for redressing
+inequalities in the distribution of wealth."[450] Let us first look
+into the financial views of the Socialists, and then into their
+positive proposals.
+
+"The purpose of Socialism is to transfer land and industrial capital
+to the people. There are two ways in which, simultaneously, this
+object may be carried out. The one way is by the municipal and
+national appropriation--with such compensation to the existing owners
+as the community may think fit to give--of the land and industrial
+concerns. The second method is by taxation. Taxation has its special
+sphere of usefulness in helping the community to secure some part of
+its own by diverting into the national purse portions of the rent,
+interest, and profit which now go to keep an idle class in luxury at
+the expense of the industrious poor."[451]
+
+"The existence of a rich class, whose riches are the cause of the
+poverty of the masses, is the justification for the Socialist demand
+that the cost of bettering the condition of the people must be met by
+the taxation of the rich. The Socialist's ideas of taxation may be
+briefly summarised as follows: (1) Both local and national taxation
+should aim primarily at securing for the communal benefit all
+'unearned' or 'social' increment of wealth. (2) Taxation should aim
+deliberately at preventing the retention of large incomes and great
+fortunes in private hands, recognising that the few cannot be rich
+without making the many poor. (3) Taxation should be in proportion to
+ability to pay and to protection and benefit conferred by the State.
+(4) No taxation should be imposed which encroaches upon the
+individual's means to satisfy his physical needs."[452]
+
+"To the Socialist taxation is the chief means by which he may recover
+from the propertied classes some portion of the plunder which their
+economic strength and social position have enabled them to extract
+from the workers; to him, national and municipal expenditure is the
+spending for common purposes of an ever-increasing proportion of the
+national income. The degree of civilisation which a State has reached
+may almost be measured by the proportion of the national income which
+is spent collectively instead of individually. To the Socialist the
+best of Governments is that which spends the most. The only possible
+policy is deliberately to tax the rich, especially those who live on
+wealth which they do not earn; for thus, and thus only, can we reduce
+the burthen upon the poor."[453]
+
+The Fabian Society suggests the following reform of national taxation:
+"In English politics successful ends must have moderate beginnings.
+Such a beginning might be an income-tax of _2s. 6d._ in the pound.
+Unearned incomes above _5,000l._ a year would pay _2s. 6d._ in the
+pound, below _5,000l._ a year _1s. 8d._ in the pound. The estate duty
+might be handled upon similar principles. Estates between _500,000l._
+and _1,000,000l._ would be charged twelve and a half per cent, instead
+of seven and a half, and estates exceeding _1,000,000l._ fifteen per
+cent, instead of eight."[454] The Fabian Society does not disguise its
+aim in proposing the foregoing: "These suggestions are doubtless
+confiscatory, and that is why they should recommend themselves to a
+Labour party. But even so, the confiscation is of a timorous and a
+slow-footed sort. The average British millionaire dies worth about
+_2,770,000l._, on which the death duty would be _415,500l._, leaving
+the agreeable nest-egg of _2,254,500l._ to the heirs. Even if we
+assume that the inheritance passes to one person only, so as to be
+subject to the highest rate of duty, it would not be until five more
+lives had passed that it would be reduced to a pitiful million. The
+most patient Labour party might not unreasonably demand something a
+trifle more revolutionary than this."[455]
+
+According to the above proposals the income-tax would return
+_47,600,000l._ per annum. This sum seems far too moderate to most
+Socialist writers. Councillor Glyde, for instance, gives in a widely
+read pamphlet elaborate tables in which the produce of a graduated
+income-tax is carefully calculated. The Fabian Society would make "a
+moderate beginning" by taxing large incomes _2s. 6d._ in the pound.
+Councillor Glyde would begin by levying a _3s._ income-tax on them.
+Taxation of incomes in accordance with his proposals would bring in
+_70,281,839l._ per annum.[456]
+
+Mr. Smart, of the Independent Labour Party, gives lengthy details of a
+taxation reform scheme in which figure a foundation-tax, a special
+property-tax, and a super-tax. Large incomes would have to pay 17-1/2
+per cent., or _3s. 6d._ in the pound, and his property and income tax
+would bring in _78,000,000l._ per annum.[457]
+
+Mr. Philip Snowden, M.P., submits a different scheme of taxation.
+There is to be an income-tax of _1s._ in the pound and a graduated
+super-tax up to _6s._ in the pound. Whilst the three authorities
+mentioned so far propose to take from the large incomes _2s. 6d._,
+_3s._, and _3s. 6d._ in the pound as a "moderate beginning," Mr.
+Snowden would, presumably also as a "moderate beginning," take _7s._
+in the pound from them. He is quite touched with his own generosity
+and magnanimity, for might he not demand at once _17s._ or _20s._ in
+the pound? "To console the possessors of incomes in the higher grade,
+say _50,000l._ a year, to the payment of an income-tax of _1s._ in the
+pound, we may remind them that they still retain _33,500l._ a year,
+which is a very generous payment by labour to them for the privilege
+of seeing them exist in gorgeous splendour and sumptuous
+idleness."[458]
+
+The proposals regarding the estate duty to be charged also vary. The
+Fabian Society proposes a maximum of 15 per cent. Mr. Smart would be
+satisfied with a graduated estate duty with a maximum of 25 per cent,
+instead of the present maximum of 8 per cent.[459] Mr. Snowden
+proposes a scale of duties which ranges from 1 per cent, up to 50 per
+cent.[460]
+
+Besides the very greatly increased income-tax and estate duty, there
+would be, according to Mr. Snowden, a land value tax of a penny in the
+pound of its capital value, which is equal to 10 per cent. annual
+value. It is to be the small beginning of the policy of taxing
+landowners out of existence, to be speedily followed by confiscation.
+"The annual value of land being _250,000,000l._, the produce of the
+land value tax would be _25,000,000l._ a year."[461] The author
+justifies the creation of that tax as follows: "Liverpool, London,
+Glasgow owe their existence and their prosperity to their respective
+situations, which are natural advantages and which ought not in
+justice to be enjoyed solely by those who live upon the sites. Every
+town and village in the country contributes to the prosperity of every
+other part. The nation is a unit; its resources and its obligations
+should be mutually shared."
+
+"Land values are so obviously not created by individual effort that
+the justice of taking the increment for the use of the community
+appeals to those who may have some difficulty in grasping the working
+of the 'unearned increment' in commercial concerns, where, however, it
+operates just as truly though not so obviously. The imposition of an
+Imperial tax of one penny in the pound on the capital value of the
+site would be a beginning, but by no means the end, of the process of
+diverting socially-created rent of land into the public exchequer.
+Taxation will do something towards that end; but taxation would be a
+long, irritating, and untrustworthy way of trying to secure the whole
+annual value of the land for the community."[462] "The taxation of
+land values is not a land reform. To get the full usefulness and the
+full value of the land for the community there is no way but for the
+State to own the land."[463]
+
+The contemplated reform of taxation will not be limited to taxing the
+rich and the well-to-do out of existence. Relief will be afforded to
+the masses by the repeal of all duties on food, and, indeed, of all
+indirect taxation. "The reforms which the Labour party will endeavour
+to obtain from the Government, in which it believes it will be
+expressing the democratic sentiment of the country, are:
+
+1. Repeal of the duties on foods.
+
+2. A minimum wage of _30s._ to all workers in Government employ or
+working under a contractor for the Government.
+
+3. Old-age pensions of _7s._ a week for persons over sixty."[464]
+
+Practically all Socialists agree that all indirect taxation should be
+abolished. "Indirect taxation has nothing whatever to recommend it to
+an intelligent people, however advantageous it may be to the
+well-to-do. Indirect taxation violates every principle of sound
+economy."[465] "Its maintenance is excused on the ground that indirect
+taxation is the only means by which the working class can be made to
+contribute to the cost of national government at ah. The poorer
+working classes should not be taxed by the Government at all."[466]
+"Under a just system of taxation all indirect taxation for revenue
+purposes would be abolished."[467] "With 43 per cent, of the working
+classes living in poverty, with an average wage over the whole working
+class not sufficient to provide themselves with the standard of
+workhouse comfort, it becomes a crime to tax them for the protection
+of their property and the enjoyment of their privileges"[468]--Is it
+true that, as Mr. Snowden, M.P., writes, the whole working class of
+Great Britain is so badly paid that it cannot provide for itself the
+standard of workhouse comfort? How then can he reconcile with that
+assertion the following statement which he gives in the same book a
+few pages further on: "Experts assign the proportion of the total
+annual drink bill of the United Kingdom contributed by the
+wage-earning classes at _100,000,000l._ A committee of the British
+Association, reporting on the 'appropriation of wages,' in 1882 said
+that 75 per cent, of the total consumption of beer and spirits, and 10
+per cent. of the wine bill, might be assigned as the shares of the
+working class."[469]
+
+As a matter of fact experts estimate that the British working men
+spend even more than _100,000,000l._ per year on drink, and that they
+spend about _50,000,000l._ on betting. It is really very inartistic
+for a professional agitator to tell us that the British workers are
+too poor to pay any taxes, that it is a "crime" to tax them at all,
+and then to remind us that the same starving ill-used workers can
+afford to spend more than the amount of the whole nation's Budget in
+drink and betting, that about one-sixth of the workman's wages are
+spent at the public-house, that many workmen spend the larger half of
+their income in drink, and that the British nation is the most drunken
+in the world, although drink is far more expensive in Great Britain
+than in any other country.
+
+With part of the money taken by means of extortionate taxation from
+the rich, whole sections of the population are to be bribed into
+supporting Socialism. "Two objectionable heads of revenue would find
+no place in a Socialist national balance-sheet--the profit from the
+Post Office and the stamp duties. Improvements in the wages and
+conditions of labour in the lower grades of the postal service would
+absorb a considerable part of the present annual profit of
+_5,000,000l._ and the rest might, with benefit, be utilised for
+cheapening the cost to the public of postal rates and services."[470]
+
+Mr. Snowden, in promising in one phrase the repeal of stamp duties and
+cheapening of postage, very likely thought that that step would
+relieve the poor. He apparently imagined that duty stamps were
+identical with postage stamps. If he had known that stamp duties are
+largely derived from Stock Exchange transactions and the sale of every
+kind of property on a large scale, from legal documents, &c., he would
+probably have proposed that they should be increased tenfold in order
+to strike another blow at private property, not that they should be
+abolished. Even the policy of confiscation requires an elementary
+knowledge of facts.
+
+Furthermore, "The Socialist Budget would provide for a very
+considerable increase of the grants-in-aid, retaining for the central
+Government just sufficient control or inspection over the expenditure
+as would not interfere with the reasonable freedom of the local
+authority."[471] "Control which would not interfere" is at present
+illogical and impossible, because the one excludes the other. It may
+be possible in the Socialist State of the future, because logic will
+have to be abolished in it. At all events it seems clear that Mr.
+Snowden wishes to secure the support of the local authorities by the
+same curious means by which he strives to secure the support of the
+Post Office servants.
+
+The foregoing extracts should suffice to show that the Socialists mean
+to ruin the owners of property of every kind by indirect confiscation
+in the form of extortionate taxation, which is to be constantly
+increased and which may be followed by direct confiscation, and that
+they rely upon force for achieving their aim. Capitalists may leave
+the country, but they must leave their capital behind, and their
+disappearance, Socialists assert, will be no loss. "The vast majority
+of our employers are routineers, who could no more contribute an
+intelligent statement of their industrial function to this paper than
+a bee could write the works of Lord Avebury. Routineers can always be
+replaced, and replaced with profit, by educated functionaries.
+Consequently when the employers threaten us with emigration, our only
+regret as to the majority of them is that it is too good to be
+true."[472] "Supposing those who have the money were to threaten to
+leave the country and to take their money with them, would not that
+upset your plans? Money is not wealth. You would have cause to
+rejoice. So would the country which was fortunate enough to see its
+capitalists emigrate."[473]
+
+According to the Socialist teaching, the workers maintain the
+capitalists. The brain is mightier than the hand, though the brain
+requires the hand. In reality it rather seems that the capitalists
+maintain the workers. It cannot too often be pointed out that those
+countries which have many wealthy capitalists are highly civilised and
+prosperous, and their workers are well off. On the other hand, those
+countries which have few or no wealthy capitalists are little
+civilised and poor, and their workers are exceedingly badly off. The
+masses may conceivably rob the capitalists of their property, and try
+to manage the national capital themselves, but whether they will
+benefit by spoliation remains to be seen. Lacking direction,
+foresight, unity, organisation, discipline, and thrift, the masses
+will probably quickly waste the national capital, and national ruin
+and distress and starvation will be the consequences of wholesale
+robbery.
+
+The confiscation experiment has often been tried in the past, and it
+has always failed. The last time it has been tried was at the time of
+the French Revolution. The money secured by robbery was recklessly
+squandered. Production was neglected, and the people became poorer
+than ever. In the country agriculture came to a standstill, weeds grew
+where corn had been growing, gardens became a natural wilderness, and
+wolves roamed in thousands.[474] The great manufacturing towns were
+dead, manufacturers in Paris who had employed sixty or eighty men
+employed but ten.[475] The people in town and country were starving.
+Many lived on roots and bark. Many of the poor in Paris waited outside
+the slaughter-houses and lapped the blood from the gutters like dogs.
+
+Private capital has existed in all countries and at all times, because
+it is a plant of natural growth. One can destroy it, but it will ever
+grow again.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[449] Snowden, _Socialist Budget_, p. 1.
+
+[450] _Ibid._
+
+[451] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 2.
+
+[452] _Ibid._ pp. 7, 8.
+
+[453] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 4.
+
+[454] _Ibid._ pp. 4, 5.
+
+[455] _Ibid._ p. 5.
+
+[456] Glyde, _A Peep Behind the Scenes on a Board of Guardians_, pp.
+28,29.
+
+[457] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, pp. 14,15.
+
+[458] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, pp. 78, 79.
+
+[459] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, p. 8.
+
+[460] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 81.
+
+[461] _Ibid._ p. 82.
+
+[462] _Ibid._ pp. 82, 83.
+
+[463] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 84.
+
+[464] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, p. 15.
+
+[465] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 15.
+
+[466] _Ibid._ p. 31.
+
+[467] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[468] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 17.
+
+[469] _Ibid._ pp. 21, 22.
+
+[470] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, p. 71.
+
+[471] _Ibid._ p. 59.
+
+[472] G.B. Shaw in the _New Age_, November 30, 1907.
+
+[473] Wheatley, _How the Miners are Robbed_, p. 12.
+
+[474] Vandal, _Avenement de Bonaparte_, 1903, vol. i. p. 25.
+
+[475] Schmidt, _Tableaux de la Revolution_, vol. iv. p. 383.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+SOCIALISM AND THE EMPIRE
+
+
+Most British Socialists object to the Empire on various grounds, and
+desire its downfall and dissolution. According to their views Great
+Britain should, in the first place, give up her non-self-governing
+colonies. Let us take note of some Socialistic pronouncements to that
+effect:
+
+"Governments have no right to exist except with the consent of the
+governed, and the British have no more right to dominate other peoples
+than other peoples have to dominate us. What we can only hold by
+maintaining an alien garrison had better be given up. The people of
+these islands would not be losers, but the gainers by such a
+course."[476] "Is it possible for a self-governing people to rule a
+subject race, and yet keep its own love for liberty? Neither the
+Greeks nor the Romans could do it, and we are not doing it very well
+ourselves. The reason is obvious. No nation can play the part of the
+despot (even the benevolent despot) abroad and that of the democrat at
+home."[477] "Socialists should oppose the creation of empires on this
+simple ground--that empire-building is accompanied by terrible misery
+and suffering for those subject races, as they are called, which are
+the chosen victims sacrificed on the altar of cupidity and
+pride."[478] "A people gain power and influence in the world in
+proportion as they solve for themselves the great problems of
+democratic self-government. We shall do more to civilise Africa by
+civilising the East End of London than by governing from Cape to
+Cairo."[479] "It is not only impossible for one nation to civilise
+another by governing it; it is wrong that it should attempt to do so.
+Conquest may have opened up one civilisation to another in times long
+antecedent to the steam engine and a world commerce, but to-day its
+only effect is to crush out and level down all national life to the
+dead uniformity of an alien political routine."[480]
+
+"What is the attitude of Socialism towards backward races, savage and
+barbaric peoples who are to-day outside the civilised world? The
+position of Socialism towards these races is one of absolute
+non-interference. We hold that they should be left entirely alone to
+develop themselves in the natural order of things; which they must
+inevitably do or die out. It is the duty of Socialists to support the
+barbaric races in their resistance to aggression."[481] "It is the
+duty of International Socialists, the only international
+non-capitalist party, to denounce, and wherever possible to prevent,
+the extension of colonisation and conquest, leaving to each race and
+creed and colour the full opportunity to develop itself until complete
+economic and social emancipation is secured by all."[482] "Duty, like
+charity, begins at home, and if the civilisation of the blacks is to
+be purchased only by the destruction of our own democratic spirit, the
+balance to the world is of evil, not of good. There is another view of
+Imperialism expressed with brutal candour by Mr. Rhodes when he said
+that the flag was our best commercial asset, that trade follows the
+flag. Trade does no such thing. Trade follows business enterprise.
+Imperialism is, indeed, a policy of industrial deterioration, and by
+impoverishing the skill of the country and encouraging the worst
+forms of financial capitalism, must crush out every budding hope that
+labour has of becoming economically and politically free."[483]
+
+The foregoing extracts should suffice to show that there is among
+British Socialists a strong desire to abandon the non-self-governing
+colonies.
+
+The attitude of the British Socialists towards the great
+self-governing dominions is not much more favourable than it is
+towards tropical colonies. Their attitude is one of hardly disguised
+hostility, which appears to spring partly from jealousy of the
+colonists, partly from hatred of the British capitalists who have
+invested money in the colonies. The loss of British capital invested
+in the colonies would probably be greeted with jubilation by the
+Socialists. "The well-to-do sections of society in Great Britain have
+found a secure and profitable outlet for their capital in loans and
+advances to the colonists alike as organised communities and as
+individual property-owners. But the drain for interest and dividends
+to England on this account is heavy, and is severely felt at times of
+depression, such as that which Australia as a whole has been suffering
+from during the recent seven years of almost continuous drought. It
+seems tolerably certain, therefore, that this comparative handful of
+colonists, eleven millions in all, of which only four millions in
+Australia, will in time to come, and as the Labour party and
+Socialists gain strength, repudiate, or at any rate reduce, these
+onerous obligations. It is also probable that with regard to
+Australia, as the white population does not increase and England's day
+as a colonising power proper is practically over (having no longer any
+agricultural population to send out as emigrants), this huge territory
+will not be permanently left at the sole dog-in-the-manger control of
+its present handful of inhabitants. We may expect, at least, that
+Australia will not be permanently able to retain its position without
+an infusion of entirely fresh blood, and should other peoples require
+an outlet in that direction, the present preposterous policy will have
+to be abandoned."[484]
+
+Socialists seem, on the whole, to be opposed to the federation of the
+British Empire. "The Labour party approaches Imperial problems with
+the politics of the industrious classes as guide on the one hand, and
+the internationalism of its nature as guide on the other."[485] Its
+"internationalism" apparently prevents it from approving of any
+practical scheme of Imperial Federation. Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P.,
+of the Labour party, has not expressed actual hostility to the Empire.
+In fact, he has even declared: "Socialism did not intend to re-write
+history. It accepted the facts of life, and one of these facts was
+that we were responsible for the Empire, and, whether we liked it or
+not, we had to rule that Empire. He was overjoyed the other day to
+find that at Stuttgart their Dutch and German and French friends were
+fully aware of the fact that, if Socialism was to play the proper part
+that belonged to it, it must devise a colonial policy."[486]
+Nevertheless, Mr. Macdonald's views do not appear to be very
+practical, as will be seen in the following pages.
+
+"These free colonies, though of enormous extent, count for little in
+the matter of population. Their wealth is out of all proportion to
+their numbers, as their pretensions are out of all proportion to their
+power. That they will play any very great part in the future of the
+world, either federated to the mother country or in any other way,
+seems exceedingly improbable."[487] "Imperialism is crudely
+ineffective. Imperial Federation would give the colonies a fuller
+sense of independence and liberty, and thus far would benefit them.
+But Imperial Federation is not approved on this account, but because
+it is supposed to be a way of uniting the Empire. That, it will not
+do: it will very likely do the opposite. In whatever form it comes, it
+will give to the independent interests of the colonies new importance.
+We shall then hear less of the Empire and more of Canada, or New
+Zealand, or South Africa, and a great danger will arise that a purely
+sectional view of Imperial interests may secure the support of the
+might and the arrogance of the whole Empire."[488] "Canada has almost
+claimed that it is a right of self-governing States to be allowed to
+make treaties for themselves. When that happens, the colonies might as
+well sever themselves from the mother country altogether. For under
+present circumstances the authority which makes treaties is the
+authority which ultimately controls armies. To give any of our
+colonies the power to embroil us in war, or to determine our relations
+with European Powers, is to give the first shattering blow to Imperial
+solidarity."[489]
+
+Nearly all British Socialists passionately oppose the retention of
+India. They never tire of condemning British rule in India, and of
+endeavouring to incite the native races to rebellion. According to the
+assertions of Socialists, the British Government has "manufactured"
+famine and plague in India, and its rule is the worst, the most cruel,
+and the most pernicious form of despotism which the world has seen.
+
+Mr. Hyndman says: "India is the greatest and most awful instance of
+the cruelty, greed, and short-sightedness of the capitalist class of
+which history gives any record. Even the horrors of Spanish rule in
+South America are dwarfed into insignificance in comparison with the
+cold, calculating, economic infamy which has starved, and is still
+deliberately starving, millions of people to death in British
+India."[490] "I charge it against the British Government, at this
+moment, that the economic condition of India is much more horrible
+than ever it was. I declare that the despotism of Russia is more
+apparently cruel, but the actual economic effect of the British
+Government's rule in India is more desperate than anything in the
+situation in Russia."[491]
+
+Mr. Hare also speaks of "famine made by Government"[492]--India
+suffers from two great evils: famine and the plague. India is very
+densely populated. The natives live chiefly upon rice, and rice
+requires an enormous quantity of moisture. If rain fails, there is
+famine, and no Government can prevent it, though it may alleviate it.
+Therefore all rice countries--China, India, Japan--are periodically
+stricken by famine. It is difficult enough, and taxes the resources of
+a country to the utmost, to feed in a barren country an army of
+500,000 men who are closely assembled. It is impossible to feed a
+population of 60,000,000, even if funds and stores of food are
+unlimited. With the most perfect system of harbours, canals, railways,
+&c., the distribution of food for 60,000,000 people offers
+insurmountable obstacles. Plague is caused by infection, and may be
+stamped out by the observance of those sanitary rules which Indians
+refuse to observe. Cases of plague are not reported to the
+authorities, but are hidden from them, so that the sanctity of the
+home may not be defiled by the entrance of a medical man.
+Nevertheless, Socialists never tire of preaching: "If there is one
+disease which is more directly the outcome of poverty than any other,
+it is the plague."[493] "Just think of 250,000 people dying of
+manufactured black plague in one month. It is not the people of
+England who benefit by our murderous despotism in India. It is not the
+working classes who would suffer if India were relieved from its
+present frightful oppression. If the present trade is beneficial, it
+is beneficial to the wealthy rather than to the workers."[494] "If
+ever there was a population in the history of the world possessed of a
+remarkable climate, with a fruitful soil, with all the opportunities
+for making wealth, and having been the source of wealth to the peoples
+who have traded with them for centuries, the population of India is
+that people and Hindostan is that country which ought to be supremely
+wealthy."[495]
+
+Socialists have done all in their power to arouse the hostility of
+Europe and America against Great Britain by denouncing British
+misrule, cruelty, and tyranny in India. "I rejoice, as an Englishman,
+that I have done my share for nearly thirty years to expose in Europe,
+America, and Asia the systematic rascality of my aristocratic and
+plutocratic countrymen."[496] "I appeal to this International
+Socialist Congress to denounce the statesmen and the nation guilty of
+this infamy before the entire civilised world, and to convey to the
+natives of India the heartfelt wish of the delegates of the workers of
+all nations here assembled that they may shortly, no matter in what
+manner, free themselves finally from the horrors of the most criminal
+misrule that has ever afflicted humanity."[497]
+
+Socialists unceasingly work for the overthrow of British rule in
+India. Theirs is a larger humanity. They wish to bring about a rising
+of the Indian population, and they seem to care little if the 250,000
+British people residing in that country are incidentally
+exterminated. Their hatred of the "capitalist" Empire is apparently
+greater than their sense of humanity and duty towards their own
+countrymen.
+
+At a recent Socialist meeting in connection with the unrest in India,
+Mr. Hyndman submitted the following motion: "This meeting of the
+citizens of London expresses its deepest sympathy and admiration for
+Lajpat Kai, Adjit Singh, and the Sikh leaders at Rawal Pindi,
+Amritsar, and Lahore, now undergoing imprisonment without trial, at
+the command of Mr. John Morley and the Liberal Government, and sends
+its cordial greetings to the agitators all over India who are doing
+their utmost to awaken their countrymen of every race and creed to the
+ruinous effect of our rule, which, by draining away _35,000,000l._
+worth of produce yearly from India without return, has manufactured
+poverty upon a scale unprecedented in history and is converting the
+greatest Empire the world has ever seen into a vast pauper warren and
+human plague farm. This meeting further records its fervent hope that
+this infamous British system which crushes all economic, social, and
+political life out of 230 millions of people will ere long be
+peaceably or forcibly swept away for ever."[498] Proceeding, Mr.
+Hyndman said: "I may mention I have just finished a pamphlet on India
+I have written for the International Socialist Congress at Stuttgart,
+which is going to be translated by the International Socialist Bureau
+into German and French, and I will take care it is translated into
+some other languages--Eastern languages--including the Japanese
+language."[499]
+
+Attempts to incite the native Indians to rise in rebellion and to
+massacre the British garrison and the British people residing in India
+are not restricted to Mr. Hyndman. We read in the leading Socialist
+monthly: "The maintenance of British rule in India means that the
+working people of Great Britain are engaged in helping their
+masters--the class which robs them--to plunder the unfortunate people
+of India of over thirty millions sterling every year. We desire to see
+the people of India, as of every other country, not only possessed of
+national independence and political rights, but of social and
+economical liberty and equality. We assert the right of the Indian
+people to manage their own affairs, and ardently desire the
+destruction of British rule there."[500] From the official organ of
+the Independent Labour Party we learn that that party also "has
+declared itself wholly in favour of constitutional government in India
+and the social emancipation of the poverty-stricken Indian people. We
+believe that Mr. Hardie has had that purpose solely in view, and the
+party will stand solidly with him in conveying to the Indian people
+the strongest expression of the sympathy and support of British
+Socialists in their struggle against social and political
+oppression."[501] If British subjects are murdered in India by the ten
+thousand, we may thank our revolutionary Socialists.
+
+Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., of the Labour party very sensibly
+recommends with regard to India: "The Government should win the
+confidence and assent of the people."[502] He then continues: "The
+immediate reforms necessary are a lightening of India's financial load
+by relieving it of the Imperial burdens which it now unjustly bears,
+and a readjustment of taxes; the extension of local and State
+self-government and further opportunities for natives to be employed
+in public offices; the freeing of the press."[503] It is easy to
+formulate a policy by expressing generous abstract sentiments. Is Mr.
+Macdonald aware that "the lightening of India's financial load" would
+mean its transference to English shoulders, that the granting of
+self-government and the freeing of the press might lead to a position
+which would put before this country the alternative of a war of
+repression in India or of its abandonment, and that the abandonment of
+India would ruin Lancashire?
+
+We have taken note of the destructive part of the policy which
+Socialists wish to pursue towards the Empire. Now let us take note of
+their constructive proposals, though these are not nearly as numerous
+as their destructive ones.
+
+Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., of the Labour party, is dissatisfied with
+Imperial administration in its present form. He would democratise it
+and replace the present Imperial Governors by labour men and Socialist
+agitators and orators. "The Crown cannot be the custodian of an
+Imperial policy, though it may be an Imperial link--and even in this
+respect its influence is greatly exaggerated at home."[504] "The real
+difficulty lies in securing the confidence of the Imperial States for
+whatever authority is to be custodian of the Imperial standard.
+Downing Street is ignorant of colonial opinion and needs. Above all,
+Downing Street is the surviving symbol of the era of the British
+'dominions' and the real 'colonies.' The Imperial States will not
+repose confidence in Downing Street, therefore Downing Street cannot
+remain the custodian of Imperial standards. What is to take its
+place?"[505]
+
+"The failure of our Empire, except to produce mechanical results, such
+as keeping warring tribes at peace, is largely owing to the fact that
+the Empire is governed by the most narrow-visioned of our social
+classes. National pride may be a valuable possession, but when it
+becomes a consciousness of racial superiority it ceases to be an
+Imperial virtue. Thus it is not only in its origin, but also in its
+present administration, that the Empire in a special sense is a
+perquisite of the rich classes, and the influence of the Labour party
+on Imperial politics must be to democratise the _personnel_ of the
+Imperial machine. A trade union secretary could govern a province
+_prima facie_ better than the son of an ancient county family or
+someone who was a friend of the Colonial Secretary when he was passing
+time at Balliol. We honestly think that the colonies appreciate our
+aristocracy, but the colonies laugh at our amiable illusions."[506]
+
+Is Mr. Macdonald sure that the dominions and colonies would welcome a
+change, and that "trade union secretaries" in their very narrow circle
+of activity might not become even more "narrow-visioned" than our
+present pro-consuls? At the same time it cannot be doubted that all
+labour leaders and Socialist agitators will highly approve of his
+proposals to make all vice-royalties and governorships their
+"perquisites." Apart from a few not very practical proposals,
+Socialists follow not a constructive, but a purely destructive, policy
+with regard to the Empire, which in their eyes is merely a capitalist
+institution. Pursuing consciously or unconsciously a policy of
+revolutionary anarchism, they would break up the Empire and even Great
+Britain herself. Therefore many Socialists advocate the legislative
+independence of both Ireland and Scotland, although some preach,
+"'Home Rule' _per se_ will not rid Ireland of Lord Deliverus and the
+gang he represents; the remedy for Ireland's distress, as the early
+leaders of Irish discontent perceived, is release from the grip of the
+brigands who stole the nation's heritage. In other words, the real
+object of the Irish movement is Socialism; their cause is ours, and
+our paths lie side by side. But they too have been tricked and led
+astray by the old political will-o'-the-wisp, the seeming angel of
+'Liberty' translated in their case to 'Home Rule.' For many years now
+they have pursued this shifty light through the arid desert of
+politics, and unless they can come to a clear understanding of their
+own original purpose again, and join with their English Socialist
+comrades to find a way out of our common difficulties, they are like
+to abide in that dreary desert for ever."[507]
+
+Whilst the vast majority of British Socialists are unpatriotic,
+anti-national, and anti-Imperial, and would act as traitors to their
+country, the powerful Socialist party of Germany is strongly, one
+might almost say passionately, national and Imperial. Many German
+Socialists are enthusiastic supporters of the German Navy League, and
+they would not hesitate in depriving, if possible, and if need be by
+force, Great Britain of those colonies which her Socialists desire to
+get rid of.
+
+The attitude of German Socialists towards their Fatherland, Empire,
+colonial possessions, and native races, may be gauged from the words
+of Herr Bernstein, one of her most prominent Socialist leaders: "The
+national quality is developing more and more. Socialism can and must
+be national. Even when we sing _Ubi bene, ibi patria_ we still
+acknowledge a _patria_, and therefore, in accordance with the motto
+'No rights without duties,' also duties towards her. To-day the
+Social-Democratic party is, and that unanimously, the most decided
+Imperial party that Germany knows. No other party is so keen to make
+over more and more legislative authority to the Empire and to widen
+its competence as the Social-Democratic party. The idea that in a
+country there exists a powerful party which is only waiting for war in
+order to make difficulties for its own Government, to set on foot a
+military strike and such-like, this idea may become the greatest
+menace to peace by being a spur to adventurous politicians to work
+towards a war with that country. But the home Government knows very
+well that the declaration that the Social-Democrats would, in case of
+need, give their lives for the independence of Germany against a
+foreign Power is by no means a free pass for them to take war
+easily."[508]
+
+In another periodical Herr Bernstein wrote: "The advantages of
+colonial possessions are always conditional. At a given period a
+nation can only sustain a certain quantity of such possessions. As
+long as she was ahead of all other nations in productive power,
+England could support a much larger amount than any other modern
+nation. But the time of her industrial supremacy has passed away, or
+at least is nearing its end. Protectionism on the Continent and in the
+United States may protract the advent of the inevitable in some
+degree. But its hour will strike one day, and when the advantages
+which free trade secures her to-day disappear, she would either have,
+I believe, to free herself of part of her colonial burdens or lose
+more and more of her trade, and with it her regenerative force. So
+much for England. With Germany the question is quite different.
+Although her rural population is now decreasing, she could, with a
+yearly increase of about 800,000, well stand more colonial possessions
+than she actually holds, nor would the costs and outlays for her
+colonies press very hard on her finances. Where two civilisations
+clash, the lower must give way to the higher. This law of evolution we
+cannot overthrow, we can only humanise its action. To counteract it
+would mean to postpone social progress."[509]
+
+It is sad to compare the sane, manly, national, and patriotic attitude
+of German Socialists with the foolish, anti-national cosmopolitanism
+of British Socialists, who, parading beautiful motives of the largest
+humanity, would not hesitate to sacrifice their country and their
+countrymen, their Empire and their colonies.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[476] Quelch, _Social Democracy and the Armed Nation_, p. 14.
+
+[477] _Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency_, p. 10.
+
+[478] Norman, _Empire and Murder_, p. 3.
+
+[479] _Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency_, p. 15.
+
+[480] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[481] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 36.
+
+[482] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 14.
+
+[483] _Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency_, pp. 12, 13.
+
+[484] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 8.
+
+[485] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 108.
+
+[486] _Labour Leader_, October 10, 1907.
+
+[487] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 8.
+
+[488] _Imperialism: Its Meaning and Its Tendency_, p. 5.
+
+[489] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, pp. 76, 77.
+
+[490] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 12.
+
+[491] Hyndman, _The Unrest in India_, p. 13.
+
+[492] Hare, _Famine in India_, p. 17.
+
+[493] Hyndman, _The Unrest in India_, p. 7.
+
+[494] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[495] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[496] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, pp. 11, 12.
+
+[497] _Ibid._ p. 14.
+
+[498] Hyndman, _The Unrest in India_, p. 1.
+
+[499] _Ibid._ p. 4.
+
+[500] _Social-Democrat_, July 1907, pp. 393, 394.
+
+[501] _Labour Leader_, October 11, 1907.
+
+[502] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 104.
+
+[503] _Ibid._ p. 105.
+
+[504] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 70.
+
+[505] _Ibid._ pp. 67, 68.
+
+[506] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, pp. 27, 28.
+
+[507] Thompson, _That Blessed Word Liberty_, p. 10.
+
+[508] Ed. Bernstein in the _Sozialistische Monatshefte_, translated in
+the _Social-Democrat_, July 1907.
+
+[509] _Nation_, October 12, 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND FOREIGN POLICY
+
+
+"Socialism," Mr. Ramsay Macdonald writes, "has a great part to play
+immediately in international politics. It alone can banish national
+jealousies from the Foreign Offices; it alone offers the guarantees of
+peace which are a necessary preliminary to disarmament. Socialism has
+a world policy as well as a national one--a corollary to its belief in
+the brotherhood of man."[510] These words contain assurances, not a
+plan, and therefore we must inquire, What is the foreign policy of
+Socialism?
+
+As regards foreign policy one may divide the Socialists into two
+classes: revolutionaries and visionaries. It will be seen in the
+following pages that the aims of both are similar.
+
+The foreign policy of the revolutionary Socialists of Great Britain is
+based on the celebrated "Communist Manifesto" of Marx and Engels,
+which contains the following programme regarding foreign policy: "The
+Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by
+this only: in the national struggles of the proletarians of the
+different countries they point out and bring to the front the common
+interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all
+nationality."[511] "The Communists everywhere support every
+revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order
+of things. In all these movements they bring to the front, as the
+leading question of each, the property question, no matter what its
+degree of development at the time. Finally, they labour everywhere for
+the union and agreement of the democratic parties of all countries.
+The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly
+declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow
+of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a
+Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but
+their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries,
+unite!"[512]
+
+In accordance with the foregoing proclamation of Marx and Engels, the
+philosopher of British Socialism teaches: "For the Socialist the word
+'frontier' does not exist; for him love of country, as such, is no
+nobler sentiment than love of class. Race pride and class pride are,
+from the standpoint of Socialism, involved in the same condemnation.
+The establishment of Socialism, therefore, on any national or race
+basis is out of the question. The foreign policy of the great
+international Socialist party must be to break up these hideous race
+monopolies called empires, beginning in each case at home. Hence
+everything which makes for the disruption and disintegration of the
+empire to which he belongs must be welcomed by the Socialist as an
+ally. It is his duty to urge on any movement tending in any way to
+dislocate the commercial relations of the world, knowing that every
+shock the modern complex commercial system suffers weakens it and
+brings its destruction nearer. This is the negative side of the
+foreign policy of Socialism. The positive is embraced in a single
+sentence; to consolidate the union of the several national sections on
+the basis of firm and equal friendship, steadfast adherence to
+definite principles, and determination to present a solid front to the
+enemy."[513]
+
+The head of the Social-Democratic Federation informs us: "We have
+never failed to hold up before the people the high ideal of a complete
+social revolution, which shall replace the capitalist sweating system
+and its terrible class war by the happiness, contentment, and glory of
+a great co-operative commonwealth for all mankind."[514]
+
+Faithful to the teaching of Karl Marx, Mr. Tom Mann proclaims: "We do
+not want any walls built round cities or nations for fear of invasion;
+what we do now stand in urgent need of is an international working
+alliance among the workers of the whole world. The only position of
+safety will be found in international action among the organised
+workers of the world."[515]
+
+These being the doctrines of revolutionary Socialism, it is only
+natural that many British Socialists take the enemy's part in case of
+war.[516]
+
+The foreign policy of the visionary Socialists is based on the idea of
+human brotherhood and the equality of men of all races, creeds, and
+colours. "Socialism is brotherhood; and brotherhood is as wide as the
+heavens and as broad as humanity. The growth of international
+Socialism is the promise of the realisation of the angels' natal song:
+On earth, peace; Good will toward men. Socialism will remove the
+causes of international antagonism and make the interests of all
+nations the same."[517] "Socialism implies the inherent equality of
+all human beings. It does not assume that all are alike, but only that
+all are equal. Holding this to be true of individuals, the Socialist
+applies it also to races. Only by a full and unqualified recognition
+of this claim can peace be restored to the world. Socialism implies
+brotherhood, brotherhood implies a living recognition of the fact that
+the duty of the strong is not to hold the weak in subjection but to
+assist them to rise higher and ever higher in the scale of humanity,
+and that this cannot be done by trampling upon and exploiting their
+weakness, but by caring for them and showing them the better
+way."[518] Thus Socialism will bring to the world eternal peace. In
+the words of the poet:
+
+    There's a good time coming, boys,
+      A good time coming;
+    And war in all men's eyes shall be
+      A monster of iniquity,
+    In the good time coming.
+      Nations shall not quarrel then,
+    To prove which is the stronger;
+      Nor slaughter men for glory's sake--
+    Wait a little longer.[519]
+
+The ideas expressed in the above are very noble, but they seem to be
+hardly in accordance with historical experience or with human nature
+as we know it. The race war on the Pacific coast, and the murderous
+attacks by strikers on free labourers who have taken their place which
+are of frequent occurrence in all countries, show that even Socialists
+are apt to rely rather on threats, violence, and superior force than
+on brotherliness and reason, although the Chinaman and the Japanese
+have, according to the Socialist doctrines given in the foregoing, as
+much right to earn a living as any white man.
+
+"Socialism is essentially international. It recognises no distinction
+between the various nations comprising the modern civilised world. 'My
+country, right or wrong,' the expression of modern patriotism, is the
+very antithesis of Socialism.... This internationalism means liberty
+and equality between nations as between individuals, and amalgamation
+as soon as feasible, and as close as possible, under the red flag of
+Social Democracy, which does not recognise national distinctions or
+the division of progressive humanity into nations and races."[520]
+"The new community will be built up on an international basis. The
+nations will fraternise together, will shake hands over old quarrels,
+and unite in gradually extending the new State over all peoples of the
+earth."[521]
+
+"Nationalisation is only the beginning of Socialism. Once let any
+nation be thoroughly imbued with the Socialist spirit, it will become
+a missionary nation. It will preach the glad tidings of salvation to
+people of other tongues, and that which was national shall become
+universal: East and West, North and South, all shall realise, all
+shall rejoice in, the glorious brotherhood of man."[522]
+
+The "brotherhood of man" reminds one of the French Revolution. Like
+the French Revolution, Socialism has imposed upon itself the mission
+to convert the world to its doctrine, and people may again be placed
+before the alternative "La Fraternite ou la Mort."
+
+    Let despots frown and tyrants sneer,
+      The red flag is unfurled;
+    We'll to our principles adhere
+      And socialise the world.[523]
+
+Being anxious to "socialise the world," Socialists eagerly note every
+progress of Socialism in foreign countries from Paris to Pekin. For
+instance, we read in the "Reformers' Year Book": "The belief that the
+quick-witted Japanese would, at the beginning of their new
+civilisation, avoid the evils of European capitalism by accepting a
+scheme of Socialism is not being fulfilled. The dividend-hunter, who
+has been to Europe and received a business training, is fastening the
+chains of monopoly upon the people. To meet this growing danger there
+is already a thriving Socialist-Labour party, which has a daily
+newspaper, the 'Hikari' ('Light')."[524] To facilitate the
+"socialisation of the world" and the introduction of "the brotherhood
+of man" by making Socialism truly international, Socialists are urged
+to study Esperanto, which apparently is to be the international
+Socialist language of the future. The "Clarion" and other Socialist
+papers regularly contain articles written in Esperanto, and the
+anti-patriotic writings of Herve and Gohier--an extract from the
+writings of the former will be found in Chapter XIII.--have been
+translated into Esperanto, apparently in the hope that these
+incendiary pamphlets may help in bringing about the great Socialist
+revolution.
+
+Among the 'immediate reforms' demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation (see Appendix) are to be found the
+demands: "The people to decide on peace and war. The establishment of
+international courts of arbitration." In view of these demands, which
+are made by most Socialist organisations, it is quite natural that
+Socialists condemn the secret action of diplomacy. For instance, a
+Socialist writer remarks on the Anglo-French agreements: "Are we the
+masters of our destinies, when a Delcasse may at any moment immerse us
+in international troubles of the first magnitude? Lord Lansdowne, as
+the accomplice of Delcasse, was equally guilty, and Sir Edward Grey,
+by now securing this triple alliance without the consent or the
+knowledge of the 150 millions of people whom it most vitally concerns,
+completes a trio of international plotters and murderers."[525]
+
+Many Socialists believe that wars may soon be abolished by
+international agreement, either among the nations or among the working
+masses, who will force their views upon the governments. According to
+a very prolific Socialist writer, "There are many signs and portents
+to-day that the evil of war, which is not more deeply rooted than was
+slavery a hundred years ago, will, ere long, meet a similar
+fate."[526] And what are the "signs and portents" upon which the
+belief is based that war will be abolished? "It is a significant fact
+that whenever the working classes meet to discuss this question of
+war, they invariably express themselves in favour of its speedy end. A
+few days ago, when the Trades Union Congress met at Liverpool, when
+delegates were present representing some two millions of the organised
+workers of the country, the representative of the Navvies' Union
+declared, amid the resounding cheers of the Congress, that it was
+impossible for a man to be a Christian and in favour of war at the
+same time."[527] The Navvies' Union will no doubt play a great part in
+the foreign policy of the Socialist commonwealth, but is the
+importance of their declaration not exaggerated? Wars begin, as a
+rule, by an act of aggression. What would the Navvies' Union and the
+Trades Union Congress have said if the secretary had read a telegram
+stating that British ships had been fired upon and sunk by an enemy,
+or that British territory had been invaded and British blood had been
+spilt? I fear that eternal peace is not yet in sight, notwithstanding
+the "sign and portent" of the statement made by the representative of
+the Navvies' Union. Indeed, clear-headed foreign Socialists are aware
+of the very limited usefulness of Peace Conferences, and they deride
+disarmament proposals, such as that submitted to the last Hague
+Conference by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman.
+
+An exceedingly able article in the foremost Socialist organ of Germany
+gave, early in the spring of 1907, the following views on the probable
+result of The Hague Conference and on the British proposals regarding
+the limitation of armaments, views which are particularly interesting
+because they show the sound good sense of the German Socialists and
+the difference between the political views of German and British
+Socialists. The article stated:
+
+"Just as the first Hague Conference of 1898 in reality achieved
+nothing more than a few secondary amendments to the law of nations,
+conformity with which was left completely to the fancy of the
+individual Powers, so the second Hague Conference will, it is highly
+probable, result in nothing further than a few general peace
+assertions and international arrangements which, when it comes to a
+war, will not outlive the first interchange of shots. Certainly the
+English Premier is right. There does exist among the thoughtful
+persons in all European States an intellectual tendency towards the
+peaceful settlement of differences between the nations and the
+diminution of the gigantic military and naval armaments. But this body
+of thoughtful people is--as the last elections in Germany have again
+proved--on the whole rather small; and above all, these thoughtful
+people do not belong to the economically powerful class who determine
+the policy of Governments.
+
+"The old ideologic conception of the English free trade doctrine, that
+the free exchange of goods between the nations leads to the abolition
+of war, to the brotherhood of humanity, that conception which found
+its most original expression in Dr. Bowring's exclamation 'Free trade
+is Jesus Christ,' still haunts some people's minds. With the greatest
+number of the liberal advocates of disarmament, their point of view
+originates simply in the consideration that the strong naval and
+military armaments demand more and more, not only from England's
+purse, but from her human material, while, on the other hand, England
+possesses all that she can expect, and has, on that account, not much
+more to gain. All over the earth's surface she has the most valuable
+colonies, and is, since the alliances with Japan and France, in a
+perfectly secure position, which awakens in her the wish to
+consolidate her position and to economise her finances for the
+upholding of her supremacy. It is that satisfied state of mind which
+makes the fortunate winner of the game say, 'Let us leave off; I am
+tired of playing now.' English capitalists feel themselves in a safe
+position. Nothing can easily go wrong at present. The thing is,
+therefore, to secure what they have got and to diminish the heavy
+burdens. This desire is comprehensible--only the other Powers will
+probably not respect it.
+
+"The working-class party is very much in sympathy with the disarmament
+idea in itself. For this party is the most consistent opponent of
+militarism, and demands in its programme not only the formation of a
+citizen army in place of the standing army, but also that questions of
+peace and war should be determined by the people themselves, and that
+all international differences should be settled by arbitration. But no
+amount of sympathy can get over the fact that in the present
+capitalist world there is very little chance of a general disarmament
+of the Powers. The conception that war is only a product of human
+unreason is on the same level as the idea that revolutions are only
+mental aberrations of the masses. War is rooted in the opposing
+interests of the nations, as are revolutions in the opposing interests
+of the classes."[528]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[510] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 120.
+
+[511] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 1
+
+[512] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 31.
+
+[513] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, pp. 126, 127.
+
+[514] Debate, Hyndman, _Will Socialism Benefit the English People?_
+Introduction.
+
+[515] Mann, _International Labour Movement_, p. 6.
+
+[516] See, for instance, Hyndman in _The Transvaal War and the
+Degradation of England_.
+
+[517] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[518] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 10.
+
+[519] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 25.
+
+[520] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 31.
+
+[521] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future_, p. 235.
+
+[522] "Veritas," _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[523] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 13.
+
+[524] _Reformers' Year Book, 1907_, p. 195.
+
+[525] _Social-Democrat_, September 1907, p. 534.
+
+[526] Ward, _The War Drum shall Throb no Longer_, p. 13.
+
+[527] _Ibid._ p. 14.
+
+[528] _Vorwaerts_, March 10, 1907, translated in the _Social-Democrat_,
+April 1907, pp. 220-224.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+SOCIALISM AND THE ARMY
+
+
+Most Socialists, British and foreign, are opposed to the existing
+armies, for two reasons:
+
+(1) Because they wish to overturn practically all existing
+institutions from the Monarchy downwards, and they fear that the
+military may defend the _status quo_;
+
+(2) Because they aim at the abolition of States and of nationality and
+at the disappearance of frontiers, as the ideal Socialist State of the
+future would, for economic and political reasons, have to embrace the
+world.
+
+The Socialist State of the future, embracing the whole universe, can
+be created only after the existing States have been overturned.
+Therefore the more immediate aim of Socialists is to seize upon the
+political power in accordance with the advice given by Karl Marx in
+his celebrated "Manifesto."[529]
+
+Most Socialists apparently believe that not by Parliamentary means but
+only by violence will they succeed in making themselves supreme, for
+we are told: "The ballot-box is no doubt a safer weapon than the
+rifle; but even when there will be a sufficient number of people in
+these islands convinced of the necessity and possibility of the
+co-operative commonwealth, the end will not yet be certain. There are
+the classes in possession to be considered. Are they going to allow
+themselves to be voted out? Will they respect a franchise and
+ballot-box which will vote that they shall get off the backs of the
+workers? Franchise 'Reform' Bills--and it is astonishing to what use
+'reform' can now be put--can be rushed through Parliament, like Crimes
+Acts, in twenty-four hours; and there is the 'voluntary' professional
+army, under military law, to overawe the recalcitrants who may resent
+the suffrage and the ballot-box being jerrymandered against the
+popular interest. But none are so likely to be overawed by threatened
+displays of armed force--whether voluntary or conscript--as those who
+have a difficulty in distinguishing the butt end of a rifle from its
+muzzle."[530]
+
+Under the heading "Will it come to barricades?" we read: "The
+barricade is to-day, all will agree, in this country at any rate, an
+impossible weapon. Armed insurrection on the part of the workers in
+this country would to-day be the height of folly, and will continue to
+be so, so long as our standing army of hired mercenaries exists.
+Standing armies are the instruments of capitalist oppression at home
+and aggression abroad. But so long as even one great Power maintains
+the present form of military organisation, so long as war is possible,
+so long will it be necessary that some form of military organisation
+exist in all countries. We dare not preach peace when we know there
+can be no peace. This is why the Socialists of all countries are
+to-day in favour of an educational policy which will make every
+citizen fit for military service within the ranks of a citizen army,
+organised and maintained for purposes of defence only. The advantages
+of such a force, from the Socialist standpoint, are so obvious that
+they need hardly be stated. And it would at least put the working
+class in a position to understand what a barricade means, and how, if
+need be, to act in their own defence. There are, I am well aware, a
+handful of individual Socialists with us who are against universal
+military training, but they are a diminishing quantity, and will in
+due season find their natural vocation within the ranks of the
+Liberty and Property Defence League."[531]
+
+Mr. Quelch, the editor of "Justice," shares the foregoing opinion, for
+he tells us: "Revolutions, it is said, can no longer be accomplished
+by force, but only by peaceful means--the vote, Parliamentary action,
+and legislation. It may be so, but it will be unprecedented if the
+present ruling class surrender without a struggle. And if they had the
+armed force of the nation at their command, they would struggle
+successfully no matter what the Legislature may have done. The ruling
+class will not be made to submit to law and order which is not their
+law and order, except by overwhelmingly superior force. Nobody
+supposes that in such a contest the people could win against the
+ruling class unless they had been able first to win over the army.
+With a professional 'voluntary' army, well paid and well affected to
+its paymasters, such winning over would be practically impossible. But
+with the armed nation there would be no winning over required. An
+armed nation--whatever it may do or submit to--is essentially a free
+nation, and whatever such a nation determines upon, that it can do and
+have, in spite of any ruling class."[532]
+
+Similar opinions have frequently been expressed by leading Continental
+Socialists. Herr Kautsky, for instance, wrote under the heading
+"Expropriation of the Expropriators," as follows: "The arming of the
+people is a political measure. It can, under certain circumstances,
+cost just as much as a standing army, but it is needed for the safety
+of the democracy in order to deprive the Government of its most
+important weapon against the people."[533]
+
+Those who are of opinion that only the extreme section of British
+Socialists, the revolutionary wing, is hostile to the army, are
+mistaken. This may be seen from the following resolution of the Fabian
+Society, which is the most moderate exponent of British Socialism:
+"Armies act as a standing menace not to neighbouring States, but to
+the working populations of their own countries. A study of the
+strategical disposition of many of the great railway stations and
+barracks of the Continent will prove that the most important function
+of the modern army is to suppress the resistance of labour to capital
+in the war of classes."[534]
+
+Among the "immediate reforms" demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation[535] we find a demand for "the abolition
+of standing armies and the establishment of national citizen forces."
+Army and police are to most Socialists very objectionable because it
+is their function to protect the national order and national property
+against predatory, anarchistic, and revolutionary attempts. Therefore
+it is only natural that "No Social Democrat regards the present police
+system as a satisfactory one, or a professional police as other than a
+dubious expedient."[536] According to the opinion held by many
+Socialists, "The soldier's primary function is to come to the rescue
+of the policeman when the latter is overpowered."[537]
+
+Voluntary armies of the British type are quite as objectionable to
+Socialists as are the national armies of the compulsory type raised on
+the Continent of Europe. "We are told that the advantage of our
+present military system is that it is not compulsory, that people are
+free to join the service or not as they please. The freedom of the
+average recruit to join the army is about on a par with the freedom
+of an unemployed workman to work for lower wages than the recognised
+rate of wages, or the freedom of the prostitute."[538] "Your soldier,
+ostensibly a heroic and patriotic defender of his country, is really
+an unfortunate man driven by destitution to offer himself as food for
+powder for the sake of regular rations, shelter, and clothing."[539]
+"A standing army of professional soldiers is the most effective
+instrument in the hands of the dominant class, the greatest menace to
+democracy and popular liberty, and the most effective barrier to
+revolutionary change that could possibly be devised. And surely, too,
+the antithesis to that is the Armed Nation--every citizen a soldier
+and every soldier a citizen."[540]
+
+The ideal army from the Socialist point of view is the armed nation.
+It is, as we shall see in the following, an army composed of Socialist
+workmen and commanded by Socialist leaders. It is not an army for
+national defence, but one for attack on the existing order; it is a
+revolutionary army, an army of plunder. The very natural desire of
+Socialists to create such a force is, as a rule, disguised under the
+demand for a democratic army and universal military training. "We
+Socialists advocate the military training of all citizens and the
+abolition of professional armies, as ensuring the maximum of military
+efficiency and the minimum of menace to democratic principles and
+popular rights. We propose that every man should undergo a thorough
+military training so as to be equal to any other man. A professional
+army is maintained in the main for the defence and maintenance of the
+master class. A professional army is a specialised class or caste,
+divorced from civil life, hostile to the general body of the
+community, and maintained as an instrument to serve the purpose of the
+master class. That purpose is as often the suppression of popular
+movements at home as aggression abroad. If it were possible to abolish
+all military organisations, the remedy would be simple. But we have
+seen that that is, under present conditions, impossible. Therefore we
+urge that all citizens should be armed and trained to the use of arms,
+so that all reasonable military requirements may be met and
+professional soldiering be entirely dispensed with."[541] The fact
+that the abolition of the professional army would involve the loss of
+India and of other possessions to Great Britain is a matter of no
+importance to the Socialists. In fact the Socialists wish Great
+Britain to lose not only India but all her colonies, as will be seen
+by reference to Chapter XI., "Socialism and the Empire."[542]
+
+Every attempt at improving the voluntary army of Great Britain is
+considered a blow at Socialism, and is therefore vigorously resisted
+by the Socialists. Hence the scheme of army reform of Mr. Haldane,
+Secretary of State for War, has been loudly condemned by them as
+reactionary and likely to strengthen the capitalists, and they entreat
+the workers not to oppose universal military training. "The capitalist
+class would be perfectly delighted that all the rest of the people
+outside themselves and their mercenaries should be peaceful unarmed
+non-resisters. Nothing could suit them better. We have Mr. Haldane's
+territorial army--on paper; and a more reactionary, militarist (in the
+worst sense), and anti-democratic system than that to which the
+present War Minister has had the effrontery to apply our term of the
+'Armed Nation' could scarcely be devised."[543]
+
+Whether Mr. Haldane's proposals give Great Britain a better army for
+national and Imperial defence, is apparently immaterial to the
+Socialists, for they criticise it merely from the point of view of
+intending rioters and revolutionaries. They complain: "The position
+of the Volunteers now is this, that they are not under military law,
+and cannot be called out as soldiers to shoot down workmen at the
+bidding of the capitalists. Mr. Haldane's scheme, however, destroys
+the civilian character of the Volunteers, and converts them into
+professional soldiers."[544]
+
+Although most Socialists are in favour of a national militia, a
+considerable number oppose even a national militia of the Swiss type,
+fearing that it would refuse to aid the Socialists in overturning
+society as at present constituted. "We have been told of the readiness
+with which the Swiss militia have donned their uniforms and seized
+their rifles when called upon to act against strikers."[545] The
+Socialist delegates who accompanied the committee of inquiry which the
+National Service League sent to Switzerland in the autumn of 1907 were
+apparently less interested in the efficiency of the Swiss army for
+national defence than in its attitude during conflicts between labour
+and capital.[546]
+
+Fearing that a national militia might not be willing to lend itself to
+revolutionary purposes, that it might become a patriotic force as is
+the Swiss militia, many Socialists condemn every kind of military
+service, and are quite ready to disarm the nation in the name of
+humanity and civil freedom. For instance, at the annual conference of
+the Socialist Independent Labour Party of 1907 the following was moved
+by a well-known revolutionary Socialist, Mr. Bruce Glasier:
+
+"That this Conference believes that the time has come when militarism
+in every form should be denounced and resisted as alien to civil
+freedom and social progress, and expresses itself emphatically against
+compulsory military service, and the attempts which are being made to
+introduce military training in public schools or other public
+institutions, and views with alarm the purposes of Mr. Haldane's Army
+Territorial Bill, which, if passed, will make military service
+practically compulsory under officers drawn wholly from, the upper
+classes, will make industrial employment dependent upon military
+service, and, instead of promoting international unity, will foster
+and increase the spirit of militarism and aggression."[547]
+
+In moving this resolution Mr. Glasier said that "he denounced
+militarism root and branch," and Mr. Keir Hardie, a Communist
+Socialist, in seconding, said: "The resolution was not only a
+declaration against militarism, but a special and specific
+condemnation of the Territorial Army Scheme now before the House of
+Commons. The Socialist party was bound to protest against a system of
+that kind. The particular feature which emphasised the danger was that
+there were to be county associations formed to have charge of the new
+territorial forces, and to have a majority of military men upon them
+with landlords and possibly employers of labour. A citizen army was as
+great a menace to an industrial population as a professional army. The
+new army would be recruited from the people, and officered by the
+enemies of the people, just as the professional army was. Children
+were to be taught that the flag was the great thing to value in life.
+They would find that a citizen army, officered by the rich and
+recruited from their own ranks, would be taught to regard the flag as
+something holy, while they shot down strikers and Socialists just as
+freely as the most exclusive professional army in the world could do.
+Patriotism was one of the weapons used by the enemies of the people to
+blind them to facts."[548]
+
+The Trade Union Congress of 1907, disregarding the security of the
+country and the Empire from foreign aggression, also condemned
+military training of every kind. Commenting hereon, the
+"Social-Democrat," the organ of the Social-Democratic Federation,
+which favours a national democratic army, wrote: "The Trades Union
+Congress declares against conscription and also condemns military
+training, which is a totally different matter. To condemn conscription
+is purely negative. It would be very much more to the point if the
+representatives of the organised working class would formulate an
+expression of opinion on the actual military problem. Conscription, at
+the worst, is in the air; but the present-day military problem is not
+in the air; it is on the earth, practical and urgent. What have the
+trade unionists to say to it? Do they approve of the present system of
+a nominally voluntary professional soldiery, maintained as an
+instrument at the service of the capitalist class for suppression at
+home and aggression abroad?"[549] The trade unionists were urged to
+abolish the voluntary army and to create a national citizen army,
+which will assist the Socialist in overturning society.
+
+A national citizen army, composed of Socialists and commanded by
+Socialists, is the ideal, and until such an army be created it is in
+the interest of Socialists to weaken the existing army and to
+undermine its discipline to such an extent that, in the event of a
+rising or a revolution, it will side with the revolutionaries. With
+this object in view, Socialists are trying to create dissatisfaction
+in the army by means of emissaries and literature. For instance, in a
+leaflet entitled "An Appeal to Soldiers," the Social-Democratic
+Federation says: "If you are to fight for patriotism and country, then
+let it be a national duty for all, wealthy as well as poor, to bear
+arms. Let not those who are called upon to fight remain a pariah class
+apart, bereft of the rights of citizenship--regarded by the upper
+classes as something to be avoided."[550]
+
+In its official programme the Social-Democratic Federation demands,
+under the heading "Immediate Reforms," "the abolition of
+courts-martial: all offences against discipline to be transferred to
+the jurisdiction of civil courts."[551] Why do the Socialists demand
+the abolition of military law? Because, in their own words, "With the
+abolition of military law, upon which we have always laid the greatest
+possible stress, militarism falls to the ground."[552] Therefore the
+"Appeal to Soldiers" admonishes the military: "You are and will remain
+a class apart from the rest of the nation so long as you are compelled
+to serve under a barbarous military code called 'military law.' The
+system of trial by court-martial is a mere farce and a mockery. We of
+the Social-Democratic Federation intend to do our utmost to abolish it
+root and branch. Give us your support. Remember that the late War
+Minister, Mr. St. John Brodrick, compared the soldier to the Chinese
+coolie in South Africa. This is how you are looked upon by the very
+people who use you as food for powder in the interest of their class.
+Now is the time for all who wish you well to demand the abolition of
+military law, the civilising of military service, and the
+establishment of a national citizen force."[553]
+
+In the autumn of 1907 a letter to the editor was published by the
+"Daily Telegraph" which contained the following statement:
+
+"I do not think that many people, least of all the authorities,
+realise what a vigorous campaign is now being waged amongst the rank
+and file by the Social-Democratic Federation. Herewith I forward a
+leaflet which, I believe, is being distributed in thousands to the
+military stations in all the corners of our Empire. The one I enclose
+I found attached to a tree by the roadside during the recent
+manoeuvres near Aylesbury. Copies of the same leaflet have reached me
+from India and Belfast, where they were distributed during the recent
+strike trouble. It is no exaggeration to say that this leaflet is
+dangerous; the men of our army are peculiarly susceptible to the
+tenets of the Social-Democratic Federation. Officers and N.C.O.s will
+tell you what a serious effect such propaganda must have upon
+discipline.
+
+                           "Yours faithfully,
+                                     "H.C. SMART,
+                              Editor, 'Army Graphic'"
+  "_October 7, 1907._"
+
+Socialism is carrying on a vigorous propaganda for destroying
+discipline in the army and also in the navy. Herveism has been
+imported into Great Britain, and is making rapid progress. "The
+Socialist," the organ of the Socialist Labour party, a party which at
+present is small in number, but which is most violent in attitude, in
+an article entitled "The Socialist Labour Party and the Citizen Army,"
+quotes with approval Herve's saying: "The present countries are cruel
+step-mothers to the proletariat. There is at present no country so
+superior to any other that its working class should get themselves
+killed in its defence. In case of mobilisation the proletariat should
+respond to the call to arms by an insurrection against their rulers to
+establish the Socialist or Communist _regime_. Rebellion sooner than
+war! In case of an order to mobilise, we would seize the moment to
+attempt the revolution, to place our hands on the social wealth to-day
+usurped by a minority." The foregoing is printed in very large type.
+The article then continues, commenting upon Herve's advice as follows:
+"The soldier has been fed and clothed by the working class. His
+continued efficiency as a military automaton depends upon regular
+supply of food, clothing, and the necessaries of life from the same
+source. He has been transported to the field of conflict by the labour
+of a whole army of railwaymen. Let us suppose that the day of the
+final struggle has been reached. Suppose the capitalist attempts to
+stifle the revolution in blood; suppose he calls upon the army to
+crush the revolutionary working class by brute force. Let us suppose,
+too, that the revolutionary agitation has not penetrated the Chinese
+walls of military discipline (a most improbable hypothesis) and that
+the soldiers, instead of turning their guns against the capitalist
+murderers, cheerfully and willingly serve their masters in the attempt
+to crush the people--what then? We shall put the army in quarantine.
+We shall isolate it from the rest of the community. We shall cut off
+supplies of food, clothing, and fuel. The railway and telegraph
+service will no longer be at its disposal--and in this respect we are
+in a more advantageous position than our French and German
+fellow-workers, inasmuch as the Government ownership of the railways
+in these countries is used to deny the workers connected with them the
+right of organisation. The army would be in a state of siege,
+surrounded on all sides by implacable foes. That, coupled with
+whatever may be possible and necessary in the way of armed
+insurrection within and outside of the army, is the policy proposed by
+the Socialist Labour party and Industrial Unionism. Circumstances may,
+and probably will, modify it in many important details, but there is
+the main outline. Is it not more logical, more coherent, more likely
+to succeed than any 'citizen army scheme'?"[554]
+
+Love of country has apparently no room in the Socialist's ethics. Its
+defence does not trouble him, since he is taught that his worst
+enemies are those Englishmen who happen to be better off.
+
+        Waste not your ready blows,
+        Strike not at foreign foes,
+    Your bitterest enemies tread your own soil;
+        The preachers who blind ye,
+        The landlords who grind ye,
+    The gluttons who revel whilst ye are at toil.
+
+    Rise in your might, brothers, bear it no longer,
+      Assemble in masses throughout the whole land;
+    Teach the vile bloodsuckers who are the stronger
+      When workers and robbers confronted shall stand.
+        Through Castle, Court, and Hall,
+        Over their acres all,
+    Onward we'll press like the waves of the sea.
+        Seizing the wealth we've made.
+        Ending the spoilers' trade;
+    Till Labour has triumphed, and England is free.[555]
+
+In their desire to abolish the army, some Socialists argue that "The
+whole of your military system is entirely unnecessary."[556] Others
+falsify history and boldly assert that British wars, "in nearly every
+case have been waged for the suppression of liberty abroad, or from
+the irritating desire on the part of British statesmen to interfere
+with the internal affairs of other nations."[557] On the other hand,
+Mr. Quelch very sensibly argues: "Militarism is an evil against which
+we have to fight with all the means in our power, but to talk of
+universal disarmament at the present stage is mere Utopianism, a
+crying of peace where there is no peace, and where existing
+antagonisms make peace impossible. We have at first to eradicate the
+causes of conflict. To-day the unarmed nation offers itself as a
+temptation and a prey to some mighty brigand Power. War is the last
+argument of kings, and all Governments rest on force. So long as that
+is the case, it is only the people which is armed that can maintain
+its freedom, or can indeed lay claim to be a free people. An unarmed
+nation cannot be free. An armed nation, on the contrary, is a
+guarantee of individual liberty, of social freedom, and of national
+independence."[558] Mr. Quelch would have the same ideals as the
+National Service League, did not later utterances of his contradict
+sensible statements such as the above.
+
+It is a curious and most interesting phenomenon that in France and
+Great Britain, two eminently non-aggressive countries, the Socialists
+do all in their power to disarm the nation, whilst in Germany, which
+can hardly be described as non-aggressive, the Socialists are
+patriotic and are ready to go to war, not only for the defence but
+also for the aggrandisement of their country. Numerous declarations to
+that effect made by the leading German Socialists are on record, and
+the following extract is characteristic of their attitude:
+
+"That Germany be armed to the teeth, possessing a strong fleet, is of
+the utmost importance to the working men. What damages our exports
+damages them also, and working men have the most pressing interest in
+securing prosperity for our export trade, be it even by force of arms.
+Owing to her development, Germany may perhaps be obliged to maintain
+her position sword in hand. Only he who is under the protection of his
+guns can dominate the markets, and in the fight for markets German
+working men may come before the alternative either of perishing or of
+forcing their entrance into markets sword in hand."[559]
+
+In the spring of 1907 the leading German Socialist paper wrote in a
+weighty article on the Peace Conference at The Hague: "The conception
+that war is only a product of human unreason is on the same level as
+the idea that revolutions are only mental aberrations of the masses.
+War is rooted in the opposing interests of the nations, as are
+revolutions in the opposing interests of the classes."[560]
+
+A comparison of German Socialism with English Socialism shows that
+English Socialism is more violent and far less patriotic than German
+Socialism. German Socialists love their country. Most British
+Socialists apparently love only themselves.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[529] See p. 107.
+
+[530] H.W. Lee in the _Social-Democrat_, June 1, 1907.
+
+[531] Thomas Kennedy in _Forward_ of May 25, 1907, reprinted in the
+_Social-Democrat_, June 1907.
+
+[532] Quelch in the _Social-Democrat_ for October 1907.
+
+[533] Kautsky, _Social Revolution_, p. 4.
+
+[534] _Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions_, p. 11.
+
+[535] See Appendix.
+
+[536] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 588.
+
+[537] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 25.
+
+[538] _Social-Democrat_, June 1907.
+
+[539] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 25.
+
+[540] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 586.
+
+[541] _Social-Democrat_, April 1907, p. 204.
+
+[542] See p. 170.
+
+[543] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 586.
+
+[544] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 589.
+
+[545] _Ibid._
+
+[546] See _The Nation in Arms_, October 1907, and _Journal de
+Neuchatel_, September 22, 1907.
+
+[547] _Independent Labour Party Report_, 1907, p. 64.
+
+[548] _Ibid._ pp. 64, 65.
+
+[549] _Social-Democrat_, November 1907, p. 516.
+
+[550] _An Appeal to Soldiers._
+
+[551] See Appendix.
+
+[552] H.W. Lee in _Social-Democrat_, June 1907.
+
+[553] _An Appeal to Soldiers._
+
+[554] _Socialist_, October 1907.
+
+[555] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, No. 30.
+
+[556] Kirtlan, _Socialism for Christians_, p. 6.
+
+[557] Smart, _Socialism and the Budget_, p. 6.
+
+[558] Quelch, _Social Democracy and the Armed Nation_, p. 3 f.
+
+[559] _Sozialistische Monatshefte_, December 1899.
+
+[560] _Vorwaerts_, March 10, 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+SOCIALISM AND THE MONARCHY
+
+
+The first of the "Immediate Reforms" demanded in the official
+programme of the Social-Democratic Federation[561] is the "Abolition
+of the Monarchy." That that demand has been made so crudely and that
+it has been given so prominent a position cannot surprise anybody who
+is acquainted with British Socialism. "Socialists are essentially
+thorough-going Republicans. Socialism, which aims at political and
+economic equality, is radically inconsistent with any other political
+form whatever than that of Republicanism, Monarchy and Socialism, or
+Empire and Socialism, are incompatible and inconceivable. Socialism
+involves political and economic equality, while Monarchy or Empire
+essentially imply domination and inequality."[562]
+
+"As in the political history of the race the logical development of
+progress was found in the abolition of the institution of monarchy and
+not in its mere restriction, so in industrial history the culminating
+point to which all efforts must at last converge lies in the abolition
+of the capitalist class, and not in the mere restriction of its
+powers. The Socialist Labour Party, recognising these two phases of
+human development, unites them in its programme, and seeks to give
+them a concrete embodiment by its demand for a Socialist
+Republic."[563]
+
+Most Socialists describe all monarchs as the drones of society, and
+habitually refer to crowned heads either as "loafers" or as "Royal
+paupers, able-bodied and outdoor."[564] "If the people were of my mind
+they would not tolerate for twelve months that the Royal paupers
+should wear robes and have every luxury, and the honest, industrious
+aged poor should wear rags and eat a crust or be imprisoned for being
+hungry."[565] (Has ever anybody in Great Britain, or in any other
+country, been imprisoned "for being hungry"?)
+
+"Is it possible that this degrading monarchical superstition can
+survive in England much longer? Has the schoolmaster now been abroad
+so long in vain? Will the English people never take their destinies
+into their own hands and close the long era of monarchical and
+aristocratic robbery? Are we never to have a Government that can hear
+the bitter cry of the outcast, and, hearing, act? We know the goal.
+The goal is the Democratic Republic."[566]
+
+Many further extracts regarding English and foreign monarchs might be
+given, but they are so indescribably coarse and so offensive--even the
+late Queen is most shamelessly slandered, abused, and calumniated--that
+they are hardly fit for publication, and their authors shall be
+nameless.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[561] See Appendix.
+
+[562] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 37.
+
+[563] _Platform, Constitutions, Rules, and Standing Orders, Socialist
+Labour Party_, pp. 2, 3.
+
+[564] See _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 25.
+
+[565] Glyde, _Britain's Disgrace_, p. 9.
+
+[566] Davidson, _The New Book of Kings_, p. 107.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS ON PARLIAMENT AND THE NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION
+
+
+The opinion of most Socialists with regard to the British Parliament
+is well summed up in the phrase "Parliament a way to the Democracy?
+Why, 'tis not a road at all, but only a barricade across our
+road."[567] It will be seen in this and the following Chapter that
+Socialism means either to capture and hold that barricade or to pull
+it down.
+
+Let us take note of some representative Socialist opinions on the
+British Parliament. "The House of Commons is a machine elaborately
+contrived by the exploiting classes to serve their own ends. In the
+race for Parliamentary seats the wisest and the best are nowhere. They
+are rarely even permitted to start. The prizes are for the richest,
+the most unscrupulous, cunning, and pushing. And without a complete
+revolution in our ideas regarding the objects as well as the methods
+of legislation, it must always remain so."[568] "Parliament is
+appointed, we are told, to fulfil the will of the nation. Then why
+doesn't it do it? If it has a job to do, why does it stand day after
+day, week after week, year after year, cackling, cackling, cackling
+about it? Can the mind of man conceive anything more intensely
+ridiculous than this spectacle solemnly presented for our admiration
+by the champions of the system, of six hundred garrulous old gentlemen
+making a set and formal business of cackling--cackling, cackling,
+cackling, with infinite pride in their own preposterous squeaking and
+nagging, and then filing out one by one at intervals, like a stately
+Lord Mayor's procession in the kingdom of the black and white
+penguins? What is to be done with such a museum?"[569] "Government by
+Parliament is a preposterous pretence--a delusion and a snare to the
+people. It is a gag imposed by the classes on the aspirations of the
+masses. Our Parliamentary representation is a fraud. If we could
+appeal directly to the whole people as to whether willing workers
+should starve, or little children suffer hunger, then something might
+be done. But how can the electors express their desires on this vital
+matter under our present electoral system?"[570]
+
+Socialists complain that Parliament is run by a class. "It is colossal
+impudence for a party paper to talk against 'class representation.'
+Every class is over-represented--except the great working class. The
+mines, the railways, the drink trade, the land, finance, the army
+(officers), the navy (officers), the Church, the law, and most of the
+big industries (employers) are represented largely in the House of
+Commons. And nearly thirty millions of the working classes are
+represented by about a dozen men, most of whom are palsied by their
+allegiance to the Liberal party."[571] "The rich man's club at St.
+Stephen's is merely a committee of plutocrats--rentmongers,
+interestmongers, and profitmongers--assembled for the purpose of
+safeguarding the spoils which the 'classes' have theftuously contrived
+to heap up."[572] "The inequality of representation of classes in
+Parliament at present is somewhat startling. It stands as follows:
+
+               _House of Lords_
+
+  Capitalist members                      614
+  Labour members                            0
+                                          ---
+               Total                      614
+
+               _House of Commons_
+
+  Capitalist members                      640
+  Labour members                           30
+                                          ---
+               Total                      670
+
+"That is, we have 640 members representing the interests of, say,
+6,000,000 of persons, and 30 members representing the interests of
+37,000,000."[573] "As recipients of rents, royalties, interests, and
+dividends, some 600 of the representatives of the people in the House
+of Commons are parasites upon the people's backs. The railway
+shareholders have 78 representatives; the railway workers, nearly
+400,000 strong, have one. One hundred and eighty thousand landed
+proprietors have 155 members; 1,000,000 agricultural labourers have
+one. Coal-mine owners have 21; and 655,000 miners have seven members.
+The shipowners and builders have 22 representatives; the 200,000
+sailors have none."[574]
+
+"The social composition of the House of Commons is as follows: 124
+lawyers, 108 manufacturers (including brewers, colliery-owners, &c.),
+85 landowners, 64 merchants and shopkeepers, 37 army and navy men, 33
+journalists and authors, 28 financiers, 23 professors, teachers, &c.,
+18 Civil servants, 18 newspaper proprietors and publishers, 16 heirs
+to the peerage, 67 of miscellaneous occupations and professions, and
+50 working men. Thus the bulk of the present House of Commons consists
+of rent, profit, and interest mongers and their hirelings and
+hangers-on. The exploited masses of the people are only represented by
+fifty men."[575]
+
+    See your masters, how unceasingly they strive to keep you down,
+    How they manage all your business up in Parliament and town;
+    Well, it is not quite your business, for it really is their own.
+    And that is why the millions of the toilers slave and groan.[576]
+
+"On the top of all this political chicanery and impudent pretence of
+popular representation, there sits an autocratic, irresponsible,
+hereditary legislative body, consisting exclusively of idlers and
+parasites who reserve to themselves the right of rejecting all laws
+which do not clearly further their own exactions and monopolies! Then
+ask yourselves: Of what use is Parliament? Of what use can it ever be
+to the mass of the common people?"[577]
+
+Parliament is not only useless to the worker, but is also, according
+to the Socialists, utterly corrupt and callous to the sufferings of
+the people. "Whenever an American is met abroad with the assertion
+that government in the Republic is corrupt, he can safely say that for
+one ounce of corruption in America there is a full pound avoirdupois
+in Britain."[578] "It is extremely doubtful, indeed, whether either
+slavery or the slave-trade would be abandoned in the British Empire if
+they still existed to-day, and their abrogation and suppression
+depended upon the English House of Commons. The hideous corruption in
+that assembly and the utter indifference of the majority of its
+plutocratic members and their retainers to the welfare of any people,
+at home or abroad, where money is to be made by neglecting the
+commonest rules of ethics, have never been so clearly manifested as
+they are to-day."[579]
+
+"The suffrage in Great Britain is very unsatisfactory, as the
+following table shows:
+
+                             Per cent. of the
+                                population
+                              having a vote.
+  France                            27.9
+  Switzerland                       23.5
+  Greece                            23.0
+  Spain                             22.4
+  Belgium                           21.5
+  Germany                           21.2
+  Bulgaria                          21.2
+  Norway                            19.9
+  Austria                           19.9
+  Portugal                          19.0
+  Great Britain                     16.5
+  Denmark                           16.4
+  Servia                            16.0
+  Holland                           16.0
+
+As to England, she occupies a very low place in the scale. But then
+the people here have not even got universal suffrage! And this is a
+'democratic,' 'self-governing' community."[580]
+
+Furthermore, "The time has come when members of Parliament will have
+to receive payment for their services in the House of Commons, because
+the people have realised that they cannot be adequately represented
+only by men of wealth and position who are able to pay their own
+expenses."[581]
+
+The national Administration is quite as unsatisfactory to Socialists
+as is the national Parliament. "To-day honesty wears rags, and
+rascality and idleness wear robes. Every pint of beer, and every drop
+of wine or spirits the workers drink, every pipe of tobacco or cigar
+they smoke, every cup of tea, coffee, or cocoa they drink, every
+patent medicine they purchase, every dog they keep, every pound of
+sugar they use, even their playing cards and their insurance policies,
+are taxed to help to pay big salaries and pensions to the younger sons
+of the aristocracy, &c. The eldest sons live on the family estate; the
+younger live on the State. One becomes a lawyer, and will lie for
+anyone who will pay him well; another becomes an officer in the army
+or navy, and he will cut the throat of anyone in return for a good
+salary; another becomes a parson, and in return for a good stipend he
+will pray for anyone; the others are quartered on the consular or the
+diplomatic service, or are placed as clerks at _1,000l._ per year in
+the Colonial, Foreign, or Home Office, &c."[582] The official
+Parliamentary Report of the Independent Labour Party for 1907 states:
+"Our short experience has been sufficient to teach us that it is as
+important to democratise our administrative departments as it is to
+democratise our Statute Book. We have found that the doors to the
+higher offices in Whitehall are closed to everyone who has not had a
+middle-class or aristocratic education, and recent changes have placed
+our Civil service more completely in the hands of the wealthy
+classes."[583]
+
+In the foregoing statements we find some of the principal complaints
+of the Socialists regarding the national Parliament and
+Administration. Let us now take note of their wishes and proposals.
+
+Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded in the programme of the
+Social-Democratic Federation we find the following regarding
+Parliament and the Administration:
+
+"Abolition of the Monarchy. Democratisation of the Government
+machinery, viz. Abolition of the House of Lords, Payment of members
+of legislative and administrative bodies, Payment of official expenses
+of elections out of the public funds, Adult suffrage, Proportional
+representation, Triennial parliaments, Second ballot, initiative and
+referendum. Foreigners to be granted rights of citizenship after two
+years' residence in the country, on the recommendation of four
+British-born citizens, without any fees. Canvassing to be made
+illegal. Legislation by the people in such wise that no legislative
+proposal shall become law until ratified by the majority of the
+people. Legislative and administrative independence for all parts of
+the Empire."
+
+As the above demands are somewhat vague, it is worth while to take
+note of another and clearer statement of the political demands made by
+the Social-Democratic Federation. "We of the Democratic Federation
+demand complete adult suffrage for every man and woman in these
+islands, because in this way alone can the whole people give free
+expression to their will; we are in favour of paid delegates and
+annual conventions, because by this means alone can the people control
+their representatives; we stand up for the direct references of all
+grave issues to the country at large and for the punishment as felony
+of every species of corruption, because thus only can tyranny be
+checked and bribery be uprooted; we call for the abolition of all
+hereditary authority, because such authority is necessarily
+independent of the mass of the people. But all these reforms, when
+secured, mean only that the men and women of these islands will at
+length be masters in their own house. Mere political machinery is
+worthless unless used to produce good social conditions."[584]
+
+A widely read Socialist writer formulates the Socialistic demands
+regarding Parliamentary reform as follows: "(1) The suffrage should
+not be given to a man's house or his lodgings, but to the man
+himself. I believe in adult suffrage, male and female. (2)
+Constituencies should be numerically equal, each having three members,
+one retiring annually by rotation. (3) Cabinets should be chosen
+annually by the members of the House of Commons, to whom alone they
+should be responsible. (4) Payment of members and election expenses.
+Members should receive reasonable 'wages' according to the ancient
+practice of the Constitution, while all election expenses (not
+strictly personal to the candidate) should be defrayed out of the
+rates. (5) The Monarchy. If we are to have more kings or queens, their
+cost ought not to exceed that of the President of the United States,
+viz. _10,000l._ a year. 'The office of a king in this nation is
+useless, burdensome, and dangerous, and ought to be abolished'
+(Resolution of the Long Parliament, 1649). (6) The House of Lords. 'A
+House of Peers in Parliament is useless and dangerous and ought to be
+abolished.'"[585]
+
+The Fabian Society proclaims: "To complete the foundation of the
+democratic State, we need manhood suffrage, abolition of all poverty
+disqualifications, abolition of the House of Lords, public payment of
+candidature expenses, public payment of representatives, and annual
+elections."[586]
+
+"The problem how the Lords are to be abolished is of easy solution.
+They cannot present themselves at the Gilded Chamber without writs,
+and these a democratic Ministry could and would peremptorily stop.
+Should they come without writs, Inspector Denning could be instructed
+to take charge of them. Or the House of Commons could simply revive
+its resolution of January 6, 1649, decreeing their abolition."[587]
+
+Many Socialists are opposed not only to the House of Lords but to all
+second chambers. "When the hereditary House is abolished, the demand
+which will be made by reactionaries for a representative second
+chamber must be sternly resisted. True, most nations have second
+chambers in imitation of our pernicious example; but there is not one
+of them, however constituted, whose history is not a conclusive
+argument against such institutions. The second chambers of Europe and
+America are nothing more than standing monuments of the gregarious
+folly of mankind. Nations can no more have two wills than individuals.
+A second chamber at one with the first is superfluous, in opposition
+it is noxious."[588]
+
+A large number of Socialists do not think that the democratisation of
+the House of Commons and the abolition of the House of Lords will
+suffice. They fear that party politics and party intrigues may become
+more pernicious in a Labour Parliament than they have proved to be in
+a middle-class Parliament. They fear that adult suffrage may not
+improve matters, and that impecunious professional politicians may
+prove worse than the class of politicians who up till now have sat in
+Parliament. "We stand in England at the parting of the ways. One leads
+to the payment of members and the creation of a class of professional
+political adventurers; the other leads to the referendum and
+initiative."[589]
+
+"In the Republics of France and the United States the electors are
+virtually endowed with male adult suffrage, and Labour representation
+is facilitated by State payment of members and of their election
+expenses. Yet the French Chamber, with its Panama and Southern Railway
+scandals, in which the patriots have gorged their servile lusts, has
+stood for many years before the nations as a monument of infamy. The
+United States Congress has not a single Labour representative within
+its walls, and the Government of the country is become a vile synonym
+for corruption."[590] "In America the compensation of each Senator and
+each Representative is fixed at five thousand dollars, or one thousand
+pounds per year. In addition to this the members have special fares on
+the railways, and many other perquisites. Yet the American
+'Encyclopedia of Social Reform,' edited by W.D.P. Bliss, says, on page
+325, 'Congressmen, notoriously, do not represent the people, but
+special interests and great moneyed corporations. The Congress is
+almost the only great national legislative body owned wholly by the
+well-to-do. In the British Parliament, even after the Conservative
+victories of the last election, there are thirteen Labour men. In
+Congress there is not one."[591] "Better the stupid British hereditary
+gentleman than the cunning politician-for-a-living. Better a Cabinet
+of Chamberlains and Gladstones than a circus of conflicting
+unscrupulous demagogues on the make."
+
+"The Parliamentary system tends, not to the summoning of thoughtful
+patriots to their country's service, but to the exaltation and
+glorification of plausible windbags."[592] "The panacea of Labour
+representation will not remedy those defects. It is in the eternal
+nature of things that in the electoral competition of rival
+personalities the scum must rise to the top. So long as self-seeking
+is rewarded by the highest honours self-seeking will flourish."[593]
+"A Parliament of Labour members would develop just the same tendency
+as any other to division into parties commanded by rival ambitions,
+between which the democratic vote would, as always, annul
+itself."[594] "If there were five hundred delegates of Labour, if the
+whole of the Cardiff Trade Unions Congress could be suddenly
+translated to Parliament and power, there might still be some envious,
+spiteful braggarts subterraneously scheming and gnawing to undermine
+and engulf a rival, though a people's cause were wrecked in the
+catastrophe. Leaders are always dangerous. The workmen have too many
+leaders. Their first political necessity is to get rid of the
+politicians. Therefore I would like to see abolished all Legislative
+Chambers, Senates, and Councils of State."[595]
+
+Views identical with the foregoing are held by many Socialists, and
+therefore a Socialist writer has asked: "Why cannot the people, even
+of a populous and extensive country, vote upon all laws?"[596]
+"Instead of representation we shall have what is technically called
+the referendum, or submission of all proposed measures to the people,
+who must signify their approval by vote before the measures can pass
+into law. This has been practised already to some extent in
+Switzerland, both in national and cantonal affairs. It was first
+proposed by Robespierre when he advised the king of France to say: 'My
+people, here are the laws I have made for you. Will you accept
+them?'"[597]
+
+Another Socialist says: "It is impossible that any delegate should
+completely represent the desires of ten or twenty thousand electors. No
+two human beings are agreed about everything; and, in every election,
+electors, in order to express approval of one cherished principle, are
+driven to adopt half-a-dozen others which they bitterly
+disapprove."[598] "The way to true democracy will never be found through
+delegacy. The only safe way is through direct legislation--through the
+referendum and initiative. The referendum and initiative does not mean
+more laws, but fewer, shorter, simpler, and more understandable
+ones."[599] "What is wanted is neither aristocracy, plutocracy, nor
+demagoguecracy, but democracy--the one governing system which never has
+been tried. The people must learn that the game of politics is not an
+unfathomable science, but a struggle of rival interests in which no
+delegate can so well represent their needs as themselves."[600] "The
+referendum quite changes the character of the Federal Assembly. It
+ceases to be a Parliament, and becomes merely a drafting committee. In
+other countries the initiative comes from above; the Parliament and the
+King are together the legal sovereign. In Switzerland it comes from
+below, for the legal sovereign is the electorate."[601]
+
+Other Socialists are strongly opposed to the referendum: "Democracy,
+as understood by the Fabian Society, means simply the control of the
+Administration by freely elected representatives of the people. The
+Fabian Society energetically repudiates all conceptions of democracy
+as a system by which the technical work of Government administration,
+and the appointment of public officials, shall be carried on by
+referendum or any other form of direct popular decision. Such
+arrangements may be practical in a village community, but not in the
+complicated industrial civilisations which are ripening for
+Social-Democracy."[602] "The people can only judge political measures
+by their effect when they have come into operation; they cannot plan
+measures themselves, or foresee what their effect will be, or give
+precise instructions to their representatives; nor can any honest
+representative tell, until he has heard a measure thoroughly discussed
+by representatives of all other sections of the working class, what
+form the measure should take so as to keep the interests of his
+constituents in due subordination to those of the community. It is to
+be considered, further, that intelligent reformers, especially
+workmen who have grasped the principles of Socialism, are always in
+the minority; they may address themselves with success to the
+sympathies of the masses and gain their confidence; but the dry
+details of the legislative and administrative steps by which they,
+move towards their goal can never be made interesting or intelligible
+to the ordinary voter. For these reasons the referendum, in theory the
+most democratic of popular institutions, is in practice the most
+reactionary."[603]
+
+Other Socialists are in favour of a reformed Parliament which is to be
+a glorified trade union congress. "Each industry would have adequate
+representation in the Parliament of Industry, and this Parliament
+would connect and harmonise the affairs of the whole. In the future
+society the descendant of the union of to-day will be the centre of
+social life and the administration of things. Let 'workers of all
+trades unite.'"[604] Others, again, call for a Parliament of a frankly
+revolutionary type which is characteristically called a "National
+Convention." "What is the use of the suffrage? It has but one use--to
+enable the workers, as a class, to take peaceful possession of the
+power of the State, so as to use that power for social purposes. But
+to do this you must have paid delegates from your own class, not
+timeserving unpaid representatives from the classes which rob you; you
+must put your servants, not your masters, at Westminster; you must
+have a National Convention of the People, not a House of the
+Confiscating Classes."[605] Readers will no doubt remember the French
+National Convention and its reign of terror and crime which culminated
+in the execution of Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette.
+
+Many Socialists, like most Anarchists, are utterly opposed to
+Parliamentary government and majority rule, preferring rule by
+violence to rule by argument. "What has hitherto been called the will
+of the people, or the will of the majority as manifested in the modern
+constitutional State, does not express any act of will at all, but the
+absence of will. It is not the will but the apathy of the majority
+that is represented."[606] "The preaching of the _cultus_ of the
+majority in the modern State is an absurdity which can only for a
+moment go down with the Parliamentary Radical who is wallowing in the
+superstitions of exploded Whiggery."[607] "The Socialist has a
+distinct aim in view. If he can carry the initial stages towards its
+realisation by means of the count-of-heads majority, by all means let
+him do so. If, on the other hand, he sees the possibility of carrying
+a salient portion of his programme by trampling on this majority, by
+all means let him do this also."[608]
+
+The Women's Suffrage problem has lately come to the front, and it is
+characteristic and noteworthy that it has been taken up with the
+greatest energy, we might almost say with hysterical energy, by
+Socialist women. They tell us, "We desire the stain removed from our
+womanhood. Remove the hateful stigma from your mothers, your wives,
+and your daughters, which places the noblest and the best of them in a
+lower position than the most uncultured and immoral specimen of the
+male sex who pays his rates and taxes."[609] According to a woman
+Socialist, the Votes-for-Women problem is "the greatest moral and
+spiritual problem that has torn asunder the souls of men since the
+fall of Adam and the coming of Christ."[610] "Society has no brighter
+hope, humanity no larger promise than her coming, radiant with health
+and happiness, love and liberty shining from her eyes, the beautiful,
+high-souled, sister-mother of the men that are going to be."[611] "The
+State cannot spare from its high councils the deep wisdom of its
+mothers and the comradeship of its wives."[612]
+
+It is obvious why Socialist women demand the vote with almost frenzied
+fervour, and why the various Socialist societies and parties support
+their agitation. Socialists believe that their wives, and the women
+workers in general, will vote for Socialism, and that most other women
+will be indifferent and abstain from voting. Therefore we learn:
+"Socialism in the only true sense of that term, in the only wise
+conception of that state, can never be brought into the fulness of its
+being until women have been made equal with men as citizens."[613]
+"The benches of the National Chamber may yet be seen accommodating
+three hundred and thirty-five intelligent women."[614] In referring to
+the elections in Finland, Mrs. Snowden writes: "To Socialists, an
+interesting point is the fact that, in spite of the women voters, who
+are supposed to be retrograde in politics, by far the largest number
+of party votes recorded were for the Socialist party."[615]
+
+The claims of women for the franchise have been supported by large
+majorities at important meetings of Socialists. The resolution of the
+Independent Labour Party, "That this Conference declares in favour of
+adult suffrage and the political equality of the sexes, and considers
+that the right of suffrage should immediately be extended to women on
+the same conditions as men," was carried by 236 votes to 24.[616] The
+Social-Democratic Federation resolved: "That this Conference declares
+that the time has arrived when equal rights of citizenship be extended
+to all women and men of full age; urges all members to take advantage
+of the present suffrage agitation to focus public opinion upon the
+only logical solution of the question, viz. the abolition of existing
+franchise qualifications and the establishment of universal adult
+suffrage; and calls upon them actively to work for this practical
+measure of reform." This resolution was carried by 42 votes to 9.[617]
+
+The recent clamour of "Votes for Women" emanated not so much from
+philosophic Radicals who had read John Stuart Mill as from Socialists,
+and many non-Socialist women have become their dupes. Socialist women
+hope that they will have the voting all to themselves. Therefore they,
+and most men Socialists also, would very likely resist to the utmost
+all proposals which would make voting compulsory for _all_ women.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[567] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, p. 3.
+
+[568] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 99.
+
+[569] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, pp. 4, 5.
+
+[570] Thompson, _The Referendum and Initiative in Practice_, p. 4.
+
+[571] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 152.
+
+[572] Davidson, _The Gospel of the Poor_, p. 59.
+
+[573] Washington, _Whose Dog art Thou?_ p. 14.
+
+[574] Thompson, _The Only Way to Democracy_, p. 8.
+
+[575] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 43.
+
+[576] Neil, _Songs of the Social Revolution_, p. 21.
+
+[577] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, p. 7.
+
+[578] Davidson, _The New Book of Kings_, p. 118.
+
+[579] Hyndman, _Colonies and Dependencies_, p. 9.
+
+[580] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 58.
+
+[581] _The Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, p. 121.
+
+[582] Councillor Glyde, _Britain's Disgrace_, p. 30.
+
+[583] _Report Annual Conference of Independent Labour Party_, 1907, p.
+52.
+
+[584] _Socialism Made Plain_, p. 7.
+
+[585] Davidson, _A Democrat's Address_, p. 4.
+
+[586] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 187.
+
+[587] Davidson, _The Book of Lords_, p. 78.
+
+[588] Davidson, _The House of Lords, Useless, Dangerous, &c._, p. 13.
+
+[589] Thompson, _The Only Way to Democracy_, p. 11.
+
+[590] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, p. 8.
+
+[591] Thompson, _The Only Way to Democracy_, p. 10.
+
+[592] Thompson, _The Referendum, &c._, p. 3.
+
+[593] _Ibid._ p. 1.
+
+[594] _Ibid._ p. 16.
+
+[595] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, pp. 8, 9.
+
+[596] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 130.
+
+[597] _Ibid._ p. 129.
+
+[598] Thompson, _The Only Way to Democracy_, p. 4.
+
+[599] _Ibid._ p. 15.
+
+[600] Thompson, _The Referendum, &c._, p. 5.
+
+[601] _Ibid._ p. 11.
+
+[602] _Report on Fabian Policy_, p. 5
+
+[603] _Report on Fabian Policy_, p. 13.
+
+[604] Kessack, _The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way Out_, p. 3.
+
+[605] _What Use is a Vote?_ p. 1.
+
+[606] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, p. 120.
+
+[607] _Ibid._ p. 128.
+
+[608] _Ibid._ pp. 127, 128.
+
+[609] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 20.
+
+[610] _Ibid._ p. 19.
+
+[611] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, Introd.
+
+[612] _Ibid._ p. 93.
+
+[613] _Ibid._ p. 97.
+
+[614] _Ibid._ p. 92.
+
+[615] _Ibid._ p. 98.
+
+[616] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference_, 1907, p.
+45.
+
+[617] _Report of 27th Annual Conference, 1907, Social-Democratic
+Federation_, p. 26.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+THE ATTITUDE OF THE SOCIALISTS TOWARDS THE TWO PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES
+
+
+From the Socialist point of view there is for all practical purposes
+no difference between the two great parties. Both are representative,
+not of the people, but of capitalism. Both are hostile to labour.
+
+"The difference between Liberalism and Toryism is merely a question of
+phraseology; there is no fundamental clashing of principle. Both stand
+for the private ownership of the means of life. They both support a
+competitive state of society with its inevitable exploitation of the
+wealth-producers."[618] "Both the Conservative and Liberal parties are
+agreed in supporting private ownership in the instruments of
+production for the purposes of profit-making. Their differences are
+merely superficial and their programmes admittedly offer no solution
+of the problems of poverty. The Independent Labour Party regards them
+both as equally the enemies of labour, and in fact merely as two
+sections of the entrenched forces of plutocracy."[619] "There are not
+really two parties in the State. There is but one great party, that of
+privilege, divided into two factions, labelled Whig and Tory, or
+Liberal and Conservative. Both do much the same things in office. The
+mimic warfare which they wage with each other, no shrewd observer
+takes seriously. It is merely a pleasant game of which the stakes are
+the spoils of office and patronage. An 'organised hypocrisy' is but a
+mild description of an English Government, whether Liberal or
+Conservative. The Liberal and the Conservative are the two thieves
+between whom the people are evermore crucified."[620] "Neither of the
+political parties is of any use to the workers, because both the
+political parties are paid, officered, and led by capitalists whose
+interests are opposed to the interests of the workers. The Socialist
+laughs at the pretended friendship of Liberal and Tory leaders for the
+workers."[621] "There's no difference whatever between Bannerman, the
+Scottish landowner, and Balfour, whose uncle made _200,000l._ out of
+army contracts in India in four years. These people are entirely
+antagonistic to the worker."[622]
+
+The assertions of the Liberals that they are the true friends of the
+people, that they have always fought for liberty and democracy, that
+they have given the vote to the people, and that they trust the
+people, are treated with derision and contempt. "Liberalism has
+historically opposed itself alike to Toryism, landed interest, and
+democracy, working-class interest whenever that interest appeared as a
+distinct political party."[623] "Since 1832 the Liberals had eight
+opportunities to give justice to the voteless multitude. In every
+election from 1832 to 1865 solemn pledges were made by the Liberals
+that a Reform Bill should be introduced as soon as they were elected,
+and each time these pledges were ignored after they had secured power
+and position."[624] As regards the giving of the franchise, the
+Conservatives have not been much better than the Liberals. "Neither
+party can claim much credit for its Reform Bills, extorted as they
+have been, not by belief in democracy, but by fear of the opposing
+faction. Even now the citizen is tricked out of his vote by every
+possible legal and administrative technicality; so that more than
+one-third of our adult men are unenfranchised, together with the whole
+of the other sex. Neither the Conservative party nor the self-styled
+'Party of the Masses,' gives proof of any real desire to give the vote
+to this not inconsiderable remnant; but both sides pay lip-homage to
+democracy."[625]
+
+Socialists say that the claims of the Liberals to the gratitude of the
+masses are hypocritical. Their policy has not been based on
+philanthropy, but on a sordid selfishness. They attacked the landed
+interest not in order to benefit the people, but in order to make
+themselves supreme in the State and to fill their own purses.
+Liberalism, with talk of liberty of the individual and of freedom of
+trade on its lips, is in reality the representative of capitalism of
+the most heartless kind. "The political power of the landed classes
+was to be broken; the capitalists were to be allowed to do as they
+liked with their own; a state of individualism was to be established;
+it was to be a fair field for all and devil take the hindmost. So far
+as politics and the law are concerned, this ideal of Liberalism has
+been realised. Land is no longer supreme. Money ranks with it.
+Everyone has a chance of obtaining money. _Ergo_, we are a democratic
+nation."[626] "With the change in economic conditions, with the growth
+of manufacture, the rise of the bourgeoisie meant the downfall of
+feudalism. The plutocrat supplanted the baron, capitalism became king.
+The 'old nobility' of England to-day are successful brewers, bankers,
+and traders, and the Nonconformist Conscience dominates in the place
+of Holy Mother Church."[627] "The representatives of this class in
+Parliament repealed the Corn Laws, securing cheap bread for their
+workers at the expense of the landlords and the farmers. The new
+masters opposed the Factory Acts, championed by Tories such as Lord
+Ashley, Thomas Sadler, and 'King Richard' Oastler, They fostered
+railway development, at the public expense, so that they might have
+quick and cheap transit for their manufactures."[628]
+
+The Liberals have shown their selfishness, heartlessness, and greed by
+opposing the greatest boon to workers, the Factory Acts. "Was it the
+Liberal party which initiated the Factory Acts, which were certainly
+the greatest step towards the elevation of the working class that was
+ever taken in the course of the last century? Oh, no! So far from the
+Liberal party initiating the Factory Acts, we know perfectly well that
+the Liberal party--leading members of the Liberal party, like Mr. John
+Bright and Mr. Richard Cobden--fiercely and bitterly opposed the
+Factory Acts. We know that no one fought more strenuously against the
+ten-hour day than Mr. John Bright. We know that all these canting
+Liberal hypocrites--I can call them nothing else--said with regard to
+the ten-hour day, just what they say now about the proposal for an
+eight-hour day--one of the proposals we put forward in order to get
+rid of this hideous difficulty of the unemployed. The argument was put
+forward then, that the restriction of the hours of labour would ruin
+our industries. Precisely the same argument was put forward when it
+was proposed to put a stop to the terrible over-work of the children
+deep down in the bowels of the earth. Women and children were
+mercilessly driven by brutal overseers at their task, and this was
+maintained by your Liberal party in order that they might obtain large
+profits out of their white slaves. Only let the Liberal party appeal
+to history in its claim for working-class support, and then the
+working class will arrive at the conclusion to which many of us have
+already come--that the Liberal party, so far from being entitled to
+our support, is entitled to our greatest loathing and hatred."[629]
+"As to the Factory Acts, it was not a question of Messrs. Bright and
+Cobden alone, but of the whole organised body of the Liberal party,
+which opposed the Factory Acts, and they were only carried by the
+hostility of the Tory party to the Liberals for having dared to
+interfere with the Corn Laws. The Factory Acts were passed in
+retaliation by the landlord party against the capitalist party."[630]
+
+"Mr. Gladstone was the only member who endeavoured to delay the Bill
+which delivered women and children from mines and pits; and never did
+he say a word on behalf of the factory children until, when defending
+slavery in the West Indies, he taunted Buxton with indifference to the
+slavery in England."[631] "If I were to draw a comparison between the
+Liberal and the Tory parties, I should say that the Tory party has
+done more in that direction than the Liberal party has done."[632] Mr.
+Blatchford wrote in the "Clarion" that "the Liberal party has never
+helped the trade unions," and proved this assertion by giving a
+detailed statement of the trade union legislation, which showed that
+modern trade unionism was constantly opposed by the Liberals and was
+created by the Conservatives.[633]
+
+In consequence of its record, Socialists see in Liberalism not a friend,
+but an enemy. "Liberalism stands for individualism, and the Liberal
+capitalist and trader are bitterly opposed to the trade union and
+co-operative society. They found that these bodies, however, were
+beginning to exercise an important, if indirect, influence upon their
+party. Liberal leaders, alive to the importance of vote-catching, began
+to angle for the support of the working-class organisations."[634] "We
+have no reason for supporting the Liberal party any more than the Tory
+party. Men do not gather grapes from thorns, nor figs from thistles. The
+Liberal party is to-day what it has always been--an organisation of
+capitalists formed to serve the interests of the capitalist class."[635]
+
+Liberalism, with its championship of exaggerated individualism, stands
+not for liberty, but for administrative anarchy. "The trouble with
+nineteenth century Liberalism is that, by instinct, by tradition, and
+by the positive precepts of its past exponents, it 'thinks in
+individuals.' It visualises the world as a world of independent
+Roundheads, with separate ends, and abstract rights to pursue those
+ends. Nineteenth century Liberalism is, in fact, axiomatically hostile
+to the State. It is not 'little Englandism' that is the matter with
+those who still cling to such views; it is, as Huxley and Matthew
+Arnold correctly diagnosed, administrative Nihilism. So far as
+political action is concerned, they tend to be inveterately negative.
+They have hung up temperance reform and educational reform for a
+quarter of a century, because, instead of seeking to enable the
+citizen to refresh himself without being poisoned or inebriated and to
+get the children thoroughly taught, they have wanted primarily to
+revenge their outraged temperance principles on the publican and their
+outraged Nonconformist principles on the Church. Of such Liberals it
+may be said that the destructive revolutionary tradition is in their
+bones; they will reform nothing unless it can be done at the expense
+of their enemies."[636]
+
+"The question is frequently put: 'Why are Socialists so much opposed
+to Liberalism?' But a little serious reflection will explain the
+circumstance. Liberalism is really more conservative than Toryism.
+This is not a paradox, it is a fact. Toryism stands for government,
+and it does not necessarily follow that it stands for bad government.
+Liberalism, on the other hand, admittedly seeks an unrestrained
+operation of the individual will. It is opposed to government. It does
+not consciously subscribe to the recognition of our social being. It
+regards individuals as self-contained units operating in separate
+spheres. The less government we have the better, is the keynote of
+Liberalism. This was Emerson's theory, and Emerson was an
+anarchist."[637] "The modern Conservative candidate is politically a
+man without prejudices. No abstract principle forbids him to listen
+sympathetically to any proposal for reform. Hence he seems on the
+platform less belated than the nineteenth century Liberal with his
+stock of shop-soiled principles at full price."[638] "In many people's
+minds the terms 'Liberalism' and 'insincerity' are held to be
+synonymous. Lacking a central idea of its own, and necessarily failing
+to nourish on borrowed ones, there is nothing before the Liberal party
+but decay. For progress in the future we must look to a party which
+has an ideal and is prepared to stand by it."[639]
+
+Before the general election of 1906 Socialists wrote: "The political
+force of Liberalism is spent. During the last twenty years its
+aspirations and its watchwords, its ideas of daily life, and its
+conceptions of the universe, have become increasingly distasteful to
+the ordinary citizen as he renews his youth from generation to
+generation. Its worship of individual liberty evokes no enthusiasm.
+Its reliance on 'freedom of contract' and 'supply and demand,' with
+its corresponding 'voluntaryism' in religion and philanthropy, now
+seems to work out disastrously for the masses who are too poor to have
+what the economists call an 'effective demand' for even the minimum
+conditions of physical and mental health necessary to national
+well-being."[640] "For the last twenty years the Liberal party has
+been trying to fit itself with a new programme. It took up Home Rule
+for Ireland, but found that split the party; it took up temperance
+reform, quite a deviation from its old policy of individual liberty,
+and again found itself divided; it avowed friendliness to Labour, and
+frightened off still another batch of supporters. The Party of
+Progress finds itself now in the unhappy position that its basic idea
+is old-fashioned, and when it tries to assimilate a new one it becomes
+a case of putting new wine into old bottles. That is the sad plight of
+the Liberal party. The party is merely living from hand to mouth as an
+anti-Tory party, hoping to profit by the mistakes of its rival. The
+party has split up on temperance, on labour, on the war, on
+Imperialism, on education, simply because there is no central
+vivifying ideal to bind together and shape the policy. Can the party
+adopt a new ideal? is the great question. Can it drop its fundamental
+idea of individualism and take up the idea of co-operation? and the
+answer is emphatically 'No.'"[641]
+
+The philosopher of British Socialism thinks that, owing to the
+principles and attitude of the Liberal party, Liberalism and Socialism
+are deadly enemies. "Liberalism, in so far as it aims at maintaining
+the liberty of private property, is reactionary and false to the
+principle which it has always implicitly or explicitly maintained, of
+the right of each and every individual to a full and free development.
+In so far as Liberalism does this, in so far as it assumes as
+axiomatic a state of society based on unrestricted freedom of private
+property, and proceeds to adjust social arrangements solely or
+primarily in the interests of the owners of private property, in so
+far Liberalism and Socialism are death enemies."[642] The leading
+Fabian organ stated: "A party subsisting on illusions, concealments,
+and hypocrisies, could hardly survive in the atmosphere engendered by
+a real fight like that between plutocracy and Socialism. For some time
+it may contrive to subsist by telling the electorate that the only
+true way of resisting Socialism is by means of Liberal reforms, while
+at the same time (with doubtful consistency) asking for Socialist
+support on the ground that it goes 'part of the way.' But its best
+chance is probably to divert public attention from Socialism to other
+matters, and this the Prime Minister evidently feels. The existence of
+the Liberal party is incompatible with the existence of intellectual
+honesty in its leaders. And with all his faults Sir Henry is too
+fundamentally honest a man to lead it effectively at the present
+juncture. The reins had better be handed over to Mr. Winston
+Churchill, against whom no such objection can be urged."[643]
+
+Before the Liberals set to work in 1906, Mr. Philip Snowden wrote: "It
+might be said that in the next Parliament the Liberal party is on its
+last trial."[644] That trial has had, as far as the Socialists and the
+Labour party are concerned, an unsatisfactory result. Before the
+general election Socialists asked themselves: "Will the Liberal party
+come into power with a clear mandate for reform which even the House
+of Lords will not dare entirely to obstruct, or will it shuffle into
+power on the misdoings of its predecessors and carry out a halfhearted
+policy in the hope of not estranging any of its moderate followers? If
+it takes the latter course, it will win the undying contempt of all
+real reformers; it will be the last time that a Liberal Administration
+holds sway, and Labour will be left the only really progressive force
+in the country."[645] Twelve months later, in a review of the activity
+of the Liberal Government, "The Reformers' Year Book" stated: "The
+story of Chinese labour in the Transvaal during the year 1906 has been
+one of continuous perfidy on the part of the Liberal Government at
+home. Returned to power largely on account of the opposition of the
+people of this country to Chinese slavery in any shape or form, they
+have burked the main issue at every point, and only carried out a few
+minor changes which have been totally ineffective, retaining all the
+while a hypocritical devotion to the popular ideal."[646] "The Liberal
+Government has failed entirely to justify the confidence reposed in it
+by the electorate, not only upon the newer questions as they have
+arisen--such as the war in Natal--but on the very matters upon which
+it was returned to power, of which the chief was the continuance of
+Chinese labour in the Transvaal."[647]
+
+Socialists think that the Liberal agitation against the House of Lords
+is insincere and hypocritical. "Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's brave
+talk about fighting the House of Lords sounds very much like blarney
+when we call to mind the fact that he has beaten all records in the
+creation of peers. He has not yet been two years in office, but he has
+managed to make no less than twenty new peers. They include a tobacco
+man, a whisky man, a newspaper man who sold his journal to the Tories,
+several usurers and company promoters."[648]
+
+The assurance of the Liberals that they are the friends of Labour is
+doubted in view of the attitude of the party towards Labour
+candidates. "Liberals are continually saying that there is no quarrel
+between Liberalism and Labour. Why, then, do we have the constantly
+recurring spectacle of a middle-class Liberal being run against a
+popular and capable man who can claim to directly represent the people
+who live by the work of their hands and heads as distinguished from
+those who live upon rent, dividends, or interest? Are there not even
+upon the Liberal side plenty of landlords, railway directors, bankers,
+stockbrokers, and employers of labour, that a seat cannot be spared to
+a workman till he wins it in despite of Liberal and Tory opposition
+alike?"[649]
+
+An amalgamation of the Liberals and the Socialist-Labour members is
+impossible. "Liberal-Labourism" is a delusion. "Labour men and
+capitalist Liberals are beginning to see that individualism and
+co-operation will not mix. If Liberalism to-day swallows Labourism, it
+will have a severe attack of indigestion. Mr. Keir Hardie in the
+Liberal ranks would do more to disrupt and destroy the Liberal party
+than he can possibly do from the outside. Labour, it is true, might
+capture the Liberal party, and this is advocated by some, but if this
+took place the party would wither away. The capitalist element would
+drop out and Labour would be left alone. Labour might just as well
+build up a new party outside. It is no use capturing a weapon which
+crumbles to pieces as soon as you grasp it. Better make a new
+weapon."[650] "The Labour party in the House of Commons is as yet not
+disliked only because as yet it is not feared. Until it has made
+itself both disliked and feared, it will be far short of having
+fulfilled the objects of its very existence. It is not saying too much
+to say that in the very near future the measure of the Labour party's
+effectiveness will be its unpopularity in the House of Commons.
+Acrimonious as are the feelings often evoked by political
+controversies, they are urbanity itself as compared with the passions
+aroused over economic issues. The limits of Liberal concession must
+needs soon be reached. The Liberal-Labour candidate is but a transient
+phenomenon of our time, and with his disappearance the storm will
+break."[651]
+
+The great Liberal majority was created by accident and it is rapidly
+dissolving. "The Liberals succeeded to power through no merit of their
+own, but merely through the errors of their opponents. Liberalism is
+shedding its supporters at both ends, and is rapidly on the way to
+becoming a mere _caput mortuum_."[652] It is true that "at the general
+election many Socialists climbed into Parliament on the backs of the
+Liberals,"[653] but Liberal-Socialist co-operation is not possible.
+
+Many Socialists believe that Liberalism and Socialism are fundamentally
+antagonistic, and that therefore Socialism must fight its battles
+unaided. "In Great Britain, as in France, Belgium, Germany, and Italy,
+the cleavage has now been definitely marked between capitalist
+Liberalism and Socialist Democracy."[654] "Political power, properly
+so-called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing
+another."[655] "All political parties are but the expression of class
+interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically
+opposed to the interests of all sections of the master class, the party
+seeking working class emancipation must be hostile to every other
+party."[656] "We shall see Liberals and Tories working together in
+cordial agreement, as they do in Germany, to prevent the election of
+the only politicians who can really profess to go to the poll on the
+broad ground of citizenship--labour done by hand or brain for the
+community, as apart from idleness and pleasure-seeking supported by
+rents, dividends, and interest taken from the community."[657]
+
+"As the machinery of government, including the armed forces of the
+nation, exists only to conserve the monopoly by the capitalist class
+of the wealth taken from the workers, the working class must organise
+consciously and politically for the conquest of the powers of
+government, national and local, in order that this machinery,
+including these forces, may be converted from an instrument of
+oppression into the agent of emancipation and the overthrow of
+privilege, aristocratic and plutocratic."[658] "The property question
+is the issue which is creating a new political cleavage in the State.
+Somewhat dimly at present, but with growing clearness of vision, the
+worker begins to see that he will remain a menial, outcast and
+forlorn, until he has made himself master of the machine he tends, and
+the soil he tills."[659]
+
+"The only true position for a genuine working-class party is that of
+open hostility to all who support capitalism in any shape or form.
+This is the safe, sure, and scientific position."[660] "Liberals will
+declare and do declare in most pathetic tones that they have done
+more, and will do more, for the workers than the Tories have done or
+will do. And Liberals will assure you that they are really more
+anxious to help the workers than we Socialists believe. But those are
+side issues. The main thing to remember is, that even if the Liberals
+are all they claim to be, they will never do as much for Labour as
+Labour could do for itself."[661]
+
+    Oh heed not the talk of those fat agitators.
+      Who prattle of Gladstone, or Churchill, or worse;
+    Expect not your rights from professional praters,
+      But manfully trust in your courage and force.[662]
+
+    Onward! Sons of Labour! nerve ye for the fray;
+    Soon shall beam the dawning of a brighter day.
+    Keep the red flag flying, herald of the free--
+    On yourselves relying, on to liberty.
+
+    See! the coming glory streams across the plains.
+    Soon the Sons of Labour shall take up the reins.
+    Then in every nation shall our Cause increase
+    Till it reigns triumphant--pledge of joy and peace.[663]
+
+On the other hand, there are Socialists who think that Socialism
+cannot succeed if it cuts itself adrift from the great national
+parties and pursues a purely Socialistic Labour policy. "A member of
+an Imperial Parliament is an Imperialist in spite of himself. A party
+which concerns itself with sectional interests only will soon cease to
+be a party; it will degenerate into a group, and as such it cannot
+hope to receive serious backing in the country."[664]
+
+Many Socialists feel confident that they will conquer power by
+conquering Parliament. "Parliament has always governed the country in
+the interest of the class to which the majority of its members
+belonged. It governed in the interest of the country gentlemen in the
+old days when they were in a majority in the House of Commons; it has
+governed in the interests of the capitalists and employers since they
+won a majority by the Reform Bill of 1832; and it will govern in the
+interest of the people when the majority is selected from the
+wage-earning class."[665] "No sooner shall two hundred Labour members
+be firmly seated upon the cross-benches of the House, than both
+parties will approach them with bended knee, bringing gold and
+frankincense and programmes."[666] "There is a fine impartiality about
+the policeman and the soldier, who are the cutting edge of the State
+power. They take their wages and obey their orders without asking
+questions. If those orders are to demolish the homestead of every
+peasant who refuses to take the bread out of his children's mouths in
+order that his landlord may have money to spend as an idle gentleman
+in London, the soldier obeys. But if his orders were to help the
+police to pitch his lordship into Holloway Gaol until he had paid an
+income-tax of twenty shillings on every pound of his unearned income,
+the soldier would do that with equal devotion to duty, and perhaps
+with a certain private zest that might be lacking in the other case.
+Now these orders come ultimately from the State, meaning in this
+country the House of Commons. A House of Commons consisting of 660
+gentlemen and 10 workmen will order the soldier to take money from the
+people for the landlords. A House of Commons consisting of 660 workmen
+and 10 gentlemen will probably, unless the 660 are fools, order the
+soldier to take money from the landlords for the people."[667]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[618] _John Burns and the Unemployed_, p. 1.
+
+[619] Independent Labour Party, _A Statement of Principles_, p. 3.
+
+[620] Davidson, _The New Book of Kings_, p. 7.
+
+[621] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 151.
+
+[622] Casey, _Who are the Bloodsuckers?_ p. 16.
+
+[623] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 70.
+
+[624] Councillor Glyde, _Liberal and Tory Hypocrisy_, p. 12.
+
+[625] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 39, 40.
+
+[626] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 2.
+
+[627] Quelch, _Economics of Labour_, pp. 9, 10.
+
+[628] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 11.
+
+[629] _Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?_ p. 10.
+
+[630] _Ibid._ p. 19.
+
+[631] Diack, _Socialism and Current Politics_, p. 10.
+
+[632] _Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?_ p. 19.
+
+[633] _Clarion_, February 16, 1906.
+
+[634] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 2.
+
+[635] _Should the Working-class Support the Liberal Party?_ p. 13.
+
+[636] _Twentieth Century Politics_, p. 4.
+
+[637] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, pp. 3, 4.
+
+[638] _Twentieth Century Politics_, p. 6.
+
+[639] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 4.
+
+[640] _Twentieth Century Politics_, p. 2.
+
+[641] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 3.
+
+[642] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, pp. 69, 70.
+
+[643] _New Age_, October 10, 1907.
+
+[644] _Daily News_, January 20, 1906.
+
+[645] _The Reformers' Year Book_, 1906, Preface p. 6.
+
+[646] _Ibid._ 1907, p. 104.
+
+[647] _Ibid._ Preface.
+
+[648] _Clarion_, November 1, 1907.
+
+[649] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 14.
+
+[650] Penny, _The Political Labour Movement_, p. 13.
+
+[651] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 14.
+
+[652] _New Age_, November 7, 1907.
+
+[653] _Ibid._
+
+[654] _Clarion_, January 19, 1906.
+
+[655] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto_, p. 22.
+
+[656] _Declaration of Socialist Party of Great Britain_, see Appendix.
+
+[657] Leatham, _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate_, p. 16.
+
+[658] _Declaration of Principles of Socialist Party of Great Britain._
+
+[659] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 30.
+
+[660] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, p. 16.
+
+[661] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, pp. 148, 149.
+
+[662] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 30.
+
+[663] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 21.
+
+[664] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 3.
+
+[665] _What Socialism Is_, p. 3.
+
+[666] Leakey, _Co-operators and Labour Platform_, p. 16.
+
+[667] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 26.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+SOCIALISM AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
+
+
+Many Socialists, especially the Fabians, hope to introduce Socialistic
+principles and Socialistic rule into Great Britain rather through the
+local than through the national authorities. They are strenuously
+exerting themselves to bring about that result, and so far their
+exertions have been by no means unsuccessful.
+
+"Socialists to-day are working in the towns with a twofold object. (1)
+To level up their districts. If Glasgow has municipal telephones,
+there is a very good precedent for Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford,
+Leeds, &c., doing likewise. If Liverpool owns a municipal milk-supply,
+London, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds, must be brought into line. Each
+town must adopt the good points from every other town. (2) To urge
+their districts to launch out into something new."[668] "The property
+held and worked and controlled by municipalities already exceeds
+_500,000,000l._ sterling in value, and is being added to yearly. This
+process has but to continue long enough to ensure that every industry
+will pass under public control, and thus State Socialism will become
+an accomplished fact by a gradual process of easy transition."[669]
+
+"The proper sphere of municipal activity includes everything a
+municipality can do better than a private company."[670] "The
+immediate object should be to municipalise all those services which
+are necessary to a healthy life. Food, fuel, clothing, shelter--these
+are required by all--and no man should have the right to deny them to
+any worker. We must not stop at municipal trams. We must not stop at
+municipal gas. We must not stop at municipal electricity. These are
+only stepping-stones. Not until we can say that poverty and disease
+and unemployment are abolished out of the land shall we have the right
+to discuss the limits of municipal trading."[671] "The economic forces
+which replaced the workshop by the factory will replace the private
+shop by the municipal store, and the private factory by the municipal
+one."[672]
+
+According to Socialist teaching the destruction of private enterprise
+by municipal undertakings will be a blessing to all citizens. "Where a
+city supplies its own gas there is no 'middle-man.' The corporation
+stands in the place of the 'middle-man,' and as the corporation is
+elected by the citizens the people are thus in the position of getting
+their own gas made and paying for it in their own way. Some of the
+citizens are makers of gas, or workmen; most of the citizens are users
+of gas, or consumers; and all of the citizens are owners and managers
+of the gasworks and of the gas supply."[673]
+
+The suppression of the "unnecessary middleman" sounds so very
+plausible that it is certain to prove an excellent election cry. But
+has the middleman really disappeared when a city corporation takes his
+place? Does the corporation-middleman supply gas gratis? Are the
+private middleman's profits not distributed to a host of corporation
+officials in the shape of substantial salaries? The transfer of
+gasworks, &c., from private hands to a city corporation is no doubt
+very beneficial to those who draw the corporation salaries. It may be
+very profitable to the local politicians and their hangers-on. Jobs
+may be had as a reward for political support. But the citizens may
+find the gas to be no cheaper and the rates to be considerably higher
+after the suppression of the "unnecessary middleman." And will it then
+console him that he is the "owner and manager of the gasworks and of
+the gas supply"?
+
+Under the heading "The Justice of Abolishing the Private Trader" one
+of the leading champions of municipal Socialism writes: "Is it unfair
+to take away the living of the private trader? Then it is unfair to
+take away the living of the unemployed, the twelve millions on the
+verge of starvation, and the thousands slain annually by poverty and
+preventable disease. I say that the welfare of the nation must be
+considered before the profits of the monopolists and the wasteful
+freedom of the small trader. Under the present system a large
+proportion of the population have so deteriorated in health and
+stamina as to endanger the existence of the nation. Private enterprise
+and competition are responsible for nine-tenths of the misery and
+suffering of our twenty million poor. But we must not attempt to alter
+the conditions because the small private trader would be ruined.
+Nevertheless the system is going to be altered, whether the small
+trader likes it or not."[674]
+
+The foregoing are typical Socialist arguments. In the first place, the
+writer grossly exaggerates existing poverty by speaking of "twenty
+million poor." Then he boldly asserts that all poverty is due to
+private enterprise and that municipal enterprise will abolish it. So
+far municipal enterprise has not even succeeded in diminishing
+poverty. On the contrary, with the phenomenal growth of municipal
+enterprise in Great Britain pauperism, actual and percentual, has also
+grown at an alarming rate. It is significant that poverty and
+distress have increased most rapidly, and have become most acute, in
+those localities in which municipal enterprise has been most active
+and in which Socialist councils have held undisputed sway, as, for
+instance, in East and West Ham and Poplar. Municipal enterprise, by
+increasing the rates--and, with the rates, the rents--has increased
+the general cost of living without at the same time increasing
+production. On the contrary, it has driven factories away through high
+rates. Therefore municipal enterprise has increased the expenditure of
+the general body of workers without increasing their earnings, and
+consequently has directly increased the existing poverty which it has
+promised to abolish. Municipal enterprise has succeeded chiefly in
+giving from the rates high wages to municipal employees at the cost of
+all other workers.
+
+Municipal Socialists rather rely on force than on justice in dealing
+with private business men. "For private traders to fight against
+municipalisation is a short-sighted policy. One thing is certain--they
+have to go. 'What! Compete with us with the ratepayers' money? Our own
+money? What injustice!' says the small trader."[675] This just
+objection of the ratepayers is answered with a contemptible quibble.
+"The small trader is mistaken. The municipality does not use their
+money, and would not use their money, under the supposed
+circumstances. If the London County Council decided to open 1,000
+bread-shops, how would they raise the capital required? Not by taking
+the ratepayers' money, or the private traders' money, but by going
+into the money market and borrowing on the credit of all the citizens.
+Suppose _100,000l._ were required? Not a penny would come out of the
+rates. The credit of all the citizens of London is so good that they
+can borrow all the money they want without any difficulty."[676] In
+other words, the Social-"Democratic" politician claims for himself the
+right of arbitrarily depriving citizens who possess property of that
+property and to ruin them by underselling them. They borrow the money
+they require for these undertakings on the credit of the very
+property-owners whom they wish to ruin, not on the credit of "all the
+citizens," as Mr. Suthers pretends, and then they have the impudence
+to assert that the corporations do not ruin the citizens with their
+own money but only with money borrowed on their credit--as if the one
+were not identical with the other.
+
+The objections to municipal enterprise on a Socialist basis are
+twofold:
+
+(1) That it increases the rates and the municipal debt, and therefore
+the rent of houses and lodgings;
+
+(2) That it is, on the whole, unprofitable, being undertaken without
+due regard to sound finance, efficiency, and economy.
+
+Socialists intend to "tax the rich out of existence." Therefore they
+endeavour to increase as much as possible not only the Imperial
+taxation but also the rates. Owners of house property are used to a
+certain income. If the rates are put up, they put up the rent.
+Therefore every increase in the rates leads, as a rule, automatically
+to an equivalent increase in the rent. The fact that a rise in the
+rates leads to a rise in the rent of houses and lodgings, and that the
+Socialist policy of waste and squander falls therefore most heavily
+not on the capitalist but on the working man, is boldly denied.
+"Generally speaking, the reduction of rates is of no benefit whatever
+to the working class. Rates are levied upon property.--Q. Do not the
+working class pay the rates and taxes? A. No. Rates and taxes are paid
+out of the surplus value taken from the workers by their exploiters.
+As already explained, the return to the workers, their wages, is
+determined by their cost of subsistence, regulated by competition in
+the labour market; consequently they have nothing wherewith to pay
+taxes, and whether these be high or low, or whoever has to pay them
+directly, the position of the worker remains the same. He gets, on the
+average, his subsistence, that is all."[677]
+
+Unfortunately, many working men know to their cost that the arguments
+given above are absolutely untrue. Whilst their wages have remained
+stationary, their expenditure for rent has greatly increased owing to
+municipal enterprise carried on by Socialists regardless of expense,
+which has greatly increased rates. At West Ham "Local government was
+to be carried on in a way regardless of expense, and under the
+compounding system the vast majority of the electors were not to
+realise that there were such things as rates at all. One member of the
+Socialist party publicly declared that it did not matter to the
+working men of the borough how high the rates were. But the 'people'
+got to see in course of time that there were drawbacks, even for them,
+in unrestricted Socialism. They found that, because of the increased
+rates, house rents were going up twelve and a half to twenty per
+cent., notwithstanding the threats of the Socialists that every
+landlord who raised his rents should have his assessments
+increased."[678]
+
+Owing to municipal enterprise directed by Socialists, "The sum-total
+of the rates, which stood at _6s._ in the pound in 1890 and at _8s._
+_1d._ in 1896, rose to _8s. 10-1/2d._ in the pound in 1900 and _9s._
+_5-1/2d._ in the pound in 1901. From that figure it advanced to _9s._
+_8d._ in the pound,"[679] and to _10s. 8d._ a little later. It is an
+impudent misstatement of fact when Socialist leaders tell the workers,
+"We are not killed by rates, we are killed by rent."[680] "The whole
+of our municipal expenditure is only a paltry 110 millions a year.
+What do we pay in rent? Two hundred and seventy-five millions!"[681]
+After all, people in other countries, where the blessings of Socialist
+local government are unknown, and where poverty is much rarer than in
+Great Britain, also pay rent. On an average the rates are 150 per
+cent. higher in Great Britain than in Germany.[682]
+
+Whilst the national Government endeavours to diminish the dead weight
+and the heavy yearly charge of national indebtedness, Socialist local
+authorities vie with each other in piling up local indebtedness as
+fast as possible with a reckless disregard of the future. The increase
+of the municipal debt, the increase of local taxation, like the
+increase of national taxation, has no terrors for Socialists. On the
+contrary, "Municipal debt is not a burden. It is a splendid
+investment. We 'owe' 370 millions. Do we 'own' nothing? The
+municipalities own all the roads, drains, sewers, public buildings,
+parks, libraries, a thousand waterworks, two hundred and sixty
+gasworks, three hundred and thirty-four electricity undertakings, one
+hundred and sixty-two tramways, two or three hundred markets, a
+hundred and fifty cemeteries, forty-three harbours, piers, and docks,
+numerous baths, washhouses, and working-class dwellings, thousands of
+schools, and thousands of acres of land."[683] Since these words were
+written local indebtedness has increased. "We owe" now 470 millions.
+
+Unfortunately, many of the splendid assets enumerated possess no
+realisable value whatever, and many municipal enterprises are run
+without an adequate profit or with a loss.
+
+The Socialist views and aims regarding local indebtedness are well
+summed up as follows by Suthers: "The 'municipal debt' argument is a
+bogey. The greater the municipal debt, the less private enterprise
+there will be. The greater the municipal debt, the cheaper and better
+the public services will be. The less private capital, the less
+profits going into a few pockets, the richer the general public will
+be. Up, then, with municipal debt."[684] These are principles which
+threaten to make Great Britain bankrupt. "The annual report of the
+work of the Local Government Board for 1907 shows that the local debt
+of England and Wales, from being 17 per cent. of the National Debt in
+1879-80, has grown to 58.5 per cent. of the National Debt in 1904-5.
+The National and Local debts have grown as follows:
+
+                      1879-80         1904-5      _Increase_
+  National Debt    L770,604,774    L796,736,491   L26,131,717
+  Local Debt        136,934,070     466,459,269   329,525,199"[685]
+
+Unless the Imperial Government interferes, the local debt will soon be
+larger than the National Debt.
+
+We have seen in the beginning of this Chapter that, as regards local
+government, the Socialists pursue a twofold aim: (1) To level up their
+districts; (2) To urge their districts to launch out into something
+new. Therefore we find, as Mr. John A. Fairlie says in his book on
+"Municipal Administration," that "the danger of excessive debt is most
+serious in the smallest cities. The largest cities, while they have
+the largest debts, have also the largest resources, and also the
+best-developed financial administration. The cities of modest size,
+however, which attempt to equal the works of the metropolis without
+its available sources of revenue, are very likely to find themselves
+in serious difficulties."
+
+The time may come, and it may come soon, when British local
+indebtedness will become greatly reduced by local bankruptcy and
+repudiation. That process would have no terrors for Socialists. They
+ought rather to look forward to it. As they demand the repudiation of
+the National Debt (see Chapter IX.), they should logically also strive
+to repudiate the local debt. A general repudiation of local debt would
+be the fitting and logical aim and end of municipal enterprise.
+Municipal enterprise aims at expropriating private property-owners,
+who, rightly considered, are paid not in cash but in debt
+certificates. The repudiation of all local debts would convey gratis
+to the municipality the municipally managed undertakings which,
+rightly considered, belong to the stockholders, and would at the same
+time ruin the capitalists who have advanced the money for acquiring
+those undertakings. The Socialist policy would triumph. This would be
+the fitting end of a rule by irresponsible and penniless demagogues.
+
+To the Socialist there is no limit to municipal enterprise. Not some
+branches of private trade and production, but all private trade and
+production are to be taken over by the municipalities. Private
+enterprise is to be extinguished altogether. The municipalities are to
+be universal owners, manufacturers, and providers. Among the first
+things which Socialist municipalities wish to control are the supply
+of bread, milk, coal; hospitals and public-houses, banks, fire
+insurances, and pawnshops.[686]
+
+All workers are to be municipal officials. Stretching out beyond their
+borders, the municipalities are ultimately to absorb the country, and
+to bring it under Socialist management and government.[687]
+
+Some of the more immediate aims of Socialism as regards London are
+expressed by Sydney Webb, the brilliant, but unfortunately somewhat
+over-imaginative, leader of British scientific Socialism, as follows:
+
+"We see in imagination the County Council's aqueducts supplying London
+with pure soft water from a Welsh lake; the County Council's mains
+furnishing, without special charge, a constant supply up to the top of
+every house: the County Council's hydrants and standpipes yielding
+abundant cleansing fluid from the Thames to every street. When every
+parish has its public baths and washhouses open without fees, every
+Board school its swimming-bath and teacher of swimming, every railway
+station and public building its drinking-fountain and basin for
+washing the hands, every park its bathing and skating ponds--then we
+shall begin to show the world that we do not, after all, fall behind
+Imperial Rome in this one item of its splendid magnificence. By that
+time the landlord will be required, as a mere condition of sanitary
+fitness, to lay on water to every floor, if not to every tenement, and
+the bath will be as common an adjunct of the workman's home as it now
+is of the modern villa residence. And just as in some American cities
+hot water and superheated steam are supplied in pipes for warming
+purposes over large areas, we may even see the County Council laying
+on a separate service of hot water to be drawn at will from a tap in
+each tenement. Why should London's million families waste their
+million fires every time hot water is needed?
+
+"The economy of fuel leads, indeed, to the municipalised gas-supply,
+then laid on, as a matter of course, to every tenement, and used, not
+only for lighting, but still more largely for cooking in the stoves
+supplied at a nominal charge.
+
+"In order to relieve the pressure of population in the centre, and
+reduce the rents of the metropolitan "Connaughts," the County Council
+tramways will doubtless be made as free as its roads and bridges.
+Taxes on locomotion are universally condemned, and the economic
+effects of a penny tram-fare are precisely the same as those of a tax
+on the trip. The County Council will, however, free its trams on the
+empirical grounds of economy and the development of its suburban
+estates of artisans' dwellings, built on land bought to retain the
+unearned increment for the public benefit. Free trams may well imply
+free trains in the metropolitan and suburban area. Does not the
+Council already run a free service of steamboats on the Thames at
+North Woolwich--eventually, no doubt, to be extended all along the
+stream?
+
+"Public libraries and reading-rooms in every ward are nearly here
+already, but we may expect that the library and the public hall will
+go far to cut out the tavern (at present our only 'public' house) as
+the poor man's club. As for bands of music in the parks, municipal
+fetes, and fireworks on 'Labour Day,' and other instances of the
+communalisation of the means of 'enjoyment,' all this is already
+common form in France. The parks, indeed, will be tremendous affairs.
+But when London's gas and water and markets are owned and controlled
+by its public authorities; when its tramways, and perhaps its local
+railways, are managed like its roads and parks, not for private
+profit, but for public use; when the metropolis at length possesses
+its own river, and its own docks; when its site is secure from
+individual tyranny, and its artisans' dwellings from the whims of
+philanthropy; when, in short, London collectively really takes its own
+life into its own hands, a vast army of London's citizens will be
+directly enrolled in London's service."[688]
+
+The foregoing political and economic programme would be more
+creditable to an imaginative schoolgirl ten years old than to a man of
+science and a politician. How are all these wonderful and almost
+miraculous changes to be financed? Quite simply and very easily--by
+plunder. Mr. Sidney Webb, like most "scientific" Socialists, is a
+loose and shallow thinker. He forgets in his calculations that
+stubborn little item--human nature. He forgets that nobody can become
+richer by transferring money from the right pocket to the left. If you
+plunder all capitalists and all middlemen, the workers will certainly
+not be better off. Owing to the absence of direct self-interest, the
+management by salaried officials will be inefficient. All experience
+of management by public bodies through officials shows that public
+enterprise is far more wasteful and far less efficient than private
+enterprise; that in official management routine, sloth, waste,
+irresponsibility, nepotism, favouritism, and often peculation too,
+become supreme. Besides, far more money than is wasted now by
+capitalists on themselves will be wasted by politicians hankering
+after popularity, and after jobs for themselves and their followers
+and dependents. The greatest wasters in the poorest districts are the
+irresponsible Socialist authorities. In palatial town halls
+sumptuously furnished, in magnificent public libraries, in marble
+baths, and other outlets of civic magnificence, money wrung from the
+hard-worked wage-earners is wasted in far greater sums than could
+possibly be spent by the most reckless capitalist on his private
+amusement. The most magnificent town halls, &c., are to be found in
+the poorest districts. Besides, "salaries must be liberal enough to
+attract the best men to the public service."[689] It is a matter of
+course that the rule of irresponsible Socialist agitators, that a
+system of local government whereby those who have no money are enabled
+to spend lavishly by drawing upon those who have money, will not make
+for efficiency and economy, and the end will be the Poplar-ising of
+Great Britain. There is a generally accepted principle, "No taxation
+without representation." That principle requires as a supplement, "No
+representation without taxation." Otherwise Great Britain will be
+ruled by a mob headed by imaginative and dishonest demagogues.
+
+No enterprise is too large or too costly for the Socialists. Quite
+recently the Fabians recommended in a leaflet that Glasgow should
+acquire the whole built-over ground of the city at a cost of
+_24,000,000l._, issuing against that sum Corporation Bonds bearing
+3-1/4 per cent. interest. Provided that everything should be settled
+according to expectations, and supposing that Glasgow should be able
+to borrow _24,000,000l._ at 3-1/4 per cent., which seems extremely
+unlikely, there would accrue, on the most favourable showing, a net
+profit of _200,000l._ per annum to Glasgow, if nothing be allowed for
+the cost of management.[690] The possibility that that gigantic
+speculation might prove a failure is not even considered. On the
+contrary, it is assumed as certain that Glasgow will greatly profit by
+the growing value of land. Now if through natural economic
+development, or through the rule of a Socialist national or local
+administration, Glasgow should decline and land in Glasgow should fall
+in value, the town might be ruined. Of course that would not hurt the
+penniless Socialist agitators. Besides, there would always be the
+sovereign remedy of repudiation.
+
+According to the fundamental Socialist doctrines which condemn
+profit,[691] "Municipal trading does not seek profit. To the private
+trader the making of profits or losses is a vital matter. He makes the
+mistake of thinking the same motives induce a municipality to provide
+a public service."[692] To the Socialist administrators it is quite
+immaterial whether their enterprises are run at a profit or at a loss,
+so long as they can draw freely on the rich and well-to-do to pay for
+their extravagance. "The Socialist view of the fair way of dealing
+with profits on trading concerns is to have none--if one may be
+excused so paradoxical a statement. Fair wages and good conditions
+generally for the employees, and selling at cost so that all may use
+freely the commodity or service, is the nearest approach to justice in
+respect to such municipal concerns as are incapable of being used with
+equal freedom by all."[693] "The only sound principle of municipal
+management is to run all these things primarily for use, with no idea
+of making profit at all, and as far as possible at a price to the user
+covering the cost of the production only. Such profits as are made
+should be used either to extend municipal enterprise or be utilised
+for what in Scotland is known as "the common good," that is, in the
+provision of instruction, amusements, parks and open spaces, helpful
+and beneficial to all."[694]
+
+"Municipalisation or nationalisation must proceed on the right lines
+and for a practical object. What should be the object of
+municipalisation and nationalisation? The primary object should be the
+most economical provision of the best possible public services. The
+general well-being should be the first consideration to be served,
+having due regard to the welfare of each and all engaged in these
+services. The idea of profit either in the shape of interest on loans,
+or of reduced rates and taxes, should be eliminated altogether."[695]
+"The private trader always pursues profits. That is why he is such a
+dreadful failure. The motive of municipal trading, on the contrary, is
+public welfare--the benefit of all the citizens. That is why it is
+such a tremendous success. No one ever thinks of criticising a town
+council because they make no profits on these services. Now when we
+consider the question of municipal trading in gas, tramways, and
+electricity, is the principle involved any different? Not at all. The
+provision of gas, trams, and electricity is inspired by just the same
+motives as inspired the provision of roads, parks, libraries,
+sewerages, police, and education. That is to say, the benefit of all
+the citizens."[696] "The day may come when municipal trams and
+municipal light will be just as free as municipal streets and
+municipal libraries. That is to say, a rate will be levied on the
+citizens for their upkeep, and everyone will be free to use them as
+required."[697]
+
+Such an ideal state of affairs, as pictured by scientific Mr. Webb and
+his rapacious followers, would be most desirable from the point of
+view of the town loafer. He would no longer monopolise the free
+library, the lodging-house, and the public-house corners, as he does
+at present. He would vary the monotony of the reading-room and the
+street corner by free rides up and down the town and into the country.
+In the evening he would take a hot bath in the free public baths
+recommended by Sidney Webb, sit for a while in the free clubs
+recommended by the same gentleman, and then stroll out to the free
+public park to view the free fireworks and listen to the free music.
+Free meals and lodgings will no doubt follow in due course. Great
+Britain will be ruled for the benefit of the tramp. Why should anybody
+work in such a "free" country? Who would not be a loafer or a tramp
+under these conditions--especially as the "vice" of work, to use a
+Socialistic expression, would speedily be visited by punishment in the
+shape of confiscatory taxation, if not of direct confiscation? The
+populace of decaying Athens and Rome lived under those conditions
+which are the ideals of British Socialists. The citizens lived by
+their votes for a time in idleness. They were fed and clothed by
+slaves and subject nations. But the end was starvation.
+
+To provide all these free benefits for those unwilling to work, the
+owners of property would of course have to be taxed out of existence.
+"There is no limit to the present rating powers of the local
+authority, nor to the taxing powers of the State. The recognised
+limits to local and national taxation are the needs of the respective
+authorities. Though not perhaps clearly or generally understood, the
+taxing powers of the community are based upon the principle that
+private property is only permitted to be held or enjoyed by
+individuals so long as that private possession is not opposed to the
+general welfare, and so long as the community does not require the
+property or the income for public purposes. The Socialist accepts the
+principle of taxation--taxation 'according to ability derived from the
+profits of stock-in-trade and other property'--but desires
+deliberately to incorporate another idea and purpose in taxation,
+namely, the taxation of the rich to secure such socially created
+wealth as is now taken in rent, interest, and profit, and to use this
+revenue for social reform purposes. In other words, we would by that
+means compel 'the rendering unto Caesar the things that are
+Caesar's.'"[698] Municipal funds would be provided, not only by local
+rates, but also by a local income and land taxes.[699] In other words,
+Socialism would eat the goose that lays the golden eggs.
+
+According to leading Socialists, municipal enterprise is preferable to
+private enterprise, not only for economic but also for moral reasons.
+"The system of private enterprise and competition reeks with
+corruption. Honesty under it is impossible. Municipal Socialism, on
+the contrary, would provide an environment which would encourage and
+promote the growth of moral activities. Instead of leading to
+corruption it would lead away from it."[700] "Private enterprise must
+lead to fraud, deceit, bribery, corruption, and even murder, in the
+struggle for existence. Municipal Socialism would entirely remove any
+temptation to commit these immoral actions. Why? Because, under
+municipal Socialism, every person who worked would be sure of a
+living."[701] We have seen some samples of the moral and purifying
+influence of municipal Socialism in the investigations recently made
+by the Board of Trade. Unfortunately these have revealed the fact
+that, in many of the most advanced Socialist corporations, fraud,
+bribery, intimidation, favouritism, and common theft are of daily
+occurrence. What else can be expected when men of predatory instincts,
+who preach the gospel of idleness and confiscation, who live not by
+work but by talk, who have been accustomed to handle pence, and who
+have to be taught by the town clerk how to sign a cheque, are suddenly
+enabled to dispose of thousands of pounds and to negotiate loans?
+
+The general public takes little interest in local elections. Most
+citizens abstain from voting. Therefore the numerous corporation
+employees often have the decisive vote in local elections, and they
+will support only a candidate who promises shorter hours or higher
+pay. Municipal employees sitting in the public galleries will even
+dominate the council chamber, intimidate councillors, and shout down
+those of whom they disapprove. Besides, they may strike and
+disorganise the public services, and make the Socialistic authorities
+look ridiculous. Therefore it is better to humour and to obey them
+than to oppose them. The Fabian Society demands for municipal servants
+"full liberty of combination," because "the servants of the public
+may often need protection against the public, as in the Post
+Office."[702] The results of Socialist teachings are to be seen in
+many municipalities. "The servants of the public" are already, and
+will in an increasing degree become, the masters of the public.
+
+Under municipal Socialism the wages of tramway-men have increased as
+follows: "In Sheffield, where the private company paid _100l._ for
+labour, the Corporation pay _165l._ for the same amount of work. In
+Bolton, where the private company paid _100l._, the Corporation pay
+_137l._ In Wallasey, where the private company paid _100l._, the
+District Council pay _185l._ In Northampton, where the private company
+paid _100l._, the Corporation pay _120l._ In Birkenhead, where the
+private company paid _100l._, the Corporation pay _315l._ In
+Portsmouth, where the private company paid _100l._, the Corporation
+pay _130l._ In Sunderland, where the private company paid _100l._, the
+Corporation pay _145l._ When the Manchester Corporation took over the
+trams they paid increased wages amounting to _60,000l._ a year."[703]
+
+The foregoing information is given by a Socialist. Some of the
+advances may be justified, but others, and probably the majority, have
+been made with that fine disregard of economy which is commonly found
+among men who can afford to be generous at other people's expense.
+Municipal Socialism is an ever-growing cancer which is rapidly
+exhausting the country.
+
+"Half the municipal debt is of a nature which can never yield a
+profit."[704] The other half is invested in enterprises many of which
+are run regardless of economy and of expense, regardless of profit and
+loss, in accordance with the Socialistic principles stated in this
+Chapter. The policy of deliberate waste and of constant increase of
+debt, the principles of "launching out into something new" and
+"levelling up their districts," perhaps also the fear of eventual
+bankruptcy and repudiation, have at last frightened the investor.
+Corporation stocks can no longer be considered as safe first-class
+securities. Besides, the banks have begun to refuse to accommodate
+Socialistic municipalities with the necessary funds by overdrafts,
+short loans, &c. Socialists have therefore begun to complain when they
+saw that the unlimited supply of other peoples' money was diminishing.
+They consider it a grievance that they can no longer arbitrarily
+squander on fantastic undertakings what is not their own. "The
+hostility of the banking interest to municipal borrowing, and the
+threat to 'cut off supplies' has at length taken practical form.
+Disappointed in their attempt to secure sufficiently favourable
+treatment from their bankers (Parr's), the Chester Corporation applied
+to four other banks in the city, viz. Lloyds, North and South Wales,
+National Provincial, and Liverpool Banks. All refused to tender for
+the account. The banks are not run for the public, the public are run
+for the bankers."[705] Also, the banks, instead of lending their funds
+gratis to Socialist corporations, are heartless enough to demand
+interest "usury" on their loans. "Unfortunately at present public
+bodies must pay heavy tribute as interest on borrowed money."[706]
+"Our embryo Socialistic enterprises are even now suffering from the
+toll of interest which a restricted credit and currency permit the
+money lords to exact."[707]
+
+Has the attitude of the investing public and the banks caused the
+Socialist municipalities to restrain their insane expenditure, and to
+keep it within legitimate bounds? No, they have tried to obtain money
+by borrowing it in small sums directly from the public. "The
+Corporation of Bolton, the Boroughs of Heywood, Middleton, and others,
+invite the investment of small sums of money in municipal enterprise,
+offering a higher rate of interest on deposits than the banks can
+supply."[708]
+
+Many Socialists advocate that the municipalities should raise money by
+issuing paper-money in unlimited quantities or that they should become
+bankers, pay interest on deposits, and invest the savings of the poor
+in highly speculative enterprises carried on without regard to economy
+and expense, or to profit and loss. "Why pay in usury at all? Abolish
+the gold monopoly by demonetising metals, and the sole remaining
+argument against municipal trading disappears along with the most
+crippling restriction under which public enterprise labours."[709]
+"Credit notes would be of little use were the city's credit gone,
+because the people would be afraid to take them. However valuable the
+assets of a municipal authority might be--and municipal concerns are
+usually far more substantial and sound than banking companies are--it
+is public confidence that constitutes the first requisite, and this it
+is the duty of all reformers to establish and maintain against the
+assaults of those whose interest it is to break it down. The
+institution of municipal savings banks under the protection of, and
+subject to inspection by, the State would assist public authorities
+and render them less dependent on the bankers; then when people had
+become accustomed to thinking their city's credit at least equal to
+that of the leading banks, a limited issue of notes might be
+allowed."[710] Further proposals for "demonetising" gold and issuing
+unlimited amounts of unconvertible notes, on the model of the
+assignats of the French Revolution, will be found in Chapter XX.
+"Some Socialist Views on Money, Banks, and Banking."[711]
+
+These and many other dangerous experiments could easily be undertaken
+by needy demagogues with fantastic ideas, if the supervision of
+municipalities by the national Government were abolished. Therefore
+the Independent Labour Party passed at the last Annual Conference the
+following resolution: "That this Conference urges the Labour party in
+Parliament to secure the extension of power to municipalities,
+enabling them to undertake trading and the development of existing
+municipal concerns, without the sanction of the Local Government
+Board, and to use any profits accruing from same in such manner as may
+be decided by the municipality, without the necessity of promoting
+Parliamentary Bills."[712]
+
+No administration can continue for long a financial and general policy
+of waste and pillage, such as that followed by the Socialist
+municipalities of Great Britain, without diminishing not merely
+private wealth but also the national wealth. The British Socialists
+seem determined to do all they can to destroy as fast as possible the
+accumulated wealth of the country and its productive power.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[668] _The Advance of Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[669] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, pp. 27, 28.
+
+[670] Snowden, _Straight Talk to Ratepayers_, p. 8.
+
+[671] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 148.
+
+[672] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 157.
+
+[673] Blatchford, _Competition_, p. 4.
+
+[674] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, pp. 93, 94.
+
+[675] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, pp. 87, 88.
+
+[676] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 88.
+
+[677] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 42.
+
+[678] _The Times, Municipal Socialism_, p. 43.
+
+[679] _Ibid._
+
+[680] Suthers, _Killed by High Rates_, p. 12.
+
+[681] _Ibid._ p. 11.
+
+[682] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 552.
+
+[683] Suthers, _Killed by High Rates_, p. 9.
+
+[684] Suthers, _Municipal Debt_, p. 4.
+
+[685] _Daily Mail_, November 26, 1907.
+
+[686] See _A Municipal Bread Supply_; _Municipal Bakeries_; _Municipal
+Drink Traffic_; _Municipal Fire Insurance_; Washington, _Milk and
+Postage Stamps, &c._
+
+[687] _Municipalisation by Provinces._
+
+[688] Sidney Webb, _The London Programme_, 1892, pp. 208-213.
+
+[689] Jowett, _Socialism and the City_, p. 17.
+
+[690] _Forward_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[691] See Chapter IV.
+
+[692] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 14.
+
+[693] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 40.
+
+[694] Irving, _The Municipality_, p. 6.
+
+[695] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 42.
+
+[696] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 9.
+
+[697] _Ibid._ p. 8.
+
+[698] Snowden, _The Socialist's Budget_, pp. 3, 4, 6.
+
+[699] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 38; Snowden, _The
+Socialist's Budget_, p. 83.
+
+[700] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 119.
+
+[701] _Ibid._ p. 122.
+
+[702] _A Labour Policy for Public Authorities_, p. 19.
+
+[703] Suthers, _Mind your own Business_, p. 103.
+
+[704] Snowden, _A Straight Talk to Ratepayers_, p. 8.
+
+[705] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 15.
+
+[706] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 42.
+
+[707] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 11.
+
+[708] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 13.
+
+[709] _Ibid._ pp. 13, 14.
+
+[710] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, pp. 45, 46.
+
+[711] See p. 281 ff.
+
+[712] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference_, 1907, p.
+50.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+SOCIALISM AND AGRICULTURE
+
+
+In one of his books Mr. Blatchford gives prominence to the following
+statement contained in Prince Kropotkin's book, "Fields, Factories,
+and Workshops": "If the soil of the United Kingdom were cultivated
+only as it was thirty-five years ago, 24,000,000 people could live on
+home-grown food. If the cultivable soil of the United Kingdom were
+cultivated as the soil is cultivated on the average in Belgium, the
+United Kingdom would have food for at least 37,000,000 inhabitants. If
+the population of this country came to be doubled, all that would be
+required for producing food for 80,000,000 inhabitants would be to
+cultivate the soil as it is now cultivated in the best farms of this
+country, in Lombardy, and in Flanders."
+
+Commenting on this statement Mr. Blatchford says: "Why, indeed, should
+we not be able to raise 29,000,000 quarters of wheat? We have plenty
+of land. Other European countries can produce, and do produce, their
+own food. Take the example of Belgium. In Belgium the people produce
+their own food. Yet their soil is no better than ours, and their
+country is more densely populated, the figures being: Great Britain
+per square mile, 378 persons; Belgium per square mile, 544 persons.
+Suppose wheat will cost us _2s._ a quarter more to grow it than to buy
+it. On the 23,000,000 quarters we now import we should be saving
+_2,000,000l._ a year. Is that a very high price to pay for security
+against defeat by starvation in time of war?"[713]
+
+Many Socialists very wisely demand that everything possible should be
+done to bring about a revival of our agriculture. They point to the
+agricultural prosperity of Belgium, France, and Germany, and they
+would be quite ready to sanction the re-introduction of Protection, as
+will be seen in Chapter XXI. Nevertheless they absolutely and
+unconditionally oppose the creation of a class of peasant proprietors,
+although the intensive agriculture of France, Belgium, and Germany is
+founded upon the system of peasant proprietorship, and although
+general experience, both in Europe and on other continents, has proved
+the great superiority of peasant proprietors over large farmers in
+intensive culture. "No Socialist desires to see the land of the
+country divided among small peasant freeholders, though this is still
+the ideal professed by many statesmen of 'advanced' views."[714]
+"Socialism is hostile to small properties."[715]
+
+Socialists pretend to be opposed to the creation of peasant
+proprietors either on scientific grounds or for ethical reasons. "As a
+matter of economic evolution, small properties will have to go. But
+viewed from an ethical standpoint, surely nothing has been more
+conducive to the development of the worst side of human nature--of
+'hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness' than the system of small
+properties."[716] "If England were cut up into small allotments, the
+general state would be harder and leaner than before."[717] "Would
+Socialists take away the land from the landlords and let it out in
+little plots? No. Because that would make a lot of little proprietors
+as selfish as the landlords."[718] "Divide the land into small
+allotments and very soon the cunning and rapacious would 'acquire' the
+estates of other men, and so we should come back to the present state
+of chaos. In fact, the parcelling out of the land means putting back
+the clock of civilisation about one thousand years."[719]
+
+The real reason which prompts Socialists to oppose by all means the
+creation of peasant proprietors is to be found neither in the realm of
+political economy nor in that of abstract ethics, but in that of party
+politics. The peasant proprietor, like every sensible owner of
+property, is hostile to Socialism. "The peasant has nothing else in
+the world but his farm, and that is one of the reasons why it is so
+very difficult to win him over to our cause. He is, indeed, one of the
+last bulwarks of private property."[720] The philosopher of British
+Socialism frankly confesses: "On the Continent the peasant proprietor,
+who may now be reckoned as part of the _petite bourgeoisie_, just as
+the large landlord with us may be reckoned as part of the big
+capitalist class, is a potent factor in retarding the process of
+Socialisation."[721]
+
+The experience of Socialists in Germany, Austria-Hungary, France,
+Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and Switzerland shows that Socialism finds
+practically no adherents among the land-owning peasants. At the German
+Reichstag elections of 1903, for instance, the Social-Democrats
+received almost 60 per cent. of the votes in the large towns as
+compared with less than 20 per cent. of the votes in the country. Of
+the latter, the vast majority was given by artisans and landless rural
+labourers. The peasant, like every property-owner, is an enemy of
+fantastic schemes of confiscation and of general plunder lavishly
+embellished with promises of Utopia. Therefore Social-Democrats will
+rather see the countryside of Great Britain turned into a wilderness
+than see it peopled by peasants.
+
+Desperately anxious lest the Government of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman
+should create a British peasantry, the Socialist press opposed the
+creation of a British peasantry as unscientific and certain to lead to
+disaster. The people were told in countless articles that peasant
+proprietorship had proved a failure everywhere. Under the heading "The
+Small-Holding Fraud" the "Social-Democrat" showed the true motive of
+the Socialist agitation by expressing the hope that "The Government
+will assuredly fail in their attempt to erect a peasant proprietary
+barrier against the rising proletariat"[722]--Has the Socialist outcry
+against creating peasant proprietors influenced Sir Henry
+Campbell-Bannerman's Government in its land-settlement policy? Did Sir
+Henry Campbell-Bannerman wish to satisfy the Socialists by rather
+creating small leaseholders than small freehold farmers?
+
+The positive proposals of Socialists for bringing about a revival of
+agriculture are frankly Utopian. Their proposals can of course not be
+practical, because they object to the present agricultural
+arrangements of Great Britain and to those prevailing on the continent
+of Europe. Many Socialists desire the towns to control and resettle
+the country. "The towns should claim the right of dictating to England
+the way in which the land should be put to profit. The great majority
+of the classes nearest the land, squires and farmers and parsons, are
+disqualified respectively by self-interest, by religious prejudice
+that scruples at anything that may lead to the mental enfranchisement
+of the poor, and by sheer sluggishness of intellect joined to a blind
+selfishness without parallel in any class of English society. The
+land and the labourer have hitherto been left to them. And we want a
+change of management."[723]
+
+Socialists want a "change of management" in agriculture, replacing the
+expert by the amateur in accordance with their general policy of
+turning everything upside down. Their ideal would seem to be that the
+owners of land should be dispossessed and driven into the towns, and
+be replaced by Socialistic town officials who would exploit the
+country in the interest of the town.
+
+The tenants whom the Socialists would like to create would, rightly
+considered, be merely wage-earners in the pay of the Socialistic
+administration, who, living from hand to mouth, would not be able to
+put anything by. With that object in view, rents would apparently be
+adjusted by Socialist administrations. "Tenancies would be granted for
+seven years or for twenty-one years revisable at periods of seven
+years, so that the tenant might not be able to appropriate the
+unearned increment of the land; but it should also be clearly
+understood that a satisfactory tenant would not be arbitrarily
+disturbed in his holding. At the same time no mercy would be extended
+to a bad cultivator; and when a tenant left his holding, either by the
+efflux of time or for any other reason, he would have no tenant-right
+to dispose of, but would only be entitled to compensation for
+unexhausted improvements and to a fair settlement of accounts as
+between himself and the committee. Rents would be fixed and disputes
+settled by the independent agricultural court, which would also
+continue the regulation of agricultural wages. Exploitation of the
+economically weak must not be permitted, even to a communal authority.
+It would be within the power of the committee to rent farms to
+co-operative associations of labourers if satisfied as to their
+industrial and financial capacity. Arrangements might also be made
+whereby a town could run its own dairy-farm or farms, since this is
+probably the only way in which a municipality can be sure of an
+uncontaminated supply of milk."[724]
+
+Many Socialists would like to resettle the country with colonies of town
+unemployed, but these proposals are opposed by some as impractical. "To
+imagine that any such colony could be self-supporting, that the land
+which no capitalist will now till with expert farm labourers at ten
+shillings a week would yield trade-union rates of wages to a mixed crowd
+of unemployed townsmen, that such a heterogeneous collection of waifs
+and strays, without a common acquaintanceship, a common faith, or a
+common tradition, could be safely trusted for a single day to manage the
+nation's land and capital; finally, to suppose that such a fortuitous
+agglomeration of undisciplined human atoms offers 'the most suitable and
+hopeful way of ushering in a Socialist State'--all this argues such a
+complete misconception of the actual facts of industrial and social
+life, such an entire misunderstanding of the process by which a
+democratic society passes from one stage of its development to another,
+that I feel warranted in quoting it as an extreme instance of
+Utopia-founding."[725]
+
+Whilst the various Socialist schools propound different Utopian
+schemes for the resettlement of the land in the future, their
+immediate aim is of course not so much to benefit agriculture, as they
+profess, but to gain adherents among the rural labourers. With this
+object in view they are urged to agitate for, and are promised to be
+given by the Socialists, better wages, safe and healthy homes, more
+powers for the parish councils, which are to be used for the
+restoration of common lands, real free schools and better ones, cheap
+and good allotments, pensions for the old people, reform of taxation,
+&c. The rural labourers are urged to form trade unions, and they are
+told, "All these things you can get for yourself by your trade union
+and your vote if you and all the other labourers in the district will
+join the union and will agree to vote only for those who will promise
+to help to get them for you."[726]
+
+In other pamphlets specially addressed to the rural labourers they are
+told how to get allotments, how to force the district councils to
+build good cottages for them, &c.[727]
+
+Many Socialists propound the doctrine that the first and the principal
+object in re-creating the rural industries must be the bettering of
+the wages of rural labourers, and that the State should secure them
+better wages by arbitrarily reducing rents. The object, it need hardly
+be mentioned, is rather to destroy private capital in accordance with
+the Socialists' tenets than to benefit the labourers. The Fabian
+Society, for instance, claims, "It is necessary for the State to
+interfere, partly to secure the better utilisation of our national
+resources, partly to increase our agricultural population. The class
+most needing protection, the labourers, must be dealt with first in
+order to raise them to a decent level of comfort. A living wage must
+be secured to them, and, as a consequence, the farmers' rents must be
+fixed at a fair level. An agricultural court must be set up in each
+county to regulate wages and fix rents. Continental success in
+agriculture depends on co-operation, and that in turn is associated
+with the peasant-proprietor system. That system for sundry reasons
+cannot be adopted here, but its advantages can be obtained through
+security of tenure. The small farm system should, therefore, form the
+basis of our reconstruction, free play being left for a graded system
+of farms where possible. In each county an agricultural committee
+should have compulsory power to acquire land and let it out to
+tenants, chiefly smallholders. It should have power to advance capital
+to individuals on the collective guarantee of its tenants, and it
+should be its duty to organise the collection of farm produce and its
+disposal in the market."[728]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[713] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, pp. 111, 112.
+
+[714] _Socialism True and False_, p. 18.
+
+[715] _Some Objections to Socialism Considered._
+
+[716] _Ibid._
+
+[717] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[718] Hazell, _The Red Catechism_, p. 11.
+
+[719] Blatchford, _The Pope's Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[720] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 30.
+
+[721] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, p. 41.
+
+[722] _Social-Democrat_, November 1907.
+
+[723] Pedder, _The Secret of Rural Depopulation_, p. 18.
+
+[724] _The Revival of Agriculture_, p. 17.
+
+[725] Sidney Webb, _Socialism True and False_, p. 12.
+
+[726] _What the Farm Labourer Wants_, p. 4.
+
+[727] _Allotments and How to get Them_; _Parish Council Cottages and
+How to get Them._
+
+[728] _The Revival of Agriculture_, p. 22.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS ON BRITISH RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING
+
+
+Many Socialists complain, and they complain with good cause, about the
+railways of Great Britain. All the British railways are in private
+hands, and they are very inefficient. They are in many respects very
+backward, badly equipped, and badly managed. They have wasted their
+capital, watered their stock, and have paid dividends out of capital;
+their freight charges are exorbitant; besides, they give habitually
+and by various means, with which it would lead too far to deal in this
+book, preferential treatment of a very substantial kind to the
+foreigner.
+
+Many Socialists have extracted from British Government publications
+instances of such preferential treatment. One of the most widely read
+Socialist writers, for example, gives among others the following
+freight charges favouring the foreigner:
+
+"Carriage of a ton of British meat, Liverpool to London, _2l._:
+Carriage of a ton of foreign meat, Liverpool to London, _1l. 5s._:
+Carriage of a ton of eggs Galway to London, _4l. 14s._: Carriage of a
+ton of eggs Denmark to London, _1l. 4s._: Carriage of a ton of plums,
+apples, and pears, Queenborough (Kent) to London, _1l. 5s._: Carriage
+of same from Flushing (Holland), _12s. 6d._: Carriage per ton of
+English pianos Liverpool to London _3l. 10s._: Carriage as above of
+foreign, _1l. 5s._: British timber per ton Cardiff to Birmingham,
+_16s. 8d._: foreign as above _8s. 10d._ In the carriage of iron ore
+and steel rails the American railways charge _6s. 3d._ where the
+British charge _29s. 3d._"[729]
+
+"The real enemy are the monopolists of land and locomotion--the
+landlord and the raillord who are uprooting the British people from
+their native soil. It is in fact by no means easy to say which is the
+greater malefactor of the two."[730] Such differential charges are
+bound to cripple the British industries, and in view of the harm which
+is thus being done to British farmers, manufacturers, and traders, it
+is only natural that British Socialists are unanimous in condemning
+the anti-British freight policy of the railways and in recommending
+that they should be taken over and managed by the State.
+
+"There are nearly 24,000 miles of railway in the kingdom, the greater
+part of which is owned or controlled by a dozen great companies, who,
+moreover, have standing conferences through which they exercise a
+virtual monopoly against the public, although they have all the
+expenses of competing concerns. The public bears the costs and
+inconveniences of competition without many of its benefits. The total
+capital of the companies is _1,300,000,000l._ of which _200,000,000l._
+is nominal or 'watered' stock. A very large part of the rest was for
+extravagant sums paid to great landowners for their land and another
+large part for legal expenses. On this huge capital a sum of
+_44,000,000l._ has to be earned in dividends. If the State bought out
+the railways, it could borrow this necessary sum for at least
+_5,000,000l._ to _8,000,000l._ a year less than this, and at once
+effect enormous savings resulting from the present competitive and
+chaotic methods of the companies. Despite the virtual monopoly, there
+are over 3,000 railway directors drawing fees or salaries amounting to
+nearly _1,500,000l._ Of the principal of these there are eighty in the
+Lords and twenty-five in the Commons. Mr. Gladstone predicted that if
+the State did not control the railway companies, they would control
+the State, and this has come to pass. Their servants are overworked
+and underpaid, extortionate freights are charged on the carriage of
+goods, unfair preferences are given, but Parliament is powerless to
+check this."[731]
+
+"The railway system to-day is the greatest protection ever heard of in
+favour of the foreigner, and neither Mr. Chamberlain nor Mr. Balfour,
+nor any other man makes a single proposal to touch the railway
+question. Why? Because the House of Commons is dominated by the
+railway interest."[732] "Our railway experience proves that it is not
+enough to make preferential rates illegal. They reappear too easily in
+the form of rebates and even of allowances which belong to the more
+private chapters of capitalist history. The attempt of the Railway
+Commission to abolish preference in railway rates has left us with a
+system which could not be much worse from the national industrial
+point of view."[733]
+
+"Imperial trade suffers no more serious handicap than that imposed
+upon it by shipping rings and railway companies, which exploit the
+Imperial needs of transport for their own purposes, which hamper the
+ready flow of Imperial trade, and, for an insignificant percentage,
+turn the British seamen off the water in favour of the Lascar."[734]
+
+"The railways of India, which yield a great portion of our Indian
+revenue, are owned by the Indian Government. The well-managed and
+prosperous systems of Australasia, with the best conditions of labour
+and the lowest freights of any railways in the world, are State owned.
+Why, then, should not the British Government own and control in the
+public interest the systems which are so wastefully and inefficiently
+managed by the present companies?"[735]
+
+The last Annual Conference of the Independent Labour Party resolved:
+"That in the opinion of this Conference the time is ripe for the
+nationalisation of the railways of the country, and that our
+representatives be asked to urge forward a measure to that effect in
+Parliament."[736] The Fabians think that "An equitable basis of
+purchase may be found in Mr. Gladstone's Act of 1844, which enables
+the Treasury to buy out the shareholders of lines built since that
+date at twenty-five years' purchase, calculated on the earnings of the
+previous three years. The price of the railways need not be an
+insuperable, or even a serious, difficulty in the way of national
+possession of the means of transit."[737]
+
+The demand of the Socialists that the Government should acquire the
+railways would perhaps be reasonable if that demand was not coupled
+with extravagant and fantastic ideas regarding their future
+management. The different Socialistic views as to the proper
+management of State railways are summed up as follows by Mr.
+Blatchford: "The railways belong to railway companies, who carry goods
+and passengers and charge fares and rates to make profit. Socialists
+all say that the railways should be bought by the people. Some say
+that fares should be charged, some that the railways should be
+free--just as the roads, rivers, and bridges now are; but all agree
+that any profit made by the railways should belong to the whole
+nation, just as do the profits now made by the Post Office and the
+telegraphs."[738]
+
+One Socialist writer modestly proposes that the fare anywhere in
+Great Britain should be a shilling. "Look at our railroads--might they
+not be the property of the community at large as well as the high
+roads, instead of being a monopoly in the hands of private persons
+whose sole object is to enrich themselves at the cost of their fellow
+citizens? If so, it has been proved that you could go to any part of
+these islands with a shilling ticket."[739]
+
+Other Socialists advocate that railway travelling should be made
+absolutely free to all, and that the costs of running the railways
+free of charge should be borne exclusively by the rich. "The blessings
+of free travel are too many by far for enumeration, but one stands
+out. It is the only effective means yet suggested for the extirpation
+of our vile city slums. At present the sweated must live near their
+work."[740] "Overcrowding can only be cured outright by one sovereign
+remedy--by giving the toiler a home in the country; and free travel
+alone makes this possible. There is no reason why a 'docker' should
+not grow his own vegetables and be his own dairyman at the same time.
+Free travel would in a few years change the whole face of
+society."[741] "A nation that can afford to spend _140,000,000l._ a
+year on strong liquors might not unreasonably be asked to strike even
+the forty odd millions off its drink-bill--about half that amount
+would suffice for the purpose--and take them out in free ozone."[742]
+"Then would rise the question how to make up for the abolition of
+passenger fares. The answer, it seems to me, is not far to seek. The
+substitute tax must be levied on the 'unearned increment' of land,
+urban and rural. The people must therefore unfalteringly press for the
+reassessment of the 'land-tax' by gradual increase up to _20s._ in the
+pound, and in the meantime procure any further funds necessary from
+our surplus capital by a graduated income-tax. Personally I abhor
+usury, whether in the shape of railway dividends or Government
+Consols, as alike _contra naturam_ and _contra Christum_."[743]
+
+In order to further the policy of free travelling by railway,
+Socialists appear to have founded a "Free Railway Travel League,"
+domiciled at 359 Strand, London, W.C. I am not aware whether the Free
+Railway Travel League--every tramp should join it--exists still.
+
+It is only logical that, if the railways should be made free for the
+carriage of people, they should likewise be made free for the
+transport of goods. "It is obvious that if railways can be worked free
+for passengers they may be made free for goods as well. Free goods
+traffic would everywhere equalise the price of commodities, be they
+the produce of sea or land, mine or manufacture, and equal wages in
+town and country would speedily follow equal prices with beneficial
+results to the people altogether incalculable. Granted free passes,
+free freights will doubtless in time follow almost as a matter of
+course."[744]
+
+When free travel by railway has been established, free travel by
+tramway, which has already been demanded by municipal reformers (see
+Chapter XVII.), will necessarily also be introduced. A publication
+issued by the most scientific body of British Socialists, the Fabian
+Society, urges: "There is only one safe principle to guide the
+reformer. The tramways, the light railways, and the railways must be
+regarded as the modern form of the king's highway. Our fathers spent
+time and trouble ridding the roads of tolls; and railway rates and
+passenger fares are merely modern tolls. Their abolition must come
+sooner or later."[745] "We have abolished the turnpike gate and the
+toll-collector, and our highways are free in the sense that they are
+maintained by general assessment. And if the turnpike gate was an
+odious obstruction to the traveller, how much more obnoxious to him,
+or her, is the railway ticket-box?"[746]
+
+Railways may be made free before the ideal Socialist State of the
+future has been created, but they will certainly be free as soon as
+the Socialist commonwealth has been established. "Railways will play a
+very great part indeed in the Socialist State, They will be absolutely
+'free' for every purpose. The cost of actual working is comparatively
+inconsiderable, while the benefits of free transit are incalculable.
+To decentralise the population so as to efface the distinction between
+dwellers in town and country is to renovate humanity physically and
+morally."[747]
+
+After travel and transport has been made absolutely free on land
+throughout the length and breadth of Great Britain, the free travel
+and transport principle will of course be extended to travel and
+transport by sea, and free travel and transport by sea will better
+bind the Empire together than a Pan-Britannic Customs Union. The most
+scientific body of British Socialists, the Fabian Society, says: "A
+logical consequence of the national management of internal means of
+communication will be the completion of the State control of our
+oversea transit. It is impossible here to go into details. Let it
+suffice to remark that already the nation has a direct financial
+interest in the great steamship lines, through its mail subsidies and
+Admiralty loans with corresponding claims for service in war; that
+intellectually the nation, by its pride in its magnificent mercantile
+fleet, regards it as a national possession, and declines to consider
+our shipping as the mere private property of the shareholders of the
+steamship companies; and finally, that our navy is maintained at
+enormous public expense expressly to protect the mercantile fleet,
+which at present is mainly private property."[748] "The notion that
+the forces making for disintegration can be neutralised by 10 per
+cent. preferential duties is not worth discussing; indeed, the raising
+of the fiscal question seems at least as likely to reveal our
+commercial antagonisms as our community of interests. And the huge
+distances will be mighty forces on the side of disintegration unless
+we abolish them. Well, why not abolish them? Distances are now counted
+in days, not in miles. The Atlantic Ocean is as wide as it was in
+1870; but the United States are four days nearer than they were then.
+Commercially, however, distance is mainly a matter of freightage. Now
+it is as possible to abolish ocean freightage as it was to make
+Waterloo Bridge toll-free, or establish the Woolwich free ferry. It is
+already worth our while to give Canada the use of the British Navy for
+nothing. Why not give her the use of the mercantile marine for nothing
+instead of taxing bread to give her a preference? Or, if that is too
+much, why not offer her special rates? It is really only a question of
+ocean road making. A national mercantile fleet plying between the
+provinces of the Empire, and carrying Empire goods and passengers
+either free or at charges far enough below cost to bring Australasia
+and Canada commercially nearer to England than to the Continent, would
+form a link with the mother-country which once brought fully into use
+could never be snapped without causing a commercial crisis in every
+province."[749]
+
+The purchase of the whole British mercantile marine by the Government
+would incidentally have the effect of abolishing the British shipping
+rings, which, like the British railways, frequently penalise with
+discriminating rates the British producer and shipper. "Of the real
+conditions of ocean traffic, at present, the public has no suspicion.
+All our lines of communication are controlled by shipping rings which
+carry preferential rating (an illegal practice in our inland transit)
+to an extent that would shock Mr. Chamberlain back again to Free
+Trade if he realised it; for their preferences are by no means
+patriotic; they have helped Belgium into our Indian market, and
+Germany and America into South Africa and New Zealand. The cotton
+conference of Liverpool directly assisted the American exporters of
+cotton to China by the heavy charges they made against the Lancashire
+manufacturer--charges which were modified only after repeated
+protests. These rings and rates constitute the most dangerous
+disintegrating force we have to face."[750]
+
+There is much justification in the complaints of the Socialists with
+regard to British railways and shipping, but their proposals are, as
+usual, quite Utopian. For all ills of the body politic and economic,
+the Socialists have only one remedy, and that an infallible
+one--nationalisation, or rather Socialisation.
+
+The policy of the British railway and shipping rings is no doubt a
+national scandal, but their defects and delinquencies may no doubt be
+counteracted by appropriate Government action and legislation. It is
+probably now too late for the State to acquire the railways. The State
+cannot afford to risk a large capital loss. Railway purchase would
+apparently be too speculative an undertaking.
+
+If the State should acquire the railways, they would certainly be run
+at a profit. The sooner the Socialists abandon their fixed idea that
+profit on private and national undertakings is immoral, the better
+will it be for them. So long as they decry profit and propose to work
+State undertakings without a profit, so long can they not be taken
+seriously. Profit consists in part of the salary of direction, in part
+of the earnings set aside for effecting the necessary alterations,
+improvements, and extensions, and for forming a reserve fund for
+making losses good, &c. Therefore abandonment of profit would mean the
+decline and decay of the national capital.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[729] Davidson, _Free Trade_ v. _Fettered Transport_, p. 9.
+
+[730] _Ibid._ p. 7.
+
+[731] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, pp. 119, 120.
+
+[732] Hyndman, _Real Reform_, p. 14.
+
+[733] _Fabianism and the Fiscal Question_, p. 17.
+
+[734] Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 96.
+
+[735] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, p. 120.
+
+[736] _Independent Labour Party Report, Annual Conference_, 1907, p.
+50.
+
+[737] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 14.
+
+[738] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 86.
+
+[739] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 13.
+
+[740] Davidson, _Free Trade and Fettered Transport_, p. 17.
+
+[741] Davidson, _Free Rails and Trams_, p. 9.
+
+[742] _Ibid._ p. 13.
+
+[743] Davidson, _Free Rails and Free Trams_, p. 7.
+
+[744] _Ibid._ p. 14.
+
+[745] _Public Control of Electric Power and Transit_, p. 10.
+
+[746] Davidson, _Free Rails and Trams_, p. 5.
+
+[747] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 158.
+
+[748] _Public Control of Electric Power and Transit_, p. 14.
+
+[749] _Fabianism and the Fiscal Question_, p. 16.
+
+[750] _Fabianism and the Fiscal Question_, p. 16.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON MONEY, BANKS, AND BANKING
+
+
+All Socialists wish to abolish private capital. Money embodies private
+capital in its most portable form. It can easily be hidden, and as the
+Socialists wish to prevent the re-accumulation of new private capital,
+the abolition of money, and especially of gold and silver, has
+prominently figured in all Socialistic programmes since the time of
+Protagoras and of Plato. Socialists wish to effect the exchange of
+commodities, the payment of labour, and the settlement of accounts
+mainly by book-keeping.
+
+"As there are no wares in the new community neither will there be any
+money."[751] "In the Social-Democratic State the citizen will be
+granted an income, which will be indicated by labour checks or credit
+cards, as advocated by Gronlund, Bellamy, and John Carruthers."[752]
+"Under ideal Socialism there would be no money at all and no wages.
+The industry of the country would be organised and managed by the
+State, much as the Post Office now is; goods of all kinds would be
+produced and distributed for use and not for sale, in such quantities
+as were needed. Hours of labour would be fixed, and every citizen
+would take what he or she liked from the common stock. Food, clothing,
+lodging, fuel, transit, amusement, and all other things would be
+absolutely free, and the only difference between a Prime Minister and
+a collier would be the difference of rank and occupation."[753]
+
+"How will exchange then be carried on? By account facilitated by some
+such contrivance as labour checks. When in the Co-operative
+Commonwealth money becomes superannuated we shall have nothing but
+checks, notes, tickets--whatever you will call them--issued by
+authority."[754] And how will international exchange be carried on?
+Very simply and easily. By barter. "So much tea is wanted from China.
+The Chinese Government is advised of the quantity and asked what
+British goods will be acceptable by the Celestials in exchange. There
+will be international barter on a grand and equitable scale."[755] It
+is quite logical that the Socialists who wish to introduce the
+primitive Communism of the prehistoric ages (see Chapter XXIX.), wish
+also to reintroduce the aboriginal system of barter.
+
+However, the contemplated form of "international barter on a grand and
+equitable scale" will have its difficulties. China, for instance, may
+sell much silk and tea to England and take in exchange mostly foreign
+manufactured goods from America, Germany, Belgium, and Japan, as she
+does at present. It is to be feared that the "grand and equitable
+system of international barter" will prove impracticable even if, as
+most Socialists somewhat rashly assume, all States should become
+Socialistic commonwealths, or if the grand Socialist Republic of the
+world should actually be created. We have at present an international
+currency, Gold. The contemplated creation of unlimited paper issues in
+lieu of gold, the fulfilment of the ideal of many Socialists, would
+have a very simple, a very certain, and a very unpleasant consequence.
+Foreign merchants, doubting the value of the new paper currency and
+the stability of the new Socialist Government, would of course refuse
+to part with their goods. Not a pound of cotton, not a bushel of wheat
+would reach England from abroad. The nation would be starving, and
+Socialist deputations would hasten to search out Lord Rothschild in
+the workhouse, where no doubt he would reside, and implore him to
+reintroduce capitalism and food into Great Britain.
+
+Some Socialists of the saner kind fear that it will not be possible to
+abolish money. Kautsky, for instance, writes: "To abolish money I
+consider impossible. Money is the simplest means as yet known which
+renders it possible in a mechanism so complicated as the modern system
+of production, with its enormously minute subdivision of labour, to
+arrange for the smooth circulation of products and their distribution
+among the individual members of society; it is the means which enables
+everyone to satisfy his needs according to his individual taste
+(naturally within the limits of his economic power). As a medium of
+circulation, money will remain indispensable so long as nothing better
+is found."[756]
+
+Socialists declaim against the immorality of charging
+interest--"usury" as they call it (see Chapters IV., IX., and XVII.),
+and they are indignant that the banks are unwilling to advance gratis
+unlimited funds to Socialist town councils to be wasted as fancy may
+direct (see page 258). Therefore they wish to abolish "that most
+costly of all modern parasites, the banker."[757] Some very
+irreligious, if not atheistic, Anarchist-Socialists, such as Mr.
+Morrison Davidson, pretend to object to interest on religious grounds
+because, "the Way, the Truth, and the Life said, 'Lend hoping for
+nothing again.'"[758] Other Socialists wish to abolish the banks and
+the charging of interest for the benefit of the people and of the
+Socialist municipal and other councils. "Usury--in that offensive
+pregnant little word is contained the secret of Society's worries and
+Man's woes. Abolish usury: that is the true Fiscal Reform
+Policy."[759]
+
+"Usury can be arrested at present by nationalisation of exchange. The
+nationalisation of exchange must be undertaken. Metal must be
+demonetised and reduced to the ranks. Banking must be undertaken by
+the municipalities and county councils, and by these elective bodies
+only, while a durable paper currency issued on the basis of the
+ascertained wealth of the nation, and maintained in true relation to
+it, shall supersede gold. Then we arrive at a scientific solution of
+the question of exchange and put in operation the currency and credit
+system of Socialism."[760]
+
+When the banks and the gold currency have been abolished and when
+"exchange has been nationalised" the Socialist local authorities will
+no longer have any difficulty in procuring the unlimited funds they
+need for the execution of their boundless plans. They will raise the
+money by the printing of practically unlimited quantities of paper
+money issued against the security of "the ascertained wealth of the
+nation." If they wish to spend money, they simply "make it" by means
+of an ordinary printing press. Could a simpler and more ingenious
+system for making money be devised?
+
+"Recently notice has been given by leading bankers of their intention
+to discriminate against municipal loans. And as things now stand, it
+is certain that, if an organised effort is made generally by the
+bankers throughout the country by advising clients against such
+investments and by refusing to accept municipal bonds as collateral
+security for overdrafts, &c.--a serious check will be put upon public
+enterprise. Those who imagine bankers either impotent or incapable of
+such treason against the public interest should remember what took
+place in the United States in 1893.
+
+"The natural suggestion to be offered as a counter-move to the threat
+of the bankers and their Industrial Freedom League is to add to those
+enterprises now under municipal control that of banking. And surely
+there is nothing which lends itself more easily to municipalisation!
+If the credit of a banking house can be employed for promoting
+enterprise and earning dividends, why cannot municipalities employ
+their own credit directly? In others words, why cannot the credit of a
+city be utilised to carry on its municipal works instead of it having
+to borrow the credit of a bank and pay interest charges? Consider how
+public works are now financed. The London County Council decides to
+build decent and respectable houses in some locality for the working
+classes. It requires, we will say, _500,000l._ with which to build
+dwellings for 2,000 families. Bankers are invited to tender for the
+loan, and finally the Council gets this advance on a guarantee of 3
+per cent. per annum, the principal being repayable at the end of
+thirty-three and a third years. At the end of this period the Council
+will have paid the bank _500,000l._ in interest as well as the
+_500,000l._ original loan. The charge for the loan is equal to the
+entire cost of the whole undertaking; the result is that each family
+must pay about twice the amount of rent that it would otherwise have
+to pay if the Council had not incurred interest charges through
+borrowing other people's credit. Was there ever greater lunacy in
+public affairs?
+
+"Suppose that instead of issuing credit in the shape of bonds of large
+denomination, the Council issued it in notes of small denominations of
+pounds and shillings. Does anyone mean to assert that that credit
+which is eagerly purchased by a banker would be refused by a
+bricklayer or stonemason? Supposing the London County Council was
+empowered to issue its credit in one-pound notes, as well as large
+amounts, and supposing it was compulsory that these notes were good
+in payment of rates. Is there any question as to their being
+acceptable? The plan is so simple and so safe that at first it seems
+amazing it should have been so long out of employment."[761]
+
+"Of course gold will drain off abroad--if the foreigners don't follow
+in our footsteps at once. If the demonetised gold is withdrawn--well,
+we can have a new currency by nationalising the railways and paying
+the shareholders 'in current coin'" (which means in unconvertible
+notes), "not in redeemable, interest-bearing bonds. So long as solid
+wealth rests behind our issue, our financial policy is sound. Of
+course, the railway and other shareholders will want fresh
+investments; they won't find them, because no man will pay interest to
+usurers when he can monetise his credit at the mere cost of banking
+and exchange. They must therefore spend it, and the currency will
+never be restricted henceforward. And this national ownership of
+exchange can be operated to compel every monopolist to sell his
+monopoly to the nation."[762]
+
+This insane project is called by the writer, "A scientific way to
+Socialism."[763]
+
+Surely science is the most abused word in modern language. The
+creation of money by unlimited issues of paper secured by the national
+possessions was tried on the grandest scale at the French Revolution.
+The "assignats" were secured on the national domains, and their
+security seemed absolute to the revolutionaries. The great Mirabeau
+had stated on September 27, 1790: "Our assignats are not ordinary
+paper money. They are a new creation for which there is no precedent.
+What constitutes the value of metal money? Its intrinsic value. Now I
+ask you: Does paper which represents the foremost of the possessions
+of a nation such as France not possess all the characteristics of
+intrinsic and generally accepted value which metal money
+possesses?"[764] The "assignats" speedily fell to a discount, although
+dealing in them at a discount was made punishable with twenty years'
+imprisonment with hard labour,[765] and they fell ultimately to
+waste-paper value. A pair of boots worth thirty francs in gold cost
+10,000 francs in paper. On paper all were immensely rich. Yet the
+masses were starving. Unfortunately people cannot live by consuming
+unlimited quantities of credit notes. They can become prosperous
+neither by robbing the rich nor by calling a shilling a sovereign, but
+only by producing more. Greater wealth means simply increased
+consumption, and increased consumption, unless based on increased
+production, can only be effected by intrenching upon and diminishing
+the national capital, the national reserve store of food, clothing,
+tools, &c., and thus causing widespread misery and starvation.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[751] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future_, p. 192.
+
+[752] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 90.
+
+[753] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[754] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 103.
+
+[755] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 157.
+
+[756] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 14.
+
+[757] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 44.
+
+[758] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 57.
+
+[759] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 1.
+
+[760] _Ibid._ pp. 10, 17.
+
+[761] _How to Finance Municipal Enterprises_, pp. 3-5.
+
+[762] McLachlan, _The Tyranny of Usury_, p. 20.
+
+[763] _Ibid._
+
+[764] _Nouvelle Biographie Generale_, vol. xxxv. p. 39.
+
+[765] Roscher, _System_, p. 227.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXI
+
+SOME SOCIALIST VIEWS ON FREE TRADE AND PROTECTION
+
+
+In his thoughtful book on Socialism, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., the
+Socialist leader, attributes the rise of the Socialist movement in
+great Britain to various causes, one of which is "the reaction against
+Manchesterism."[766]
+
+Socialists, generally speaking, are opposed to Free Trade. Neither the
+moderate nor the revolutionary sections of British Socialism have a
+good word to say for it. The Socialist leaders, looking at the
+question of Free Trade and Protection from the worker's point of view,
+have arrived with Lecky at the conclusion that the whole Liberal Free
+Trade agitation is one of the greatest political impostures which the
+world has witnessed,[767] a view which, by the by, was also expressed
+by Bismarck.[768]
+
+Socialists are not under any illusion as to the causes which led to
+the introduction of Free Trade into Great Britain, and they sneer at
+the humanitarian cant with which its promoters successfully surrounded
+it. One of the leading Socialist books states with regard to this
+point: "Protection was no longer needed by the manufacturers, who had
+supremacy in the world-market, unlimited access to raw material, and a
+long start of the rest of the world in the development of machinery
+and in industrial organisation. The landlord class, on the other
+hand, was absolutely dependent on Protection. The triumph of Free
+Trade therefore signifies economically the decay of the old landlord
+class pure and simple, and the victory of capitalism. The capitalist
+class was originally no fonder of Free Trade than the landlords. It
+destroyed in its own interest the woollen manufacture in Ireland, and
+it would have throttled the trade of the colonies had it not been for
+the successful resistance of Massachusetts and Virginia. It was
+Protectionist so long as it suited its purpose to be so. But when
+cheap raw material was needed for its looms, and cheap bread for its
+workers; when it feared no foreign competitor, and had established
+itself securely in India, in North America, in the Pacific; then it
+demanded Free Trade."[769] "Protection at home was needless to
+manufacturers who beat all their foreign rivals, and whose very
+existence was staked on the expansion of their exports. Protection at
+home was of advantage to none but to the producers of articles of food
+and other raw materials, to the agricultural interest, which, under
+the then existing circumstances in England, meant the receivers of
+rent, the landed aristocracy."[770]
+
+The Free Trade manufacturers, who were chiefly interested in cheapness
+of production, cared little what became of the workers. "The
+individualist devotees of _laisser faire_ used to teach us that when
+restrictions were removed, free competition would settle everything.
+Prices would go down, and fill the 'consumer' with joy unspeakable;
+the fittest would survive, and as for the rest--it was not very clear
+what would become of them, and it really didn't matter."[771]
+
+The doctrines and the boasts of the Free Traders are usually treated
+by the Socialists with contempt. "Cobdenites ascribe every known or
+imagined improvement in commerce, and the condition of the masses, to
+Free Trade. Things are better than they were fifty years ago: Free
+Trade was adopted fifty years ago. _Ergo_--there you are. There is not
+a word about the development of railways and steamships, about
+improved machinery, about telegraphs, the cheap post and telephones,
+about education and better facilities of travel."[772]
+
+The unsoundness of the fundamental doctrine of Free Trade, "Buy in the
+cheapest and sell in the dearest market," has frequently been exposed
+by Socialists. Mr. Blatchford, for instance, in a book of his of which
+more than a million copies have been sold gives prominence to Cobden's
+pronouncement in the House of Commons in which he expounded the
+celebrated maxim: Buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market:
+"To buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest, what is the
+meaning of the maxim? It means that you take the article which you
+have in the greatest abundance and with it obtain from others that of
+which they have the most to spare; so giving to mankind the means of
+enjoying the fullest abundance of earth's goods."[773] Mr. Blatchford
+then comments upon Cobden's doctrine as follows: "Let us reduce these
+fine phrases to figures. Suppose America can sell us wheat at _30s._ a
+quarter, and suppose ours costs _32s. 6d._ a quarter. That is a gain
+of 1/15th in the cost of wheat. We get a loaf for _3d._ instead of
+having to pay _3-1/4d._ That is all the fine phrases mean. What do we
+lose? We lose the beauty and health of our factory towns; we lose
+annually some twenty thousand lives in Lancashire alone; we are in
+constant danger of great strikes; we are reduced to the meanest shifts
+and the most violent acts of piracy and slaughter to 'open up
+markets' for our goods; we lose the stamina of our people, and we lose
+our agriculture."[774]
+
+Most Socialists recognise that under the Free Trade _regime_ Great
+Britain has sacrificed her safety and her strength to profit. "Did you
+ever consider what it involved, this ruin of British agriculture?
+Don't you see that if we lose our power to feed ourselves we destroy
+the advantages of our insular position?"[775] "Don't you see that the
+people who depend on foreigners for their food are at the mercy of any
+ambitious statesman who chooses to make war upon them? And don't you
+think that is rather a stiff price to pay to get a farthing off the
+loaf? No nation can be secure unless it is independent; no nation can
+be independent unless it is based upon agriculture."[776] "We must buy
+wheat from America with cotton goods; but first of all we must buy raw
+cotton with which to make those goods. We are therefore entirely
+dependent upon foreigners for our existence."[777]
+
+"The present national ideal is to become 'The workshop of the world.'
+That is to say, the British people are to manufacture goods for sale
+to foreign countries, and in return for those goods are to get more
+money than they could obtain by developing the resources of their own
+country for their own use. My ideal is that each individual should
+seek his advantage in co-operation with his fellows, and that the
+people should make the best of their own country before attempting to
+trade with other people's."[778] "The Free Traders tell me that under
+their glorious system of free exchange nations naturally occupy
+themselves in those industries which produce the most wealth. Thus, if
+Great Britain, by employing a million men in growing corn, can produce
+_50,000,000l._ a year, while she can produce _51,000,000l._ by
+employing the men in getting coal. Great Britain will 'naturally'
+employ those men in getting coal! Sending her coal abroad, Great
+Britain can get _1,000,000l._ a year more wealth. What a beautiful
+doctrine! Enormous increase in wealth. Foreigners can send us
+_51,000,000l._ of corn for our coal, while Great Britain could only
+grow _50,000,000l._ Free Trade for ever! It never occurs to the Free
+Traders to ask: 'Is it better to have a million men working in the
+bowels of the earth, or a million men tilling the surface?"[779]
+
+"The idea is, that if by making cloth, cutlery, and other goods we can
+buy more food than we can produce at home with the same amount of
+labour, it pays us to let the land go out of cultivation and make
+Britain the 'workshop of the world.' Now, assuming that we can keep
+our foreign trade, and assuming that we can get more food by foreign
+trade than we could produce by the same amount of work, is it quite
+certain that we are making a good bargain when we desert our fields
+for our factories? Suppose men can earn more in the big towns than
+they could earn in the fields, is the difference all gain? Rents and
+prices are higher in the towns; the life is less healthy, less
+pleasant. It is a fact that the death-rates in the towns are higher,
+that the duration of life is shorter, and that the stamina and
+physique of the workers are lowered by town life and by employment in
+the factories. And there is another very serious evil attached to the
+commercial policy of allowing our British agriculture to decay, and
+that is the evil of our dependence upon foreign countries for our
+food. The plain and terrible truth is that even if we have a perfect
+fleet and keep entire control of the seas, we shall still be exposed
+to the risk of almost certain starvation during a European war. As I
+have repeatedly pointed out before, we have by sacrificing our
+agriculture destroyed our insular position. As an island we may be,
+or should be, free from serious danger of invasion. But of what avail
+is our vaunted silver shield of the sea if we depend upon other
+nations for our food? We are helpless in case of a great war. It is
+not necessary to invade England in order to conquer her. Once our
+food-supply is stopped, we are shut up like a beleaguered city, to
+starve or to surrender. Stop the import of food into England for three
+months and we shall be obliged to surrender at discretion. And our
+agriculture is to be ruined and the safety and honour of the Empire
+are to be endangered that a few landlords, coal-owners, and
+moneylenders may wax fat upon the vitals of the nation."[780] "For
+over half a century we have been committing industrial suicide. By
+laying waste our own land and throwing ourselves upon the mercy of the
+foreign food-producers, we have been deliberately sacrificing the
+millions and the future to the millionaires and the moment."[781]
+
+The celebrated cheapness argument of the Free Traders has little
+attraction for Socialists. "'Ah,' says the Free Trader, 'but think of
+the cheaper grocery and the cheaper boots!' Yes, let us think of them.
+What good does it do me, my countrymen, one of the unemployed, to
+think of the wealth of the Rothschilds, or the cheap boots and the
+cheap bread and the cheap clothes of those who benefit by these
+things? I am one of the nation. Are these things that are so good for
+the nation good for me? How can these cheap wares do me any good, who
+have no money at all? The fact is that Free Trade and cheap goods are
+only good for certain individuals. They are good for those who benefit
+by them."[782]
+
+Cheapness means low wages. Cheapness may benefit that strange and
+mythical figure the abstract "consumer" of the text-books, but need
+not benefit the working man. Very likely it will harm him, because
+"Cheap goods mean cheap labour, and cheap labour means low wages. You
+have nothing but your labour to sell, and you are told that it will
+pay you to sell that cheaply."[783] "All commodities are produced by
+labour, therefore to drive commodities down to their cheapest rate
+must result in cheap labour."[784] Cheapness may fill those with joy
+who have money in their pocket and who do not care how cheap goods are
+produced. But incidentally the policy of Free Trade and of _laisser
+faire_, the policy of cheapness which benefits the consumer and takes
+no notice of the producer, encourages and causes sweating and untold
+misery to the workers. "Do you ever consider the lives of the people
+who make these marvellously cheap things? And do you ever think what
+kind of homes they have; in what kind of districts the homes are
+situated; and what becomes of those people when they are too ill, or
+too old, or too infirm to earn even four shillings as the price of a
+hundred and twelve hours' work?"[785]
+
+Free Trade may have been beneficial in Cobden's time, when Great
+Britain was the chief manufacturing country in the world. But what is
+its effect under the changed conditions of the present time, and how
+will these changes affect her industries and her workers? "In the
+early days of our great trade the commercial school wished Britain to
+be the 'workshop of the world,' and for a good while she was the
+workshop of the world. But now a change is coming. Other nations have
+opened world-workshops, and we have to face competition. France,
+Germany, Holland, Belgium, and America are all eager to take our
+coveted place as general factory, and China and Japan are changing
+swiftly from customers into rival dealers. Is it likely, then, that
+we can keep all our foreign trade, or that what we keep will be as
+profitable as it is at present?"[786] "Suppose we lost a lump of our
+export trade. Suppose the Japanese, Chinese, or Americans capture some
+of our markets. Where should we get our food? If we could not sell our
+exports, we could not buy imports of food. We are walking on thin ice,
+my countrymen. And if competition became keener, what would the
+champions of Free Trade do to meet it? They would say: 'We must sell
+our manufactures, or you will get no food. To sell our manufactures we
+must reduce the price. To reduce the price we must reduce the cost of
+production. To reduce the cost of production we must cut down
+wages.'"[787] "Free Trade means _laisser faire_ all round, not only in
+regard to inanimate commodities, but in respect to that most important
+commodity of all--human labour power. Chinese, Japanese, Indians,
+negroes are all permitted under complete Free Trade to compete freely
+on their lower standard of life against the white man."[788] "A demand
+for a general reduction of wages is the end of the fine talk about big
+profits, national prosperity, and the 'workshop of the world.' The
+British workers are to emulate the thrift of the Japanese, the
+Hindoos, and the Chinese, and learn to live on boiled rice and water.
+Why? So that they can accept low wages and retain our precious foreign
+trade. Yes, that is the latest idea. With brutal frankness the workers
+of Britain have been told again and again that, 'If we are to keep our
+foreign trade, the British workers must accept the conditions of their
+foreign rivals,' and that is the result of our commercial glory! For
+that we have sacrificed our agriculture and endangered the safety of
+our Empire."[789]
+
+The assertion of the Free Traders that Free Trade has made Great
+Britain prosperous is treated with scorn. "The Free Traders say we,
+the nation, are richer under this system than we should be under
+Protection. By employing ourselves in those occupations in which we
+can produce the cheapest article, we earn the most wealth in money
+value.--In money value.--They do not consider the twelve million
+underfed, the hundreds of thousands of unemployed. The nation, _we_,
+are richer. That is the test. Well, my countrymen, I think it is a
+damnable doctrine, and its results are damnable. The Free Traders
+boast of our wealth. Are twelve million underfed, a million starving
+children, a million paupers, an infantile death-rate of 150 per
+1,000--are these signs of wealth? The question is not 'Is the nation
+wealthy?' but 'Are the people wealthy?' Judged by this standard, how
+poor a nation is this, my countrymen! The Free Traders tell us that we
+earn more wealth under Free Trade than we should under Protection.
+Again I ask: Who are _we_?"[790] A Socialist weekly lately said:
+"Great Britain, I understand, has recovered its prosperity; our
+exports are going strong, and our imports have nothing much to
+complain about. Prosperity? Why, Great Britain is simply rolling
+in--statistics."[791]
+
+Socialists rightly demand that the effect of British fiscal policy
+should be judged not by its effect upon the wealth of the few, but
+upon the employment of the many, and they clearly recognise the
+destructive effect which Free Trade has upon the national industries.
+"Under Free Trade it is possible for a foreign trader to take trade
+away from a British trader. If for any reason we lost an important
+trade, or several small trades, our unemployed would naturally grow.
+The Free Trade theory that the capital and the labour in the lost
+trades will find other employment is simply theory. Suppose they
+didn't. The Free Trader has no answer except: Look at our enormous
+wealth. My countrymen, looking at another man's wealth does not feed
+me, clothe me, and house me."[792] "When men are thrown out of work,
+by competition, or depression, or any cause, they do not so easily
+'transfer their services to some other new employment.' It is easy to
+make them do so--on paper. And when they do get a fresh job, is it
+always as good as the one lost? Do they not often lose all their
+belongings, and get into debt, while looking for that new employment
+which the Free Traders talk about so glibly? and do not capitalists
+often lose a good deal of capital before they give up the fight for
+the trade? Nevertheless, say the Free Traders, we, the nation, are
+richer under this system than we should be under Protection. By
+employing ourselves in those occupations in which we can produce the
+cheapest article, we earn the most wealth in money value."[793] To
+this argument the Socialists reply: "Does your moral law say it is
+right that men should be thrown on the streets to starve because other
+men in other countries produce goods 2-1/2 per cent. cheaper?"[794]
+
+The statistics of an enormous foreign trade, which Free Traders
+triumphantly display for the edification of the masses, give,
+according to the Socialists, little consolation to the unemployed and
+ill-employed workers. "Figures, be they never so dazzling, and
+numbers, be they never so round, will not feed the hungry, house the
+homeless, or bring light and warmth into the drear, precarious lives
+of the mass of our people. The increase of trade means only an
+increase of production, and not necessarily of persons employed or
+wages gained. With the rapid concentration of industries and the
+perfection of labour-saving devices, production has been enormously
+increased without any corresponding increase of employment; in some
+cases, with an actual decrease of employment. What the workers are
+interested in is not the mere growth of profitable trade, but the
+extent to which the industries of their country afford them and their
+families a security of livelihood, and the reasonable comforts and
+recreations which their labour has more than earned."[795]
+
+Most Socialists frankly own that Free Trade has been a failure. "In
+the House of Commons on March 12th, 1906, Mr. P. Snowden, M.P., said:
+'Sixty years of Free Trade had failed to mitigate or palliate to any
+considerable extent the grave industrial and social evils which Free
+Traders and Protectionists alike were compelled to admit. Sir H.
+Campbell-Bannerman had admitted them when he said that 30 per cent. of
+our population were on the verge of hunger. He contended that whatever
+improvement had been effected in the condition of the people during
+the last sixty years was due to other causes than Free Trade."[796]
+
+During 1907 the complaints among the Socialists about the effect of
+Free Trade upon employment have become louder. The fact that British
+unemployed workmen furnished an apparently inexhaustible supply of
+strike-breakers to Continental employers, that men fought like wild
+beasts at the registry offices in order to be allowed to act as
+strike-breakers in Hamburg and Antwerp, has shown the great prevalence
+of unemployment. Commenting hereon a Socialist monthly said in bitter
+irony, under the heading "British Blacklegs": "The intervention in the
+Antwerp dock-workers' strike of British workmen as blacklegs is a
+striking commentary on the prosperity of the people of this country.
+Under Free Trade we have been told--_ad nauseam_--by Liberal
+politicians that the British working-man is the most prosperous and
+well-fed human being on the face of the earth. He, with wages nearly
+double those of the best-paid Continental workman, with all kinds of
+provisions infinitely cheaper--thanks to Free Trade--than they can be
+procured elsewhere, is indeed 'God's Englishman.' It would be as
+unkind as rude to suggest that these honourable politicians had been
+lying. The only alternative conclusion to be arrived at is that the
+British workman is a most disinterested being, willing to sacrifice
+his prosperity and comfort in order to compel the miserably paid
+dockers of Antwerp and Hamburg to submit to the conditions against
+which they have revolted."[797] The action of Mr. Haldane, the present
+Secretary of State for War, in dismissing a large number of workmen
+from Woolwich Arsenal and giving a contract for 100,000 horseshoes for
+the British Army to an American firm on account of greater cheapness,
+prompted the following verses:
+
+    Mr. Haldane was smiling and suave
+    As his views upon horseshoes he gave;
+      He will buy from the Yanks
+      (Who take orders with thanks).
+    And believes that much money he'll save.
+
+    How thankful we all ought to be
+    That this most kind and careful M.P.
+      Thus shows Woolwich men
+      They will be employed when
+    They're off to the States--Q.E.D.[798]
+
+Some Socialists take a very pessimistic view of the economic position
+of Great Britain. Mr. Hyndman said that "Great Britain had lost her
+commercial and industrial supremacy. The United States now stood
+first, Germany second, and Great Britain was forced into third
+place."[799] Many years ago some far-seeing Socialists had prophesied
+the coming industrial decline of Great Britain. "The notion that
+Britain can hold a monopoly of engineering, or of any other trade,
+must be given up. Britain cannot; countries that have been almost
+wholly agricultural are rapidly becoming manufacturers too."[800] Of
+late these pessimistic forecasts have become louder and more frequent.
+The progress of industrial countries can be measured, to some extent,
+by their output of coal, and "at no distant date Germany will probably
+also surpass our output and we will be relegated to third place."[801]
+This event will very likely take place about 1910. The statistics
+published by the British Board of Trade are deceptive. They leave out
+Germany's very large and constantly growing output of lignite, which
+amounts to about 60,000,000 tons per annum, and which increases
+Germany's coal output, as stated by the Board of Trade, by about 50
+per cent.
+
+British Socialists have found out that the Free Trade doctrine with
+its hypothetical "consumer" for a centre is opposed to science, to
+experience, and to common-sense. "The present system of trade is, in
+my opinion, opposed entirely to reason and justice. Nearly all our
+practical economists of to-day put the consumer first and the producer
+last. This is wrong. There can be no just or sane system which does
+not first consider the producer and then widely and equitably
+regulates the distribution of the things produced."[802] They
+recognise that Free Trade has caused ill-balanced production, and
+that, through the stagnation and decay of industries, men who ought to
+be engaged in production have been forced into more or less
+unprofitable and more or less useless employments. "What this country
+is rotting for is the want of more and better producers of
+necessaries--more and better market-gardeners, fruit-growers,
+foresters, general farmers, wool-workers, builders, and useful makers
+generally. Instead of which, the present system is giving us more and
+more non-producers--more and more shopkeepers, middlemen, commercial
+travellers, advertising agents, dealers, and wasters generally.
+According to the last census returns, we find that whilst the
+agricultural class shows a terrible decline, and the industrial class
+has barely kept pace with the population as a whole, on the other hand
+the commercial, or selling class, shows an increase of over 42 per
+cent. inside ten years."[803]
+
+Free Trade has been tried and has been found wanting, and a return to
+Protection, which is in accordance with the needs of the times and the
+spirit of the workers, especially of the trade unionists, is
+inevitable. "Capitalist Free Trade is a manifest failure. Trade
+unionism is, in its essence, a very sturdy form of Protection, as we
+can see, if not here in Great Britain, certainly in America and in
+Australia."[804] "Society is constantly changing its form of living:
+every day some supposed old truth goes into the limbo of forgotten
+things, and, looking around us, those who have eyes to see and ears to
+hear may see and hear on all hands the death-knell of the old
+Manchester school of political economy."[805]
+
+The claims of Free Trade and the cheap-food cry are disregarded and
+treated with contempt. "Free Traders talk about the folly of
+Protection. But Free Trade itself is a form of Protection. It protects
+the strong and the cunning against the weaker and the more honest. It
+protects the cheap and nasty against the good."[806] The founder of
+modern Socialism had stated already in 1847: "What is Free Trade under
+the present conditions of society? Freedom of capital."[807] Free
+Trade undoubtedly directly protects capital and leaves labour
+unprotected. "Your food will cost you more! I am to bow down to the
+idol of cheapness. I, one of the unemployed. What is cheapness to me,
+who have no money at all?"[808] "Your Manchester school treat all
+social and industrial problems from the standpoint of mere animal
+subsistence."[809] Declarations such as "The Social-Democratic
+Federation stands for universal free trade or free exchange and for
+the abolition of all indirect taxation,"[810] and "The only form of
+Protection advocated by the Social-Democratic Federation is the
+protection of the proletariat against the robbery and exploitation of
+the master-class"[811] have not the ring of seriousness about them.
+
+Only very rarely are utterances in favour of Free Trade to be found in
+Socialist writings. However, frequently the demand is made that Tariff
+Reform and Socialism must go hand in hand, and doubt is expressed
+whether the Tariff Reform agitation is carried on for the benefit of
+the manufacturer or for that of the workers. "Mr. Chamberlain is not a
+Socialist. His Government will not be a Socialist Government. His plan
+would protect only the rich. This fiscal fight is a fight between
+capitalists as to who shall make the profits. It is not a fight for
+the benefit of the 'nation.' That is what they tell you. The
+capitalist who loses his trade through foreign competition is a Tariff
+Reformer. He wants Protection. The capitalist who depends on cheap
+foreign imports for raw material is a Free Trader. He does not want
+his prices raised."[812] "Preferential trade is the proposal of
+individual capitalists who desire to make profits out of our Imperial
+connections."[813]
+
+The Fabian organ looks at Free Trade and Protection merely as a
+business proposition. "We care nothing for abstract Cobdenite
+economics, and are quite willing to welcome Tariff Reform if its
+advocates show us that it can be used as a lever for raising the
+standards of life and labour. The Labour party is therefore eminently
+wise in seeing how far it can be used for their advantage.
+Protectionism of the Australian Labour party is the right kind of
+Protectionism--Labour-Protectionism: a very different thing from the
+Capital-Protectionism which is (with a few exceptions) the
+characteristic mark of Tariff Reformers in this country."[814]
+
+Some revolutionary Socialists are in favour of Free Trade because they
+hope that it will bring on a revolution in Great Britain. Their great
+leader, Karl Marx, taught sixty years ago, when Free Trade was being
+introduced: "The Protective system is nothing but a means of
+establishing manufacture upon a large scale in any given country.
+Besides this, the Protective system helps to develop free competition
+within a nation. Generally speaking, the Protective system in these
+days is conservative, while the Free Trade system works destructively.
+It breaks up old nationalities and carries the antagonism of
+proletariat and bourgeoisie to the uttermost point. In a word, the
+Free Trade system hastens the social revolution. In this revolutionary
+sense alone I am in favour of Free Trade."[815] Those Socialist
+revolutionaries who wish to increase the misery of the people, hoping
+that unbearable poverty, owing to increasing unemployment and
+consequent want, will at least madden the people and cause a
+revolution--they remember that the great French revolutions were also
+brought about by unemployment and consequent widespread misery--are
+the most determined champions of Free Trade.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[766] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[767] Lecky, _History of the Eighteenth Century_, quoted in _Fabian
+Essays in Socialism_, p. 81.
+
+[768] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 531.
+
+[769] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 80, 81.
+
+[770] F. Engels in Marx, _Discourse on Free Trade_, p. 5.
+
+[771] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 90.
+
+[772] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 154.
+
+[773] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 33.
+
+[774] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 33.
+
+[775] _Ibid._ pp. 33, 34.
+
+[776] _Ibid._ p. 35.
+
+[777] _Ibid._ p. 34.
+
+[778] _Ibid._ p. 12.
+
+[779] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 100.
+
+[780] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, pp. 97, 98, and 118.
+
+[781] Hall, _Land, Labour, and Liberty_, p. 11.
+
+[782] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 82.
+
+[783] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 92.
+
+[784] _Ibid._ p. 97.
+
+[785] _Ibid._ p. 97.
+
+[786] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 100.
+
+[787] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 103.
+
+[788] _Justice_, November 23, 1907.
+
+[789] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 100.
+
+[790] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, pp. 102, 103.
+
+[791] _Clarion_, October 25, 1907.
+
+[792] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, pp. 96, 97.
+
+[793] _Ibid._ p. 101.
+
+[794] _Ibid._ p. 104.
+
+[795] _Labour Leader_, January 12, 1906.
+
+[796] _National Union Gleanings_, vol. xxvi. January-June 1906, p.
+220.
+
+[797] _Social-Democrat_, September 1907, pp. 519, 520.
+
+[798] _Battersea Vanguard_, November 1907, p. 5.
+
+[799] _Report, 27th Annual Conference Social-Democratic Federation_
+1907, p. 29.
+
+[800] Mann, _The International Labour Movement_, p. 8.
+
+[801] Jones, _Mining Royalties_, p. 14.
+
+[802] Blatchford, _Competition_, p. 9.
+
+[803] Hall, _Land, Labour, and Liberty_, pp. 9, 10.
+
+[804] _Justice_, November 23, 1907.
+
+[805] George Lansbury, _The Principles of the English Poor Law_, p.
+16.
+
+[806] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 104.
+
+[807] Karl Marx, _A Discourse on Free Trade_, p. 39.
+
+[808] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 100.
+
+[809] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 15.
+
+[810] H. Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 11.
+
+[811] _Ibid._
+
+[812] Suthers, _My Right to Work_, p. 119.
+
+[813] J. Ramsay Macdonald, _Labour and the Empire_, p. 97.
+
+[814] _New Age_, October 10, 1907, p. 369.
+
+[815] Karl Marx, _A Discourse on Free Trade_, p. 42.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXII
+
+SOCIALISM AND EDUCATION
+
+
+The attitude of Socialists towards education is a peculiar one. They
+see in it apparently less an agency for distributing knowledge and
+discovering ability than an instrument for the propagation of
+Socialism and an institution for relieving parents of all cost and
+responsibility for the maintenance and the bringing up of their
+children. Hence most Socialists, in discussing education, consider it
+rather from the point of view of those who are desirous of State
+relief than from the point of view of those who wish for good
+education.
+
+Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded by the Social-Democratic
+Federation, the following embody its education programme: "Elementary
+education to be free, secular, industrial, and compulsory for all
+classes. The age of obligatory school attendance to be raised to
+sixteen. Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher
+education, both general and technical, and all such education to be
+free. Free maintenance for all attending State schools. Abolition of
+school rates; the cost of education in all State schools to be borne
+by the national Exchequer."[816] An influential Socialist writer
+demands: "Education should be fee-less from top to bottom of the
+ladder, the universities included."[817] In accordance with the
+Socialist views regarding the relation of the sexes, which are
+described in Chapter XXV. "Socialism and Woman, the Family and the
+Home,"[818] most Socialists demand co-education and identical
+education for both sexes. "Under Socialism boys and girls will receive
+exactly the same training and exercise in the fundamentals of a
+liberal education. Success in examinations of whatever character shall
+bring equal reward and distinction. There will be no separation into
+boys' classes and girls' classes. The instruction being the same, they
+shall receive it at the same time."[819] "Education will be the same
+for all and for both sexes. The sexes will be separated only in cases
+in which functional differences make it absolutely necessary."[820]
+
+Socialists see in the schools chiefly a means whereby to abolish
+parental responsibilities and to secure "free State maintenance" for
+all children. In claiming free State maintenance, Socialists grossly
+exaggerate with regard to the number of underfed children. "It is
+doubtful if half the children at present attending school are
+physically fit to be educated, and medical men of eminence have
+unhesitatingly expressed the opinion that the alarming increase of
+insanity, which is one of the most terrible characteristics of modern
+social life, is largely, if not entirely, due to the attempt to
+educate those who are too ill-nourished to stand the mental strain
+that even the most elementary school-training involves. As a remedy
+for this, the Social-Democratic Federation advocates a complete system
+of free State maintenance for all children attending school. This is
+an essential corollary of compulsory education. Only complete free
+maintenance will meet the requirements of the case."[821] "All
+children, destitute or not, should be fed, and fed without charge, at
+the expense of the State or municipality. We propose that the regular
+school course should include at least one meal a day. Thus only can
+we make sure that all the children who need feeding will be fed."[822]
+"To cram dates into the poor little skulls of innocent children when
+you ought to be cramming dates down their throats is not a right thing
+to do, especially when you remember that the most precious thing in
+this world is a human life, and when you realise that you are
+murdering systematically thousands of children every year because they
+cannot get proper food--they cannot even get pure milk in the great
+cities of our land. One of our first duties in this nation is to see
+that every child has a right to the best and most ample provision for
+its physical needs. That should be the primary charge upon the nation.
+I am not here to-night to discuss the great question of the State
+maintenance of children. Personally I am absolutely in favour of
+it."[823] Experience of other nations has taught that the institution
+of free meals for necessitous school-children is immediately and very
+grossly abused by unscrupulous parents easily able to feed their
+children. From Milan, for instance, we learn that "When in 1900 this
+service began, meals were given on only 133 days out of a possible 174
+days of school attendance. The outlay was then set down at 98,300
+francs. During the second year, however, free meals were served on 153
+days and cost 149,337 francs. In 1903 the free meals cost the
+municipality 247,766 francs and 277,603 in 1904. The outlay will now
+exceed 300,000 francs, and the number of pupils who manage to
+establish their claim to be fed gratuitously is ever increasing."[824]
+British experiments of free feeding on a smaller scale have shown that
+"In the large majority of cases the children who are sent to school
+hungry are so sent, not by honest and poor parents, but by those who
+have an imperfectly developed sense of parental responsibility and are
+willing to shuffle out of the duty of providing for their children if
+they think anybody else will undertake it for them. These parents are
+not in need of assistance--they are perfectly well able to feed their
+own children; but if free meals can be had for the asking, they are
+not too proud to tell the child to ask. It relieves the mother of the
+trouble of preparing a meal for the child, and the money saved can be
+used for some more attractive form of personal expenditure."[825] At
+Birmingham, for example, numerous applications were made by the
+teachers to the relieving officers on behalf of children under their
+care, but when inquiries were made into the circumstances of the
+parents it was found that many of them were earning over thirty
+shillings a week, and in one case the parent was in constant
+employment with an average wage of _3l. 17s. 6d._ a week.[826] In
+Bolton, where during the winter of 1904-5 a charitable society
+provided free meals for children in certain centres of the town, it
+was found that the parents of some of the children who were partaking
+of the free meals so provided, and even reported as being underfed,
+were in receipt of as much as from _2l._ to _3l._ a week.[827] In
+Fulham (London) "More than one hundred names were sent to the Boards
+of Guardians of children who were adjudged to be underfed and were
+receiving meals from public charity. In hardly one of these cases did
+the relieving officer consider the complaint well founded. One family
+was found by him to be earning an income of _4l. 4s._ a week, and yet
+the children were sent to share in the charitable meals."[828] "Some
+of the parents who sent their children to the Johanna Street school in
+Lambeth said that they did not give their children food before going
+to school as they knew that if they did not do so they would receive
+it at the school, as the children of other people got food there and
+they did not see why theirs should not too."[829] The fact that
+Socialists grossly exaggerate in giving the proportion of underfed
+school children, and in ascribing the cause of underfeeding solely to
+the poverty of parents, is clear to all who have studied the problem
+of poverty. Mr. Cyril Jackson, the chief inspector of public
+elementary schools, for instance, in summarising the evidence of the
+women inspectors appointed to inquire into the age of admission of
+infants into elementary schools, says: "The question of underfed
+children cannot fail to be touched in the course of such an inquiry.
+It is interesting to find a general agreement that it is unsuitable
+rather than insufficient feeding that is responsible for sickly
+children. Want of sufficient sleep, neglect of personal cleanliness,
+badly ventilated homes, are contributory causes of the low physical
+standard reached."[830]
+
+Some Socialists, though only a few, have been honest enough to express
+similar views. A Fabian tract, for instance, says: "We have said that
+universal free feeding appears to be the only way in which the evil of
+improper (as distinct from insufficient) feeding can be removed. At
+present many children whose parents get fairly good wages cannot feed
+their children properly, either because they do not know what is the
+best food to give, or because they have not the time or the skill to
+prepare it. Manifestly the case of these will not be met by any system
+which feeds only the patently starved and destitute child. But it will
+be met both directly and indirectly by a universal system; directly,
+because the children, whatever they get at home, will at least get
+proper food at school; indirectly, because it will serve to educate
+the next generation of mothers in the knowledge of what is the best
+and most economical way of providing for their families. This is not
+the place to go into the very large question of what is the ideal diet
+for a child. All that need be insisted on here is that the provision
+should be bought and prepared under expert advice, and that
+consideration of cheapness should never be allowed to count as against
+the needs of nourishment. Every child should receive at least one
+solid meal in the middle of the day, and perhaps a glass of hot milk
+on arrival in the morning."[831]
+
+The "hungry children" argument is a valuable one for purposes of
+agitation, and it is used by the Socialists to the fullest extent. The
+workers are told: "The children are too ill provided for to be
+educated. This is not because the worker is idle or thriftless, but
+actually because he is too industrious and produces so much that his
+labour as a producer is at a discount. It is objected that to provide
+free State maintenance for all the children would be to destroy
+parental responsibility. But it is too late in the day to urge this
+objection, seeing that the State has taken upon itself the education
+of the children and is prepared to undertake, and does undertake,
+their maintenance and bringing-up when the parents are so careless of
+their responsibilities as to neglect them entirely."[832] "The
+old-fashioned prejudice fostered by the capitalists and their
+hangers-on that it is degrading to accept anything from the State is
+fast dying out"[833]--That workmen who are daily told by their leaders
+that it is unreasonable to expect that they should bring up their
+children frequently desert their family is natural. Every year many
+thousands of wives and children are deserted. At every police station
+the names of such men may be seen posted up, and those desertions are
+undoubtedly largely due to Socialistic teaching.
+
+The real object of the Socialists in demanding free maintenance for
+the children is not humanity. In making that demand they do not even
+think of the welfare of the children, as the following extracts will
+prove, which clearly reveal the real object of their demands. "Free
+maintenance for children should be accepted by trade unionists as
+tending to raise the standard of comfort. All should demand it with
+the object of personally benefiting themselves."[834] "In nine cases
+out of ten it is the hungry child who breaks the back of the strike.
+Let them feel assured that their children's dinner is secure, and they
+will continue the struggle to a victorious end."[835] "Free
+maintenance for children would be a tax on that surplus wealth which
+the capitalists and the aristocracy share between them. To the worker
+free maintenance for his children would be equivalent to an additional
+income. His standard of living would rise. No doubt the capitalist
+would reduce his wages as much as possible, but the worker would then
+be able to fight him on more equal terms. His children being well
+cared for, he would be able to hold out against the capitalist for an
+indefinite period."[836] "We counsel the workers to accept the offer
+as a small payment on account of a huge debt, but to accept it with no
+more gratitude than is shown by the class which is maintained in
+luxury, parents and children alike, by the collective industry of the
+workers. By dint of organisation they may be able very soon to exact
+payment of a more substantial sum--State maintenance, to wit."[837]
+
+The doctrines above given have unfortunately been accepted by many
+organised workers. A resolution of the Trades Union Congress at
+Leeds, in September 1904, asserted:
+
+"That having regard to the facts (_a_) that twelve millions of the
+population are living in actual poverty, or close to the poverty line;
+(_b_) that physical deterioration of the people is the inevitable
+result of this; (_c_) that it is impossible to teach starving and
+underfed children, this Congress urges the Government to introduce,
+without further delay, legislation instructing education authorities
+to provide at least one free meal a day for children attending
+State-supported schools."
+
+A resolution passed at the Scottish Miners' Conference on December 30,
+1904, stated:
+
+"That this Conference is in favour of State maintenance of children,
+but that in the meantime we identify ourselves with the movement in
+favour of free meals for school children."
+
+Resolutions passed by the National Labour Conference on the State
+maintenance of children, at the Guildhall, City of London, Friday,
+January 20, 1905, declared:
+
+"That this Conference of delegates from British Labour Organisations,
+Socialist and other bodies, declares in favour of State maintenance of
+children as a necessary corollary of universal compulsory education
+and as a means of partially arresting that physical deterioration of
+the industrial population of this country which is now generally
+recognised as a grave national danger. As a step towards such State
+maintenance this Conference, supporting the decision of the last
+Trades Union Congress upon this question, calls upon the Government to
+introduce without further delay such legislative measures as will
+enable the local authorities to provide meals for children attending
+the common schools, to be paid for out of the National Exchequer; and
+in support of this demand calls attention to the evidence given by Dr.
+Eichholz, the official witness of the Board of Education on the
+Committee on Physical Deterioration, in which he stated that the
+question of food is at the base of all the evils of child degeneracy,
+and that if steps were taken to ensure the proper adequate feeding of
+the children the evil will rapidly cease."
+
+A Socialist has worked out in a widely read book the cost of free
+education and State maintenance, which will require a yearly
+expenditure of _458,750,000l._, a sum four times as large as the
+entire national Budget. This outlay does not deter him. Combining the
+State schools with State workshops, he promises that they will yield a
+profit of exactly _105,850,000l._ a year.[838] This scheme should
+recommend itself to Chancellors of the Exchequer in search of a few
+millions.
+
+Another imaginative Socialist would make the abolition of all existing
+languages part of his educational scheme: "Socialism will steadfastly
+aim at the adoption of a universal language, be it English or volapuk.
+All the modern languages--and for the matter of that, the ancient
+also--are but jungles of verbiage which retard, rather than
+facilitate, human thought and progress. They have grown up anyhow; but
+what we now want is a made language, constructed on scientific
+principles, and so easy of comprehension that any intelligent person
+can acquire it in a few months."[839]
+
+Across the educational, as most other, proposals of British Socialists
+should be written in large letters, Utopia!
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[816] See Appendix.
+
+[817] Davidson, _Democrat's Address_, p. 5.
+
+[818] See p. 330.
+
+[819] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, pp. 39, 40.
+
+[820] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 218.
+
+[821] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 8.
+
+[822] Fabian Tract, _After Bread, Education_, No. 120, p. 9.
+
+[823] Kirtlan, _Socialism for Christians_, p. 8.
+
+[824] _Free Feeding of School Children_, p. 23.
+
+[825] Cox, _Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[826] _Local Government Board Report_, Cd. 3105, p. 495.
+
+[827] _Ibid._ p. 506.
+
+[828] _Times_, March 17, 1906.
+
+[829] Cox, _Socialism_, pp. 16, 17.
+
+[830] _Cd._ 2726, p. iii.
+
+[831] Fabian Tract, _After Bread, Education_, No. 120, p. 14.
+
+[832] Quelch, _Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 9.
+
+[833] _Socialism and Trade Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[834] _Socialism and Trade Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[835] Fabian Tract, _After Bread, Education_, No. 120, p. 11.
+
+[836] _Socialism and Trade Unionism_, p. 5.
+
+[837] Watts, _State Maintenance for Children_, p. 4.
+
+[838] Richardson, _How It Can Be Done_, pp. 50-61.
+
+[839] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 166.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXIII
+
+THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIALISTS TOWARDS PROVIDENCE, THRIFT, AND TEMPERANCE
+
+
+Socialism thrives upon the poverty, unhappiness, and misery of the
+workers. Starving and desperate men may easily be aroused to
+rebellion. Contented men will not become Socialists. Therefore it lies
+in the interest of the professional Socialist agitators to maintain
+poverty and misery among the masses, and if possible to increase it.
+With this object in view, many Socialist agitators oppose all measures
+which are likely to turn the propertyless wage-earner--the "wage
+slave" as the Socialists like to call him, in order to exasperate
+him--into an owner of property, a small capitalist. That might make
+him a contented man. Therefore, as we have seen in Chapter XVIII., the
+Socialist leaders strenuously oppose "for scientific reasons" the
+creation of peasant proprietors. They distinctly encourage
+improvidence and oppose, also "for scientific reasons," providence,
+thrift, and abstinence among the workers. The philosopher of British
+Socialism informs us: "Thrift, the hoarding up of the products of
+labour, it is obvious, must be without rhyme or reason, except on a
+capitalist basis,"[840] and the Socialists do not wish the workers to
+become capitalists.
+
+Some Socialists were indiscreet enough to confess that they opposed
+providence, thrift, and temperance among the workers, as practised
+especially by the members of trade unions, co-operative societies, and
+friendly societies, because these are likely to elevate the masses
+and rob the Socialist leaders of supporters. We read, for instance:
+"The so-called thrift and temperance movements are essentially
+antagonistic to Socialism."[841] "The trade co-operator canonises the
+bourgeois virtues, but Socialist vices, of 'over-work' and
+'thrift.'"[842] "Co-operation, though regarded by the individual
+trader as an enemy, does not necessarily enter into conflict with the
+capitalist at all. Indeed, so far as it transforms workmen into
+shareholders, it forms a bulwark for capitalism, the same as the
+creation of small landholders or any other class of small proprietors
+would do."[843] "Co-operation, as carried on in England, is an
+obstacle and a danger to the Socialist cause. Being capitalist
+concerns pure and simple, co-operative societies are subjected to the
+same influences as all other capitalistic ventures."[844] "The
+friendly societies are the least promising of any of the democratic
+movements from the political point of view. The doctrine of 'thrift'
+also has been preached very vigorously to them. There is at present
+little prospect of the friendly societies identifying themselves with
+the general political labour movement of the country."[845] The
+Anarchist Congress of 1869 at Marseilles stated very truly: "La
+cooperation demoralise les ouvriers en faisant des bourgeois."[846]
+
+Now let us take note of the "scientific" arguments with which British
+Socialists oppose providence, thrift, and sobriety among the workers.
+
+"Under present circumstances, the more frugal, thrifty, and abstemious
+working people as a class become, the more cheaply they have to live,
+the more cheaply they have to sell their labour power to the
+capitalist class, wages being determined by the cost of
+subsistence."[847] "Temperance, thrift, industry only serve to make
+labour an easier or more valuable prey to capital. If they reduce the
+cost of living in any particular, they but reduce the cost of labour
+to the capitalist."[848] "If _all_ the workers were very thrifty,
+sober, industrious, and abstemious they would be worse off in the
+matter of wages than they are now."[849] "The mere cheapening of the
+cost of living only tends to reduce wages, and thus cannot advantage
+the worker."[850] "If _all_ workers were to become teetotalers and
+vegetarians, wages would inevitably fall to the wretched level,
+perchance, of Oriental countries like India and China, where thrift in
+every form is carried to incredible lengths."[851] "Is it not proved
+that the Hindoos and the Chinese, who are the most temperate and the
+most thrifty people in the world, are always the worst paid? And don't
+you see that if the Lancashire workers would live upon rice and water,
+the masters would soon have their wages down to rice and water
+point?"[852]
+
+The foregoing arguments, which are based on the "Iron Law of Wages,"
+of which a refutation has been given in Chapter IV.,[853] may sound
+plausible to the unthinking workman. They may infuriate him and
+therefore serve the ends of the Socialist agitator, but they are
+utterly false and dishonest, as all Socialist leaders know. Wages
+depend partly on the supply and demand for labour, partly on the
+productiveness of labour. In machineless countries, such as China and
+India, the average worker produces very little, and the supply of
+workers is unlimited. Hence their wages are low. If the Socialistic
+arguments were right, Chinese and Hindoos could double or treble
+their wages by becoming drunkards, and English navvies could earn
+_5l._ a week by agreeing among themselves to drink champagne instead
+of beer. If the cost of subsistence determined the rate of wages, the
+wages for all workers in London ought to be approximately the same. In
+reality, however, we find that wages range in London from _3l. 10s._
+to _18s._ per week. The most skilled workers receive the highest, the
+least skilled the lowest, wages. It is therefore evident that wages
+are determined by the cost of subsistence only in the case of the
+least skilled workers, provided an unlimited supply of such workers
+and unrestricted competition among them for work drive down their
+wages to the bare existence level.
+
+Providence, thrift, and temperance are habitually attacked by
+Socialists not only on "scientific" but also on moral and philosophical
+grounds. For instance, Mr. Keir Hardie tells us: "As for thrift, much
+which passes for such at present is little different from
+soul-destroying parsimony. Men and women starve their years of healthy
+activity that they may have enough to keep alive an attenuated old age
+scarcely worth preserving."[854] In other words, he advises the workers
+to spend all they earn and to become paupers in their old age. A very
+influential Socialist writer says: "A man by starving his mind and his
+body is able to save money. He borrows books instead of buying them. He
+starves his emotional nature by neglecting to go to the theatre,
+because to go to the theatre costs money. He doesn't go to concerts
+because concerts cost money. He is a teetotaler, not so much because he
+wishes to keep his stomach clean and his head clear, but because his
+ideal men are teetotalers, grad-grinds, who mortify the flesh in order
+to save. And the money is saved with a bad intention. The aim is either
+to start independently in business, or else to secure shares in the
+undertaking paying the highest dividends compatible with security. The
+object of this man is to leave his class behind him, and to live _upon_
+labour rather than _by_ it"[855]--According to this authority it would
+be immoral for the rural labourer to save in order to be able to till
+his own field and to live in his own cottage; it would be immoral for
+the artisan to endeavour to have a workshop and a house of his own; it
+would be immoral for the worker to put his savings into a savings-bank
+or a friendly society, or some limited company, and to live upon his
+savings during his old age. It would almost seem as if from the
+Socialist point of view the only moral way of obtaining property was by
+plundering the rich. "Waste all you earn and die in the workhouse" is
+at present their advice to the worker, and the worker who follows that
+advice and who lives from hand to mouth easily becomes a pauper. For
+him a short spell of unemployment means starvation and despair. This is
+evidently a state of affairs which Socialist agitators favour because
+it will increase their following.--Another prominent Socialist writer
+says: "Among the many quack remedies for poverty, the most venerable
+and the most illusive is thrift or saving. The habit of saving is
+always represented by the rich as the highest of social virtues; but it
+is one they are careful rarely to practise themselves"[856]--If the
+rich are so wasteful, how is it then that the national capital, held by
+the rich, as the Socialists tell us, has increased from
+_4,000,000,000l._ to _12,000,000,000l._ during the last sixty years,
+notwithstanding huge capital losses caused by suffering industries? The
+decay of agriculture alone has caused a capital loss which approximates
+_2,000,000,000l._
+
+The great co-operative movement in England was created by the
+celebrated Rochdale Pioneers, the name given to the weavers of
+Rochdale who started it. On a rainy night in November 1843, twelve men
+met in the back room of a mean inn and commenced the co-operative
+movement by organising themselves as "The Rochdale Society of
+Equitable Pioneers." They agreed to pay twenty pence a week into a
+common fund, but only a few of these twelve men were able to pay their
+pence that evening. They began by buying a little tea and sugar at
+wholesale prices, which they sold to their members at little more than
+cost. In a year their number had grown to twenty-eight, and they had
+collected _28l._, with which they rented a little store and stocked it
+with _15l._ worth of flour. During the first year they made no profit.
+In its second year the society had seventy-four members, _181l._ in
+funds, _710l._ of business, and made _22l._ profit, 2-1/2 per cent. of
+which was used as a fund for education.[857]
+
+Gradually but constantly growing, this movement has branched out in
+every direction, and the result is that there are now in Great Britain
+1,685 co-operative societies with 2,263,562 members. These
+co-operative societies are manufacturers, ship owners, bankers,
+brokers, factors, merchants, millers, printers, bookbinders, and
+shopkeepers of every kind on the largest scale. The rapidly growing
+assets of the various undertakings represent a value of about
+_50,000,000l._, the combined nominal capital comes to _42,813,348l._,
+and the yearly net profits amount to about _11,000,000l._, or to more
+than 35 per cent. per annum on the subscribed capital. In 1905 the net
+profits amounted to 37.4 per cent., in 1906 to 36.4 per cent. on the
+share capital.
+
+Capitalised at 4 per cent, the co-operative societies represent an
+investment value of about _300,000,000l._, or about _100l._ per
+co-operator. The societies maintain an army of 107,727 employees.
+Their progress during the last decade may be seen at a glance from
+the following figures:
+
+_Total Trade of British Co-operative Societies._
+
+    1896                    L58,729,643
+    1901                     88,394,304
+    1906                    110,085,826[858]
+
+Already the income of the co-operative societies is twice as large as
+the interest paid on the whole of the deposits in the British
+savings-banks. There is no reason why the co-operative movement should
+not further grow and increase, and it is to be hoped that it will
+further extend in every direction to the benefit of the industrious
+and thrifty workers. There ought to be no propertyless workers in
+Great Britain.
+
+The British co-operative societies have proved to the dismay of the
+Socialists that working men may improve their position unaided and may
+become capitalists. They have proved that thrift and ability create
+prosperity, and they have therefore incurred the hatred of the
+Socialist agitators. The philosopher of British Socialism complains:
+"Co-operation so far from being Socialism is the very antithesis of
+Socialism. Trade co-operation is simply a form of industrial
+partnership, in which the society of co-operators is in the relation
+of capitalist to the outer world. The units of the society may be
+equal amongst themselves, but their very existence in this form
+presupposes exploitation going on above, below, and around them."[859]
+The editor of "Justice" seems to regret that co-operation encourages
+and rewards ability and thrift, for he says: "Co-operation is most
+valuable to those among the workers who are best off. The artisan
+earning a regular weekly wage has not only a better opportunity of
+becoming a member of the co-operative society than the more
+precariously employed and more poorly paid labourer, but the advantage
+to him is greater by reason of his having more money to spend at the
+store. In many cases the poorer members have to sell out, and then the
+affair becomes simply a joint-stock company of the more fortunate, the
+race being once more to the swift, the battle to the strong."[860]
+"The ordinary workman can if he likes become a shareholder in the
+"co-op." So he may become a shareholder in a railway if he likes; but
+this does not make the capitalist domination of our railways less a
+fact. In a co-operative store, as elsewhere, the man with _2l._ a week
+is worth just twice as much as the man with _1l._ Co-operation as a
+factor in social progress has effected nothing, and is absolutely
+valueless except to a certain extent as an educational influence."[861]
+
+Some Socialist writers show their hatred of the co-operative societies
+and the co-operators by bitter and almost vicious attacks upon them.
+One of them complains: "Instances of successful co-operation _in
+production_ have, as yet, been very few, and their moral results
+disappointing. Their general tendency has been, not to raise the
+workers as a class, but to raise a certain number of prudent--I had
+almost said selfish--workmen _out_ of their class, and so to
+constitute a _Labour Caste_. Such co-operators employ and exploit
+other workmen even more mercilessly than the capitalist employers, and
+in struggles between Labour and Capital their sympathies have nearly
+always been on the side of the capitalists."[862] Another says: "The
+Rochdale Pioneers hire and fleece labourers in the usual manner.
+Experience teaches, indeed, that such associations are the hardest
+taskmasters. Their interest becomes identified with Capital; and if
+ever circumstances should make it easier for the smarter labourers to
+start companies of the kind successfully, the creation of a _Labour
+Caste_ would be the result. In a general dispute between Labour and
+Capital these associations, instead of being a vanguard of Labour,
+will go over to the side of Capital. The sons of Rochdale Pioneers,
+living in luxury, and imitating the airs and fashions of the wealthy
+of all times, point the moral. Where, then, is the gain to the
+labouring class? No, instead of advising workmen to save and to invest
+their savings in such risky enterprises, it would be much better to
+advise them to put their savings into their own flesh and bone."[863]
+
+The foregoing extracts, and many similar ones which might be given,
+display a regrettable hatred of ability, providence, and
+thrift--qualities which, it is true, are not easily reconcilable with
+the tenets of Socialism.
+
+The British nation spends on intoxicating drink about _160,000,000l._
+per annum. Out of this enormous sum--a sum much larger than the
+national Budget--between _100,000,000l._ and _120,000,000l._ is spent
+by the working class alone. Drink is a fearful evil in Great Britain.
+The average working man spends every year two months' earnings in
+drink, and as there are many moderate drinkers and abstainers, there
+must be many who spend three months' earnings and more--that is,
+one-quarter of their wages, sometimes one-half, and sometimes more
+than one-half, on intoxicants. According to some of the foremost
+authorities on social science, and according to some of the most
+prominent medical men, drink is chiefly responsible for poverty,
+underfeeding, ill-health, and racial degeneration. Nevertheless, the
+British Socialists, instead of condemning drunkenness, rather
+encourage, or at least excuse, this terrible vice; and again, the
+universally discredited Iron Law of Wages is solemnly brought forth to
+prove "scientifically" that sobriety and abstinence on the part of
+the workers would not benefit the workers but the capitalists. "We are
+not prepared to admit that, if all workers were to become teetotalers,
+as I am, the _140,000,000l._ now spent on intoxicants would benefit
+the workers to any appreciable extent. On the contrary, all economists
+tell us that wages always tend towards the minimum subsistence
+point--the level at which the wage-slave is willing to subsist and to
+reproduce his kind."[864]
+
+The Iron Law of Wages has been abandoned by all scientists because of
+its manifest absurdity. However, supposing the Iron Law of Wages were
+true, it would not by any means follow that general abstinence would
+lead to a lower rate of wages. Non-abstemious wage-earners live
+frequently in the most wretched homes, and are dressed in rags because
+they spend all they can spend in drink. If they should become sober,
+they would find better houses, better clothing, better furniture as
+indispensable as drink is now to them. In reality abstinence, instead
+of lowering wages, would probably increase them very considerably in
+accordance with the increased productive power of the worker. It is a
+general experience that the steady and abstemious worker commands a
+higher wage than his more or less drunken, unreliable, and untidy
+colleague.
+
+Socialists are fond of excusing drunkenness by arguing that the worker
+gets drunk "because he is physically and mentally exhausted, used up
+with the day's work";[865] "because the wretched social condition of
+the mass of workers of this country--the long hours, the uncertainty
+of work, the insufficient food and clothing, and degrading home-life,
+which are their daily portion--makes drunkards."[866] Another
+well-known writer states: "If thousands of the workers drink to drown
+the cares and sorrows of their dreary, degraded, wretched existence,
+they do so at the expense of going without some of the merest
+necessaries."[867] This is, unfortunately, only too true. But it is
+not true that "Our damnable, infernal, profit-mongering system
+manufactures and produces drunkards because huge profits can be made
+out of the business for the brewer and the publican."[868]
+
+The above statements, which excuse drunkenness as something natural
+and unavoidable in Great Britain, are untrue. All civilised countries
+are based upon the private possession of capital, and in all large
+profits can be made by brewers and publicans. Now, if it were true, as
+has been stated in the foregoing, that hard work and long hours cause
+drunkenness, drunkenness should be greater in the United States,
+Germany, and France than in Great Britain, for in these countries and
+most others workers work much harder and work much longer hours than
+in Great Britain. The British nation should therefore be the most
+sober nation, but it is in reality the most drunken nation, a fact
+which is known to all who have studied this question.
+
+The majority of British Socialist leaders apparently desire to keep
+the workers drunken, for every suggestion that the worker might
+improve his position by greater moderation in drinking is passionately
+denounced by them. In a speech Andrew Carnegie mentioned that "he had
+employed forty-five thousand men at one time, and his experience was
+that the man who drank was good for drinking and for nothing else. He
+had nothing to do with the man who drank. He did not believe in the
+Submerged Tenth, but what he wanted to do, remembering he was a
+working man himself, was to take an honest, sober, well-doing,
+hard-working man by the hand and help him if he could. He only wanted
+to help those who could help themselves." Commenting on this speech,
+one of the Socialist weeklies said: "According to the foregoing, no
+drunkard, no matter how chronic, could display a greater specimen of
+human demoralisation than does that reported speech of Dr. Andrew
+Carnegie depict himself; soulless beyond imagination almost, in spite
+of his self-advertised respect and sympathy for the honest, sober
+working man." In the same article we read: "Total abstainers are
+capable of viler actions than those of certain drunkards, while the
+profoundest depth of ignorance and incapacity to think are attributes
+of millions of total abstainers."[869] When Mr. John Burns advised the
+workmen to help themselves by abstaining from drink and gambling, the
+whole Socialist press raged, and he was called a traitor to the cause
+and an agent of capitalism.
+
+Only rarely does a Socialist rebuke drunkenness. In "Socialism for
+Christians" we find a passage: "As long as you have a democracy sodden
+in drink you will have a democracy under the hoofs of capitalists.
+There is no hope for the democracy as long as it is content to grovel
+before the great pewter pot which it has made into a god."[870]
+However, that passage was not penned by a professional Socialist, but
+by a clergyman, an outsider, and an amateur in Socialism.
+
+While British Socialist leaders try to degrade the masses and to
+increase their misery by encouraging them to waste a very large part
+of their wages in drink, instead of spending the money on necessary
+food and clothing, on sufficient living room and furniture, foreign
+Socialists try to elevate their followers and to combat the drinking
+evil among them. The foremost Belgian Socialist, who constantly
+agitates against drunkenness, wrote:
+
+"How often have we not found in Socialist pamphlets, or in our
+newspapers, statements such as the following: 'Misery produces
+alcoholism,' or 'Drink is a consequence of capitalism, and will only
+disappear with the capitalistic system itself.' These are comfortable
+theories indeed, but they unfortunately come in conflict with the
+facts. The labourer must not only regard alcohol as one of the causes
+of poverty, demoralisation, and degeneration, but as a canker which
+destroys his strength and powers of resistance. We therefore address
+to all our comrades this warning: The more earnest you are and the
+stricter towards yourself, the greater will be the authority you bring
+to bear upon the branding of this evil. Everything which decreases the
+consumption of alcohol increases the helping powers of labour
+movements, raises the moral tone of the working class, and gives it
+fresh strength in its struggle for emancipation. Therefore all
+Socialistic societies should break away from out-of-date ideas with
+regard to alcoholism, and leave off expecting results from a social
+revolution which they themselves can attain to-day. It is our bounden
+duty to declare war against alcohol. War to the knife, for it is all
+the more dangerous as it dwells in our midst in the guise of
+friendship. When addicted to drink, the working class cannot do what
+must be done. Alcohol, by its paralysing qualities, naturally leads to
+fatigue, negligence, weakness, and impotence. Only those who can rule
+themselves are able and worthy to rule the world."[871]
+
+The German Socialist leaders also endeavour to elevate their followers
+by fighting drunkenness. At the Congress at Essen in 1907, a
+resolution was unanimously passed by the German Social-Democratic
+party in which various recommendations were made to the Government
+regarding the diminution of drunkenness, and which concluded with the
+words: "The working-class organisations are invited to suppress in
+their meeting all compulsion to consume alcoholic liquors, to put a
+stop to its sale in schools, in registry offices, and in places where
+collections are made for strikers, and to inform children and young
+men by word of mouth and by the Press of the danger of alcohol, and to
+watch over drinking habits which lead to the abuse of alcohol."[872] A
+German Socialist periodical recently wrote: "Workers who drink neglect
+their duties towards their family, drink away their wages, bring
+disorder into their unions, lose the sympathy of the quiet and
+industrious citizens, become the slaves of the public-house, and
+damage Socialism. Therefore Socialists should abstain absolutely from
+drinking intoxicating drinks. Ordinary capitalism exploits the
+proletariat, but does not poison them too in their own persons and in
+their posterity. But alcohol does both; it lames the power of a whole
+nation and leads to the degeneration of the race, as does opium in
+China. The drinker loses his self-respect, his higher aims as a human
+being. It must be made a fundamental principle of the German
+Social-Democratic party that the proletariat can vanquish capital only
+after it has first vanquished drink. The sooner that victory is won,
+the sooner the fate of society will be decided."[873]
+
+Continental Socialist leaders recommend to their followers thrift,
+sobriety, and co-operation. British Socialist leaders, who have taken
+the whole of their doctrines from the Continent, condemn "on
+scientific and moral grounds," thrift, sobriety, and co-operation.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[840] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 95.
+
+[841] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 40.
+
+[842] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 94.
+
+[843] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 16.
+
+[844] _Social-Democrat_, April 1907, p. 212.
+
+[845] Penny, _Political Labour Movement_, p. 11.
+
+[846] Roscher, _Politik_, p. 575.
+
+[847] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 41.
+
+[848] Quelch, _Economics of Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[849] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 127.
+
+[850] Quelch, _Economics of Socialism_, p. 16.
+
+[851] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 107.
+
+[852] Blatchford, _Britain for the British_, p. 129.
+
+[853] See p. 53 ff, _ante._
+
+[854] Keir Hardie, _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_ p.
+13.
+
+[855] Leatham, _The Class War_, p. 8.
+
+[856] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 105.
+
+[857] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, pp. 358 and 1195.
+
+[858] _Labour Gazette_, December 1907.
+
+[859] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 94.
+
+[860] Quelch, _Trade Unionism_, p. 10.
+
+[861] _Ibid._ p. 13
+
+[862] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 109.
+
+[863] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 51.
+
+[864] Muse, _Poverty and Drunkenness_, p. 3.
+
+[865] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 11.
+
+[866] Muse, _Poverty and Drunkenness_, p. 12.
+
+[867] Glyde, _Britain's Disgrace_, p. 20.
+
+[868] _Ibid._ p. 20.
+
+[869] _Forward_, November 16, 1907.
+
+[870] Kirtlan, _Socialism for Christians_, p. 15.
+
+[871] Vandervelde, _Drink and Socialism_, pp. 3, 8.
+
+[872] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 620.
+
+[873] _Die Neue Gesellschaft_, November 1907, pp. 332, 337.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXIV
+
+SOCIALIST VIEWS ON LAW AND JUSTICE
+
+
+Most Socialists have a very strong objection to the existing laws.
+"Law is only a masked form of brute force."[874] "The laws to-day are
+defences of the foolish rich against the ignorant and hungry poor. The
+laws to-day, like the laws of the past, make more criminals than they
+punish. The laws keep the people ignorant and poor, and the rich idle
+and vicious."[875] "The laws were made by ignorant and dishonest men;
+they are administered by men ignorant and selfish; they are dishonest
+laws, good for neither rich nor poor; evil in their conception, evil
+in their enforcement, evil in their results."[876]
+
+Most Englishmen are proud of the English judges because of their
+learning, high character, and integrity. To many Socialists the judges
+are the most contemptible and mercenary of men. The philosopher of
+British Socialism informs us: "It is an undoubted truth that no judge
+can be strictly an honest man. The judge must necessarily be a man of
+inferior moral calibre. A judge, by the fact of his being a judge,
+proclaims himself a creature on a lower moral level than us ordinary
+mortals, and this without any assumption of moral superiority above
+the average on our part. He deliberately pledges himself, that is, to
+be false to himself. He may any day have to pass sentence on one whom
+he believes to be innocent. He lays himself under the obligation of
+administering a law which he may know to be bad on any occasion when
+called upon, merely because it is a law. He makes this surrender of
+humanity and honour for what? For filthy lucre and tawdry notoriety.
+Now, I ask, can we conceive a more abjectly contemptible character
+than that which acts thus?"[877]
+
+The cause of the hatred with which the British Socialists contemplate
+the law and the judges is obvious:
+
+    They're blocking up the highway; yes, they think to keep us back
+    By piling barriers of law and falsehood on the track;
+    We'll break the barriers down, and burn them into cinders black,
+                As we go marching to liberty.[878]
+
+    Come every honest lad and lass!
+      Too long we've been kept under
+    By rusty chains of fraud and fear--
+      We'll snap them all asunder!
+
+    That robbers' paction styled the Law
+      To frighten honest folk, sirs,
+    We'll set ablaze and fumigate
+      The country with the smoke, sirs.[879]
+
+When Jack Cade, whom the Socialists praise as a social reformer,
+marched at the head of the insurrectionists into London, one of his
+first acts was to burn the stored-up documents of the law, an act
+which Shakespeare immortalised in his "Henry VI." in the following
+words:
+
+"Cade: Is not this a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent
+lamb should be made parchment? that parchment, being scribbled o'er,
+should undo a man?... Away, burn all the records of the realm: my
+mouth shall be the parliament of England.
+
+"John (_aside_): Then we are like to have biting statutes, unless his
+teeth be pulled out.
+
+"Cade: And henceforward all things shall be in common."[880]
+
+Socialism will abolish the law: "The great act of confiscation will be
+the seal of the new era; then, and not till then, will the knell of
+Civilisation, with its rights of property and its class-society, be
+sounded; then, and not till then, will justice--the justice not of
+Civilisation but of Socialism--become the corner-stone of the social
+arch."[881] Therefore one of the first acts of Socialist government
+will be "the abrogation of 'civil law,' especially that largest
+department of it which is concerned with the enforcement of contract
+and me recovery of debt."[882]
+
+Socialists never tire of denouncing the barbarity of the existing law.
+According to their religious views given in Chapter XXVI. (see p.
+360), man is an irresponsible being. He does not know the difference
+between right and wrong, between good and evil. Therefore it is
+according to their opinion unjust and cruel to punish criminals. "The
+Christian regards the hooligan, the thief, the wanton, and the
+drunkard as men and women who have done wrong. But the humanist
+regards them as men and women who have been wronged."[883] "Human law,
+like divine law, is based upon the false idea that men know what is
+right and what is wrong, and have power to choose the right."[884]
+"Man becomes that which he is by the action of forces outside
+himself."[885] "All human actions are ruled by heredity and
+environment. Man is not responsible for his heredity and environment.
+Therefore all blame and all punishment are unjust. Blame and
+punishment, besides being unjust, are ineffectual."[886]
+
+"To the Socialist, for every crime committed the State, or the society
+in which it is committed, is as much or more responsible than the
+individual."[887] "A society that employs the gallows and the 'cat'
+pretty much deserves all it gets at the hands of criminals. If the
+criminal, when he gets the chance of doing so with impunity, commits
+the crime for which the gallows or the lash is reserved, society has
+only itself to thank."[888]
+
+From the foregoing considerations it logically follows that "a
+Socialist administration would treat delinquents with the utmost
+leniency consistent with the existence of society."[889] "A man of
+average sense ought to be able to protect himself against fraud. Theft
+only requires the restitution of the stolen property plus an addition,
+such as the Roman law provided. The ideal condition of a community is
+that the remorse following the commission of a crime should be an
+adequate preventive of its commission"[890]--By its attitude towards
+crime, Socialism should secure for itself the enthusiastic support of
+the criminal classes. By abrogating the enforcement of contract and
+the recovery of debt, it should secure for itself the equally
+enthusiastic support of all fraudulent debtors. Conspirators and
+revolutionaries since the time of Catiline have opened the gaols and
+have relied on criminal desperadoes for the realisation of their
+ambitions. It is worth noting that most Anarchists also recommend the
+abolition of law and the law courts.[891]
+
+Until the ideal Socialist commonwealth has been firmly established,
+and "until the economic change has worked itself out in ethical
+change, it is clear that a criminal law must exist. The only question
+is whether its basis shall be a mass of anomalous statutes and
+precedents or a logical system."[892] Bax decides that the logical
+system and the Code Napoleon is to be introduced after the Socialist
+revolution.[893] The fact that the people do not know the French laws
+apparently does not matter.
+
+Many Socialists complain that British laws, and American laws too, are
+not collected and codified. Hence the citizen does not, and cannot,
+know the law. "What is called 'the law' is something that no lawyer
+can learn in a lifetime, both on account of the bulk of the Reports,
+and because he never can be absolutely certain what is good and what
+is bad law. The profession chooses rather than ascertains the
+law."[894] Owing to lack of a code of laws, the law is uncertain and
+exceedingly costly. Hence the poor man can obtain justice only with
+difficulty, if at all. Besides, "The fear of litigation is a weapon
+society places in the hands of the rich man to coerce the poor man,
+irrespective of the merits of the case, by dangling ruin before
+him."[895] There is much justification for these complaints.
+
+We have seen in former Chapters that Socialism teaches that property
+is theft and that rich men are criminals. In the present Chapter we
+have learned that criminals are men wronged by society. The Socialist
+conception of law and justice should recommend itself to all
+criminals, and all criminals should be Socialists.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[874] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 107.
+
+[875] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, p. 258.
+
+[876] _Ibid._ p. 259.
+
+[877] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 108.
+
+[878] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 17.
+
+[879] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 19.
+
+[880] _King Henry VI._, Part II. Act IV. Scenes 2 and 7.
+
+[881] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, pp. 82, 83.
+
+[882] _Ibid._ pp. 85, 86.
+
+[883] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 100.
+
+[884] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, p. 19.
+
+[885] _Ibid._ p. 23.
+
+[886] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, p. 251.
+
+[887] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 146.
+
+[888] _Ibid._ p. 105.
+
+[889] Bax, _Ethics of Socialism_, p. 59.
+
+[890] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 104.
+
+[891] See Stirner, _Der Einzige und sein Eigentum_; Bakounine, _Dieu
+et l'Etat_; Kropotkine, _Paroles d'un Revolte_, &c.
+
+[892] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, p. 88.
+
+[893] _Ibid._ p. 89.
+
+[894] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 138.
+
+[895] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 147.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXV
+
+SOCIALISM AND WOMAN, THE FAMILY AND THE HOME
+
+
+Men in all classes of society save and endeavour to become owners of
+some property, not so much for their own sake as for the sake of their
+wives and of their children, whom they wish to leave "provided for."
+Married men are notoriously more provident and thrifty than unmarried
+ones. Property is the defence of the family. The fundamental aim of
+Socialism is the abolition of that private property which is the prop
+of the family. Consequently every prudent head of a family is likely
+to resist Socialism, and thus there exists a natural and innate
+hostility between Socialism and the family.
+
+Besides, the idea of the family is not easily reconcilable with the
+idea of the Socialistic State. The maintenance of the family requires
+private capital, and the present capitalistic and individualistic
+system of society, the modern State and modern civilisation, are based
+upon the family and have sprung from it. The citizen of the modern
+civilised State places the interest of his family above the interest
+of the community. Socialism wishes to reverse the situation and to
+subordinate the interest of the family to the interest of the
+community.
+
+Socialism strives after equality among the citizens. Therefore many
+British Socialists are avowed communists, as will be shown in Chapter
+XXIX. Now it is clear that a perfect equality among the citizens
+cannot be created by abolishing merely the institution of private
+property. The man who envied his neighbour for the exclusive
+possession of his property may, after the abolition of private
+property, envy him for the exclusive possession of a particularly
+attractive wife. Therefore most of the great thinkers since Plato who
+have mapped out systems for the equalisation of fortunes, have
+logically insisted on the community of wives.
+
+Lastly, the subordination of the private family under the State, the
+control of work and food for all by the State, must logically lead
+also to State control of the increase of the population. Two thousand
+two hundred years ago, when in Athens the idea of the equalisation of
+fortunes had come to the front, Aristotle wrote: "Whoever would
+regulate the extent of private fortunes must also regulate the
+increase of families. If children multiply beyond the means of
+supporting them, the intention of the law will be frustrated and
+families will be suddenly reduced from opulence to beggary, a
+revolution always dangerous to public tranquillity."[896] At the same
+time Aristophanes showed in his comedy "Ecclesiazusae" that the
+community of goods would necessarily lead to the community of wives.
+
+The assertion of the opponents of Socialism that Socialism means the
+dissolution of the marriage tie and the abolition of the family has
+been met with an indignant denial by many Socialists: "Socialism does
+not 'threaten the sanctity of the home.' Socialism has no more to do
+with the marriage laws than Toryism has."[897] "No party--neither
+Socialist nor non-Socialist--has openly identified itself with the
+views of its prominent members on this question. The idea that
+marriage, as an institution, ought to be abolished has never received
+the sanction of any political organisation in Great Britain."[898] "No
+Socialist entertains the remotest idea of 'abolishing' the family,
+whether by law or otherwise. Only the grossest misrepresentation can
+fasten upon them such a purpose; moreover, it takes a fool to imagine
+that any form of family can either be created or abolished by
+decree."[899]
+
+The above is confirmed by an official declaration of recent date. At a
+meeting of the National Council of the Independent Labour Party, which
+took place in London on October 4 and 5, 1907, the following
+resolution was adopted:
+
+"The National Council of the Independent Labour Party repudiates the
+attack upon Socialism on the ground that Socialism is opposed to
+religion, and declares that the Socialist movement embraces men and
+women of all religions and forms of belief, and offers the most
+complete freedom in this respect within its ranks. It further
+repudiates the charge that Socialism is antagonistic to the family
+organisation, and reminds the public that the disintegration of the
+family, which has been in progress for some generations, has been
+owing to the creation of slums, the employment of children in
+factories, the dragging of mothers into workshops and factories, owing
+to the economic pressure created by low wages, sweating, and other
+operations of capitalism which the anti-Socialist campaign is designed
+to support, and which it is the purpose of Socialism to supplant."
+
+Now let us compare with these emphatic denials addressed to the
+general public the deliberate statements of the intellectual leaders
+of British and foreign Socialism regarding marriage and the family,
+addressed to their followers.
+
+The celebrated "Manifesto" issued by the founder of modern
+international Socialism declares: "On what foundation is the present
+family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. The
+bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its
+complement vanishes. Bourgeois marriage is in reality a system of
+wives in common, and thus, at the most, what the Communists might
+possibly be reproached with is that they desire to introduce, in
+substitution for a hypocritically concealed, an openly legalised,
+community of women."[900] The founders of British Socialism state:
+"Even now it is necessary that a certain code of morality should be
+supposed to exist, and to have some relation to that religion which,
+being the creation of another age, has now become a sham. With this
+sham, moreover, its accompanying morality is also stupid, and this is
+clung to with a determination, or even ferocity, natural enough, since
+its aim is the perpetuation of individual property in wealth, in
+workman, in wife, in child."[901]
+
+"Like every other institution of existing society, marriage, as we
+know it, is a consequence of private property. The primitive
+swag-monger could think of no better method of keeping his swag
+together after his death than by making the child of a particular
+slave-wife his heir. The chief pre-eminence of the Sultana of the
+harem lay in the fact that she acted, so to speak, as the conveyancer
+of the estate."[902] The spokesmen of the Social-Democratic Federation
+say: "What is the position of Socialism towards the question of
+marriage as at present constituted? The existing monogamic relation is
+simply the outcome of the institution of private or individual
+property. It has developed, in proportion to the accentuation of the
+institution of private, as against communal, property. When private
+property ceases to be the fulcrum around which the relations between
+the sexes turn, any attempt at coercion, moral or material, in these
+relations must necessarily become repugnant to the moral sense of the
+community."[903]
+
+The foregoing statements lead to the inevitable conclusion that "The
+transformation of the current family form into a freer, more real, and
+therefore a higher form, must inevitably follow the economic
+revolution which will place the means of production and distribution
+under the control of all for the good of all."[904]
+
+Another authority informs us "Socialism, Communism, or whatever one
+chooses to call it, by converting private property into public wealth
+and substituting co-operation for competition, will restore society to
+its proper condition of a thoroughly healthy organism, and ensure the
+material well-being of each member of the community. It will, in fact,
+give life its proper basis and its proper environment. Socialism
+annihilates family life, for instance. With the abolition of private
+property, marriage in its present form must disappear. This is part of
+the programme."[905] A distinguished Fabian proclaims: "The Socialist
+no more regards the institution of marriage as a permanent thing than
+he regards a state of competitive industrialism as a permanent
+thing."[906] The leading book of the Fabian Society states: "The
+economic independence of women and the supplanting of the head of the
+household by the individual as the recognised unit of the State will
+materially alter the status of children and the utility of the
+institution of the family."[907] The leading periodical of the Fabians
+says: "Of all the stupid theories regarding the family, the most
+stupid is the belief that it is natural. On the contrary, the
+trinitarian family organisation is plainly a work of art, a
+deliberate device of man's. Nothing is more plain than the fact that
+the hierarchy of the family has been employed, and is still employed,
+as a model for the hierarchy of the State and of human society
+generally; in other words, as a prop of aristocracy."[908] A leading
+member of the Independent Labour Party tells us: "I do not believe it
+is desirable to cultivate the family idea as at present understood,
+which in the main is designed to teach the children to think more of
+their own family than any other; I want to see the broader family life
+of society taught in the spirit of the West Country motto, 'One for
+all and all for each.'"[909]
+
+Marriage is, according to many Socialists, not only incompatible with
+Socialistic progress, but is also immoral. The philosopher of British
+Socialism, going a step further than did Marx in his Manifesto,
+endeavours to prove that marriage and prostitution are equally immoral.
+"Both legalised monogamic marriage and prostitution are based
+essentially on commercial considerations. The one is purchase, the
+other hire. The higher and only really moral form of the marriage
+relation which transcends both is based neither on sale nor hire.
+Prostitution is immoral as implying the taking advantage by the woman
+of a monopoly which costs her no labour for the sake of extorting money
+from the man. But the condition of legal marriage--maintenance--does
+the same."[910] This opinion is shared by the leading American
+Socialist writer, who says: "The one has sold her person for money
+under cover of marriage, the other has done the same thing outside
+marriage."[911] Other Socialists express similar opinions: "The present
+marriage system cannot be claimed by anyone as a success. Complete
+economic independence of women will, however, solve the question. Under
+Communism will and affection will be supreme. Marriage will be
+infinitely holier and more permanent than it is to-day."[912] "Mere
+legal matrimony and familism could not survive the communalisation of
+property, and it may be well so. Marriage as we know it is merely one
+of the many unwholesome fungi that grow out of the reeking, rotting
+corpus of private property, and it would not be difficult to conceive
+of a sexual order infinitely more angelic."[913]
+
+There is no reason why an "infinitely more angelic sexual order"
+should not replace marriage as at present conceived and constituted,
+for "Marriage is no more a Christian ethic than it is a Mohammedan
+ethic, or a Japanese custom. We have already 'considered' the marriage
+laws and altered them. Where, then, is the immorality in demanding a
+further consideration? Our notions concerning the relations of men and
+women have changed with the changing times, and at each stage we have
+reached a more exalted plane of understanding. What right have we to
+assume, therefore, that the future does not hold a nobler ideal than
+our present one?"[914]
+
+The direction in which inter-sexual relations should be changed in
+order to attain a nobler ideal than the present one is obvious: "What
+we need is freedom from the restraints of an artificial existence;
+liberty to make the most of our inherent capacity, and human longing
+for a higher life will do all the rest."[915] "Socialism will strike
+at the root at once of compulsory monogamy and of prostitution by
+inaugurating an era of marriage based on free choice and intention,
+and characterised by the absence of external coercion. For where the
+wish for the maintenance of the marriage relation remains, there
+external compulsion is unnecessary; where it is necessary, because the
+wish has disappeared, there it is undesirable."[916] "The present
+marriage system was based on the general supposition of the economic
+dependence of the woman on the man, and the consequent necessity for
+his making provision for her which she can legally enforce. This basis
+would disappear with the advent of social economic freedom, and no
+binding contract would be necessary between the parties as regards
+livelihood; while property in children would cease to exist, and every
+infant that came into the world would be born into full citizenship
+and would enjoy all its advantages, whatever the conduct of its
+parents might be. Thus a new development of the family would take
+place, on the basis not of a predetermined life-long business
+arrangement to be formally and nominally held to, irrespective of
+circumstances, but on mutual inclination and affection, an association
+terminable at the will of either party. There would be no vestige of
+reprobation weighing on the dissolution of one tie and the forming of
+another."[917]
+
+Many Socialists, led by Bax, the philosopher of Socialism in Great
+Britain, and by Bebel, the head of the Social-Democratic party in
+Germany, take a very broad and a very primitive view with regard to
+marital relations and to the greater freedom in these relations in the
+Socialistic State of the future: "The whole of our sexual morality (as
+such), in so far as it has a rational, as opposed to a mystical,
+basis, is nothing but a 'plant' to save the ratepayers' pockets by
+fixing the responsibility for the maintenance of children on the
+individuals responsible for the procreation of them. To the consistent
+Socialist, the sexual relation is, _per se_, morally indifferent
+(neither moral nor immoral) like any other bodily function, but it
+may easily become immoral _per accidentem_, i.e., from the special
+circumstances under which it takes place, and whereby it acquires the
+character of an act of injustice or treachery, such as seduction of a
+friend's wife or daughter."[918] A very influential Socialist writer
+asks: "Is chastity a virtue, and is there such a vice as unchastity?"
+and he answers his question by quoting the above statement of
+Bax.[919] "If it be asked, Is marriage a failure? the answer of any
+impartial person must be--monogamic marriage is a failure--the rest is
+silence. We know not what new form of the family the society of the
+future, in which men and women will be alike economically free, may
+evolve and which may be generally adopted therein. Meanwhile, we ought
+to combat by every means within our power the metaphysical dogma of
+the inherent sanctity of the monogamic principle. Economic development
+on the one side and the free initiative of individuals on the other
+will do the rest."[920]
+
+Bebel thinks, "The satisfying of amatory desires is a law which every
+individual must fulfil as a sacred duty towards himself, if his
+development is to be healthy and normal, and he must refuse
+gratification to no natural impulse. The so-called animal passions
+occupy no lower rank than the so-called mental passions. A healthy
+manner of life, healthy employment, and a healthy education in the
+broadest sense of the word, combined with the natural gratification of
+natural and healthy instincts, must be brought within the reach of
+all."[921] Freedom of love is to be equal to men and women: "In the
+choice of love woman is free just as man is free. She woos and is wooed
+and has no other inducement to bind herself than her own free will.
+The contract between the two lovers is of a private nature as in
+primitive times. The gratification of the sexual impulse is as strictly
+the personal affair of the individual as the gratification of every
+other natural instinct. No one has to give an account of him or herself
+and no third person has the slightest right of intervention."[922]
+
+A prominent British Socialist shares Bebel's views: "For the
+non-childbearing woman the sex-relationship, both as to form and
+substance, ought to be a pure question of taste, a simple matter of
+agreement between the man and her, in which neither the society nor
+the State would have any need to interfere, a free sexual union, a
+relation solely of mutual sympathy and affection, its form and
+direction varying according to the feelings and wants of the
+individuals."[923] The founders of British Socialism agree with the
+foregoing opinion. "Under a Socialistic system contracts between
+individuals would be free and unenforced by the community. This would
+apply to the marriage contract as well as others, and it would become
+a matter of simple inclination. Nor would a truly enlightened public
+opinion, freed from mere theological views as to chastity, insist on
+its permanently binding Nature in the face of any discomfort or
+suffering that might come of it."[924]
+
+"Socialists expect that, under Socialism, the terrible evil of
+prostitution will disappear. If it does not, it will be either because
+women are still denied political power, or because their votes have
+decided that the prostitute must remain. But if, as at present, the
+'unfortunate woman' be regarded as a necessity in those days of
+advanced thought and increased opportunities, then her status must be
+raised. She must not be an acknowledged necessity and a scorned
+outcast at the same time, as is the case now. Her position in the
+State will be clearly defined. She will be held to be performing a
+necessary social service. Whether this idea meets with favour or not,
+it is the only fair, the only possible, solution, if the prostitute is
+to remain."[925]
+
+"In a Socialistic State, no woman will be economically dependent upon
+any one man, father, brother, or husband. Her living will be assured
+to her by the community. Marriage will not make her the more
+dependent. If she should have children, she will be salaried, or
+otherwise supported, according to the number and the healthiness of
+her offspring. If no children are born to her, she will be at liberty
+to occupy herself with some other profitable work--not necessarily
+household labour, certainly not household labour all the time--for
+that will be reduced to a minimum. But she will engage in such useful
+work as her special tastes will direct. A free woman, she will thus be
+able to give her love freely."[926] "The 'subjection of woman' being
+at an end in consequence of her economic emancipation, actions for
+breach of promise or seduction, as well as prostitution itself, will
+be rendered meaningless. When a woman sues for breach of promise she
+is really suing for loss of a lucrative situation. When she plies for
+hire on the public street, she does so because the scourge of
+starvation is laid on her shoulders. Remove that scourge, and instead
+of the hideous commerce between lust and lucre we shall, in all cases,
+have the fair exchange of genuine human love for love."[927] "Free as
+the wind, the Socialist wife will be bound only by her natural love
+for husband and children."[928]
+
+Men and women being sexually free in the Socialist State of the
+future, the law will take cognisance neither of breach of promise,
+seduction, prostitution, and desertion of the family, nor of even
+graver offences against the present code of morality. The philosopher
+of British Socialism informs us: "Society is directly concerned--(1)
+with the production of offspring, (2) with the care that things
+sexually offensive to the majority shall not be obtruded on public
+notice, or obscenity on 'young persons.' Beyond this, all sexual
+actions (of course excluding criminal violence or fraud) are matters
+of purely individual concern."
+
+"Offences connected with sexual matters, from rape downwards, may be
+viewed from two or three different sides, and are complicated in ways
+which render the subject difficult of discussion in a work intended
+for promiscuous circulation. Here, as in the last case--viz. of theft
+or robbery--we must be careful in considering such offences to
+eliminate the element of brutality or personal injury, which may
+sometimes accompany the crime referred to, from the offence itself.
+For the rest I confine myself to remarking that this class also,
+though not so obviously as the last, springs from an instinct
+legitimate in itself but which has been suppressed or distorted. The
+opinions of most, even enlightened, people on such matters are,
+however, so largely coloured by the unconscious survival in their
+minds of sentiment derived from old theological and theosophical views
+of the universe, that they are not of much value. This is partly the
+reason why the ordinary good-natured bourgeois, who can complacently
+pass on by the other side after casting a careless look on the most
+fiendish and organised cruelty in satisfaction of the economic
+craving--gain--is galvanised into a frenzy of indignation at some
+sporadic case of real or supposed ill-usage perpetrated in
+satisfaction of some bizarre form of the animal craving--lust. Until
+people can be got to discuss this subject in the white light of
+physiological and pathological investigation rather than the dim
+religious gloom of semi-mystical emotion, but little progress will be
+effected towards a due appreciation of the character of the offences
+referred to. It is a curious circumstance, as illustrating the change
+of men's view of offences, that an ordinary indecent assault, which in
+the Middle Ages--in Chaucer's time, for instance--would evidently have
+been regarded as a species of rude joke, should now be deemed one of
+the most serious of crimes."[929]
+
+"When a sexual act, from whatever cause, is not, and cannot be,
+productive of offspring, the feeling of the majority has no _locus
+standi_ in the matter. Not only is it properly outside the sphere of
+coercion, but it does not concern morality at all. It is a question
+simply of individual taste. The latter may be good or bad, but this is
+an aesthetic, and not directly a moral or social question."[930] "No
+social and secular argument readily presents itself against the act
+for which the brilliant and wretched Wilde is to-day the associate of
+felons. In view of the exclamations of bated horror over this offence,
+and the tacit assumption that it stands second only to murder in its
+enormity, it may be worth while to point out that, tested by a
+non-theological ethic, it is not quite certain that such practices are
+immoral at all."[931] "It has been well said that there are few laws
+so futile as those that profess to seek out and punish acts--normal or
+abnormal--done in secret and by mutual consent between adult persons.
+There are also few laws more unjust when the acts thus branded by law
+are the natural outcome of inborn disposition and not directly
+injurious to the community at large. The Moltke-Harden case brings
+these considerations clearly before us afresh, and compels us to ask
+ourselves whether it would not be possible to amend our laws in the
+direction not only of social purity and sincerity but of reason and
+humanity."[932]
+
+The "social purity" of Socialism would be the purity of Sodom and
+Gomorrah. It would be unrestricted bestiality.
+
+The majority of Socialists who have seriously considered the marriage
+problem in the Socialist State of the future--Marx, Lassalle,
+Rodbertus, and others, consider only the economic problems--have
+pronounced themselves in favour of free love in some form or the
+other. In this the conclusions of the Socialists agree with those of
+the Anarchists.[933] Indeed, "collective" marriage and other
+abominations have been freely practised during a long time in the
+Socialist colonies of North America, such as Oneida and
+Wallingsford.[934] Some Socialist thinkers, such as Saint-Simon and
+Enfantin, following the footstep of Plato, condemn marriage for life
+and recommend the organisation of procreation by the State. Others,
+such as Fourier, favour polygamy and polyandry. Others, such as
+Bellamy[935] and Kautsky,[936] believe that the people will remain
+attached to marriage as at present constituted. Others again find
+consolation in the fact that "despite the marital customs of the East,
+there is in the average human animal a strong monogamous
+instinct."[937] Anton Menger compares free love with free competition,
+and therefore objects to it[938] for the same reason for which
+Aristophanes objected to it in his "Ecclesiazusae" 2200 years ago. He
+thinks that free love would benefit the young, strong and
+good-looking, and believes that the doctrine of free love owes its
+rise to hatred of Christianity among Socialists,[939] monogamous
+marriage being a Christian institution.
+
+Socialists propose to break all the bonds which at present connect
+woman with her husband and her children, and to put her into an
+artificial and unnatural position calculated to unsex her. "For the
+first time since the world began, woman will in every respect be the
+equal of man. She will be the guardian of her own honour, and marriage
+will assume an entirely novel character. All unions will be unions of
+affection and esteem, and children, as of old, will primarily be the
+children of the mother. Her right to select the father of her own
+children is absolute. In such a society all children will be equally
+'legitimate,' and the Seventh Commandment will become practically
+obsolete, because the economic circumstances in which it was
+formulated will have passed away. She will be the complete arbiter of
+her own destiny. Her unsullied conscience will be the foundation of a
+purer morality than is at present even conceivable."[940] The
+principles expressed in the foregoing recall to one's mind the decree
+of the French Convention, dated June 28, 1793, which runs as follows:
+"La nation se charge de l'education physique et morale des enfants
+abandonnes. Desormais ils seront designes sous le seul nom
+d'orphelins. Aucune autre qualification ne sera permise"; and the
+principle of the French Code, "La recherche de la paternite est
+interdite," will become a principle of British law. The State will
+have to become the protector of the husbandless mothers and the
+fatherless children.
+
+"Woman stands to gain much from the growth of a Socialist State. Among
+the free communistic services the right of the wife to maintenance
+during the period of maternity will quickly find a place."[941] "For
+every child born, the State will make provision. Either the mother
+will be paid so much per child so long as it lives and thrives, as her
+wages for important work done for society in bearing and rearing it"
+(it should be noted that children will belong no more to their parents
+but to "society," that childbearing will be "work" paid for by
+"wages," and that the breeding of children will become as much a
+business on the part of independent women as is now the breeding of
+cats and dogs for profit), "or her absolute independence of her
+husband will be secured in some other way. The State doctor (a woman
+for this office) will prescribe and care for the child from the moment
+of its birth, and State nurses will be in attendance to see that the
+mother is in need of nothing for her own and the child's
+well-being."[942] "Socialism will simply be the scientific development
+of those natural tendencies which augment the happiness or improve the
+comfort of the people. It is conceivable that every child shall come
+under the care of the administrative assembly. The right of the child
+is not interwoven with parental responsibility. They are separate
+considerations. Only a madman will hold that in the event of its
+parents being unmindful of their duties a helpless little one should
+be allowed to suffer. The fact of its being is the child's title to
+whatever provision society is able to make for it."[943] "Socialism
+therefore teaches men to expect a communal watchfulness over infant
+life. If parents refuse, or are unable, to meet the requirements of
+the case, the State will supply the deficiency."[944] "A State that
+truly represents its members will legislate generously for those who
+announce frankly and without cant that they have no desire for the
+care of children."[945]
+
+In the Socialist State of the future, people could therefore get rid
+of new-born babes far more easily than they now can of puppies and
+kittens. The institution round the corner would be the general
+foster-mother. Hordes of fatherless and motherless children would
+throng the State nurseries. The words "father" and "mother" would lose
+their meaning. However, we are told that "Socialism would begin by
+making sure that there should not be a single untaught, unloved,
+hungry child in the kingdom."[946] Love would evidently also be
+"organised" by the authorities.
+
+Some Socialists fear that, under a _regime_ of free love and free
+State maintenance for mothers and children, life will become a riot,
+that husbands will constantly change wives and wives husbands, and
+that, owing to the absence of all responsibility on the part of the
+parents for their offspring, over-population and consequent
+pauperisation will take place. Therefore some Socialists think that "A
+time will come when the patriot will consider it to be his duty, not
+to kill as many enemies as possible in time of war, but to restrict
+his family as far as possible in time of peace."[947] Socialist
+daydreamers seem to be unaware that the best preventive against
+over-population lies in the duty of parents to bring up and educate
+their children, a duty which they wish to abolish.
+
+As Aristotle pointed out 2200 years ago, the all-regulating State
+would also have to regulate the increase of population. "If the State
+is to guarantee wages, it is bound in self-protection to provide that
+no person shall be born without its consent. The State is to sanction
+the number of births; all others are immoral, because anti-social. As
+national wealth increased, a larger number of births would be allowed,
+or a larger sum would be expended on such as were allowed. An
+unsanctioned birth would receive no recognition from the State, and in
+times of over-population it might be needful to punish, positively or
+negatively, both father and mother. As such births may be due to
+ignorance or inefficiency of some check system, it would be the duty
+of the State to scientifically investigate the whole system of checks,
+and to spread among its citizens a thorough knowledge of such as were
+harmless and efficient in practice."[948]
+
+The State would control procreation. Intending couples would
+apparently have to take out a procreation licence, which would be
+granted only to those able to pass a searching examination. "Marriage
+between the mentally weak will not be allowed. Imbeciles, lunatics,
+and those with dangerous and ineradicable criminal tendencies will not
+be permitted to reproduce their species at all."[949]
+
+Unfortunately the writer fails to specify how unauthorised
+reproduction of the species would be prevented, and how contravention
+of the procreation laws would be punished. These details are furnished
+by another writer. "All those actually certified as degenerates must
+be prevented from procreating. Society has not only a right but a duty
+to protect itself against such by-products, and it can only do this by
+State control of marriage."[950] "Marriage without a satisfactory
+medical certificate should be subjected to a penalty which would be in
+effect prohibitive. In certain cases asexualisation and sterilisation
+should be applicable under special safeguards and conditions."[951]
+
+Free love has apparently its limitations and its dangers. The
+procreation inspector might make an irreparable mistake.
+
+There are, of course, Socialists who think that the family ought to be
+preserved, and who oppose State nurseries. One of them writes: "The
+State, in its own interests, will do everything it can to develop
+individuality in its children. The barrack school and State
+nursery--never much more than the Utopian dreams of amiable
+people--are condemned by up-to-date psychologists. The personal touch
+and affection of the mother, the surroundings and ethics of a small
+community, the sense of continuity which comes to the maturing child's
+mind from a personal organisation like the family, are all invaluable
+to a State which must take as much care of its citizens of to-morrow
+as it does of its citizens of to-day."[952] Mr. Macdonald's views on
+Socialism are hardly orthodox, and he has been denounced by
+thorough-going Socialists as an agent of the bourgeoisie.
+
+As women may be the strongest opponents to the dissolution of the
+family, Socialists addressing themselves to women try to persuade them
+that they are forced into matrimony by necessity, that marriage is a
+degradation to them and to their children, and that Socialism will
+elevate them and make them free and happy. "The average young woman of
+the working class, who is not herself employed in some well-paid
+occupation, has nothing but marriage to which to look forward. She
+gives herself and all she has or is in exchange for such board as her
+husband's means permit."[953] "For the sake of bread and shelter she
+marries and becomes the unpaid cook and housekeeper of a husband and
+the mother of his children."[954] "Woman has been degraded, the mother
+has been kept down; so the children have been born with slavish
+instincts, ready to creep for any favour, and only just awakening to
+the need for self-assertion and independence of action."[955]
+Socialism will change all that, for "Socialism means freedom for
+women, just as it does for men."[956]
+
+What is the Socialistic conception of "freedom for women"? What are
+its privileges and its advantages? "In considering the position of the
+woman Socialist, one great central fact must be borne constantly in
+mind. What she will be, what she will do, how she will live--all will
+depend upon one great fact, the greatest fact in Socialism--a fact
+which constitutes Socialism--namely, that she will be economically
+free."[957] "The new order will make husband and wife equals simply by
+enabling the wife to earn her living by fitting employment."[958] "A
+living will be assured to every woman."[959] "In the new community
+woman is entirely independent, a free being, the equal of man. Her
+education is the same as that of man except where the difference of
+sex makes a deviation from this rule and special treatment absolutely
+unavoidable. She works under exactly the same conditions as a
+man."[960] "Under a Socialist _regime_ every profession will be open
+to women as to men."[961] "Socialism means enfranchising them, giving
+them the vote, so that they can lift their voice alongside with men's
+voice and fight with the same weapon for a better, happier
+life."[962] "It is only by removing the disabilities and restraints
+imposed upon woman, and permitting her to enter freely into
+competition with men in every sphere of human activity, that her true
+position and function in the economy of life will ultimately be
+ascertained."[963] "Socialism alone offers woman complete economic
+emancipation, with all that that implies. It provides her with
+suitable work, and it pays her exactly as men are paid. It educates
+her as men are educated, and protects her in pregnancy with tender
+regard; and, in so doing, Socialism will raise the whole level of
+society to a height of moral grandeur never yet attained and hardly
+ever dreamed of by the most optimist of poets and philosophers."[964]
+
+Apparently Socialists will elevate downtrodden woman by compelling her
+to work for a living, and it is doubtful, as will be seen in Chapter
+XXXVI., whether she will be allowed to select her task or whether she
+will have to work under a system of forced labour. She will be given
+that freedom and liberty which is now called licence by the abolition
+of all the laws of morality. In the words of an exceedingly
+straightforward Socialist, "Independence for women will mean a heavy
+sacrifice for them, for it will mean for them compulsory work."[965]
+In return for such work they will be given full sexual license and the
+vote.
+
+There is another aspect to be taken note of with regard to the
+emancipation of woman. Many Socialists, in giving to woman equality
+with man as a wage-earner and voter, wish to unsex her completely.
+They wish to deprive her of those privileges which she possesses at
+present owing to her sex. The philosopher of British Socialism informs
+us: "The law nowadays makes no distinction of persons between men.
+True; but it makes distinctions between men and women, and where law
+draws no distinction, practice does. 'Benefit of clergy' is superseded
+by 'benefit of sex.'"[966] "The tendency of the bourgeoisie world, as
+expressed in its legislation and sentiment, has been towards a
+factitious exaltation of the woman at the expense of the man--in other
+words, the cry for 'equality between the sexes' has in the course of
+its realisation become a sham, masking a _de facto_ inequality. The
+inequality in question presses, as usual, heaviest upon the working
+man, whose wife, to all intents and purposes, now has him completely
+in her power. If dissolute or drunken, she can sell up his goods or
+break up his home at pleasure and still compel him to keep her and
+live with her to her life's end. There is no law to protect him. On
+the other hand, let him but raise a finger in a moment of exasperation
+against this precious representative of the sacred principle of
+'womanhood,' and straightway he is consigned to the treadmill for his
+six months amid the jubilation of the 'Daily Telegraph' and its
+kindred, who pronounce him a brute and sing paeans over the power of
+the 'law' to protect the innocent and helpless female. Thus does
+bourgeois society offer sacrifice to the idol 'equality between the
+sexes.' For the law jealously guards the earnings or property of the
+wife from possible spoliation. She on any colourable pretext can
+obtain magisterial separation and protection."[967] Bax concludes that
+if the law is right in flogging men it should flog women too, for "the
+brutality and cowardice of the proceeding is no greater in the one
+case than in the other."[968]
+
+The abolition of the marriage tie may mean that general barracks will
+take the place of private houses. Is the home worth preserving? Most
+Socialists think it is not. "It may be doubted after all whether it
+is necessary to regard 'the home' in the sense in which the phrase is
+here used as the final and immutable form of social organisation.
+Humanity does not stand or fall by the arrangement whereby families
+take their food in segregated cubicles."[969] "The entire preparation
+of food will be undertaken by society in the future. The private
+kitchen will disappear."[970] "Instead of a hundred kitchens and fires
+and cooks, we shall have one. Instead of a hundred meals to prepare,
+we shall have one. Instead of a hundred homes being made to reek of
+unsavoury dishes, or the detestable odour of bad cooking, the
+offensive effluvia will be confined to one building. Under Socialism
+domestic duties will be reduced to a minimum."[971] "We set up one
+great kitchen, one general dining-hall, and one pleasant
+tea-garden."[972] Only a few Socialists are in favour of individual
+houses, believing that "Each house should be self-contained."[973]
+
+The proposals of British Socialists regarding woman, the family, the
+home, and marriage are not new. They were tried in the French
+Revolution, and the consequences of the experiments recommended by the
+philosophers of the Revolution were as follows:
+
+"The legislation of the Revolution diminished the paternal authority
+and converted the family into a republic. Marriage became a contract
+which could be broken at will by either party, a contract which
+allowed of short notice and which could be concluded for any space of
+time. People married for a year, sometimes only for a month. They
+married for fun or for profit, and marriages were dissolved and others
+contracted if it paid to do so."[974] The French police reports tell
+us: "The depravity of morals is extremely great, and the new
+generation is growing up in a state of disorder which promises to have
+the most unfortunate and most far-reaching consequences to future
+generations. Sodomy and Sapphic love flourish with the same
+shamelessness as prostitution, and the progress of all these vices is
+terrifying."[975] From another source we learn: "Society has become
+terribly depraved; fornication, adultery, incest, and murder by poison
+or violence are the fruits of philosophism. Things are as bad in the
+villages as in Paris. Justices of the peace report that immorality has
+spread to such an extent that many communes will soon no longer be
+inhabitable by decent people."[976] This is the new and the better
+world towards which Socialism is steering.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[896] Aristotle, _Politics_, Book ii. Chapter v.
+
+[897] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 2.
+
+[898] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 13.
+
+[899] Kautsky, _The Socialist Republic_, p. 23.
+
+[900] Marx and Engels, _Manifesto of the Communist Party_, pp. 19, 20.
+
+[901] Morris and Bax, _Socialism: Its Growth and Outcome_, p. 9.
+
+[902] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 164.
+
+[903] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 39.
+
+[904] Bax, _The Religion of Socialism_, p. 145.
+
+[905] Oscar Wilde, "The Soul of Man under Socialism," _Fortnightly
+Review_, February 1891.
+
+[906] Wells, "Socialism and the Middle Classes," _Fortnightly Review_,
+November 1906.
+
+[907] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 200.
+
+[908] A.R. Orage in the _New Age_, November 21, 1907.
+
+[909] Lansbury, _The Principles of the English Poor Law_, p. 10.
+
+[910] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 160.
+
+[911] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 151.
+
+[912] Benson, _Woman, the Communist_, p. 16.
+
+[913] Davidson, _Gospel of the Poor_, p. 149.
+
+[914] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, pp. 14, 15.
+
+[915] _Ibid._ p. 15.
+
+[916] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, pp. 159, 160.
+
+[917] Morris and Bax, _Socialism; Its Growth and Outcome_, p. 199.
+
+[918] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, pp. 114, 115.
+
+[919] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 30.
+
+[920] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 160.
+
+[921] Bebel, _Woman_, pp. 44, 86.
+
+[922] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future_, pp. 229, 230.
+
+[923] Karl Pearson, _The Ethic of Free Thought_, p. 108.
+
+[924] Morris and Bax, _Manifesto of the Socialistic League_, p. 100.
+
+[925] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 56.
+
+[926] _Ibid._ pp. 59, 60.
+
+[927] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 165.
+
+[928] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 61,
+
+[929] Bax, _The Ethics of Socialism_, p. 62.
+
+[930] _Ibid._ p. 126.
+
+[931] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 24.
+
+[932] "The Moltke-Harden Case" in the _New Age_, November 14, 1907.
+
+[933] For details on this subject see Bebel, _Woman_; Meslier, _Le
+Testament_, 1864, ii. 226; Dezamy, _Code de la Communaute_, 1842, p.
+266; Godwin, _Enquiry concerning Political Justice_, ii. 507; Owen,
+_The Marriage System_, 1838, p. 66; Owen, _Manifesto_, 1840, p. 56;
+Owen, _What is Socialism?_ 1841, p. 40; Morris, _News from Nowhere_,
+1899, p. 90; Tucker, _Instead of a Book_, 1897, p. 15; Grave, _Societe
+Future_, ch. xii.; Charles Albert, _L'Amour Libre_, 1899, p. 191, &c.
+
+[934] See Nordhoff, _Communistic Societies_, 1875, p. 275; Noyes,
+_History of American Socialism_, 1870, p. 623; Hinds, _American
+Communities_, 1902, p. 196.
+
+[935] _Looking Backward_, ch. xxiv.
+
+[936] _Erfurter Programm_, 1892, p. 145.
+
+[937] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 32
+
+[938] Menger, _L'Etat Socialists_, 1904, p. 187.
+
+[939] _Ibid._ p. 188.
+
+[940] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, pp. 164, 166.
+
+[941] Benson, _Woman the Communist_, p. 15.
+
+[942] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, pp. 48, 49.
+
+[943] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[944] Russell Williams, _The Difficulties of Socialism_, p. 10.
+
+[945] _New Age_, Letter to Editor, November 14, 1907.
+
+[946] Blatchford, _What is this Socialism?_ p. 7.
+
+[947] A. Menger, _Volkspolitik_, p. 51.
+
+[948] Karl Pearson, _Socialism and Sex_, pp. 12, 108.
+
+[949] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 49.
+
+[950] Victor Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 14.
+
+[951] Victor Fisher, _The Babies' Tribute_, p. 15.
+
+[952] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 98.
+
+[953] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 64.
+
+[954] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 13.
+
+[955] _Ibid._ p. 42.
+
+[956] _Independent Labour Party Leaflet_, No. 5.
+
+[957] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 37.
+
+[958] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 148.
+
+[959] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 57.
+
+[960] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 229.
+
+[961] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 86.
+
+[962] _What Socialism means for Women_, p. 1.
+
+[963] Keir Hardie, _Citizenship of Women_, p. 6.
+
+[964] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 113.
+
+[965] Menger, _L'Etat Socialiste_, p. 191.
+
+[966] Bax, _Ethics of Socialism_, p. 66.
+
+[967] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 116.
+
+[968] _Ibid._ p. 117.
+
+[969] _After Bread, Education_, p. 10.
+
+[970] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 227.
+
+[971] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 70.
+
+[972] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 49.
+
+[973] Jowett, _The Socialist and the City_, p. 60.
+
+[974] Vandal, _L'Avenement de Bonaparte_.
+
+[975] _Rapports de police publies par Schmidt_, iii. p. 389.
+
+[976] Roussel, _Un Eveque assermente_, p. 298.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXVI
+
+THE SOCIALIST ATTITUDE TOWARDS CHRISTIANITY AND RELIGION
+
+
+What is the attitude of Socialism towards Christianity and religion?
+
+A clerical apologist of Socialism informs us that "Socialism is
+founded on the doctrine of the Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of
+man."[977] Another reverend gentleman states: "Socialism in the first
+place means combination, bringing together men for the building up of
+a sacred, holy life on this earth. It means the building up together
+of the different elements of human life. It is, in the grand words of
+the New Testament, which we were told Socialists did not believe in,
+'No man liveth unto himself, and no man dieth unto himself.'"[978] A
+third clergyman tells us that "The ethics of Socialism are identical
+with the ethics of Christianity."[979]
+
+Some British Socialist leaders explain that Socialists are good
+Christians, and that Socialism attacks only the Church and professed
+Christians, but not religion. "Much of what is regarded as
+anti-Christian Socialist doctrine is only an attack upon the Churches
+and professed Christians, and, so far from being anti-Christian, is,
+as a matter of fact, inspired by the ethics of Christ's
+teaching."[980] Other British Socialist leaders say that Socialism,
+not being a religious doctrine, has no concern with religion and does
+not meddle with it. "A charge against Socialists is that they are
+Atheists whose aim is to destroy all religion and all morality. This
+is not true. It is true that many Socialists are Agnostics, and some
+are Atheists. But Atheism is no more a part of Socialism than it is a
+part of Toryism, or of Radicalism, or of Liberalism."[981] "Socialism
+has no more to do with a man's religion than it has with the colour of
+his hair. Socialism deals with secular things, not with ultimate
+beliefs."[982]
+
+It is quite true that "there is at present no consensus of Socialist
+opinion on religious questions,"[983] but it is hardly honest on the
+part of Socialist leaders to assert that Socialism has nothing to do
+with religion. The leading journal of the Fabian Society frankly
+confesses: "There is the argument that Socialism has nothing whatever
+to do with subjects such as religion and marriage. But if Socialism is
+a theory of the State, nothing human is alien to it. It may be true
+that no one of the specific theories of religion or marriage so far
+put forward by Socialists has any claim to be regarded as the
+Socialist view; but there is all the difference in the world between
+such an admission and the denial that Socialism has any concern with
+the questions at all."[984]
+
+Some Socialists proclaim that Socialism will carry out the will of
+Christ upon earth. Mr. Keir Hardie, for instance, says: "Christ laid
+down no elaborate system of either economics or theology. No great
+teacher ever did. His heart beat in sympathy with the great human
+heart of the race. His words are simple and not to be misunderstood
+when taken to mean what they say. His prayer--Thy kingdom come, Thy
+will be done on earth as it is in Heaven--was surely meant to be taken
+literally Are our opponents prepared to assert that in Heaven there
+will be factories working women and children for starvation wages;
+coal-mines and private property in land, dividing the population of
+Heaven into two classes, one revelling in riches and luxury,
+destructive of soul and body, the other grovelling in poverty, also
+destructive of all that is best in life? If not, how can they
+consistently support the system which inevitably produces that state
+of things upon earth?"[985]
+
+Other Socialists frankly confess that Socialism is absolutely
+incompatible with Christianity and all other religions; that Socialism
+can succeed only if religion be abolished, and that therefore religion
+must be abolished. The philosopher of British Socialism states:
+"Socialism utterly despises the 'other world' with all its stage
+properties--that is, the present objects of religion. It brings
+back religion from heaven to earth."[986] "As to the ethical
+teaching of Christ, with its one-sided, introspective, and
+individualistic character, we venture to assert that no one
+acquainted with the theory of modern scientific Socialism can for one
+moment call it Socialistic. Socialism has no sympathy with the morbid,
+eternally-revolving-in-upon-itself transcendent morality of the Gospel
+discourses. This morality sets up a forced, to the vast majority
+impossible, standard of 'personal holiness' which, when realised,
+has seldom resulted in anything but (1) an apotheosised priggism,
+_e.g._ the Puritan type, or (2) in an epileptic hysteria, _e.g._
+the Catholic saint type."[987] Mr. Blatchford states: "I have
+been asked why I have 'gone out of my way to attack religion.'
+In reply I beg to say that I am working for Socialism when I
+attack a religion which is hindering Socialism, that we must pull down
+before we can build up, and that I hope to do a little building, if only
+on the foundation. I oppose the Christian religion because I do not
+think the Christian religion is beneficial to mankind, and because I
+think it an obstacle in the way of humanism."[988] Another very
+influential writer says: "Personally I feel called upon to attack
+Christianity as I would any other harmful delusion. I do not believe in
+the theology of Jesus any more than I do in his sociology. It is no use
+pretending that Socialism will not profoundly revolutionise religion.
+The change in the economic basis of society is the more important thing
+to strive for; but if the triumph of the Socialist ideal does not crush
+supernatural religion, then we shall still have a gigantic fabric of
+falsity and convention upon which to wage war. Happily Christianity
+becomes less and less of a power every day. So far, indeed, from
+Christianity being able to support Socialism, it goes hard with
+Christianity to stand by itself. As a support to Socialism it would
+surely prove a broken reed."[989]
+
+A Socialist poet proclaims:
+
+    The name of Christ has been the sovereign curse,
+    The opium drug that kept us slaves to wrong,
+    Fooled with a dream, we bowed to worse and worse.
+    "In heaven," we said, "He will confound the strong."
+    O hateful treason that has tricked too long!
+
+    Had we poor down-trod millions never dreamed
+    Your dream of that hereafter for our woe,
+    Had the great powers that rule, no Father seemed,
+    But Law relentless, long and long ago
+    Had we risen and said, "We will not suffer so!"
+
+    "O Christ, O You who found the drug of heaven,
+    To keep consoled an earth that grew to hell,
+    That else to cleanse and cure its sores had striven,
+    We curse That name!"[990]
+
+There is an eminently practical reason for the hostility of Socialists
+to Christianity. Religious people are not likely to become Socialists.
+"Christianity is like a set of manacles fastened upon the minds of
+those who believe in it. It is vain for us to look for aid from the
+Church and Christianity. It might be supposed that a hungry Christian
+would rebel against his hunger as readily as a hungry Atheist. But it
+is not the case."[991]
+
+The belief in a life after death also is incompatible with Socialism,
+and must therefore be combated: "We are compelled to abandon the
+belief in immortality. He who is given to meditating on his latter end
+and for whom the question of a post-physical future life for himself
+as an individual is of primary importance, is, generally speaking,
+indifferent where not positively hostile to social ideals."[992] "The
+moment this belief in an after-death existence is erected into a
+dogma, the moment it comes to be looked upon as an article of faith,
+which it is a duty to hold, or at least which it is the evidence of an
+ignoble disposition of mind not to hold, then it becomes an enemy to
+be combated."[993]
+
+The practical teachings of Christ are directly opposed to the
+practical teachings of Socialism: "Jesus said, 'Blessed are the poor.'
+Socialism recognises that wealth is a good thing, and it exists for
+the purpose of securing a better share of it for the 'blessed' poor.
+Socialism declares that all ought to work; but Jesus did no manual
+work after he was thirty years of age, and he encouraged his disciples
+to leave their occupations, to wander about and to beg, and this last
+feature of discipleship has in all ages been well maintained.
+Socialism incites the workers of all countries to unite for the
+prosecution of the class war; but Jesus approved of obedience,
+contentment, and humility of spirit."[994]
+
+Socialism has no use for Christianity. "To-day we have to settle down
+to our primers and our programmes, our Blue-books and our social
+experiments, just as if Jesus had never lived, or perhaps all the more
+because he lived. We get no assistance from Him. His followers are our
+enemies in every country which owns His influence--and the worst
+enemies of all because ever professing friendship."[995]
+
+Christianity is, according to Socialists, an outworn creed. "As Marx
+says, 'The religious world is but the reflex of the real world.
+Christianity, like all religions, is but an expression of material
+conditions, a direct outcome of social relations, the unsubstantial
+image of a world reflected in the muddy pool of human intellect. Jesus
+varies with the ages. Redeemer of Roman slave; War-God of Crusader;
+General Overseer of Manufacturing Capitalist."[996] Besides,
+Socialists resent "the continual reference of ideal perfection to a
+semi-mythical Syrian of the first century when they see higher types
+even in some now walking this upper earth, but in vulgar flesh and
+blood and without the atmosphere of nineteen centuries to lend
+enchantment to them."[997]
+
+Lastly, Christianity has been a failure: "The success of Christianity
+as a moral force has been solely upon isolated individuals. In its
+effects on societies at large it has signally and necessarily
+failed."[998] "Holiness! Your religion does not make it. Its ethics
+are too weak, its theories too unsound, its transcendentalism is too
+thin. There ought to be no such thing as poverty in the world. The
+earth is bounteous: the ingenuity of man is great. He who defends the
+claims of the individual, or of a class, against the rights of the
+human race is a criminal. A hungry man, an idle man, an ignorant man,
+a destitute or degraded woman, a beggar or pauper child, is a
+reproach to society and a witness against existing religion and
+civilisation. In such a world as this, friend Christian, a man has no
+business reading the Bible, singing hymns, and attending divine
+worship. He has not time. All the strength and pluck and wit he
+possesses are needed in the work of real religion, of real salvation.
+The rest is all 'dreams out of the ivory gate and visions before
+midnight.'"[999] "In a really humane and civilised nation there should
+be and need be no such thing as poverty, ignorance, crime, idleness,
+war, slavery, hate, envy, pride, greed, gluttony, vice. But this is
+not a humane and civilised nation, and never will be while it accepts
+Christianity as its religion."[1000]
+
+Our belief in God also must be abandoned, but if we continue believing
+in God it follows that man is not responsible for his actions, that he
+cannot do wrong: "Man is what God made him; could only act as God
+enabled him or constructed him to act. If God is responsible for man's
+existence, God is responsible for man's act. Therefore man cannot sin
+against God."[1001] "If God is all-knowing, He knew before He made man
+what man would do. If God is all-powerful, He need not have made man
+at all, or He could have made a man who would be strong enough to
+resist temptation. Or He could have made a man who was incapable of
+evil. If God had never made man, then man could never have succumbed
+to temptation. God made man of His own divine choice and made him to
+His own divine desire. How then could God blame man for anything man
+did? Man might justly say to God: 'I did not ask to be created. You
+knew when You made me how I should act. If You wish me to act
+otherwise, why did You not make me different? I was fore-ordained by
+You to be and to do what I am and have done. Is it my fault that You
+fore-ordained me to be and to do thus?' The actions of a man's will
+are as mathematically fixed at his birth as are the motions of a
+planet in its orbit. God, who made the man and the planet, is
+responsible for the actions of both."[1002]
+
+"Divine law says that certain acts are good and that certain acts are
+evil; and that God will reward those who do well and will punish those
+who do ill. And we are told that God will so act because God is just.
+But I claim that God cannot justly punish those who disobey, nor
+reward those who obey His laws. If God created all things, He must
+have created the evil as well as the good. Who, then, is responsible
+for good and evil? Only God, for he made them. He who creates all is
+responsible for all. God created all: God is responsible for all. He
+who creates nothing is responsible for nothing. Man created nothing:
+man is responsible for nothing. Therefore man is not responsible for
+his nature, nor for the acts prompted by that nature. Therefore God
+cannot justly punish man for his acts. Therefore the Divine law, with
+its code of rewards and punishments, is not a just law and cannot have
+emanated from a just God."[1003]
+
+"I do not pretend to say whether there is, or is not, _a_ God, but I
+deny that there is a loving Heavenly Father who answers prayer. I deny
+the existence of Free Will and possibility of man's sinning against
+God. I deny that Christ is necessary to man's salvation from Hell or
+from Sin. I do not assert or deny the immortality of the soul. I know
+nothing about the soul, and no man is, or ever was, able to tell me
+more than I know."[1004] "I do seriously mean that no man can, under
+any circumstances, be justly blamed for anything he may say or do.
+That is one of my deepest convictions."[1005]
+
+Mr. Blatchford's philosophy excuses, and therefore encourages, every
+action based upon a bad impulse, every vice and every crime, and his
+creed should find the unqualified approval of habitual criminals and
+loafers.
+
+Views similar to those of Mr. Blatchford are expressed by many other
+Socialists. We read, for instance: "It was pleasant to believe that a
+benevolent hand was guiding the steps of society; overruling all evil
+appearances for good; and making poverty here the earnest of a great
+blessedness and reward hereafter. It was pleasant to lose the sense of
+worldly inequality in the contemplation of our equality before God.
+But utilitarian questioning and scientific answering turned all this
+tranquil optimism into the blackest pessimism. Nature was shown to us
+as 'red in tooth and claw': if the guiding hand were indeed
+benevolent, then it could not be omnipotent, so that our trust in it
+was broken: if it were omnipotent, it could not be benevolent; so that
+our love in it turned to fear and hatred."[1006]
+
+    As long as childhood pines in City slum;
+      As long as Landlords steal their racking rent;
+    As long as Love and Faith to gold succumb;
+      As long as human life in war is spent;
+    While false religion teaches men to pray
+      To a false Tyrant, whom they misname God;
+    Whose "Holy Will" is--so they glibly say--
+      The poor should suffer 'neath His chast'ning rod;
+    As long as men do buy and sell the soil,
+      And thereby make their fellow men their slaves;
+    While selfishness exacts its cruel spoil;
+      While yet the poor are ground into their graves;
+    Until these crying wrongs are made to cease
+    Nowhere upon this earth can there be peace.[1007]
+
+Although the Socialists have declared war against the Christian
+religion and the Christian Churches, they freely quote the Scriptures
+and the Fathers if it suits their purpose, and shamelessly misuse the
+name of Christ. In support of their maxim "Property is theft," they
+quote St. Jerome's saying: "Opulence is always the result of theft:
+if not by the actual possessor, then by his predecessors."[1008] They
+quote Christ in support of their demand for the abolition of private
+property, marriage and the family. "Christ abolished all private
+property, and with it the State. He abolished all distinctions of
+race, rank, sex, and intellect. He made the first last and the last
+first, acknowledging only devoted _service_ as true greatness; the
+only law, the Law of Love. In His sweeping condemnation of egoism in
+every form it seems doubtful if He did not even lay iconoclastic hands
+on marriage and the family, as they existed and exist. In the
+resurrection they neither marry nor give in marriage, but are as the
+angels in heaven. Woman (to His mother), what have I to do with thee?
+Whosoever shall do the will of My Father which is in heaven the same
+is My brother, and sister, and mother."[1009] They use the name of
+Christ for electioneering purposes. At a West Ham election, for
+instance, the electors received leaflets which stated "If you vote for
+the Municipal Alliance you vote against God. If Christ were in
+Plaistow Ward, Christ would vote for Coe."[1010]
+
+Professor Schaeffle, perhaps the most fair-minded and moderate
+scientist who ever criticised Socialism, was perfectly right in
+stating: "Socialism of the present day is out-and-out irreligious, and
+hostile to the Church. It says that the Church is only a police
+institution for upholding capital, and that it deceives the common
+people with a 'cheque payable in heaven,' that the Church deserves to
+perish."[1011] The above words were written with regard to German
+Socialism, and British Socialism is far more irreligious, violent, and
+revolutionary than is the German variety.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[977] Rev. E.T. Russell in _Forward_, November 23, 1907.
+
+[978] Rev. L. Jenkyns Jones in _Forward_, November 16, 1907.
+
+[979] Rev. Frank Ballard in _Socialism: A Cancerous Growth_, p. 19.
+
+[980] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 99.
+
+[981] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 4.
+
+[982] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 101.
+
+[983] _New Age_, October 10, 1907.
+
+[984] _Ibid._ p. 10.
+
+[985] Keir Hardie, _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_ p.
+18.
+
+[986] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 52.
+
+[987] _Ibid._ p. 97.
+
+[988] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 189.
+
+[989] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 14.
+
+[990] Francis Adams, _The Mass of Christ_, p. 12.
+
+[991] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 14.
+
+[992] Bax, _Ethics of Socialism_, pp. 192, 193.
+
+[993] _Ibid._ pp. 196, 197.
+
+[994] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 6.
+
+[995] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 16.
+
+[996] _Socialist Standard_, December 1, 1907.
+
+[997] Bax, _The Religion of Socialism_, p. 90.
+
+[998] _Ibid._ p. 98.
+
+[999] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 194.
+
+[1000] _Ibid._ p. 197.
+
+[1001] _Ibid._ p. 124.
+
+[1002] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, pp. 135, 136.
+
+[1003] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, pp. 11, 12.
+
+[1004] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 122.
+
+[1005] _Ibid._ p. 137.
+
+[1006] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 27.
+
+[1007] _The Deadly Parallel_, October 1907.
+
+[1008] Wheatley, _How the Miners are Robbed_, p. 13.
+
+[1009] Davidson, _Gospel of the Poor_, p. 149.
+
+[1010] _Times, Municipal Socialism_, p. 42.
+
+[1011] Schaeffle, _Quintessence of Socialism_, p. 116.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXVII
+
+THE RELIGION OF SOCIALISM
+
+
+We have seen in Chapter XXVI. that Socialism makes war upon
+Christianity and upon religion, that it strives to eradicate religion
+out of the people's hearts. Now the question arises: How do Socialists
+propose to fill the void? What do they intend to put into the place of
+that religion which they wish to destroy?
+
+"Socialism involves a change which would be almost a revolution in the
+moral and religious attitude of the majority of mankind."[1012]
+"Religion will share the fate of the State. It will not be
+'abolished,' God will not be dethroned, religion will not be 'torn out
+of the people's hearts.' Religion will disappear by itself without any
+violent attack."[1013] "The establishment of society on a Socialistic
+basis would imply the definitive abandonment of all theological cults,
+since the notion of a transcendent god or semi-divine prophet is but
+the counterpart and analogue of the transcendent governing class. So
+soon as we are rid of the desire of one section of society to enslave
+another, the dogmas of an effete creed will lose their interest. As
+the religion of slave industry was Paganism; as the religion of
+serfage was Catholic Christianity, or Sacerdotalism; as the religion
+of Capitalism is Protestant Christianity or Biblical dogma, so the
+religion of collective and co-operative industry is Humanism, which is
+only another name for Socialism."[1014] "The religion of the future
+is to be the religion of the common life. It will have for its ideal
+the complete organic unity of the whole human race. And this religion
+will be a political religion. It will be a religion which will seek to
+realise its ideal in our industrial and social affairs by the
+application and use of political methods. The popular conception of
+politics as something apart from religion is a cunning device of the
+devil to serve his own ends; just in the same way as the popular
+impression that politics is something apart from bread and butter, and
+shorter hours, and better homes, and better industrial conditions.
+There can be no separation between politics and religion. The religion
+of the future will be an application of the moral truths of religion
+through politics to our industrial and social conditions."[1015]
+
+To root out the very memory of Christianity, Socialists would abolish
+the Sunday. "We would surrender once and for all this chimerical
+notion of one day of universal rest and institute three days a week,
+or, if necessary, more, as days of partial rest, _i.e._ on which
+different sections of the community would be freed from labour in
+turn."[1016]
+
+This proposal, like so many Socialist proposals, reminds us of the
+French Revolution, which also simultaneously abolished the Christian
+religion and changed the calendar. The month was divided into three
+periods of ten days. The tenth day, the "_decadi_," replaced
+Sunday.[1017] The people were compelled to rest on _decadi_ and to
+work on Sunday. Peasants who on Sundays did not bring their vegetables
+to market were prosecuted.[1018] Policemen who on _decadi_ heard
+suspicious noises broke by force into houses to find out whether
+people were "desecrating" _decadi_ by work, and the people
+complained, "Where is the liberty you promised us when we may not even
+dance on any day we like?"[1019]
+
+The French Revolutionaries destroyed the statues and pictures in the
+churches. British Socialists at present only propose to replace the
+effigies of Christ and the saints by Socialist heroes: "Let the
+painters, sculptors, poets, and musicians do honour to the heroes of
+humanity, the apostles of science and progress, as they have
+heretofore lavished their taste and skill and imagination on a
+conventional Jesus, an ideal Madonna and imaginary saints, and Gospel
+scenes; let statues arise to Bruno, Vanini, Servetus; let the
+historian and the biographer recount with loving wealth of detail
+their struggles, controversies, flights, imprisonments, and
+martyrdoms; let poets and painters cast the halo of romantic art
+around Caxton, Galileo, William the Silent, Milton, Harry Vane, and
+great masterful Cromwell; let hymns be sung to Copernicus, Newton,
+Harvey, to Massaniello, Danton, Garibaldi, Delescluze, to Grace
+Darling, Sister Dora and Father Damien."[1020]
+
+"To the Socialist, Marx has said the last word that need be said on
+the subject of the relation of Socialism and religion. 'The religious
+reflex of the real world can only finally vanish when the practical
+relations of everyday life offer to man none but perfectly
+intelligible and reasonable relations with regard to his fellow men.'
+Material conditions rule. 'The English Established Church will more
+readily pardon an attack on thirty-eight of its thirty-nine articles
+than on one-thirty-ninth of its income.' This is as true to-day as
+when written in 1867."[1021] Among the "Immediate Reforms" demanded by
+the Social-Democratic Federation is, of course, "the disestablishment
+and disendowment of all State churches."[1022]
+
+British Socialists, like the French Revolutionaries, have issued
+numerous travesties of the Christian church service. The following are
+extracts from a widely read "Socialist Ritual."
+
+
+"A CATECHISM FOR THE MOB
+
+"Q. What is thy name? A. Wageworker.--Q. Who are thy parents? A. My
+father was called Wageworker--my mother's name is Poverty.--Q. Where
+wast thou born? A. In a garret under the roof of a tenement house
+which my father and his comrades built.--Q. What is thy religion? A.
+The Religion of Capital.--Q. What duties does thy religion lay upon
+thee with regard to society? A. To increase the national wealth--first
+through my toil, and next through my savings, as soon as I can make
+any.--Q. What does thy religion order thee to do with thy savings? A.
+To entrust them to the banks and such other institutions that have
+been established by philanthropic financiers, to the end that they may
+loan them out to themselves. We are commanded to place our earnings at
+all times at the disposal of our masters."
+
+
+"A LITANY
+
+for the use of the respectable classes. Edited by Edward Carpenter.
+
+"O God, the Father of Heaven, have mercy upon us, miserable
+sinners.--Remember not, Lord, our offences, nor the offences of our
+forefathers, neither take thou vengeance of our sins. Spare us, good
+Lord; spare us whom thou hast brought into honour and good position
+through the precious blood of the toiling masses, and be not angry
+with us for ever: Spare us, good Lord.--From all evil and mischief,
+from the crafts and assaults of the thief and the burglar, from
+poverty and the everlasting damnation of the workhouse: Good Lord,
+deliver us.--From bad trade and bogus dividends, from shady and
+unprofitable investments, from all unsuccessful speculation and
+losses, whether on the turf or in the City: Good Lord, deliver us."
+
+
+"THE CAPITALIST'S TEN COMMANDMENTS
+
+"I am Capital, thy Master, that brought thee out of the Land of
+Liberty into a State of Slavery. Thou shalt not become thine own
+Master, nor have any other Masters but me. Thou shalt commit murder
+for my sake only. Thou shalt give thy daughters in prostitution and
+thy wife in adultery to me."
+
+
+THE LATEST DECALOGUE
+
+    Thou shalt have one God only, who
+    Would be at the expense of two?
+    No graven images may be
+    Worshipped, except the currency.
+    Swear not at all, as for thy curse
+    Thine enemy is none the worse.
+    At Church on Sunday to attend
+    Will serve to keep the world thy friend.[1023]
+
+The foregoing representative statements and extracts clearly prove
+that the teachings of Socialism, far from being in harmony with
+Christianity, are incompatible and directly hostile not only to
+Christianity but to all religion. The philosopher of British Socialism
+has very truly said, "Socialism has been well described as a new
+conception of the world, presenting itself in industry as co-operative
+Communism, in politics as international Republicanism, in religion as
+atheistic Humanism, by which is meant the recognition of social
+progress as our being's highest end and aim."[1024] As there is very
+little difference between "atheistic Humanism" and Atheism pure and
+simple, Socialists have really no right to complain if their
+opponents, relying on Bax's high authority, reproach them with being
+Atheists. The excerpts given above show that the religion of Socialism
+is a political and economic one. Its character and principles may be
+found in the publications of the Labour Church Union and of the
+Socialist Sunday School Union. The prospectus of the Labour Church
+Union contains the following declaration of principles:
+
+"(1) That the Labour Church exists to give expression to the religion
+of the Labour movement. (2) That the religion of the Labour movement
+is not theological, but respects each individual's personal
+convictions upon this question. (3) That the religion of the Labour
+movement seeks the realisation of universal well-being by the
+establishment of Socialism--a Commonwealth founded upon justice and
+love. (4) The religion of the Labour movement declares that
+improvement of social conditions and the development of personal
+character are both essential to emancipation from social and moral
+bondage, and to that end insists upon the duty of studying the
+economic and moral forces of society."
+
+It will be noticed that the words Christianity, God, morality, virtue,
+&c., do not occur in the foregoing statement.
+
+Now let us study the details of the Socialist religion. These details
+are taken from a statement of the aims, methods, &c. of the Socialist
+Sunday Schools, published for the enlightenment of the public by the
+Glasgow and District Socialist Sunday School Union, the principal
+Socialist Sunday School Union of Great Britain. In that official
+publication we read: "Socialism, which the children are taught, is an
+idealism. It has been described as 'the highest flight of the ideal
+into the realm of the practical.' It is a faith--a faith based on the
+divine brotherhood and sisterhood of humanity--irrespective of class,
+colour, or creed. It is a religion--a religion greater than creeds or
+dogmas. It is a religion of love! Its followers and disciples are
+lovers of mankind! Its worship is service to humanity! Socialism has
+absorbed not only all the essential spiritual elements contained in
+the Christ teaching, but it has also, as Christianity itself has done
+before it, absorbed all the highest altruistic teaching of the ages.
+But Socialism has done something more--it has struck a new note,
+deep-sounding, far-reaching, and its vibrations are stirring in the
+hearts of the nations! Socialism has proclaimed its tenets, declaring
+the only possible ways and means whereby the sacred rites of the
+religion of love can be observed, and without which there can be no
+realisation of the divine sentiment--'the brotherhood of man.'
+
+"The Church, the State, and the people alike, in so far as they
+sanction and sanctify unrighteous social conditions, are equally guilty
+of breaking the very first laws of brotherhood, and thereby of
+violating the pure and holy religion of love. When the Sun of Social
+Justice--Socialism--has arisen in its full glory, all the artificial
+and unnatural causes of evil and error will have been rooted out from
+the pathway of human progress. The sons and daughters of men may then,
+without mockery, stand before the great throne of love and worship the
+beauty and the wonder and the glory of the earth, sky, and sea, as
+brothers and sisters in one holy unity, and be more worthy to fathom
+the deeper mystery. Thus Socialism, or the law of the religion of love,
+unfalteringly maintains: That private property in land is public
+robbery. It is public robbery because, the land being the source of all
+the necessaries of life, it should belong equally to all, by birthright
+of our common inheritance in the brotherhood of the world. 'Let them
+know that the earth from which they were created is the common
+property of all men, and that therefore the fruits of the earth belong
+indiscriminately to all. Those who make private property of the gift of
+God, pretend in vain to be innocent, for they are the murderers of
+those who die daily for want of it.' Such is the terrible and
+unassailable dictum of one of the great founders of the early Christian
+Church, Saint Gregory I. Private property in capital--whether in money,
+railways, mines, factories, machinery, tools, &c.--is public robbery.
+It is public robbery because it creates and divides the human family
+into classes. Classes of rich and idle people who claim and hold all
+these things as by right--and classes of hirelings who are thus forced
+to pay for the use of them--as rent in land, interest in capital,
+profit on labour. This means that the hireling classes require to give
+all the work of their hands and brains in order to secure a small share
+of the things which they need to live, and which they themselves have
+produced out of Nature's ample store. And this at once hinders the
+possibility of any unity of brotherhood or sisterhood and breaks the
+law of love."[1025]
+
+It will be noticed that in this lengthy statement God is mentioned
+only for party purposes, and that the chief aim of the "religion of
+love" is to sow hatred and to incite to plunder.
+
+The Labour Church Union and the Socialist Sunday Schools use the same
+form of the Socialist Ten Commandments, which are as follows:
+
+"Love your schoolfellows, who will be your fellow-workers in life.
+Love learning, which is the food of the mind, and be grateful to your
+teacher as to your parents. Make every day holy by good and useful
+deeds and kindly actions. Honour good men, be courteous to all, bow
+down to none. Do not hate or speak evil of anyone, do not be
+revengeful, but stand up for your rights and resist oppression. Do not
+be cowardly, be a friend to the weak and love justice. Remember that
+all the good things of the earth are produced by labour. Whoever
+enjoys them without working for them is stealing the bread of the
+workers. Observe and think in order to discover the truth. Do not
+believe what is contrary to reason, and never deceive yourself or
+others. Do not think that he who loves his own country must hate and
+despise other nations, or wish for war, which is a remnant of
+barbarism. Look forward to the day when all men will be free citizens
+of one fatherland and live together as brothers, in peace and
+righteousness. Socialism is the hope of the world."
+
+Here also the words Christianity and God do not occur.
+
+We are officially told that "Socialist Sunday Schools are intended to
+serve as a means of teaching economic causes of present-day social
+evils and of implanting a love of goodness in the child mind."[1026]
+
+The following extracts from the "Red Catechism" serve to show how
+"love of goodness" is inculcated in the Socialist Sunday Schools:
+
+"Q. Is there any difference in the teachings at Socialist Sunday
+schools and other Sunday schools? A. Yes.--Q. What is taught in
+Christian schools? A. Christian morals and capitalist teachings.--Q.
+What is meant by the term 'employing men for profit'? A. Capitalists,
+when they pay wages, make the workers produce three or four times the
+amount they pay them. The extra which the men produce over their wages
+is called profit.--Q. What evidence is there that the workers earn a
+great amount and get very little? A. The national amount of wealth
+produced every year is two thousand millions and the amount paid out
+in wages is only five hundred millions, showing that the poor are poor
+because they are robbed.--Q. Who creates all wealth? A. The working
+class.--Q. Who creates all poverty? A. Our capitalist society.--Q. Who
+are the workers? A. Men who work for wages.--Q. What class of men get
+into Parliament? A. The capitalist and aristocratic class?--Q. How is
+that? A. Because the workers are opposed by men interested in keeping
+them poor.--Q. How many children are there in London who go to school
+insufficiently fed and clothed? A. It is stated as many as 100,000; a
+number equal to the population of a small county.--Q. To what class do
+these poor starving children belong? A. The working class.--Q. Is it
+not the working class which creates all wealth? A. Yes.--Q. Do the
+rich trouble about the poor children of London who are ill-fed and
+clothed? A. No.--Q. What is a pauper? A. One who lives upon others,
+while being able to work?--Q. Are the rich class able to work? A. Yes;
+because they are well cared for when young and grow up strong?--Q. Do
+they work? A. No; they consider it menial and beneath them.--Q. Then
+they are paupers? A. Yes.--Q. Do the rich and their children live at
+the expense of those who work? A. Yes.--Q. What does machinery enable
+the workers to do? A. To produce wealth quicker.--Q. Do the workers
+benefit by machinery? A. No. On the contrary. It generally reduces
+their wages and throws them out of work.--Q. Why is that? A. Because
+the machinery is controlled by the capitalist class.--Q. What is a
+wage-slave? A. A person who works for a wage and gives all he earns to
+a capitalist.--Q. What proportion does a wage-slave receive of what he
+earns? A. On the average about a fourth. The slave and serf always had
+food, clothing, and shelter. The wage-slave, when he is out of work,
+must now starve or go into the workhouse and be made miserable, or
+commit suicide.--Q. What is the remedy for wage-slavery? A.
+Socialism.--Q. Who pays the rent? A. Father and mother.--Q. Who
+demands the rent? A. The landlord.--Q. Can you say how much the
+landlord takes from the wages of father, generally for rent? A. Yes; a
+fourth.--Q. That is sheer robbery, is it not? A. Yes; but working men
+cannot help it.--Q. Why is that? A. Because the landlord class have a
+monopoly of land and houses, and workmen have no land and are too poor
+to build for themselves."[1027]
+
+With this mendacious stuff the "Religion of Love" systematically
+poisons the innocent minds of little children. The religion of
+Socialism is indeed a political religion, as Mr. Snowden, M.P., has
+stated.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1012] Ball, _The Moral Aspects of Socialism_, p. 23.
+
+[1013] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 213.
+
+[1014] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 81.
+
+[1015] Snowden, _The Christ that Is to be_, pp. 6, 7.
+
+[1016] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, pp. 58, 59.
+
+[1017] Mignet, _Revolution Francaise_, ch. viii.
+
+[1018] Sciout, iii. 176.
+
+[1019] Sciout, iv. 386.
+
+[1020] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 16.
+
+[1021] _Socialist Standard_, December 1, 1907.
+
+[1022] See Appendix.
+
+[1023] _A Socialists' Ritual_, pp. 7-16.
+
+[1024] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. 81.
+
+[1025] Glasier, _Socialist Sunday Schools_, p. 9.
+
+[1026] Glasier, _Socialist Sunday Schools_, p. 10.
+
+[1027] Hazell, _The Red Catechism_, pp. 3-10.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXVIII
+
+CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM
+
+
+The position of the Christian Churches and of Christian ministers
+towards Socialism is one of considerable difficulty. Socialism and
+Christianity are two words which are not easily reconcilable. Chapters
+XXVI. and XXVII. show that the attitude of British Socialists, not
+only towards Christianity but towards all religion, is in the main a
+hostile one. Their attitude is only logical. Socialists see in
+religious men and in religious corporations obstacles to their
+revolutionary and predatory progress. However, as many Socialists have
+declared that the teachings of Christ and of Socialism are identical,
+some large-hearted Christian ministers have tried to reconcile
+Christianity and Socialism. Working under the banner of Christian
+Socialism, these are rather trying to exercise practical Christianity
+than to assist the Socialist agitation, as may be seen from their
+programmes given in the Appendix.
+
+Many Christian Socialist ministers are pious and worthy men whose
+actions are wise and moderate. Others have adopted an attitude of
+hysterical enthusiasm and admiration towards Socialism. Whilst the
+former have only a few adherents, some of the latter have rapidly
+secured for themselves a considerable Socialist following, and if one
+takes note of their views, one cannot help doubting whether their
+motives are entirely disinterested. The following utterances, for
+instance, one would expect from the mouth of a Soudanese dervish or
+an Indian fakir, but not from the pen of a Christian minister:
+
+"Socialism is the Greatest Movement for Justice and Brotherhood that
+this old Planet has ever known. Socialism is the Greatest Passion for
+the Release and Freedom of the Human Soul that this world has ever
+felt. Socialism is the Greatest Urge of the Average Man to stand
+erect, independent, and free, without a Master and without a slave,
+that the human race has ever experienced.
+
+"The Spirit of the Lord of Life within me, burning as a fierce flame
+in my bones, saith 'Speak unto the people these words': There is only
+one Sacred Thing beneath the stars--Human Life. Human Life is the
+Incarnation of the Desire of the Lord of Life. Behold! He awaits the
+Full Expression, the Complete Emancipation, the Perfect Freedom of
+that Human Life, as Life, in all its undisclosed majestic meanings.
+And it doth not yet appear what it shall be! The Average Man at your
+side in the street, next door--the average woman, any woman, the
+child, any child--Behold here is the Sacred One. Love, Worship, and
+Bless in the name of the Lord of Life. 'Inasmuch as ye have done it
+unto one of the least of these, ye have done it unto Me.' No
+artificial, conventional, social, or financial dignity can make that
+Human One worthy; no present degradation or humiliation can finally
+obscure that Radiant One. 'I see through your sham tinsel and title; I
+see through the dirt and despair to the Human One shining there,'
+saith the Living Truth. 'The worship that passeth these Darlings of My
+Heart and leaveth them--that worship I am against,' saith the Lord of
+Life. O stand erect now, just where you are, just as you read these
+words. Thou hast no Superior! Thou art very Beautiful! Thou art the
+Freedom Incarnate, whose Heart-beat shall dissolve all slaveries and
+Injustice. I Love thee, O Thou Human One. There is only one Sacred
+Thing beneath the stars--Human Life. Whatever hurts, harms, makes
+cheap, blights, hinders, enslaves, subordinates, or profits off Human
+Life is Wrong tho' demanded by ten thousand priests, tho' framed in a
+thousand laws, tho' hoary with ten thousand years. Whatever hurts the
+Son of man--that--that is the Blasphemy. Whatever helps, releases,
+emancipates, makes free, glorifies, makes sacred, enlarges, enricheth
+Human Life, that is the Right and Good, tho' persecuted by private
+interests; that is the Truth, tho' withstood by dead men's creeds.
+Whatever emancipates the average man--that--that is the coming of the
+Lord. The Fundamental fact of Life is Bread. Man doth not--cannot live
+by Bread alone. But man cannot live without Bread. In the eating of
+Bread, behold the Divine Democracy of Human Life. The necessity of
+eating Bread--there is the Universal Sacrament--all are present--all
+partake. Behold, the Supper of the Lord is--just Bread--our common
+Daily Bread. Why is this Bread Sacred? Not in itself. No! Why, then?
+It is the food of the Sacred Ones--the Human Ones. It is the Food of
+the Incarnation of the Lord of Life. And the first Basic Sacred
+Ceremony of Man is--Labour in securing that Bread--the Fact of
+Bread-Getting. If that is not Just, True, Right, Good, a
+Blessing--then nothing is. All else is measured here. You cannot build
+a Sacred Ceremony in the superstructure of Human Life if the Basis in
+Bread-getting is a Lie, a Fraud, a Cheat, a Theft, a Slavery, a
+Service to the Gain-god--Mammon, a Gamble with Human Flesh. Nay,
+verily! 'I will not hear your prayers, your chants, your liturgies,
+your praises; My soul hateth even your solemn meeting,' said the Lord
+of Life, if thou wilt not see Me in these Human Ones as they struggle
+for Bread, if thou wilt not make thy Bread-getting Just, and Holy, and
+Good, and True.
+
+"And now, O Capitalism, Thou art doomed! I am against thee, saith the
+Spirit. O Capitalism, I have weighed thee in My balances--thou art
+found wanting. O Capitalism, thou hast gambled with the Land that I
+gave to all for Bread. O Capitalism, thou hast gambled with the great
+machines that are for the bread-getting of the people. O Capitalism,
+thou hast made Human need an asset of thy gains. Thy Purse is filled
+with Bloody Coin. Thy Store-Houses burst where the many Hunger. The
+Little Ones cry in the streets whilst thou hidest thy Plunder. I am
+against thee, O Capitalism, I am against thee! Thou hast gambled with
+the very Bodies and Souls of men in thy Mad Mammonism. Thy fierce
+Profit-Hunger Hath rejoiced in the Hunger of Man. I am against thee, O
+Capitalism!
+
+"Behold! the Day Dawns! I see Justice arise. I see the Land redeemed!
+I see the Titans of Iron, the machinery of shops, used for man! I see
+the Toilers go forth to their labours and return with the product of
+their toil! I see Capitalism lie prone! I see Mammonism fallen! I see
+the Profit of the Many Arise! I see Freedom! I see Brotherhood! I see
+the Socialist Age! I see the Commonwealth of Man! 'Tis the coming of
+the Lord of Life."[1028]
+
+Much of the foregoing is printed in half-inch letters. At the end of
+these wild utterances we read in letters an inch tall: "Rally, Rally,
+Rally! Great Social Crusade! Rally, Rally, Rally!"--which unpleasantly
+reminds one of the shouting butcher's insistent cry, "Buy, Buy, Buy!"
+to be heard in crowded thoroughfares on Saturday nights.
+
+The moderate Christian Socialists cannot help opposing the most
+important item in the Socialist programme. For example, "The Christian
+Social Union asserts that it has not the slightest sympathy with
+confiscation." In fact, "the whole question of expropriation is
+tacitly ignored in the literature of Christian Socialism."[1029] "The
+Christian who believes in the words: 'Take heed, and keep yourselves
+from all covetousness, for a man's life consisteth not in the
+abundance of the things which he possesseth,' cannot easily be a
+Socialist, and a Christian minister cannot easily approve of the
+spoliation of the Church."[1030] Professor Flint stated quite
+correctly: "What is called Christian Socialism will always be found to
+be unchristian in so far as it is socialistic, or unsocialistic in so
+far as it is truly and fully Christian."[1031]
+
+Christian Socialist leaders urge Socialists to join the Christian
+Socialist movement. "Every Socialist who understands how deeply
+religion has been concerned in every movement that has ever won the
+enthusiasm of men, every Socialist who realises how enormous is the
+work before him, must welcome the assistance of this ancient and
+imperishable organ of love and justice. And every Christian who
+rejoices in the singular growth of religious zeal in recent years must
+long to see all that huge force given to the service of the Humanity
+which Jesus Christ has taken up into the Godhead. For the man that
+loves much is a Socialist, and the man that loves most is a saint, and
+every man that truly loves the brotherhood is in a state of
+salvation."[1032] These words seem rather perfunctory and laboured.
+
+By far the largest number of Socialists regard the Christian Socialist
+movement with suspicion and dislike. The philosopher of British
+Socialism, Mr. Bax, for instance, wrote contemptuously: "The leaders
+of the Guild of St. Matthew wish to accomplish vast changes through 'a
+clarified Christianity'?--a Christianity which shall consist
+apparently of the skins of dead dogmas stuffed with adulterated
+Socialist ethics." A leading Socialist weekly wrote of the early
+Christian Socialists: "Whether their labours were largely beneficial
+depends on the way one looks at these things. We have no doubt that
+for the capitalist class these labours were eminently beneficial, and
+that is why Maurice and his friends are held in such great esteem by
+them. For the working class, however, their labours spelt slavery, and
+ought always to be remembered when similar attempts to 'Christianise'
+Socialism are made by the 'servants' of the Church. Here, as in many
+other things, the motto of the worker must be 'I fear the Greeks, even
+when they come with gifts.'"[1033]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1028] _The Social Crusade to Herald the Message of Truth and Freedom
+to this Age, conducted by Rev. J. Stitt Wilson, M.A._, November 1907.
+
+[1029] Woodworth, _Christian Socialism in England_, p. 161.
+
+[1030] _Church and Socialism_, p. 39.
+
+[1031] Flint, _Socialism_, p. 441.
+
+[1032] Dearmer, _Socialism and Christianity_, pp. 22, 23.
+
+[1033] _Justice_, October 19, 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXIX
+
+SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM
+
+
+Socialism is not a simple but a complex movement. It contains a
+powerful strain both of Communism and of Anarchism. In fact one might
+almost divide all Socialists into two classes: Communist Socialists
+and Anarchist Socialists. A study of the history of Socialism,
+Communism, and Anarchism shows that all three movements have much in
+common. It shows instances of Socialistic parties branching out and
+having Communist and Anarchist offshoots, and shows instances of
+Anarchist and Communist groups combining under the red banner of
+Socialism.
+
+Owing to its intimate historical and sentimental connection with
+Communism and Anarchism, Socialism is hostile to the State, and many
+Socialists desire its downfall: "The expropriation of all the private
+proprietors of the means of production being effected, society starts
+on a new basis. The conditions of existence and of human life are
+changed. The State Organisation gradually loses its foundation. The
+State expires with the expiration of a ruling class, just as religion
+expires when the belief in supernatural beings or supernatural
+reasoning powers ceases to exist."[1034] "The first act wherein the
+State appears as the real representative of the whole body social--the
+seizure of the means of production in the name of society--is also its
+last independent act as State. The interference of the State in social
+relations becomes superfluous in one domain after another and falls of
+itself into desuetude. The place of a government over persons is taken
+by the administration of things and the conduct of the processes of
+production. The State is not 'abolished,' it dies out."[1035] "The
+representatives of the State will have disappeared along with the State
+itself--ministers, parliaments, standing armies, police and
+_gens-d'armes_, law courts, lawyers and public prosecutors, prisons,
+rates, taxes and excises--the entire political apparatus. The great and
+yet so petty parliamentary struggles have given place to administrative
+colleges and administrative delegations, whose function it is to settle
+the best methods of production and distribution."[1036] "The
+Co-operative Commonwealth will incorporate the whole people into
+society. The whole people does not want, or need, any government at
+all. It simply wants administration--good administration,"[1037]
+
+The arguments contained in the foregoing extracts are exceedingly
+shallow. The various authorities quoted tell us in more or less
+involved language that the State disappears because "governments" will
+be replaced by "administrations." Unconvincing verbiage apart, the
+only change which would take place would be a change of name.
+Countries would be ruled by Socialist governments instead of by
+non-Socialist ones. The State could disappear only with the
+disappearance of nations and of frontiers, with the advent of the
+"Brotherhood of Man." The first Socialist State might of course
+proclaim the Brotherhood of Man in accordance with the precedent set
+by the French Revolution, but other nations might feel as little
+inclined to join it as during the time when bloodthirsty demagogues
+ruled France in the name of Liberty, Fraternity, and Equality, with
+the liberal assistance of the rifle and the guillotine.
+
+What is Communism? John Stuart Mill tells us: "The assailants of the
+principle of individual property may be divided into two
+classes--those whose scheme implies absolute equality in the
+distribution of the physical means of life and enjoyment, and those
+who admit inequality, but grounded on some principle, or supposed
+principle, of justice or general expediency, and not, like so many of
+the existing social inequalities, dependent on accident alone. The
+characteristic name for the former economical system is
+Communism."[1038] "Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy" says:
+"Communism is the theory which teaches that the labour and the income
+of society should be distributed equally among all its members by some
+constituted authority."[1039]
+
+Let us now take note of some Socialist views on Communism. "Laurence
+Gronlund, whose 'Co-operative Commonwealth' has been styled the New
+Testament of Socialism (as the 'Capital' is its Old Testament), has
+tried to distinguish between Socialism and Communism by describing
+Communism as meaning 'each according to his needs,' and Socialism 'each
+according to his deeds.'"[1040] "As soon as the principle of equality
+is applied to Socialism, Socialism becomes 'Communism.'"[1041]
+"Socialism and Communism are very generally confounded, but they are
+quite distinct economic systems. Socialists seek only to control the
+instruments of production--Land and Capital; Communists leave nothing
+to the individual which he can call his own. St. Paul was a Socialist,
+Christ a Communist."[1042]
+
+Many so-called Socialists are in reality avowed Communists who look
+forward to the introduction of Communism more than to the advent of
+Socialism. They see in Socialism merely an intermediate stage towards
+their final goal. "If the millennial haven of Communism is to be
+reached by mankind generally, it must be through the disciplinary
+portal of Socialism."[1043] "Communism, the final goal of Socialism,
+is a form of Social Economy very closely akin to the principles set
+forth in the Sermon on the Mount."[1044] "Socialism and freedom 'gang
+thegither.' Socialism implies the inherent equality of all human
+beings. It does not assume that all are alike, but only that all are
+equal."[1045] "Between complete Socialism and Communism there is no
+difference whatever in my mind. Communism is, in fact, the completion
+of Socialism; when that ceases to be militant and becomes triumphant
+it will be Communism."[1046] "The vision of freedom is an
+ever-expanding conception of life and its possibilities. The slave
+dreams of emancipation, the emancipated workman of citizenship; the
+enfranchised citizen of Socialism; the Socialist of Communism."[1047]
+
+Some Socialists champion Communism because Communism, the equality of
+all, is "natural," whilst individualism is "unnatural": "Capitalistic
+individualism has no prototype in Nature and is therefore unnatural.
+But some opponent will say, 'It is here, and therefore it must be a
+natural product.' The answer is simple. It is here, but it is one of
+Nature's failures. We have seen how, low down in the organic scale,
+Nature makes many failures in order to achieve one success. Sometimes
+even millions perish in order that one of high type may survive.
+Nature always accomplishes her purposes in the end. We know that her
+aim is Communism, for some of the higher species have already reached
+it, and all are tending towards it."[1048] The assertion, "We know"
+(who are we?) "that Nature's aim is Communism," can hardly be called a
+sufficient scientific proof of the foregoing proposition. Other
+Socialists assert that Communism is in accordance with the Bible:
+"Christ's teaching is often said to be Socialistic. It is not
+Socialistic, but it is Communistic, and Communism is the most advanced
+form of the policy generally known as Socialism."[1049]
+
+A Socialist Bible student and very prolific writer says: "Can anything
+be conceived more diametrically opposed to the principle laid down by
+Christ than the present system, based as it is on the principle of
+competition? 'You are all brothers,' says Christ, and if all are
+brothers, then it needs no philosopher to tell us that all should work
+together for the common good."[1050] In support of this doctrine that
+Communism is in accordance with the Bible, the said writer quotes Acts
+iv. 32-35, "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart
+and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things
+which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
+Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were
+possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the
+things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and
+distribution was made unto every man according as he had need."[1051]
+The Socialist can quote Scripture for his purpose--and misquote it
+too. Therefore the pious Socialist writer leaves out the lines which
+follow: "But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold
+a possession, and kept back part of the price."[1052] Will there be no
+Ananiases in the Socialist Commonwealth? Besides, the early Christian
+Communism was voluntary and dictated only by charity. It certainly was
+not enjoined as a religious duty.[1053] Lastly, the first Christian
+experiment in Communism proved immediately a failure, probably because
+there were many Ananiases, and because Communism is opposed to human
+nature and leads to poverty and strife, not to prosperity and peace.
+Hence, St. Paul founded no more Communist settlements, but collected
+everywhere for the "poor saints at Jerusalem" in order to relieve them
+in their "deep poverty," as may be seen in Romans xv. 26-27, 1
+Corinthians xvi. 1-3, 2 Corinthians viii. and ix. To misquote
+Scripture in support of Socialist Communism with an attitude of deep
+piety is not only in bad taste, but also dishonest. It is cant and
+hypocrisy.
+
+Another prolific Socialist writer, under the title "Was Jesus a
+Socialist?" tells us that Socialism "claims complete equality of
+rewards for all members of society, not on any theologico-metaphysical
+ground, such as the Christian abstract principle of brotherhood, but
+because it sees men to have on the whole the same natural endowments,
+and the same natural needs."[1054] Have they? Considered merely as
+two-legged animals requiring only food, warmth, and shelter, men have
+not even the same physical needs.
+
+It is very difficult to make out a good case in favour of Communism,
+an equal reward for all, a doctrine which will be attractive only to
+the lowest rank of workers, the lazy, and the inefficient. Therefore
+Socialist Communists endeavour to make Communism appear more palatable
+to the active and the efficient by the lavish use of poetry and
+hyperbole. For instance, we learn: "He who makes the canvas is as
+useful as he that paints the picture. He who cleanses the sewer and
+prevents disease is as useful as the physician who cures the malady
+after it has been contracted."[1055] To learn painting or medicine
+requires at least ten years' study; sewer-cleaning requires no study.
+The offer of equal rewards for an hour's work at painting, at
+amputating in a hospital, and at cleaning sewers must be very
+attractive to sewermen. Will it prove equally attractive to surgeons
+and painters? Socialism is to be world-wide. Will the highly skilled
+British trade unionist agree to work side by side with unskilled
+Chinamen and for equal wages?
+
+    In youth, as I lay dreaming,
+      I saw a country fair.
+    Where Plenty sheds its blessing down,
+      And all have equal share.
+    There Poverty's sad features
+      Are never, never, seen;
+    And each soul in the Brotherhood
+      Scorns cunning arts or mean.[1056]
+
+I think skilled workers will hardly hail with enthusiasm the day of
+liberty and equality and of sewermen's wages all round, poetry
+notwithstanding.
+
+Other Socialists try to recommend Communism by a ridiculous and
+dishonest play upon words: "He who declares himself an enemy of
+Communism declares himself an enemy of common interest, an enemy of
+society and mankind. Whoever wishes to annihilate Communism will have
+to destroy the common roads, the schools, he will have to destroy the
+public gardens and parks, he will have to abolish the public baths,
+the theatres, the waterworks, all the public buildings; he will have
+to destroy the railroads, the telegraphs, the post-office. For all
+these belong to Communism."[1057] It would be as logical to say, "He
+who opposes Socialism will have to destroy the Royal Society, and all
+clubs, for all these are social institutions." The Social-Democratic
+Federation says about Communism: "Has there not always been the
+aggregation of wealth in the hands of a few in all stages of human
+society?--Certainly there has been a tendency to such concentration
+throughout history. In what did tribal society differ from civilised
+society?--Briefly, it differed in that its underlying principle was
+that of social solidarity and Communism. We may instance such examples
+as survived in the village communities of India before the
+establishment of British institutions; in the Russian Mir, in its
+older form; in the Arab tribal organisation and the Javan village
+communities."[1058] That "primitive Communism" of "tribal society,"
+the organisation of savages and semi-savages, of the decadent and of
+the unfit, Socialists wish to foist upon a highly cultured nation. The
+above arguments, penned by the philosopher of British Socialism and
+the editor of "Justice" in recommendation of Communism, suffice to
+condemn it.
+
+We have a survival of ancient Communism in the Russian Mir, and to the
+Mir is the great backwardness of Russian agriculture chiefly to be
+attributed.[1059] The Russian peasants, recognising the disadvantages
+of the Communist Mir, are gradually abandoning it and converting
+common into individual properties. Nevertheless some Socialists have
+the hardihood to ascribe the universal disappearance of ancient
+Communism to the tyranny of man, not to the logic of facts and the
+action of Nature which replaces inefficient by efficient
+organisations. "There have been attempts in all ages to introduce some
+system of holding things in common in order to alleviate and soften
+the hard struggle with Nature for food, clothing, and shelter. This
+voluntary Communism rendered the workers too independent for the
+governing classes, and the jealousy of Church and State invariably
+destroyed it as the Russian village communes are now being destroyed
+by the Government."[1060]
+
+Another Socialist quotes with approval the pronouncement of Gregory
+the Great "Let them know that the earth from which they spring, and of
+which they are formed, belongs to all men in common, and that
+therefore the fruits which the earth brings forth must belong, without
+distinction, to all."[1061] China suffers from over-population and is
+very poor. Would the writer give to the Chinese a share of Great
+Britain's wealth since "the earth and its fruits belong without
+distinction to all?"
+
+Mr. Keir Hardie, M.P., who has apparently a somewhat elementary
+knowledge of ancient history, and who seems to rely for information on
+a primer such as "Little Willie's First History Book," recommends
+Communism because "In Sparta there were not only common lands, but
+also a common table, whilst dogs and horses were practically common
+property also. Sparta, which kept its Communism almost to the end, was
+also the Republic from which came the immortal heroes who made the
+pass of Thermopylae one of the great inspirations of the world."[1062]
+The Spartans were barbarians among the Greeks. Spartan Communism was
+founded on slavery and on the virtual community of women.
+Slave-murder, child-murder, rape, and theft were legally enjoined, and
+that is the community which Mr. Keir Hardie bids us consider as our
+model. Mr. Keir Hardie concludes: "We have seen how mankind when left
+free has always, and in all parts of the world, naturally turned to
+Communism. [Has it? When, and where?] That it will do so again is the
+most likely forecast of the future which can be made, and the great
+industrial organisations, the Trade Unions, the Co-operative Movement,
+the Friendly Orders, the Socialist organisations and the Labour party
+are each and all developing the feeling of solidarity and of mutual
+aid which will make the inauguration of Communism a comparatively easy
+task as the natural successor to State Socialism."[1063]
+
+The ideas of Socialists with regard to Communism are incredibly
+confused. For instance, we find in the same book the following
+contradictory statements describing Socialism: "Socialism is the
+common holding of the means of production and exchange, and _the
+holding of them for the equal benefit of all_"[1064] (the italics are
+in the original), and "To distribute the gifts of Nature justly
+according to the labour done by each in the collective search for
+them. This desire is Socialism."[1065] These absolutely contradictory
+statements, telling us that Socialism is both individualistic and that
+it is also Communistic, are taken from the fundamental book of the
+Fabian Society, the most scientific body of Socialists, and they have
+been reprinted again and again down to the edition bearing the imprint
+"43rd Thousand."
+
+Socialism is eternally between the horns of a dilemma. It promises to
+make all men happy. If it rewards men by results, the inefficient and
+the lazy will be dissatisfied. If it rewards all men alike
+(Communism), the efficient, able, and energetic will be dissatisfied.
+Reward by result will, in the absence of self-regulating commercial
+demand and supply, require an autocratic and absolute authority which
+arbitrarily apportions the unequal rewards of labour. It would be the
+tyranny of the few over the many, and would mean the abolition of
+democracy. Communism, equal rewards for all, would lead to the tyranny
+of the many over the few, and would stifle all motives to excel. Well
+might the Fabians ask: "Since we are too dishonest for Communism
+without taxation or compulsory labour, and too insubordinate to
+tolerate task work under personal compulsion, how can we order the
+transition so as to introduce just distribution without Communism and
+maintain the incentive to labour without mastership?"[1066]
+Unfortunately for the Socialists, that question is unanswerable. It is
+likely always to remain so, and the impossibility of answering it
+makes Socialism impossible. However, since Socialists wish to array
+the masses against the classes, the poor against the rich, they
+naturally incline, for tactical reasons rather than from honest
+conviction, to Communism, the worst of all tyrannies, and the most
+retrograde and inefficient of economic organisations.
+
+"Communism in proposing the appropriation of the results of the
+unequally productive labour for a uniformly equal distribution
+according to needs, seeks to establish a universal and monstrous
+appropriation by one set of persons of the surplus value belonging to
+others. Socialism would, in short, do to a far greater degree the very
+thing with which to-day it so indignantly and bitterly reproaches
+capitalism."[1067] Whilst Mr. Keir Hardie and his numerous followers
+enthusiastically support a free Communism in which "the rule of life
+will be--From each according to his ability, to each according to his
+needs,"[1068] "the Fabian Society resolutely opposes all pretensions
+to hamper the Socialisation of industry with equal wages, equal hours
+of labour, equal official status, or equal authority for everyone.
+Such conditions are not only impracticable, but incompatible with the
+equality of subordination to the common interest which is fundamental
+in modern Socialism."[1069]
+
+The Communistic idea is not yet dead. The short-sightedness and folly
+of mankind is such that Communism, in spite of a record of more than
+2,000 years of universal failure, is still a power to be reckoned
+with. Visionaries like Saint-Simon and Owen, and madmen like Fourier,
+are still able to lead the people astray.
+
+Fourier taught that Communism would alter not only man but the
+physical world as well. The duration of the human race on earth would
+be 80,000 years, divided into two periods of ascending and two of
+descending vibrations. Lions would be taught to draw waggons, as a
+symbol of the victory of man over Nature. Human life would on an
+average last 144 years. The aurora borealis, which now rarely appears
+in northern regions, would become permanently visible and be fixed at
+the Pole. It would give out, not only light, as at present, but also
+heat. It would decompose the sea water by the creation of citric
+boreal acid and convert it into a kind of lemonade which would
+dispense with the necessity of provisioning ships with fresh water.
+Oranges would grow in Siberia and tame whales would pull becalmed
+sailing-ships. The full indulgence of human nature in all its passions
+would produce happiness and virtue. Society would harmoniously be
+organised in groups (phalanxes) of 1,600 persons to inhabit a large
+palace called a phalanstery. If England would introduce these
+phalanxes, her labour would become so productive that she could pay
+off her national debt in six months by the sale of hens' eggs. Labour
+would be organised and occupation be changed every two hours. Workers
+would be taken in carriages to and from their work, and agricultural
+labourers would work under tents so as to be protected against the
+rain. The relations between the sexes would be of the freest. All
+should freely satisfy all their passions, and all passions would
+naturally combine in one grand harmony. The world would become a huge
+Republic which would be governed from Constantinople, and French would
+be the universal language.[1070]
+
+Notwithstanding the evident insanity of Fourier's proposals, and the
+almost equally extravagant proposals of Owen, more than a hundred
+phalansteries and other Communistic settlements were founded in Great
+Britain and elsewhere, especially in the United States. Their failure
+was universal and their immorality was very great.[1071] "The trouble
+with all the Fourierite communities was that they were fanciful and
+theoretical schemes, not simple and natural growths. They had little
+definite religious spirit to hold them together. They had little
+business headship. At the least discouragement and misfortune they
+melted away. Only religious communism, the facts seem to prove, can be
+successful."[1072] Only the communism of the convent and of the
+monastery, the equality of all based on a fervent religious belief, on
+a firm discipline, on an equal and absolute poverty, and on the almost
+insurmountable difficulty of re-entering the world, has hitherto
+proved practicable from the time of the Essenes to the present day.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1034] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 178.
+
+[1035] Engels, _Socialism: Utopian and Scientific_, pp. 76, 77.
+
+[1036] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 212.
+
+[1037] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 123
+
+[1038] Mill, _Political Economy_, Book iii. ch. i. par. 2.
+
+[1039] _Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy_, vol. i. p. 297.
+
+[1040] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 89.
+
+[1041] Menger, _L'Etat Socialiste_, p. 35.
+
+[1042] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 93.
+
+[1043] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 94.
+
+[1044] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 36.
+
+[1045] _Ibid._ p. 9.
+
+[1046] Morris, _Communism_, pp. 11, 12.
+
+[1047] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 77.
+
+[1048] Connell, _Socialism and the Survival of the Fittest_, p. 19.
+
+[1049] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 5.
+
+[1050] Ward, _Are All Men Brothers?_ p. 19.
+
+[1051] Ward, _All Things in Common_, p. 5.
+
+[1052] Acts v. 1, 2.
+
+[1053] Acts v. 4.
+
+[1054] Leatham, _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ p. 5.
+
+[1055] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 159.
+
+[1056] _Clarion Song Book_, p. 27.
+
+[1057] Sorge, _Socialism and the Workers_, p. 8
+
+[1058] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, pp. 20, 21.
+
+[1059] See Simkhowitsch, _Die Feldgemeinschaft_, 1898; Haxthausen,
+_Studien_, &c.
+
+[1060] Benson, _Socialism_, p. 4.
+
+[1061] Ward, _All Things in Common_, p. 1.
+
+[1062] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 17.
+
+[1063] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, pp. 96, 97.
+
+[1064] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 212.
+
+[1065] _Ibid._ p. 4.
+
+[1066] B. Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 17.
+
+[1067] Schaeffle, _The Impossibility of Social Democracy_, p. 60.
+
+[1068] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 89.
+
+[1069] _Report on Fabian Policy and Resolutions_, p. 7.
+
+[1070] See Fourier, _Oeuvres_; Pellarin, _Fourier_; Sargant, _Social
+Innovators_.
+
+[1071] See Noyes, _History of American Socialism_; Nordhoff,
+_Communistic Societies of the United States_.
+
+[1072] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 319.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXX
+
+SOCIALISM AND ANARCHISM
+
+
+Socialism is, on the whole, hostile to the State. All Socialists hate
+the State as at present constituted, because it protects the property
+which they wish to seize. However, many Socialists hate not only the
+State in its present form. They have become doubtful whether private
+capital or the State is the greater evil. They long for liberty, and
+would not welcome the restraint of any State, and least of all that of
+the absolute, all-regulating, and constantly interfering Socialistic
+State. Hence many Socialists have become Anarchists. Socialists may be
+divided into two classes--Communists and Anarchists--and Prince
+Kropotkin, the foremost Anarchist leader living, described the two
+Socialistic sections as follows: "A section of Socialists believes
+that it is impossible to attain Socialism without sacrificing personal
+liberty on the altar of the State. Another section, to which we
+belong, believes, on the contrary, that it is only by the abolition of
+the State, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by
+free agreement, association, and absolute free federation, that we can
+reach Communism."[1073] Many Socialists, seeing the enemy rather in
+the State than in private capital, express their passionate hatred of
+the State: "The State at present is simply a huge machine for robbing
+and slave-driving the poor by brute force."[1074] "The Parliament ever
+cries for more money, more money for the service of the State. Just
+heavens! Of what service is the State? Of very little service to
+honest, industrious men,"[1075] The philosopher of British Socialism
+frankly confesses himself a revolutionary Anarchist: "As an
+international revolutionist I have always been strongly sympathetic
+with all movements for local autonomy as most directly tending to
+destroy the modern 'nation' or centralised bureaucratic State."[1076]
+"It is quite true that Socialism will have to take over the accursed
+legacy of existing national frontiers from the bourgeois world-order;
+but Socialism will take it over merely with the view of killing it off
+and burying it at the earliest possible moment. The modern nation or
+centralised State is a hideous monstrosity, the offspring of
+capitalism in its various phases; in its present shape the outcome of
+the developed capitalism of the great industry. We quite admit that in
+form it may, and probably will, survive the earlier stage of
+Socialism, but its ultimate disappearance is none the less certain.
+The sentiment of the national patriotism will then, let us hope, be
+reduced to its last expression--the holding of annual dinners, or some
+harmless festivity of this sort, such as is affected by the natives of
+certain English counties resident in the metropolis. The Nationalist
+movement, therefore, is an old Radical 'plank' which clearly no longer
+belongs to us as Socialists."[1077]
+
+The Socialist-Anarchist hates State government in every form. To him a
+Social-Democratic State is quite as hateful as any other form of
+government: "The State is the evil, the inveterate foe of labour--be
+the Government Autocratic, Bureaucratic, or Social-Democratic. For
+what, after all, is our vaunted nose-counting, majority-ridden
+Democracy but an expansion of the old-time tyranny of monarch and
+oligarch, inasmuch as the Governmentalist, whatever his stripe, is
+doomed to act on the two root principles of statecraft--force and
+fraud? And, obviously, so long as that is so, his particular profession
+of political faith is almost a matter of indifference."[1078] "What
+was, what is the State, wherever it exists, but a community of human
+beings barbarically held together by a well-drilled gang of
+magistrates, soldiers, policemen, gaolers, and hangmen?"[1079] Mr.
+Blatchford, who is apparently never quite sure in his mind whether he
+is a Socialist, a Communist, or an Anarchist, gives voice to his
+Anarchist sentiments in the words: "Rightly or wrongly, I am opposed to
+godship, kingship, lordship, priestship. Rightly or wrongly, I am
+opposed to imperialism, militarism, and conquest. Rightly or wrongly, I
+am for universal brotherhood and universal freedom."[1080]
+
+Another influential Socialist writer exclaims: "What is freedom but
+the unfettered use of all the powers which God for use has
+given?"[1081]--a sentiment which is heartily endorsed by all
+Anarchists. However, the unfettered use of all powers means that the
+will of the individual, not the will of society, is the supreme law.
+It means the denial of the supremacy of society, the State,
+government. Similar sentiments are expressed with greater energy and
+greater fulness by many Socialist writers. Mr. Davidson, for instance,
+says: "In the new order every man (woman, of course, included) will be
+his own legislator. In the state of ultimate and universal freedom to
+which we aspire, when the greatest of all tyrants, poverty, is slain
+and plenty sits on the throne which the lean monster has so long
+usurped--it may well be that there shall be no necessity for any law
+except that which the purified conscience of every individual man and
+woman will readily supply. Then will have come the true Golden Age,
+the millennium of Christian Anarchism."[1082]
+
+The claims, programme, and aims of Socialism and Anarchism are
+curiously alike. Prince Kropotkin, the leading exponent of Anarchism,
+writes: "Anarchy appears as a constituent part of the new philosophy,
+and that is why Anarchists come in contact on so many points with the
+greatest thinkers and poets of the present day. In fact, it is certain
+that in proportion as the human mind frees itself from ideas
+inculcated by minorities of priests, military chiefs, and judges, all
+striving to establish their domination, and of scientists paid to
+perpetuate it, a conception of society arises, in Which conception
+there is no longer room for those dominating minorities. A society
+entering into possession of the social capital accumulated by the
+labour of preceding generations, organises itself so as to make use of
+this capital in the interests of all, and constitutes itself without
+reconstituting the power of the ruling minorities. Acknowledging as a
+fact the equal rights of all its members to the treasures accumulated
+in the past, it no longer recognises a division between exploited and
+exploiters, governed and governors, dominated and dominators, and it
+seeks to establish a certain harmonious compatibility in its midst not
+by subjecting all its members to an authority that is fictitiously
+supposed to represent society, not by trying to establish uniformity,
+but by urging all men to develop free initiative, free action, free
+association."[1083]
+
+There is little difference between the Anarchism of Proudhon,
+Bakounin, and Kropotkin, and the Socialism of many British Socialists.
+The economic doctrines of Socialism and Anarchism are practically
+identical. Socialism has taken the most important doctrines from
+Proudhon,[1084] and, owing to the similarity of their views and aims,
+Socialists and Anarchists are commingling and fraternising. Anarchists
+see in Socialists a wing of the great Anarchist army of destruction,
+and Socialists see in Anarchists associates and friends and partners
+in the revolution and general pillage which both movements equally
+strongly desire to bring about. Therefore a leading Fabian Socialist
+tells us: "Kropotkin is really an advocate of free Democracy, and I
+venture to suggest that he describes himself as an Anarchist rather
+from the point of view of the Russian recoiling from a despotism
+compared to which Democracy seems to be no government at all, than
+from the point of view of the American or Englishman who is free
+enough already to begin grumbling over Democracy as 'the tyranny of
+the majority' and 'the coming slavery.'"[1085] If Kropotkin is a
+"Democrat," then Ravachol, Vaillant, Henry, Pallas, and Bresci were
+also merely Democrats.
+
+British Anarchists are closely watching the British Socialist Labour
+movement, which they wish to lead into Anarchist channels. Thus we
+learn from an Anarchist monthly: "The question of the position to be
+taken in relation to the labour movement is certainly one of the
+greatest importance to Anarchists. It does not suffice for us to form
+groups for propaganda and for revolutionary action. We must convert as
+far as possible the mass of the workers, because without them we can
+neither overthrow the existing society nor reconstitute a new one. And
+since to rise from the submissive state in which the great majority of
+the proletarians now vegetate to a conception of Anarchism and a desire
+for its realisation, is required an evolution which generally is not
+passed through under the sole influence of the propaganda; since the
+lessons derived from the facts of daily life are more efficacious than
+all doctrinaire preaching, it is for us to take an active part in the
+life of the masses and to use all the means which circumstances permit
+to gradually awaken the spirit of revolt, and to show by these facts
+the path which leads to emancipation. Amongst these means the Labour
+movement stands first, and we should be wrong to neglect it. In this
+movement we find numbers of workers who struggle for the amelioration
+of their conditions. They may be mistaken as to the aim they have in
+view and as to the means of attaining it, and in our view they
+generally are. But at least they no longer resign themselves to
+oppression nor regard it as just--they hope and they struggle. We can
+more easily arouse in them that feeling of solidarity towards their
+exploited fellow-workers and of hatred against exploitation, which must
+lead to a definitive struggle for the abolition of all domination of
+man over man."[1086] Anarchists therefore constantly try to influence
+the British Socialist Labour movement. When, for instance, in the
+autumn of 1907 the possibility of a railway strike was being discussed,
+Anarchists did their best to bring about a revolutionary struggle: "The
+railway crisis must have shown very clearly that if the men had but the
+will, they have the power to bring about at any time a revolutionary
+situation in the struggle of labour against capital. Some day they will
+have to do this, for the conditions of the conflict will leave them no
+choice. They will perhaps learn also that the glorification of a man
+like Bell--whose fooling of their cause is his method of
+advertisement--means putting powers into one man's hands that no man
+ought to possess. Nothing could be more absurd than the prolongation of
+this 'crisis' which has been done so that one man might have the centre
+of the stage, while hundreds of thousands of men toil on in suspense.
+Bell is everything: the workers are mere cyphers. Yet this man is
+mistrusted by many; and everyone knows how on occasion he can join the
+feast of the directors and be one of them. And if generalship were
+needed, what an ass this would be to attempt to lead the men to
+victory! Successful strikes are never made by the farcical tactics of a
+Bell. Recognition, forsooth! They'll recognise you when you strike.
+Workers, watch your leaders!"[1087]
+
+In view of the connection existing between British Socialism and
+Anarchism, it is but natural that Socialists have become the
+apologists of Anarchism. "The vulgar notion that Anarchism is a
+synonym for disorder is as nearly as possible the reverse of the
+truth. It is Governments and Laws that do all the mischief. They
+produce the very evils they pretend to remedy."[1088] "Verily the
+State is the evil. Back to the land. Back to the simple life. Away
+with Governments, palavers, Dumas, and Courts of Law. Long live the
+Commune."[1089]
+
+Anarchists contend that the "Social Revolution" for which most
+Socialists strive will become an Anarchist revolution: "If the workers
+succeed by revolt in destroying the mutual insurance society of
+landlords, bankers, priests, judges, and soldiers; if the people
+become masters of their destiny for a few months, and lay hands on the
+riches they have created and which belong to them by right--will they
+really begin to reconstitute that blood-sucker, the State[1090]?" "On
+the day when ancient institutions splinter into fragments before the
+axe of the proletariat, voices will be heard shouting: Bread for all!
+Lodging for all! Right for all to the comforts of life! And these
+voices will be heeded. The people will say to themselves: Let us
+begin by satisfying our thirst for the life, the joy, the liberty we
+have never known. And when all have tasted happiness we will set to
+work; the work of demolishing the last vestiges of middle-class rule,
+with its account-book morality, its philosophy of debit and credit,
+its institutions of mine and thine. 'While we throw down we shall be
+building' as Proudhon said, 'we shall build in the name of Communism
+and of Anarchy."[1091] Anarchists are authorities on revolutions. Very
+likely Prince Kropotkin's view is right.
+
+There are two kinds of Anarchists: Philosophic Anarchists who
+propagate their views by speech and pen, and Anarchists of action who
+propagate their views by dynamite and dagger, and the former are
+responsible for the crimes of the latter. Many British Socialists
+defend not only philosophic Anarchism, but also that form of Anarchism
+which finds its expression in murder.
+
+Leading British Socialists refer, for instance, to the four
+Anarchists, Spies, Fischer, Engel, and Parsons, the heroes of the
+Chicago bomb outrage, who were responsible for the death of six
+policemen and for the wounding of about sixty, and who were hanged in
+November 1886 in Chicago, as "martyrs,"[1092] and British Socialists
+are urged to follow the glorious footsteps of the Chicago Anarchists:
+
+    Then on to revolution, boys! Keep Freedom's highway broad.
+    The path where Spies and Parsons fell--as fearlessly they trod;
+    And though we fall as they fell--millions follow on the road,
+              To carry the Red Flag to victory.[1093]
+
+The sympathy which British Socialists feel for the Chicago Anarchists
+arises from the similarity of their aims. The programme of the
+American Anarchists was, according to the Pittsburg proclamation, as
+follows:
+
+(1) Destruction of the existing class rule, by all means, _i.e._ by
+energetic, relentless, revolutionary, and international action. (2)
+Establishment of a free Society based upon co-operative organisation
+of production. (3) Free exchange of equivalent products by and between
+the productive organisations without commerce and profit-mongery. (4)
+Organisation of education on a secular, scientific, and equal basis
+for both sexes. (5) Equal rights for all without distinction of sex or
+race. (6) Regulation of all public affairs by free contracts between
+the autonomous (independent) communes and associations resting on a
+federalists basis.[1094]
+
+The attitude of many leading British Socialists towards the murdering
+of monarchs and statesmen may be gauged from the following extracts:
+"On the occasion of the assassination of any potentate or statesman,
+the public opinion of the possessing class and its organs is lashed up
+to a white heat of artificial fury and indignation against the
+perpetrator, while they have nothing but approbation for the
+functionary--military or civil--who puts to death a fellow-creature in
+the course of what they are pleased to call his duty. Evidently force
+and bloodshed, when contrary to the interests of the possessing class,
+is a monstrous crime, but when it is in their favour it becomes a duty
+and a necessity."[1095] "We believe the 'potting' of the 'heads' of
+States to be a foolish and reprehensible policy, but the matter does
+not concern us as Socialists. We have our own quarrel with the
+Anarchists, both as to principles and tactics, but that is no reason
+why, as certain persons seem to think, we should put on sackcloth and
+ashes, and dissolve ourselves in tears because, say, M. Carnot or the
+head of any other State has been assassinated by Anarchists. What is
+Carnot to us or we to Carnot, that we should weep for him? We do not
+specially desire the death of political personages, while we often
+regret their slaying on grounds of expediency, if on no others. But at
+the same time Socialists have no sentimental tears to waste over the
+heads of States and their misfortunes. To the Socialist the head of a
+State, as such, is simply a figure-head to whose fate he is
+indifferent--a ninepin representing the current political and social
+order."[1096]
+
+    We're low, we're low, we're very very low.
+      And yet when the trumpets ring.
+    The thrust of a poor man's arm will go
+      Through the heart of the proudest king.[1097]
+
+The "Socialist Annual" contains in its calendar pages numerous items
+under the heading "For the Working Class to Remember," which is
+filled with Socialist dates such as "birth of Mr. Blatchford," and
+with the records of the most conspicuous Anarchist, Nihilist, and
+Revolutionary crimes. Details regarding the deeds of Orsini and
+Louise Michel, Jack Cade and Wat Tyler, the execution of Louis XVI.
+and Marie Antoinette, the assassination of Presidents Lincoln,
+McKinley, and Carnot, the attempt on King Alfonso, and other facts
+are there recorded--"for the working class to remember." Earlier or
+later the Socialist-Communist-Anarchist agitation in Great Britain
+may, and very likely will, lead to Anarchist outrages.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1073] Prince Kropotkin, _Anarchism_, p. 16.
+
+[1074] B. Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 24.
+
+[1075] Davidson, _The Democrat's Address_, p. 15.
+
+[1076] Bax, _Paris Commune_, p. 35.
+
+[1077] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, pp. 98, 99.
+
+[1078] Davidson, _Christ, State, and Commune_, pp. 16, 17.
+
+[1079] _Ibid._ p. 6.
+
+[1080] Blatchford, _God and My Neighbour_, p. 195.
+
+[1081] Thompson, _That Blessed Word Liberty_, p. 13.
+
+[1082] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 172.
+
+[1083] Kropotkin, _Anarchism_, p. 8.
+
+[1084] Brockhaus, _Konversations Lexikon_, vol. i. p. 578.
+
+[1085] Shaw, _The Impossibilities of Anarchism_, p. 26.
+
+[1086] _Freedom_, November 1907.
+
+[1087] _Freedom_, November 1907.
+
+[1088] Davidson, _Christ, State, and Commune_, p. 22.
+
+[1089] _Ibid._ p. 31.
+
+[1090] Kropotkin, _Anarchism_, p. 19.
+
+[1091] Kropotkin, _The Wage System_, p. 15.
+
+[1092] See Leatham, _Lives of the Chicago Martyrs_.
+
+[1093] _Social-Democratic Federation Song Book_, p. 35.
+
+[1094] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 63.
+
+[1095] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 31.
+
+[1096] Bax, _A Short History of the Paris Commune_, p. 78.
+
+[1097] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 33.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXI
+
+SOCIALISM AND REVOLUTION
+
+
+The "Socialist Catechism" contains the following passage: "Q. How are
+forms of government changed so as to readjust them to the economical
+changes in the forms of production which have been silently evolving
+in the body of society? A. By means of revolution.--Q. Give an
+instance of this? A. The French Revolution of 1789."[1098]
+
+Many British Socialists are revolutionaries. They hope to introduce
+Socialism into Great Britain by revolutionary means. They have studied
+the French revolutions, and have become pupils of the French
+revolutionary leaders. "Socialism is essentially revolutionary,
+politically and economically, as it aims at the complete overthrow of
+existing economic and political conditions. We should organise and be
+prepared for what might be described as a revolutionary outbreak. The
+economic changes which are taking place, and the corresponding changes
+in other conditions, are bringing about a revolutionary transformation
+in human society, and what we have to do is to help on this
+development, and to prepare the way for it."[1099] "We Socialists are
+not reformers; we are revolutionists. We Socialists do not propose to
+change forms. We care nothing for forms. We want a change of the
+inside of the mechanism of society; let the form take care of
+itself."[1100] British Socialism was founded by revolutionary
+Communists. Marx was a revolutionary. "For a number of years the late
+William Morris, the greatest man whom the Socialist movement has yet
+claimed in this country, held and openly preached this doctrine of
+cataclysmic upheaval and sudden overthrow of the ruling
+classes."[1101] That idea has been revived by modern British
+Socialists, many of whom believe that "The only effective way to
+induce the ruling class to attempt to palliate the evils of their
+system is to organise the workers for the overthrow of that
+system."[1102] "In the International Socialist movement we are at last
+in the presence of a force which is gathering unto itself the rebel
+spirits of all lands and uniting them into a mighty host to do battle,
+not for the triumph of a sect, or of a race, but for the overthrow of
+a system which has filled the world with want and woe. 'Workers of the
+world, unite!' wrote Karl Marx; 'you have a world to win and nothing
+to lose but your chains.' And they are uniting under the crimson
+banner of a world-embracing principle which knows nor sect, nor creed,
+nor race, and which offers new life and hope to all created
+beings--the glorious gospel of Socialism."[1103]
+
+In many respects the French Revolution has served as a model to
+British Socialists of the Anarchist-Revolutionary type. They have
+adopted its outward emblems, its songs, and its most effective
+catch-phrases: "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity was the brave and
+splendid legend inscribed on the blood-red banners of the French
+Revolutionists. And in strange ways the oppressed and hunger-maddened
+people sought to realise their ideal. It is still the battle-cry of
+the English Socialists--indeed, of the world-wide Socialist
+movement."[1104] In the Socialist song-books a translation of the
+"Marseillaise" is to be found, which is sung at Socialist gatherings:
+
+    Shall hateful tyrants, mischief-breeding,
+      With hireling hosts, a ruffian band,
+      Affright and desolate the land,
+    While Peace and Liberty lie bleeding?
+    To arms! to arms, ye brave!
+      The avenging sword unsheathe!
+    March on! March on! all hearts resolved
+      On Liberty or death.[1105]
+
+In the eyes of many British Socialists the French Revolution was not
+sufficiently democratic, not sufficiently radical, not sufficiently
+violent. We are told that the French revolutionaries were soft-hearted
+men, and that our sympathy with their innocent victims, such as Queen
+Marie Antoinette, is quite uncalled for. "The Revolution was in its
+conception, its inception, and its results a middle-class revolution.
+The revolution was inaugurated by the Parliament of Paris--a
+pettifogging legal assembly. Marie Antoinette was but one fine useless
+woman among the millions, and she personified the heedless prodigal
+selfishness of autocracy. We of the Socialist movement, who are full
+of the idea of social service, of making a full return to society for
+the bread we eat, the clothes we wear out, and the house-room we
+occupy, how can we be expected to think so much of the suffering of
+one idle extravagant woman and so little of the age-long privation and
+torture of the hard-working useful mothers and sisters of France? The
+crimes of ignorant, passionate democracy, of which Burke and Carlyle
+have made so much, are as a drop in the ocean by comparison with the
+deliberate enormities perpetrated by enlightened cold-blooded
+autocracy, from Herod to Nicholas. The democracy has always been
+pitiful, extremely pitiful. Even the September massacres, carried out
+by the lowest of the low in an enraged and degraded and
+terror-stricken populace, are brightened by golden patches of clemency
+and love such as the annals of class punishment nowhere reveal."[1106]
+
+The outbreak of the Paris Commune of 1871, having been less a
+"middle-class" revolution, is considered by Socialists with greater
+approval than the French Revolution of 1789. The philosopher of
+British Socialism writes: "The Commune of Paris is the one event which
+Socialists throughout the world have agreed with single accord to
+celebrate. Every 18th of March witnesses thousands of gatherings
+throughout the civilised world to commemorate the (alas! only
+temporary) victory of organised Socialist aspiration over the forces
+of property and privilege in 1871."[1107] Another leading Socialist
+writer says: "Year by year as the 18th of March comes round, it is the
+custom with Socialists to commemorate the proclamation of the Commune
+of Paris. As a Socialist I am a friend of the Commune."[1108]
+
+What was the Paris Commune, and what did it do? In the words of an
+impartial publication, "The Communard chiefs were revolutionaries of
+every sect, who, disagreeing on governmental and economic principles,
+were united in their vague but perpetual hostility to the existing
+order of things. History has rarely known a more unpatriotic crime
+than that of the insurrection of the Commune."[1109] "The Commune was
+an insurrection which initiated a series of terrible outrages by the
+murder of the two generals Lecomte and Thomas.... The incapacity and
+mutual hatred of their chiefs rendered all organisation and durable
+resistance impossible.... The Communists were committing the most
+horrible excesses: the Archbishop of Paris, President Bonjean,
+priests, magistrates, journalists, and private individuals, whom they
+had seized as hostages, were shot in batches in prisons, and a scheme
+of destruction was ruthlessly carried into effect by men and women
+with cases of petroleum. The Hotel de Ville, the Palais de Justice,
+the Tuileries, the Ministry of Finance, the Palace of the Legion of
+Honour, that of the Council of State, part of the Rue de Rivoli, &c.,
+were ravaged by the flames; barrels of gunpowder were placed in Notre
+Dame and the Pantheon ready to blow up the buildings, and the whole
+city would have been involved in ruin if the national troops had not
+gained a last and crowning victory."[1110]
+
+Socialists have nothing but praise for the Communards, who killed and
+burned, desecrated the churches and devastated the town. They speak
+with enthusiasm of the leaders of that outbreak as of heroes who
+fought for the "Brotherhood of Man," and they exalt them above the
+saints of early Christianity. The philosopher of British Socialism
+exclaims: "Limitless courage and contempt of death was displayed in
+defence of an ideal, the colossal proportions of which dwarf
+everything in history, and which alone suffices to redeem the
+sordidness of the nineteenth century. Here was a heroism in the face
+of which the much-belauded Christian martyrs cut a very poor
+figure."[1111] "It was in the Commune that we saw manifested as never
+before the strong compelling force of a secular altruism. Without hope
+of heaven and without fear of hell, men lived and died for the idea of
+a brotherhood of self-governing and self-respecting men and
+women."[1112]
+
+Even the murderous Paris Commune was too moderate for the taste of
+many British Socialists, who favour sterner measures. The philosopher
+of British Socialism informs us; "The Commune had one special fault,
+that of a fatuous moderation in all its doings. Probably never since
+history began have any body of men allowed themselves and theirs to be
+treated as lambs in the slaughterhouse with more lamb-like forbearance
+and absence of retaliation than the Commune and its adherents; we have
+seen this illustrated by the incredible fact that up to the last, amid
+all the slaughterings of Communists, the vast majority of the hostages
+and prisoners in its hands remained unscathed."[1113] "One of the most
+unfortunate characteristics of the leaders of the Commune was their
+sensitiveness to bourgeois public opinion. The first thing for the
+leader of a revolutionary movement to learn is a healthy contempt for
+the official public opinion of the 'civilised world.' He must
+resolutely harden his heart against its 'thrills of horror,' its
+'indignation,' its 'abomination,' and its 'detestation,' and he must
+learn to smile at all the names it will liberally shower upon him and
+his cause."[1114]
+
+Whilst the revolutionary criminals who ruled by murder and arson were
+heroes and martyrs, the defenders of law and order were criminals
+according to British Socialists: "The thirst of the well-to-do classes
+for the blood of the Communards was insatiable. The latter were tried
+and shot in batches."[1115] "The Communards, desperate as they were,
+only faintly imitated the wholesale savagery of the regular
+troops."[1116] Peaceful M. Thiers, being at the head of the
+government, was "probably the cleverest, most hypocritical, and most
+unscrupulous villain that ever denied the pages of history."[1117]
+
+Although Socialists pose as democrats, they do not believe in majority
+government.[1118] Being aware that they will hardly be able to gain
+over the majority of the people to their revolutionary and visionary
+plans, they may, like the Paris Commune, try to force Socialism upon
+an unwilling majority. Therefore the attempt of the Parisian
+Socialists to overrule France is not condemned but regretted by the
+British Socialists: "The revolt was open to the objection that may be
+urged against most insurrections. It was an attempt to impose the will
+of a minority on a large majority of the people. The Socialists in the
+Commune must have realised at times that the people of France were not
+prepared for even the small instalments of Socialism which they sought
+to introduce. The revolutionists may have thought to impose their
+policy upon France by a mere _coup de main_."[1119]
+
+The attitude of Socialists makes it appear possible that the
+revolutionary outbreak of 1871 will not be the last. The next
+revolutionary attempt may conceivably take place in Great Britain.
+"One man with an idea in his head is in danger of being considered a
+madman; two men with the same idea in common may be foolish, but can
+hardly be mad; ten men sharing an idea begin to act; a hundred draw
+attention as fanatics, a thousand and society begins to tremble, a
+hundred thousand and there is war abroad."[1120] "Whilst our backers
+at the polls are counted by tens, we must continue to crawl and drudge
+and lecture as best we can. When they are counted by hundreds, we can
+permeate and trim and compromise. When they rise to tens of thousands,
+we shall take the field as an independent party. Give us hundreds of
+thousands, as you can if you try hard enough, and we will ride the
+whirlwind and direct the storm."[1121]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1098] Joynes, _A Socialist Catechism_, p. 13.
+
+[1099] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 37.
+
+[1100] De Leon, _Reform or Revolution_, p. 3.
+
+[1101] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 23.
+
+[1102] _Socialist Standard_, October 1, 1907.
+
+[1103] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 86.
+
+[1104] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 10.
+
+[1105] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 20.
+
+[1106] Leatham, _French Revolution_, pp. 13, 14.
+
+[1107] Bax, _Paris Commune_, Preface.
+
+[1108] Leatham, _The Commune of Paris_, p. 3.
+
+[1109] _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, vol. xxviii. p. 480.
+
+[1110] _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, vol. xviii. p. 294.
+
+[1111] Bax, _Paris Commune_, p. 59.
+
+[1112] Leatham, _The Commune of Paris_, p. 18.
+
+[1113] Bax, _Paris Commune_, p. 74.
+
+[1114] _Ibid._ p. 88.
+
+[1115] Leatham, _The Commune of Paris_, p. 13.
+
+[1116] _Ibid._ p. 19.
+
+[1117] Bax, _Paris Commune_, p. 86.
+
+[1118] See Chapters XV. and XXX. _ante._
+
+[1119] Leatham, _The Commune of Paris_, p. 15.
+
+[1120] Morris, _Art, Labour, and Socialism_, p. 24.
+
+[1121] Shaw, _The Fabian Society and its Early History_, p. 28.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXII
+
+STATE SOCIALISM
+
+
+Most Socialist agitators in Great Britain oppose and condemn State
+Socialism for two reasons: firstly, because, owing to their Communist
+and Anarchist leanings, they oppose and hate the State as such, as has
+been shown in the Chapters on "Socialism and Communism," "Socialism
+and Anarchism," "Socialism and Revolution"; secondly, because with the
+introduction of State Socialism their occupation would be gone.
+Socialist agitators do not wish others to govern the State. They wish
+to govern it themselves. The welfare of the masses is to them
+apparently only a secondary consideration. Hence most British
+Socialist agitators condemn the State Socialism of Germany, though it
+has greatly benefited the masses, and perhaps because it has greatly
+benefited the masses. They also condemn the British Post Office,
+although, being not overburdened with scruples, they praise it to the
+skies as a Socialistic model institution when it happens to suit them.
+In fact, most Socialist leaders condemn all existing Government
+institutions, ostensibly because they are capitalistic enterprises
+which are run at a "profit," and because they "exploit" their workers.
+It would of course be fatal to the Socialist agitators had they to
+preach the gospel of envy and hatred, of destruction and pillage, to
+the contented.
+
+"The State of to-day, nationally and locally, is only the agent of the
+possessing class."[1122] "Mere nationalisation or mere municipalisation
+of any industry is not Socialism or Collectivism; it may be only the
+substitution of corporate for private administration; the social idea
+and purpose with which Collectivism is concerned may be completely
+absent."[1123] "Mere Statification, as we may term it, does not mean
+Socialism. The State of to-day is mainly an agent of the possessing
+classes, and industrial or commercial undertakings run to-day by
+Governmental bodies are largely run in the interests of these classes.
+Their aim in all cases is to show a profit, in the same way as ordinary
+capitalistic enterprises. This profit accrues to the possessing classes
+in the form of relief of imperial or local taxation, mainly paid by
+them, interests on loans, &c. In other words, these industrial
+undertakings are run for profit and not for use, and their employees
+are little, if at all, better off than those of private
+employers."[1124] "The modern State is but the organisation which
+capitalist society gives itself in order to maintain the external
+conditions of capitalist production against the attacks both of the
+workmen and of individual capitalists. The modern State, whatever its
+form, is essentially a capitalist machine."[1125] "State administration
+is very far from being the same as a Socialistic administration, as is
+sometimes erroneously supposed. The State administration is just as
+much a system of capitalistic exploitation as if the institutions in
+question were in the hands of private undertakers."[1126] "A
+bureaucracy--that is, a body of permanent officials, entrenched in
+Government departments, according to whose piping ministers themselves
+have willingly or unwillingly to dance--is totally incompatible with
+the very elementary conditions of Socialistic administration."[1127]
+"Bismarckian State control is brusque and baneful, and is certainly
+not the desire of the true Socialist."[1128]
+
+"State ownership, State tyranny, State interference exist to-day. We
+have to bear them now; we have to submit to them now; we have to pay
+for them now. The people, as such, own nothing. And the Socialists
+demand that the people shall own everything. Not the 'State,' the
+'People.' So great is the difference between the word 'State' and the
+word 'people.'"[1129] "Do you propose that all these means of
+production which are now owned by individuals, by this class, as you
+say, should be made the property of the Government, like the Post
+Office and the telegraph system are in this country, and the railways
+as well in some others, or that they should be owned by municipal
+bodies, as waterworks, tramways, gasworks, and so on, are in many
+cases already?--No. Socialism does not mean mere Governmental
+ownership or management. The State of to-day, nationally or locally,
+is only the agent of the possessing class; the Post Office and the
+other State-owned businesses are run for profit just as other
+businesses are; and the Government, as the agent of the possessing
+class, has, in the interests of its employers, to treat the employees
+just as other employees are treated. The organised democratic society
+contemplated by Socialists is a very different thing from the class
+State of to-day. When society is organised for the control of its own
+business, and has acquired the possession of its own means of
+production, its officers will not be the agents of a class, and
+production will be carried on for the use of all and not for the
+profit of a few."[1130] "The Post Office to-day is an organised
+sweating-den. The Government get the largest possible amount of work
+for the lowest possible wages. That is capitalist wage-slavery under
+Government control."[1131] "The country postman has to walk excessive
+distances for miserable wages in order that the profit on the Post
+Office may be filched from the employees and from the public by the
+Chancellor of the Exchequer."[1132]
+
+The Fabians, on the other hand, advocate State Socialism, but they are
+a small minority. "The Socialism advocated by the Fabian Society is
+State Socialism exclusively."[1133] Some Socialists would welcome
+State Socialism in the hope that it would prepare the way for free
+Communism. Mr. Keir Hardie, for instance, says: "State Socialism with
+all its drawbacks, and these I frankly admit, will prepare the way for
+free Communism, in which the rule, not merely the law of the State,
+but the rule of life will be--From each according to his ability, to
+each according to his needs."[1134]
+
+"Socialists only believe in the fraternal State. Paternal State
+Socialism all Socialists unanimously oppose."[1135]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1122] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[1123] Ball, _The Moral Aspects of Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[1124] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[1125] Engels, _Development of Socialism from Utopia to Science_, p.
+71.
+
+[1126] Bebel, _Woman_, pp. 198, 199.
+
+[1127] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[1128] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[1129] _Clarion_, October 18, 1907.
+
+[1130] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism of Socialism_, pp. 8, 9.
+
+[1131] Hyndman, _Social-Democracy_, p. 22.
+
+[1132] _Fabian Election Manifesto_, 1892, p. 3.
+
+[1133] _Report on Fabian Policy_, 1896, p. 5.
+
+[1134] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 89.
+
+[1135] Bliss, _Encyclopedia of Social Reform_, p. 1262.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXIII
+
+THE SOCIALIST ORGANISATIONS: THEIR MUTUAL RELATIONS AND THEIR POLICY
+
+
+The Social-Democratic Federation is the most honest and
+straightforward of the various Socialist organisations. Its aims are
+revolutionary, as the following statement proves:
+
+"The Social-Democratic Federation is a militant Socialist organisation
+whose members--men and women--belong almost entirely to the working
+classes. Its object is the realisation of Socialism--the emancipation
+of the working class from its present subjection to the capitalist
+class. The means by which it seeks to attain that end are: agitation,
+education, and the organisation of the working class into a
+class-conscious political party--that is, a party clearly conscious of
+the present position of the workers as a subject class, in consequence
+of all the means of production being owned and controlled by another
+class, and clearly conscious of its duty and mission to free them from
+that position by the conquest of all the powers of the State, and by
+making all the means of production collective common property, to be
+used for the benefit of all instead of for the profit of a class. To
+this end the Social-Democratic Federation proclaims and preaches the
+class war."[1136]
+
+"According to the report for the year ending March 1907 it has 186
+branches and affiliated societies. One of its members sits in
+Parliament as a member of the Labour party, and about 120 are members
+of various local bodies. Its gross income and expenditure through, out
+the country is estimated at _15,500l._ It has a weekly paper,
+'Justice,' and a monthly magazine, 'The Social-Democrat.'[1137] "In
+its own estimation "Justice" is "the most respected of Socialist
+newspapers."[1138]
+
+The various Socialist organisations do not love each other. The Fabian
+Society caustically remarks: "The Federation runs a newspaper called
+'Justice' which has not hitherto been worth a penny to any man whose
+pence are so scarce as a labourer's, and which has made repeated
+attacks on the ordinary working-class organisations without whose
+co-operation Socialists can at present do nothing except cry in the
+wilderness. The branches are expected to sell this paper at their
+meetings."[1139] "The Social-Democratic Federation is virtually the
+oldest Socialist society and is certainly the most conservative. It
+was founded as the Democratic Federation about 1880, and adopted its
+present name in 1884. Mr. H.M. Hyndman, its most prominent member,
+imported its doctrines--which were of German origin--and the S.D.F.
+(as it is familiarly called) has ever since endeavoured to maintain an
+unshaken faith in all the teachings of Karl Marx. In fact, the S.D.F.
+changes its doctrines not with the times, but a dozen years or so
+after; so that it is always rather out of touch with the actualities
+of politics and attracts the type of mind that prefers clear-cut
+principles to practical political progress."[1140]
+
+Other Socialist organisations which are less straightforward than the
+Social-Democratic Federation hide their identity and object under
+misleading titles. The Independent Labour Party, for instance, is a
+purely Socialist party notwithstanding its name. "Its object is, an
+Industrial Commonwealth founded upon the Socialisation of land and
+capital. Its methods are the education of the community in the
+principles of Socialism; the industrial and political organisation of
+the workers; the independent representation of Socialist principles on
+all elective bodies."[1141] "No one will find much difference in the
+programmes of the Social-Democratic Federation and the Independent
+Labour Party."[1142] "The Independent Labour Party, commonly called
+the I.L.P., which must be carefully distinguished from the Labour
+party, is much the largest, and politically the most important,
+Socialist organisation. It was founded at Bradford in 1892, by Mr.
+Keir Hardie, M.P., and others, and it has from the first advocated
+Socialism of the English type and endeavoured to work in harmony with
+trade unionists. The Labour party is mainly due to its initiative, and
+through its members in trade unions it largely controls the policy of
+the party. In August 1907 it had over 700 branches, of which 155 had
+been formed in the preceding six months. Its operations have recently
+expanded with extraordinary rapidity, its central office expenditure
+for the years ending February 28 having been _955l._ in 1905,
+_1,817l._ in 1906, and _3,552l._ in 1907. It does a very large
+business in the publication and sale of pamphlets and books, and has a
+weekly paper, "The Labour Leader." At the general election of 1906,
+eighteen of its members were returned to Parliament, all belonging to
+the Labour party, and two more have since been elected, one for the
+Labour party, and one, Mr. Victor Grayson, as an independent
+Socialist. Over five hundred of its members sit on town councils and
+other local bodies. The total membership is estimated at 40,000, and
+its income and expenditure at perhaps _100,000l._"[1143] "The
+Independent Labour Party was formed in January 1893. As years have
+passed the Independent Labour Party has steadily strengthened its
+programme, until it is to-day entirely Socialist, but it has not quite
+got rid of the strain of opportunism, at elections its independence
+being more in evidence in its name than in its conduct."[1144]
+
+Wishing to secure Socialist and non-Socialist adherents, and
+masquerading as a Liberal Labour party, the attitude of the
+Independent Labour Party is not a straightforward one. One of its
+competitors states: "The Independent Labour Party has continued its
+policy of bargain-making with capitalist politicians. The leaders at
+times call themselves Socialists, and at other times protest against
+frightening their supporters by introducing the word into resolutions.
+At the general election, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald at Leicester, and Mr.
+James Parker at Halifax, were amongst the candidates who entered into
+compacts with the Liberals. At the Amsterdam International Congress
+they voted for a resolution extolling the 'tried and victorious policy
+based on the class war,' and on their return to England referred to
+the class war as a 'shibboleth' and as a 'reactionary and Whiggish
+precept, certain to lead the movement away from the real aims of
+Socialism.'"[1145]
+
+The Fabian Society is the least open and the least straightforward
+Socialist organisation. Ostensibly it adopted its curious name because
+"for the right moment you must wait, as Fabius did most patiently when
+warring against Hannibal, though many censured his delays; but when
+the time comes you must strike hard as Fabius did, or your waiting
+will be in vain, and fruitless."[1146] In reality the misleading title
+was probably adopted because the Fabian Society habitually and on
+principle sails under a false flag, wishing not to arouse suspicion as
+to its objects.
+
+The object of the small but powerful Fabian Society is a peculiar one:
+"Founded on a small scale in 1884 and actually the oldest of the three
+great Socialist organisations, the Fabian Society has never aimed at a
+large membership or endeavoured to become a political party. Its work
+has been mainly educational, its endeavour to translate the principles
+of Socialism into practical politics suited to English conditions.
+From the first it refused to accept Marxian teaching. The Fabian
+Society is not a political body, in that it allows its members
+complete freedom to adopt any method of carrying out the principles
+they profess. Hence its members in Parliament belong to the Liberal or
+the Labour party, and they sit as Progressives on London local bodies.
+The Society is mainly middle-class, and the majority of its members
+belong to London, where fortnightly meetings are held for the
+discussion of Socialism. Its great force lies in the ability of many
+of its members, some of whom, Mr. Bernard Shaw, the dramatist; Mr.
+Sidney Webb, the political writer; Sir Sydney Olivier, now Governor of
+Jamaica, have belonged to it from the start; whilst others, such as
+Mr. H.G. Wells and the Rev. R.J. Campbell, are more recent recruits.
+Recently it has greatly increased its membership, now nearly 2,000,
+and has formed substantial branches in the Universities and in many
+large towns. Eleven of its members sit in Parliament."[1147]
+
+"The chief object to which the Society devotes its resources is the
+education of the people in political, economic, and social subjects.
+To effect this purpose it must in the first place educate itself by
+the discussion of those problems which from time to time appear ripe
+for solution. Its members therefore undertake the study of such
+problems, and lay the results before the Society, where they are
+considered from various points of view. Finally the conclusions
+adopted and generally approved by the members are published, usually
+in penny tracts, and by this means made available for the information
+of all. The Society further endeavours to promote social amelioration
+by the dissemination of information about existing institutions, in
+order that better use may be made of the powers already possessed by
+local administrative authorities, now too often neglectful of their
+obligations. The same ends are sought to be attained by means of
+circulating libraries supplied to Working-men's Clubs, Co-operative
+Societies, Trade Unions, and similar bodies, and by the publication of
+lists of best books on social and political subjects. The Society also
+at times engages trained lecturers to give courses of lectures during
+the winter months on social politics to working-class and other
+organisations. The members of the Society who control its policy are
+Socialists; that is to say, are committed to the theory of the
+probable direction of economic evolution which is now often called
+Collectivism."[1148]
+
+"The object of the Fabian Society is to persuade the English people to
+make their political constitution thoroughly democratic, and so to
+socialise their industries as to make the livelihood of the people
+entirely independent of private Capitalism. The Fabian Society
+endeavours to pursue its Socialist and Democratic objects with complete
+singleness of aim. For example: It has no distinctive opinions on the
+Marriage Question, Religion, Art, abstract Economics, historic
+Evolution, Currency, or any other subject than its own special business
+of practical Democracy and Socialism. It brings all the pressure and
+persuasion in its power to bear on existing forces, caring nothing by
+what name any party calls itself, or what principles, Socialist or
+other, it professes, but having regard solely to the tendency of its
+actions supporting those which make for Socialism and Democracy and
+opposing those which are reactionary. It does not propose that the
+practical steps towards Social Democracy should be carried out by
+itself, or by any other specially organised society or party. It does
+not ask the English people to join the Fabian Society. The Fabian
+Society does not claim to be the people of England, or even the
+Socialist party, and therefore does not seek direct political
+representation by putting forward Fabian candidates at elections. But
+it loses no opportunity of influencing elections and inducing
+constituencies to select Socialists as their candidates."[1149]
+
+"The Fabian Society, far from holding aloof from other bodies, urges
+its members to lose no opportunity of joining them and permeating them
+with Fabian ideas as far as possible."[1150] "The typical Fabian is an
+uncompromising Socialist and Democrat; but he holds aloof from no
+association that can possibly be induced to push in his direction.
+Instead of wasting time in forming new sects, he tries to inoculate
+with his Socialism the existing organisations--the political clubs,
+the caucuses, the trade unions, the Press, the co-operative societies,
+and the rival party leaders."[1151]
+
+Whilst the other Socialist organisations rely chiefly on direct
+driving force, the Fabian Society relies chiefly on subtle, indirect
+action and on intrigue. One of its most prominent men boasted: "In
+1888 it only cost us twenty-eight postcards, written by twenty-eight
+members, to convince the newly-born 'Star' newspaper that London was
+aflame with Fabian Socialism."[1152] "Our policy has been to try to
+induce some of these regular papers to give a column or two to
+Socialism, calling it by what name they please. And I have no
+hesitation in saying that the effect of this policy as shown in the
+'Manchester Sunday Chronicle,' the 'Star,' the London 'Daily
+Chronicle,' and other more exclusively working-class papers, notably
+the 'Clarion,' has done more for the cause than all the time and money
+that has been wasted on 'Justice' since the 'Star' was founded. Our
+mission is to Socialise the Press as we hope to Socialise Parliament
+and the other estates of the realm, not to run the Press
+ourselves."[1153]
+
+Owing to these peculiar methods, by which they secured the support of
+many people who did not know they were Socialists, the Fabians have
+been very successful in their policy: "In 1888 we had not been found
+out even by the 'Star.' The Liberal party was too much preoccupied
+over Mr. O'Brien's breeches and the Parnell Commission, with its
+dramatic climax in the suicide of the forger Pigott, to suspect that
+the liveliness of the extreme left of the Radical wing in London meant
+anything but the usual humbug about working-class interests. We urged
+our members to join the Liberal and Radical Associations of their
+districts, or if they preferred it, the Conservative Associations. We
+told them to become members of the nearest Radical club and
+co-operative store and to get delegated to the Metropolitan Radical
+Federation and the Liberal and Radical Union if possible. On these
+bodies we made speeches and moved resolutions, or better still, got
+the Parliamentary candidate for the constituency to move them, and
+secured reports and encouraging little articles for him in the 'Star.'
+We permeated the party organisations and pulled all the wires we
+could lay our hands on with our utmost adroitness and energy; and we
+succeeded so far that in 1888 we gained the solid advantage of a
+Progressive majority, full of ideas that would never have come into
+their heads had not the Fabian put them there, on the first London
+County Council. The generalship of this movement was undertaken
+chiefly by Sidney Webb, who played such bewildering conjuring tricks
+with the Liberal thimbles and the Fabian peas that to this day both
+the Liberals and the sectarian Socialists stand aghast at him."[1154]
+Fabians rely for their success chiefly on their artfulness. "Always
+remember that, even if you cannot convert a man to Socialism, you may
+get his vote all the same."[1155]
+
+Fabian middle-class Socialism differs from the democratic Socialism of
+the larger Socialist organisations which appeal to the working class:
+"The Socialism advocated by the Fabian Society is State Socialism
+exclusively."[1156] "We have never advanced the smallest pretensions
+to represent the working classes of this country."[1157] Therefore the
+Fabians are very cordially hated by the Democratic Socialists. The
+Social-Democratic Federation blames them for their "cynical
+opportunism."[1158] Another organisation declares: "The Fabian Society
+poses as a Socialist organisation, for we are told that this Society
+'consists of Socialists.' It is indeed composed of middle-class men
+who naturally deny the class struggle, profess to believe in
+permeating the capitalist class with Socialism, and hold that the
+tendency of society is towards government by the expert-Fabianism
+therefore tends towards the rule of the bureaucrats or that section
+of the educated middle-class. The Fabians are the cult of the civil
+service and are Socialists neither in name nor in fact."[1159]
+
+Let us now consider the genesis and character of the great Labour
+party.
+
+Formerly Socialists and trade unionists marched and fought apart.
+However, "On the 27th February, 1900, a joint Socialist and Trade
+Union Conference met in the Memorial Hall, London. One hundred and
+seventeen delegates were present representing sixty-seven Trade
+Unions, seven representing the Independent Labour Party, four the
+Social-Democratic Federation, one the Fabian Society. The result was
+the formation of the Labour Representation Committee,"[1160]
+simultaneously representing trade unions and Socialists. "At the
+General Election of 1906, the Labour Representation Committee ran
+fifty candidates for Parliament and returned thirty. That year its
+name was changed to the Labour Party."[1161] The Labour party
+therefore unites trade unionists and Socialists. The Fabian Society
+and the Independent Labour party have joined it. Only the
+Social-Democratic Federation has so far kept aloof from it.
+
+The Labour party, being chiefly composed of trade unionists, is fond
+of posing as a non-Socialist party. It is true that "Mr. Keir Hardie,
+the Labour leader, said they did not want Toryism, Liberalism, or
+Socialism, only Labourism, but the same Keir Hardie sits as a delegate
+on the International Socialist Bureau."[1162] "Many of the Labour
+members in Parliament are avowed Socialists. The working-class
+movement already is largely a Socialist movement, and is in continual
+process of becoming more so. With the speculative side of Socialism
+the average man with us has but small concern; it is its common-sense
+which appeals to him. By inherited instinct we are all Communists at
+heart."[1163]
+
+"The Labour party, which now has thirty-one members in the House of
+Commons, is not purely Socialist, but twenty-three or twenty-four of
+its M.P.s, and nearly all its elected executive, are Socialists. It
+has no official programme; but in view of its membership its policy is
+and must be Socialist. This is not because the majority rules. It is
+because the Socialist section has a policy and the non-Socialist
+section approves of that policy so far as it can be translated into
+Bills or resolutions to be laid before Parliament. There is no
+anti-Socialism in the Labour party. There is far more difference
+between sections of Liberals or Conservatives than there is between
+Socialist and non-Socialist Labour men. All these bodies are working
+more or less together for the same great ends."[1164] The connection
+between organised Labour and organised Socialism is further
+illustrated by the important letters printed on pages 141-143 of this
+book.
+
+The demands and semi-official programme of the Labour party are
+practically identical with those of avowed Socialists, as may be seen
+from the following statement of its Secretary:
+
+"We are in favour of the special taxation of land values, of a minimum
+income-tax on earned incomes, and a super-tax on a graded scale on all
+incomes over, say, _1,000l._ This is described as robbing the rich.
+That does not express either the purpose or the spirit of the Labour
+party however. We call it--securing for the public values created by
+the public. Our critics, if they are to have any effect on intelligent
+public opinion, must understand this cardinal point in our creed, this
+axiom in our programme-making. We do not regard taxation as a taking
+by the State of property which belongs to other people, but the
+appropriation of property which ought to belong to itself. This theory
+of taxation goes very far, and its full application involves the
+complete destruction of parasitic classes. It can only be applied
+slowly, but as people get clearly to understand that socially-created
+values should be socially-owned values, many of our most recondite
+problems, like overcrowding, waste-lands, high rating, will be in a
+fair way to settlement."[1165]
+
+The foregoing shows that the Labour party, like the most predatory
+Socialist, wishes to tax all private capital out of existence. "The
+Labour party is not as yet a purely Socialist organisation, because
+any attempt to make it such would disrupt it."[1166] However, its rank
+and file are rapidly being permeated with Socialism.
+
+The following table shows the composition of the Labour party and its
+numerical strength and growth:
+
+"GROWTH OF THE LABOUR PARTY
+
+             Trades Union    Socialist
+              Membership     Membership      Total
+  1900-1        353,070       22,861       375,931
+  1901-2        455,450       13,861       169,311
+  1902-3        847,315       13,835       861,150
+  1903-4        956,025       13,775       969,800
+  1904-5        885,270       14,730       900,000
+  1905-6        904,496       16,784       921,280
+  1906-7        975,182       20,885      *998,338
+
+*This total includes 2,271 co-operators"[1167]
+
+Apparently only one-fiftieth of the members of the Labour party are
+Socialists, but in reality their proportion is very much larger,
+because only a few working men with Socialistic leanings have actually
+joined a Socialist party. "When the daily Press states that out of a
+million affiliated members of the Labour party there are only 17,000
+Socialists, its readers naturally inquire, 'How then is it that there
+are at least twenty Socialists among its thirty M.P.s?' The reply is
+that as the trade union candidates were elected by the ballot of the
+members of their respective societies, it must be supposed that those
+candidates with Socialist views were the most acceptable to the
+majority of members. This situation was strikingly reflected in the
+results of the election of 1906. The votes cast for declared
+Socialists account for 232,378, or 70 per cent. of the total Labour
+Representation Committee poll of 331,280, whilst of the whole Labour
+poll, comprising that of the L.R.C., Scottish workers, miners, trades
+union group, and Socialists, the votes for declared Socialists
+accounted for 274,631 out of 530,643, or nearly 52 per cent."[1168]
+"The Labour party is not a Socialist party yet, but those who possess
+an ear for the great changes now taking place in the depths of the
+nation will understand that the Labour party is going to be a
+Socialist party one day."[1169]
+
+It seems likely that the more or less Socialist Labour party in
+Parliament will soon absorb practically the whole trade union group.
+"Of the eighteen miners' representatives in the House of Commons
+fifteen are in the trade union group. In October 1907, at the
+Conference of the Federated Miners' Associations, a resolution was
+adopted declaring that the time had come for joining the Labour party
+and ordering a ballot of the whole Federation area to be taken. It is
+practically a foregone conclusion that the proposal will be carried,
+in which case the fifteen miners' representatives now sitting on the
+Ministerial benches will cross the House and practically double the
+effective power of the Labour party as against the Government. The
+trade union group will then practically cease to exist. The railway
+servants have decided that all their candidates at the next election
+must join the Labour party. Therefore Richard Bell must sign the
+constitution of the Labour party or retire in favour of someone who
+will. Of the remaining seven members of the group W.C. Steadman is the
+only recognised leader of trade unionism."[1170]
+
+Apart from the larger Socialist parties described in the foregoing,
+there are two smaller organisations composed of revolutionary
+Socialists of the most violent type, whose Socialism is a misnomer for
+Anarchism. They are "The Socialist Party of Great Britain" domiciled
+in London, and "The Socialist Labour Party" (an American importation),
+domiciled in Edinburgh. Their programmes, as those of the other
+Socialist organisations, will be found in the Appendix.
+
+The numerous Socialistic organisations mentioned in this Chapter
+oppose and fight one another. Many Socialists recommend that a united
+Socialist party should be formed, but it is clear to all who are
+acquainted with the inner history of British Socialism that "the vital
+differences that exist among Socialist parties as to tactics--as to
+the way to attain Socialism--cannot be glossed over by a few
+expressions of brotherly love."[1171] The Socialists are divided among
+themselves, and the rivalry and enmity between some of the sections is
+deep-seated and bitter. Nominally they differ with regard to the
+policy to be pursued, but in reality their differences seem to be
+rather of a personal nature. Socialist leaders, though they have the
+words "democracy," "freedom," "liberty," and "love" constantly on
+their lips, are apt to be very autocratic as soon as their sphere of
+political influence is threatened by competition, and as soon as their
+private property, their political capital which they have created, is
+threatened with "socialisation." The men who so glibly recommend the
+world-wide brotherhood of man, and the socialisation and co-operation
+of the world, cannot even co-operate among themselves although they
+pursue the identical immediate aim: the plunder of the well-to-do. It
+is an old experience that revolutionaries always end in cutting one
+another's throats.
+
+Some Socialist groups have been formed owing to very peculiar and very
+unsavoury circumstances. A comparatively innocent though
+psychologically highly interesting and characteristic Socialist new
+formation has recently occurred in that ally of the Socialists, the
+Women's Social and Political Union. "In September 1907 a bombshell was
+thrown into the camp of the Women's Social and Political Union by the
+extraordinary action of Mrs. Pankhurst, who, as 'the founder,'
+announced that she had discharged the Executive Committee of the
+Union."[1172] In the words of an opponent: "Mrs. Pankhurst tore up the
+constitution, robbed the branches and members of all control over the
+National Committee, abolished the annual conference, and elected
+herself and a few personal friends as an autocratic permanent
+committee answerable to no one in the world and to sit at her
+pleasure."[1173] The consequence of this personal squabble among
+leaders for supremacy was of course the splitting up of the party, and
+the aggrieved ladies formed a new party, the "Women's Freedom League."
+
+Socialists never tire of declaiming against competition, and of
+praising co-operation. At present there are two "competitive" Women's
+Freedom societies. If they continue pushing the identical article of
+agitation, all custom will go to the larger party. Therefore we may
+expect that, unless the breach is healed, the two parties will agree
+to differ "on the basic principles of women's freedom" and will
+recommend slightly different political mixtures.
+
+The example of France, Germany, and other countries shows that the
+jealousy and envy of leaders and party tyranny is nowhere greater than
+among Socialists. It will not be easy for British Socialists to found
+a united party, especially as it is more difficult to create unity
+among individualistic Englishmen, who are by their nature impatient of
+restraint, than among Frenchmen and Germans, who are more used to
+co-operation and who through their military training have learned the
+necessity of discipline and the duty of obedience.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1136] Quelch, _The Social-Democratic Federation_, p. 3.
+
+[1137] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1908, pp. 74, 75.
+
+[1138] _Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation Conference 1906_,
+p. 2.
+
+[1139] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, p. 23.
+
+[1140] The Secretary of the Fabian Society in _Daily Mail Year Book_,
+1908, p. 72.
+
+[1141] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1906, p. 73.
+
+[1142] _Report of the Twenty-sixth Annual Conference,
+Social-Democratic Federation, 1906_, p. 1.
+
+[1143] _Reformers' Year Book, 1908_, p. 73; _Daily Mail Year Book,
+1908_, p. 72.
+
+[1144] _Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation Conference, 1906_,
+p. 3.
+
+[1145] _Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 2.
+
+[1146] _Capital and Land_, Motto.
+
+[1147] Secretary of Fabian Society in _Daily Mail Year Book, 1908_, p.
+72.
+
+[1148] Official Circular: _The Fabian Society_.
+
+[1149] _Report on Fabian Policy_, 1896, p. 3.
+
+[1150] _Ibid._ p. 4.
+
+[1151] _Scottish Leader_, September 4, 1890, reprinted by Fabian
+Society and issued in form of a leaflet.
+
+[1152] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, p. 26.
+
+[1153] _Ibid._ p. 24.
+
+[1154] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, pp. 18, 19.
+
+[1155] _How to Lose and How to Win an Election_, p. 1.
+
+[1156] _Report on Fabian Policy_, 1896, p. 5.
+
+[1157] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, p. 23.
+
+[1158] _Annual Report, Social-Democratic Federation Conference, 1906_,
+p. 2.
+
+[1159] _Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 11.
+
+[1160] Macdonald, _Socialism_, p. 52.
+
+[1161] _Ibid._ p. 53.
+
+[1162] _Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 13.
+
+[1163] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, pp. 33, 34.
+
+[1164] Secretary, Fabian Society, in _Daily Mail Year Book_, 1908, p.
+73.
+
+[1165] R. Macdonald, M.P., in _Daily Mail Year Book_, 1908, p. 109.
+
+[1166] _Manifesto, Socialist Party of Great Britain_, p. 3.
+
+[1167] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1908, p. 8.
+
+[1168] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, p. 51.
+
+[1169] _Social-Democrat_, October 1907, p. 607.
+
+[1170] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1908, p. 23.
+
+[1171] _Socialist_, December 1907.
+
+[1172] _Independent Labour Party Year Book_, 1908, p. 28.
+
+[1173] _Forward_, November 23, 1907.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXIV
+
+THE GROWTH AND DANGER OF BRITISH SOCIALISM
+
+
+Up to a recent date the Socialists in Great Britain had neither power
+nor influence. Whilst Germany, France, and other countries had large
+Socialist parties, British Socialism was practically unrepresented in
+Parliament. Many Englishmen thought that the free British democracies
+did not offer a soil favourable to the growth of Socialism, whilst
+many Socialist leaders believed that England possessed ideal
+conditions for effecting a social revolution because no other country
+contains, proportionally, so large a propertyless proletariat as
+England.[1174] In view of the large number of propertyless people in
+Great Britain and the nervous restlessness of the race since it has
+become a race of town-dwellers we cannot wonder at the rapid growth of
+British Socialism, and we must look forward to its further increase.
+
+The following most interesting table gives a picture of the growth of
+the Socialist vote in the three most Socialistic countries on the
+Continent of Europe, and in Great Britain. It shows that Socialism has
+apparently passed the zenith on the Continent of Europe, but that it
+has not yet reached maturity in Great Britain.
+
+          "GERMANY
+                      Members of
+             Votes    Parliament
+  1867       30,000        8
+  1878      437,158        9
+  1887      763,123       11
+  1890    1,427,298       35
+  1893    1,876,738       44
+  1896    2,107,076       57
+  1903    3,010,472       81
+  1907    3,258,968       43
+
+          GREAT BRITAIN
+                      Members of
+             Votes    Parliament
+
+  1895       46,000        0
+  1900*      65,000        2
+  1906*     335,000       30
+
+          FRANCE
+                      Members of
+             Votes    Parliament
+
+  1887       47,000       19
+  1889      120,000        9
+  1893      440,000       49
+  1898      790,000       50
+  1902      805,000       48
+  1906      896,000       52
+
+          BELGIUM
+                      Members of
+             Votes    Parliament
+
+  1894      320,000       32
+  1900      344,000       33
+  1902      467,000       34
+  1904      463,967       28
+  1906      469,094       30
+
+    *This is the vote of the Labour party candidates,
+     not all of whom were Socialists."[1175]
+
+A glance at the above table shows that the Socialist vote in Great
+Britain is as yet insignificant by comparison with other countries,
+and it seems likely to increase very greatly. More than a third of the
+Australian House of Representatives and Senate consists of Socialists.
+May not proportionately as large a Socialist party arise in Great
+Britain, especially as no political party can outbid the Socialists?
+The Socialist danger is probably greater in Great Britain than it is
+in France, Germany, or Belgium. In those countries a vast body of
+freehold peasants exists who are absolutely opposed to revolutionary
+schemes. Besides, owing to the fact that the majority of Continental
+workers have a substantial stake in the country, either in the form of
+land, houses, or other property, Continental Socialism is
+comparatively moderate, whilst it is violent, Anarchistic, and
+revolutionary in Great Britain, where the majority of workers possess
+far less property than the majority of French, German, and Belgian
+workers. The German Socialists, since Germany's unity, have gone the
+way of Lassalle, the patriot Socialist. "They have ceased to denounce
+the churches. From a necessary evil or a mere stop-gap, the present
+State has become to them gradually, and perhaps unconsciously, their
+own State."[1176] It is true that the Socialist vote is ten times
+larger in Germany than in Great Britain. Nevertheless the danger of
+Socialist troubles of the very gravest kind is perhaps greater in
+England than in Germany, especially as unemployment is far greater in
+Great Britain than in Germany.[1177] It seems that Great Britain will
+pass through bad industrial times, and it should not be forgotten that
+the French Revolutions of 1789 and of 1848 were made by unemployed
+workmen upon whom Socialist and Communistic doctrines had taken a firm
+hold; that the distress caused by the siege of Paris led to the rising
+of the Commune in 1871; that between 1837 and 1848 the Chartist
+movement in Great Britain rose and declined in almost exact
+correspondence with the variations in the economic distress of the
+people.
+
+The present aspect of Great Britain resembles the aspect of
+pre-Revolution France, owing to the unequal distribution of property.
+"Almost three-quarters of the soil of France belonged to the nobility
+and the clergy, or to 350,000 people. The whole of the rest of the
+nation possessed less than one-third of the soil."[1178] The absence
+of a sturdy property-owning lower middle-class, the disappearance of
+the yeomen, is a source of instability and weakness to Great Britain.
+Vast numbers of British workers live from hand to mouth. They are
+being inflamed by Socialist agitators against the wealthy, and they
+are being promised an equal share in the whole wealth of the nation.
+In case of very acute distress, either through purely economic causes
+or through a war with a strong naval power, which might lead to
+starvation in a country which is absolutely dependent on foreign
+countries for its food, a revolutionary outbreak in the overgrown
+towns of Great Britain seems by no means impossible. The revolutionary
+centre of the world may conceivably move from Paris to London.
+
+The Socialists in Great Britain may not always remain a chaotic
+multitude led by rival agitators who fight and intrigue against one
+another. Socialists believe: "So soon as Socialism becomes popular,
+great statesmen and philosophers will arise and take their stand boldly
+with the people in their fight for industrial freedom."[1179] There are
+more than 2,000,000 trade unionists in Great Britain, and Socialism is
+spreading rapidly among them. "Already the working-class movement is
+largely a Socialistic movement and is in continual process of becoming
+more so."[1180] The political character of the trade unionists is
+changing owing to the influence of Socialism and of the new unions.
+"The differences between the 'old' and 'new' unions are becoming more
+and more accentuated. The former adhere to the 'No politics' cry,
+_i.e._ no working-class politics, and still pin their faith to the
+Liberal or even Tory party; while the latter, like their Continental
+comrades, understand that their emancipation can only be achieved by
+means of political action as a class."[1181] "It is not possible for
+the working-class movement to dissociate itself from the Socialists, or
+from Socialism, because Socialism, however vaguely the fact may yet be
+recognised, is as essentially the political expression of that movement
+as Toryism was the political expression of landlordism and Liberalism
+is that of the bourgeoisie. In other words, there can be no
+working-class movement as such without Socialism."[1182] "It is true
+that the present Parliamentary Labour party is committed to
+independence on 'Labour questions only,' but no one has yet defined
+what is a 'Labour question,' and still less has anyone attempted to
+show what political questions are not labour questions."[1183] The
+letters printed on pages 141-143 of this book show that Socialism and
+Labour are commingling.
+
+Socialism and Socialist influence have grown far more rapidly in Great
+Britain than is generally known. Their growth can be gauged not so
+much by the result of the General Election of 1906, and of some
+startling by-election results, as by the reports of the Socialist
+societies, and especially by the sale of their literature. Therefore
+the following facts indicating the growth of British Socialism should
+prove to be of considerable interest.
+
+The Independent Labour Party reported at its yearly meeting held at
+Derby on April 1 and 2, 1907:
+
+"No department of our activities has been more encouraging in its work
+this year than that of literature. Last year our literature sales
+amounted to _1,200l._, which was _600l._ more than the previous twelve
+months. This year they amount to _2,830l._, or _1,600l._ more than
+last year. The sales of books and pamphlets are nearly double that of
+last year. This is a magnificent result. Many branches have
+established literature stalls in the markets or public streets of
+their towns, and have met with much success. The fruits of this
+propaganda are certain, and will be reaped sooner or later by the
+branches concerned. The income is larger than has been the case in any
+former year, and amounts to the sum of _6,064l. 12s._, as against
+_1,884l. 7s. 9d._ for last year. The excess of assets over liabilities
+amounts to _3,729l. 2s. 5d._, as against _1,511l._ last year. The
+financial position of the party is thus becoming increasingly solid
+and stable."[1184]
+
+Since the time when that report was given, the Independent Labour
+Party has continued its rapid growth, as may be seen from the
+following "Facts of Progress" recently published by that party. "At
+the time of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Independent Labour
+Party, held at Derby at Easter 1907, there were then in existence 545
+branches of the party. Now (November 1907), there are 709 branches.
+Gain in seven months, 164 branches. There are few Parliamentary
+constituencies in the United Kingdom without branches, and it is hoped
+before the present year to make even these omissions good. There are
+now six branches of the Independent Labour Party in Ireland, and more
+to follow. The Independent Labour Party has now 845 of its members on
+local governing bodies, endeavouring to put into operation locally the
+principles for which the party stands. During the summer nearly 2,000
+meetings have been held each week throughout the country. Twenty-two
+special organisers have been at work for this last six months."[1185]
+
+The latest reports of the other Socialist Societies give a picture of
+a similarly great activity, and of a similarly rapid growth.
+
+It is true that the funds of the Socialist organisations are
+comparatively small, but it must not be forgotten that "1,000 men who
+subscribe _1d._ are stronger in the poll than one man who subscribes
+_1,000l._"[1186] Besides, the Independent Labour Party has since 1893
+spent more than _250,000l._ for purposes of propaganda. That is a
+large sum to be spent in agitation. Furthermore, it is significant
+that many Socialist pamphlets and books have been sold in more than a
+hundred thousand copies, and a few even in more than a million
+copies. The Socialist periodicals have a considerable circulation.
+"The circulation of the 'Clarion' alone is 74,000."[1187]
+
+The danger of British Socialism lies not only in its rapid increase
+among the workers, but also in the fact that it is making converts
+among the large class of people who possess no settled conviction of
+their own, and who are easily carried away by a plausible catch-phrase.
+The persons who count are the multitude of loose thinkers who are
+drifting towards Socialism without knowing it. "Politicians who have no
+suspicion that they are Socialists are advocating further instalments
+of Socialism with a recklessness of indirect results which scandalises
+the conscious Social-Democrat."[1188] "Year by year more legislation is
+proposed of which the effect is to draw upon the earnings of the
+efficient for the benefit of the inefficient. Year by year Parliament
+makes life harder for those whose labour benefits the State and easier
+for those who are a drag upon it."[1189] "There is in fact no definite
+and declared Socialist party in the present House of Commons, and yet
+what may be called the spirit of Socialism pervades the whole House to
+a greater extent than in any previous Parliament."[1190] For instance,
+Mr. Rutherford, M.P., in an anti-Socialistic speech brought forward a
+"Democratic Tory Programme" which, in the words of a Socialist
+periodical, was "cribbed almost bodily from the Socialist programme. He
+advocated among other reforms-nationalisation of the railways, State
+provision of work for the unemployed, payment of Members, manhood and
+womanhood suffrage, the suppression of adulteration, town planning on
+the German system, crime to be treated as a disease, compulsory closing
+of slums, taxation of site values, and State powers to purchase any
+site at the price on the rate-book, a national system of insurance
+against accident and sickness, feeding and clothing poor children, free
+opening of secondary schools and universities."[1191] In giving
+prominence to this "anti-Socialist" speech the "Labour Leader"
+sarcastically remarked: "The items do not, of course, take us quite as
+far as we Socialists would go; but they are fairly good to be going on
+with. Ours is to once again cordially welcome Mr. Rutherford as
+champion against Socialism."[1192]
+
+A further danger consists in this, that many Socialists in Parliament
+and out of it like to sail under a false flag, in accordance with the
+tactics usually employed by the Fabian Society (see _ante_, Chapter
+XXXIII). Socialist publications inform us: "Among Socialists who stood
+and were elected as official Liberals are P. Alden, Clement Edwards,
+and L.G. Chiozza Money."[1193] "Many Liberals, like Mr. Chiozza Money,
+Mr. Masterman, Mr. J.M. Robertson, not to speak of the Liberal-Labour
+group, are committed to Socialist or semi-Socialist legislation. Many
+Liberal newspapers, we cannot fairly deny, are avowedly on the side of
+Socialism. The Liberal rank and file are also in the majority of
+instances quite favourable to the general principles of
+municipalisation and Labour legislation. Above all, as has so often
+been predicted by us, the two political camps of landlordism and
+capitalism are bound to combine together against Socialism, and they
+can only do so effectively under the Imperialist, Tariff Reform,
+anti-Land Reform, and anti-Municipalisation flags. The Liberal party
+cannot attempt single-handed to withstand us."[1194] Socialism often
+poses as Liberalism and is accepted as such by the unwary.
+
+A further danger of British Socialism lies in the fact that it leads
+to the deterioration of the national character. "The strength of every
+community must finally depend on the character of the individuals who
+compose it. If they are self-reliant, energetic, and dutiful, the
+community will be strong; if, on the contrary, they have been taught
+to rely upon others rather than on themselves, to take life easily and
+to avoid unpleasant duties, then the community will be weak. Teach men
+that they owe no duty to their families, no duty to their country, and
+that their only responsibility is to humanity at large, and they will
+quickly begin to think and act as if they had no responsibility to
+anyone but themselves."[1195] "Many workmen are being ruined morally
+and materially by Socialistic doctrines, because directly a man
+becomes imbued with the idea that he is not receiving full recompense
+for his labours he thinks himself justified in doing as little as he
+can for his employer. The consequence is that his labour, which is to
+him his stock-in-trade, depreciates in value and when business
+slackens down he is one of the first to get the 'sack.'"[1196]
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1174] See Karl Marx, _Capital_; Yorke, _Secret History of the
+International_; Stegmann und Hugo, _Handbuch_, p. 177; Kautsky,
+_Social Revolution_.
+
+[1175] Macdonald, _Socialism_, pp. 125, 126.
+
+[1176] _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, vol. xxxii. p. 666.
+
+[1177] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, p. 546.
+
+[1178] Block, _Dictionnaire General_, vol. ii. p. 822.
+
+[1179] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, p. 8.
+
+[1180] _Ibid._ p. 34.
+
+[1181] Aveling, _Working-Class Movement in England_, p. 40.
+
+[1182] _The Socialist Annual_, 1907, p. 38.
+
+[1183] _Ibid._ p. 39.
+
+[1184] _Independent Labour Party Annual Report Conference_, pp. 10,
+12, 9.
+
+[1185] _Labour Leader_, November 29, 1907.
+
+[1186] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1906, p. 80.
+
+[1187] _Clarion_, December 20, 1907.
+
+[1188] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 188.
+
+[1189] Lord Balfour of Burleigh in the _Times_, October 3, 1907.
+
+[1190] Cox, _Socialism_, p. 7.
+
+[1191] _Labour Leader_, October 18, 1907.
+
+[1192] _Ibid._
+
+[1193] _Reformers' Year Book_, 1907, p. 58.
+
+[1194] _Labour Leader_, October 11, 1907.
+
+[1195] Cox, _Socialism_, p. 20.
+
+[1196] Daw, _Socialism Unmasked_, p. 7.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXV
+
+HOW THE PROGRESS OF SOCIALISM MAY BE CHECKED
+
+
+What can be done to check the growth of Socialism? Some most
+interesting statistics supplied by the German Social-Democratic party
+will furnish the best reply to that question. An analysis of the
+electorate of Magdeburg and Bremen, two typical commercial and
+industrial towns, gave the following result:
+
+
+COMPOSITION OF ELECTORATE
+
+                                 Magdeburg           Bremen
+                              Numbers Per cent.   Numbers Per cent.
+ 1. Capitalists                  4,491 =  8.08      5,085 =  8.34
+ 2. High officials                 559 =  1.06        197 =  0.32
+ 3. Medium officials             2,304 =  4.35        615 =  1.01
+ 4. Lower officials              4,364 =  7.75      3,567 =  5.85
+ 5. Professional men             1,422 =  2.55      1,047 =  1.72
+ 6. Newer middle-class           3,924 =  7.06      4,882 =  8.01
+ 7. Independent artisans         3,704 =  6.67      5,196 =  8.53
+ 8. Bakers and grocers             932 =  1.57      1,124 =  1.84
+ 9. Older middle-class           2,787 =  5.01      4,074 =  6.68
+10. Clerks and bookkeepers       3,121 =  5.62      5,247 =  8.61
+11. Working men in State and
+    municipal employment         1,424 =  2.55      1,415 =  2.32
+12. Working men in privateer
+    employment                  26,423 = 47.73     28,573 = 46.77
+                                ------   -----     ------   -----
+                                55,563 = 100       60,962 = 100[1197]
+
+Commenting upon the foregoing table, a German Socialist periodical
+wrote: "An analytical comparison of the electorate of Hamburg and
+Bremen reveals an extraordinary similarity in its social composition.
+It shows that the workers form hardly a majority of the population.
+They can be victorious only when they march hand in hand with
+professional men, the lower officials, and the newer middle-class.
+However, not all working men are Socialists. At the last election
+3,000 working men in Magdeburg, and 2,500 working men in Bremen, voted
+against Social-Democracy. The patriotic anti-Socialist working-men's
+associations are rapidly increasing their membership. A thousand
+workmen, one-third of the whole occupied at the Krupp-Gruson Works in
+Magdeburg, have joined the anti-Socialist working-men's associations.
+The 'working-men's associations for fighting Social-Democracy' have
+grown in a surprising fashion."[1198]
+
+The lower middle-class forms the strongest bulwark against the
+progress of Socialism, and Socialists know it. The philosopher of
+British Socialism, for instance, wrote: "The proletariat proper, the
+class which bears the future Socialist world in its womb, by no means
+at present everywhere outweighs, numerically, all other classes. On
+the contrary, so far as I am aware, this is only the case in Great
+Britain and some of the North American States, and even in these
+countries the majority is not large. The bulk of the non-proletarian
+sections of the democracy are by no means proletarian or
+Social-Democratic, even in their instincts, let alone Socialistic in
+their convictions. The predominating, or at all events most
+influential, elements in the non-proletarian democracy are what, for
+brevity, I have rather loosely termed the clerk and the shopkeeping
+class: in other words, they who are, or hope to become, small
+capitalists, the small middle-class. This last section of the 'people'
+or the democracy is, as such, the most formidable, because the most
+subtle, enemy with which the Socialist movement has to contend. The
+aim of the small capitalist, and of him who hopes to become one, is
+security and free play under the most advantageous conditions for his
+small capital to operate. On this account the little bourgeois, the
+small middle-class in its various sections, is the great obstacle
+which will have to be suppressed before we can hope to see even the
+inauguration of a consciously Socialist policy. It must be destroyed
+or materially crippled as a class before real progress can be
+made."[1199]
+
+Whilst many Socialists wish to destroy the lower middle-class, others,
+especially the Fabians, endeavour to convert it to Socialism, and to
+set it on against the wealthy. They argue: "The commercial clerk with
+his reading, his writing, his arithmetic, and his shorthand is a
+proletarian, and a very miserable proletarian, only needing to be
+awakened from his poor little superstition of shabby gentility to take
+his vote from the Tories and hand it over to us. The small tradesmen
+and ratepayers who are now allying themselves with the Duke of
+Westminster in a desperate and unavailing struggle--against the rising
+rates entailed by the eight hours day and standard wages for all
+public servants, besides great extensions of corporate activity in
+providing accommodation and education at the public expense, must
+sooner or later see that their interest lies in making common cause
+with the workers to throw the burden of taxation directly on to
+unearned incomes."[1200] "It only needs one evening's intelligent
+discussion of this monstrous state of affairs to make a beginning of a
+really sensible and independent organisation of the middle classes for
+their own defence and for their escape from between the two millstones
+of organised Labour and organised Plutocracy, which are at present
+grinding the last penny in the pound out of them."[1201] It is
+estimated that there are in England 500,000 clerks.[1202] With the
+object of permeating this large section of the middle class with
+Socialism, a new monthly paper, the "Clerk," has recently been started
+under Fabian auspices.
+
+Socialism is undermining the lower middle-class, and it is
+unconsciously being assisted in this policy by short-sighted
+anti-capitalistic Parliamentary legislation, which, as usual, hits
+hardest the smaller capitalists. If Great Britain wishes to erect a dam
+against the rising tide of Socialism, she must strengthen the lower
+middle-class in town and country by well-devised legislation, and she
+should before all re-create her peasantry. Great Britain should
+encourage the accumulation of small capitals by encouraging thrift. At
+present thrift is discouraged by the difficulty which small savers
+experience in obtaining satisfactory investments. The low interest of
+2-3/4 per cent. paid by the British savings-banks--Continental
+savings-banks give 4 per cent.--is quite inadequate; and the British
+Company Laws are so bad and sound investments so scarce that the small
+investor who wants a higher return than 2-3/4 per cent. is almost
+certain to lose his money if he buys stocks or shares. Leasehold
+investments are very unsatisfactory, because the object bought
+automatically reverts to the landlord, and small freehold properties
+are as a rule unobtainable under the present system of land-holding.
+Therefore the first and most important step to encourage thrift should
+be to enable the small saver to invest his savings profitably and
+securely in land and houses where it is under his own control.
+Co-operation also should be encouraged. Co-operative banking, which is
+highly developed in Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy, but almost
+unknown in Great Britain, would at the same time greatly benefit the
+small investor and the small _bona-fide_ borrower.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1197] _Die Neue Gesellschaft_, September 1907, p. 325.
+
+[1198] _Die Neue Gesellschaft_, September 1907, pp. 325, 326.
+
+[1199] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, pp. 40, 41.
+
+[1200] Shaw, _The Fabian Society_, p. 26.
+
+[1201] _New Age_, November 1907, p. 23.
+
+[1202] _Clerk_, January 1908.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXVI
+
+IS SOCIALISM POSSIBLE?--A GLANCE INTO THE SOCIALIST STATE OF THE
+FUTURE
+
+
+The realisation of Socialism, the creation of a Socialistic
+commonwealth in which private property does not exist, seems
+impossible. Socialists entirely leave out of their calculations two
+elementary factors:
+
+
+NATURE, AND HUMAN NATURE
+
+A State devoid of private property is an unthinkable proposition.
+Private property is not a fortuitous creation, but a natural growth.
+It is founded not merely upon law, but upon immemorial custom which
+owes its rise to a fundamental human instinct, an instinct which has
+been a characteristic of the human race in all countries, and which is
+as old as humanity itself. The instinct of acquisition, of
+accumulation, and of property is common to all men from Central Africa
+to the poles. It is equally strongly developed in the most civilised
+nations and among savages.
+
+However, supposing that the instinct of acquisition, of accumulation,
+and of property, which is found not only among all races of mankind
+but even among the higher animals, could be overcome, would human
+nature allow of the creation of a co-operative commonwealth based on
+voluntary co-operation, not on compulsion? Could the brotherhood of
+man be made a reality, and would men co-operate without strife in that
+mutual friendship and good-fellowship which one finds but rarely,
+even among those who are connected by the closest ties of affection
+and blood relationship, unless self-interest acts as the determining
+factor? Did not Plato found his ideal commonwealth upon perfectly wise
+and virtuous men? "Does not Socialist society presuppose extraordinary
+human beings, real angels, as regards unselfishness and gentleness,
+joy of work and intelligence? Is not the Social Revolution, with the
+present brutal and egoistical race of men, bound to become the signal
+for desolating struggles for the booty or for general idleness in
+which it would go to ruin?"[1203]
+
+"Who is more ready to tilt against society than the average Socialist?
+And if the individuals in it are so deeply imbued with a double dose
+of original sin as not to be able to handle any part of distribution
+and exchange, it follows that you cannot trust the individual."[1204]
+"In a social State you must consider two things--man and his
+surroundings. You often forget man, because you think it easier to
+alter his surroundings. The real question is: Can you produce men fit
+for the new social State?"[1205]
+
+"Socialism postulates an intelligent democracy."[1206] "The
+proletariat will require high intelligence, strong discipline, perfect
+organisation of its great masses. We may expect that it will only
+succeed when it will have developed these qualities in the highest
+degree."[1207] "Socialists demand a higher morality than any now to be
+found."[1208] "It is incumbent upon Socialism to recognise the
+existence of an intellectual motive, and it must place that motive
+above the economic, because without it the economic struggle would be
+devoid of any constructive value; it would be a mere tug-of-war; it
+would never bring us to Socialism. It would lead to a scramble for the
+spoils and mutual throat-cutting."[1209] "If 'each for all and all for
+each' be nothing more than a text for a banner or a motto for a wall;
+if its truth has not captured the hearts and minds of men and women in
+that new society, we shall be an official-ridden people with our eye
+on the best posts in the State for ourselves or our sons; and we shall
+be as pitiable in our spiritual deformity as we are in our economic
+bondage."[1210] "Socialism demands more than that we should merely
+import Socialistic institutions into our midst. It insists on a moral
+regeneration of society of the most complete and searching kind in
+order to make a lasting foundation for the political and social
+changes we many of us long to see."[1211] "Convey it in what spirit we
+may, an appeal to class interest is an appeal to personal interest.
+Socialist propaganda carried on as a class war suggests none of those
+ideals of moral citizenship with which Socialist literature abounds,
+'each for all and all for each,' 'service to the community is the sole
+right of property' and so on. It is an appeal to individualism" [which
+seems to be a euphemism for envy and cupidity], "and results in
+getting men to accept Socialist formulae without becoming
+Socialists."[1212]
+
+Unfortunately there is nothing ideal and elevating in the Socialist
+teachings, as the previous chapters show. Socialism appeals to all the
+passions and to all the vices, such as hatred, jealousy, envy,
+cupidity. It encourages, or at least excuses, wastefulness,
+improvidence, profligacy, and drunkenness. Its aim is plunder.
+
+The voluntary co-operation of all for the benefit of all presupposes
+the existence of wise, virtuous, and unselfish citizens. Do the
+people in England, or in any other country, possess these high
+qualities, or are these qualities likely to be created by the
+teachings of the Socialists? A distinguished Socialist despairingly
+exclaimed: "That spirit which animated the apostles, prophets,
+martyrs, is alive in Japan to-day. Is it alive in us as a nation? If
+not, if we have replaced it to any extent by some selfish opposite, by
+any such diabolically careless sentiment as 'after me the deluge,'
+then we as a nation have lost our soul, sold it for mere individual
+prosperity, sold it in some poor cases for not even that, for mere
+liquid refreshment, and we are on the down grade."[1213] Another
+Socialist wrote: "We are all of us great-great-grandchildren of the
+beasts. We carry the bestial attributes in our blood, some more, some
+less. Who amongst us is so pure and exalted that he has never been
+conscious of the bestial taint?"[1214] "Descendants of barbarians and
+beasts, we have not yet conquered the greed and folly of our bestial
+and barbarous inheritance. Our nature is an unweeded garden. Our
+hereditary soil is rank."[1215]
+
+The Socialists themselves acknowledge that Socialism presupposes a
+nation composed of ideal individuals, industrious, gentle, mutually
+helpful, unselfish, forbearing, and wise. They also acknowledge that
+men are the descendants of barbarians and beasts. Do Socialist
+agitators really believe that they can convert the descendants of
+barbarians and beasts into ideal beings by constantly preaching to
+them the gospel of hatred, envy, selfishness, self-indulgence, and
+plunder, and by even encouraging them to continue poisoning themselves
+and their descendants by over-indulgence in alcoholic drink?[1216]
+Surely "the defective natures of citizens will show themselves in the
+bad acting of whatever social structure they are arranged into. There
+is no political alchemy by which you can get golden conduct out of
+leaden instincts."[1217]
+
+It is clear to most thinking Socialists that human nature, as at
+present constituted, will make the realisation of Socialism
+impossible. How do Socialists, then, propose to meet the difficulty?
+Very simply. By bold assertions and prophecies. That which all
+religions and all philosophers have been unable to accomplish during
+3,000 years, Socialists will effect as by the touch of a magician's
+wand. "Socialism will change human nature. The opportunity makes the
+man. Socialism will take away the desire for accumulating riches.
+Under such conditions the possession of riches will be a superfluous
+burden which no sane man will wish to bear."[1218] "As soon as high
+purpose, intense human attachments, are the springs of action and
+resolve, discipline will come into our movement to crush out base
+selfishness, vanity, and personal ambition,"[1219] This is very nice,
+but how are "high purpose" and "intense human attachment" to be made
+the "springs of action"? Unfortunately the writer keeps the secret to
+himself.
+
+The philosopher of British Socialism states: "Socialism only calls for
+enlightened selfishness. But the fact that this selfishness is
+enlightened and recognises that it can serve itself by serving the
+common interest will completely change its character, so that it will
+cease to be the narrow selfishness of to-day, which so often defeats
+its own ends. Selfishness passing through the refining fire of
+economic change ceases to be selfishness and becomes Socialism."[1220]
+If selfishness ceases to be selfishness and becomes Socialism, then it
+changes merely its name, and Socialism and selfishness are identical,
+which is quite correct. Other Socialist leaders prophesy: "May we not
+assume that under these conditions a new type of mankind will evolve
+which will surpass the highest type which culture has produced up till
+now? An overman, if you please, not as an exception, but as the
+rule."[1221]
+
+"Selfishness will become public spirit."[1222] "The desire to serve
+the common life, to advance its welfare, will be the highest ambition
+of the individual."[1223] "Just as the nightingale sings in the
+evening shades, or the lark trills in the summer sky, so man in
+natural surroundings" [does Socialism create "natural" surroundings or
+unnatural ones?] "will seek to gratify his higher nature. Socialism
+will create a condition of things favourable to the development of the
+higher type of individuality."[1224] "This is the religious aspect of
+labour. It is dignified, ennobling. That is the divine ideal, the
+aspect concerning labour which God intended should be realised. Just
+think of it! The ordinary working man as divinely taught and inspired
+as the prophets and seers of old, and having the capacity to
+understand the sublimest truths and the profoundest philosophy
+concerning human life and the eternal destinies."[1225]
+
+The statements given above, with their superlatives, their laboured
+philosophy, their lyrics, hysterics, and prophecies, are singularly
+unconvincing. The manner in which the simple question, "How do you
+propose to fit actual human nature into your scheme?" is answered by
+the Socialists, proves that they find that question unanswerable.
+History teaches us that revolutions based on plunder, euphemistically
+called confiscation, expropriation, or socialisation, have indeed
+altered human nature, but they have altered it for the worse. All
+revolutions have hitherto caused a fearful depravation of manners and
+led to the most hideous crimes--and will a Socialistic revolution
+prove an exception? Why should it be an exception? Are its teachings
+such as make it seem likely that a Socialistic revolution will prove
+an exception? An attempt to establish the Socialist Commonwealth would
+undoubtedly lead, not to a revolution, but to a series of revolutions,
+to Anarchism and to civil war. The tragedy of the great French
+Revolution might be acted over again.
+
+Now let us look into some practical questions which the Socialist
+State of the future will have to settle. Let us, for instance,
+inquire:
+
+
+HOW WILL LABOUR BE REMUNERATED?
+
+Many Socialists think that different workers should get different
+wages: "The citizens shall be consciously public functionaries, and
+their labours shall be rewarded according to results."[1226]
+"Socialism does not propose that everyone shall have an equal share of
+the product of collective labour."[1227] How, then, is the amount of
+the unequal wages to be calculated? Some Socialists, following Marx,
+propose to determine wages by means of labour-time. "Ascertain the
+time taken to produce two commodities and we know their relative
+exchange value. And this quality tallies with market valuations. So
+far as creating value is concerned, then, one man creates as much
+value as another, and on the basis of equal labour-time equal value,
+Socialists rest their argument of social equality."[1228] "The working
+time which the making of an article requires is the only scale by
+which its social value can be measured. Ten minutes of social work in
+one branch are exchangeable for ten minutes of social work in another.
+It will be easy to calculate how much social working time each single
+product requires."[1229] A hunter hunts all day and shoots a deer. A
+fisher fishes all day and catches a sprat. Will the hunter exchange
+his deer for the sprat, on the principle of equal labour-time? Will
+highly skilled workers be satisfied to receive the same wages as the
+most unskilled labourers? Will equal labour-time pay for all not lead
+to universal dawdling, shrinkage in production, and consequent
+starvation? Would workers not strive to get the maximum pay for the
+minimum work? To prevent dawdling, could it be ascertained how long it
+should take to repair a machine, paint a picture, amputate a leg,
+plough an acre?
+
+It is manifestly impossible to pay men of varying capacity and
+productive power equal labour-time wages. Therefore many Socialists,
+especially the Fabians, maintain: "The principle of inequality of
+payment must be recognised. It is a necessary consequence of
+inequality of ability."[1230] "Every man should receive from the
+Commonwealth a fair equivalent in payments or services for the
+payments or services which the Commonwealth receives from him. It is
+not possible to say exactly how much each citizen has contributed to
+the wealth of the State, and absolute economic justice is therefore
+impossible."[1231] The question now arises how is the "fair equivalent
+for services rendered" to be determined? Many Socialists teach the
+doctrine that "the labourer is entitled to the entire product of his
+labour."[1232] Should the labourer be given an equivalent to the
+product of his labour _minus_ various necessary expenditures? Could
+the value of the labour of an individual be calculated at all in the
+complicated processes of modern industry? What is the value produced
+by a day's labour of a ploughman, a railway porter, a postman, a
+book-keeper, a policeman, a machine-minder? Mr. Bax very sensibly
+argues: "What does each man produce of himself as an individual? Show
+me how much cotton any given factory operative has produced in the
+course of a year? I don't mean the amount of wages the capitalist has
+given him for the exploitation of his labour power during that
+period--but the actual product of his labour in the manufactured
+article. You could not do so, because his labour, like all modern
+labour, is associated; and the work of the individual producer is
+completely and indissolubly merged in that of the group (factory,
+mill) to which he belongs, which is again inseparable from that of the
+machinery employed in the process and from that of other
+groups."[1233]
+
+It is impossible to calculate the exact value of service to the
+community by work in a factory or a field as soon as the wages system
+based on demand and supply has ceased to exist. Besides, differential
+pay will be impossible, because none will be satisfied with the pay
+received, except those who receive the highest pay. Therefore the same
+Fabian Society which in other writings, such as those quoted in the
+foregoing, advocates unequal payment, concludes: "Inequality of pay
+would be odious; the impossibility of estimating the separate value of
+each man's labour with any really valid result, the friction which
+would arise, the jealousies which would be provoked, the inevitable
+discontent, favouritism, and jobbery that would prevail: all these
+things will drive the Communal Council into the right path--equal
+remuneration of all workers."[1234] The Fabians, like so many other
+Socialists, cannot apparently quite make up their mind whether to
+plunge into the Scylla of equal pay or into the Charybdis of unequal
+pay. Therefore they plunge alternately into the one or the other.
+
+Many Socialists are in favour of equal pay: "The credits granted to
+the citizens will be equal in all cases, without reference to skill,
+intelligence, or the nature of the service performed."[1235] "The
+labours of the bus driver or the mangler will be appraised just as
+highly as those of the Prime Minister, with this difference perchance,
+that if it can be clearly shown by statistics that buscraft uses up
+the life energy of a man more rapidly than statecraft, four hours of
+busmanship shall count, say, as five of statesmanship."[1236] Equal
+wages should logically be followed by equal treatment for all. "An
+anti-Socialist will say, 'How will you sail a ship in a Socialist
+condition?' How? Why, with a captain and mates and sailing-master and
+engineer (if it be a steamer) and A.B.s and stokers, and so on, and so
+on. Only there will be no first and second and third class among the
+passengers, the sailors and stokers will be as well fed and lodged as
+the captain or passengers, and the captain and the stoker will have
+the same pay."[1237]
+
+So confused are the minds even of the leading Socialists with regard
+to the important question of the remuneration of labour that Mr.
+William Morris, one of the founders of British Socialism, in a poem
+first recommends individualistic Socialism and pay according to
+results:
+
+    _For that which the worker winneth shall then be his indeed_,
+    Nor shall half be reaped for nothing by him that sowed no seed.
+
+Two lines later in the same poem he recommends Communism and equal pay
+for all, regardless of the work done:
+
+    _Then all Mine and Thine shall be Ours_, and no more
+        shall any man crave
+    For riches that serve for nothing but to fetter a
+        friend for a slave.[1238]
+
+The above extracts show that confusion reigns in the Socialist camp
+regarding the settlement of the Wage Question.
+
+Wage-earners are not philanthropists. Highly skilled men will not be
+content with wages equal to those of unskilled labour, not even in the
+name of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. In the absence of a free
+demand and supply, which automatically graduates wages in accordance
+with the social value of the work done, its attractiveness or
+unattractiveness, &c., it cannot scientifically, though it can perhaps
+autocratically, be determined how wages should be graduated. When it
+comes to the fixing of differential wages in the Socialist State of
+the future, quarrels will immediately arise, which will lead to strife
+and rebellion, for all workers will use arguments such as the
+following ones recently put forward by Mr. Smillie, President of the
+Lanarkshire Miners' County Union. In reply to the reproach that
+miners, by unduly high wages, increased the cost of coal to the poor,
+Mr. Smillie answered: "Miners are being blamed in some quarters for
+the high price of coal. Their wages at present range from _6s. 6d._ to
+_8s._ per day, or from _30s._ to _2l. 5s._ per week when broken time
+is taken into consideration. Will anyone grudge an income of this kind
+to a worker whose labour is of a most uncomfortable and exhausting
+nature, and who takes his life in his hand from the moment he steps
+into the cage until he reaches the surface again? The miner recognises
+that high-priced coal means pinching and suffering in the homes of the
+poor, and he has real sympathy for this class, but he argues that the
+true value of coal must include a reasonable sustenance for those who
+risk their lives in its production."[1239] If miners claim higher
+wages than other workers because their work is uncomfortable and
+dangerous, railway workers, sailors, and many others will raise the
+same claims; fishers and butchers will claim higher wages because
+their work is disgusting; factory workers because their work is
+sedentary and monotonous; waiters because it is menial; postmen
+because they have to walk; drivers because they have to sit still;
+washerwomen because they have to stand; farm labourers because they
+have to work in the cold; bakers because they have to work in the
+heat, &c. All workers would of course demand the maximum pay, and who
+could adjudicate on all the rival claims? The Wages Question seems
+likely to prove insoluble.
+
+
+HOW WILL LABOUR BE ORGANISED AND DIRECTED?
+
+We are told: "Labour will be organised on principles of perfect
+freedom. Everyone decides for himself in which branch he desires to be
+employed. If a superfluity of workmen occur in one branch and a
+deficiency in another, it will be the duty of the executive to arrange
+matters and readjust the inequality."[1240] In accordance with the
+variations in demand and supply and the rise and decay of industries,
+the introduction of labour-saving machinery, &c., labour requires
+continual redistribution. That redistribution is at present
+automatically effected largely through the rise and fall of wages. A
+rise in the wages of industries which require more labour, and a
+decline in the wages of industries which require less labour, cause
+labour to turn from shrinking to growing industries. When wages are no
+longer fixed with reference to commercial demand and supply, how will
+the periodical and necessary redistribution of labour be effected?
+Some Socialist leaders think: "As the workers, of course, will not be
+drafted into the different branches of production under military
+compulsion, irrespective of their wishes, it may well turn out that
+some will have a superfluity of labour, while others will suffer from
+scarcity. The necessary equilibrium could then be restored by reducing
+the wages in those industries where the applicants are too many and by
+raising them in those where the applicants are too few, till each
+branch has just the number of workers which it requires. It could be
+restored also by other means; for instance, by the shortening of the
+hours of labour in those industries that are short of workers. With
+all that, however, the general rate of wages throughout the working
+class will be influenced no longer by supply and demand, but by the
+quantity of available products. A general fall of wages in consequence
+of over-production will be impossible."[1241] In other words, the
+beautiful schemes of remuneration independent of the laws of supply
+and demand discussed in the foregoing would immediately break down. In
+order to redistribute labour, workers would either have to be
+compelled by direct force to work in those trades which required
+additional labour, or their wages or hours of work would arbitrarily
+be altered in order to effect the necessary changes by economic
+pressure--that is, by reducing their food. In other words, commercial
+demand and supply would break down the Utopian regulations of the
+Socialist Commonwealth as soon as they had been framed.
+
+While some Socialists wish to distribute and redistribute labour by
+arbitrarily changing wages and hours of labour, some of the more
+logical and scientific Socialist leaders are frankly in favour of
+compulsory labour: "We already see official salaries regulated, not
+according to the state of the labour market, but by consideration of
+the cost of living. This principle we seek to extend to the whole
+industrial world. Instead of converting every man into an independent
+producer, working when he likes and as he likes, we aim at enrolling
+every able-bodied person directly in the service of the community for
+such duties and under such kind of organisation, local or national, as
+may be suitable to his capacity and social function. If a man wants
+freedom to work or not to work, just as he likes, he had better
+emigrate to Robinson Crusoe's island or else become a millionaire. To
+suppose that the industrial affairs of a complicated industrial State
+can be run without strict subordination and discipline, without
+obedience to orders, and without definite allowances for maintenance,
+is to dream, not of Socialism but of Anarchism."[1242] "Everyone
+should have a legal right to an opportunity of earning his living in
+the society in which he has been born; but no one should or could have
+the right to ask that he shall be employed at the particular job which
+suits his peculiar taste and temperament. Each of us must be prepared
+to do the work which society wants doing, or take the consequences of
+refusal."[1243] And what consequences would refusal to do the allotted
+work at the allotted pay entail? Either dismissal, which would mean
+starvation--for the State, as the sole employer, would control all
+employment and all the food--or bodily chastisement, or imprisonment.
+There could be no strike on the part of dissatisfied workers, for the
+State--that is, the officials--holding all the wealth, would be able
+to starve them out in a week.
+
+Socialists admit: "Mankind is as lazy as it dares to be."[1244] "In
+the average man there is a strong tendency to mere idleness and
+aimlessness which, but for the compulsions and temptations of
+existing circumstances, might run to great lengths. The trouble is
+that, while the average man is willing to work occasionally where his
+choice is free, he considers his lot a hard one if necessity compels
+him to continue regularly at a given task. He is willing to work at
+almost anything save that at which he is asked to work. It is a common
+thing to hear even good workmen profess a dislike to their
+trade."[1245]
+
+How will shirking and idling be prevented in the Socialist
+Commonwealth when men are no longer compelled by economic necessity
+and free competition to do their best?
+
+The leading American exponent of Socialism prophesies that workers
+will work no longer in order to live in comfort, but that they will
+henceforth see in work a semi-religious duty, which they perform owing
+to their strong sense of beneficence: "In the New Commonwealth the
+butcher will be conscious and satisfied that 'the essential thing is
+not that he shall have a living, but that meat shall be supplied.' The
+work of the citizen will be the willing performance of social office.
+He will be a worker whose best efforts, best ardour, and highest aims
+will be drawn out by his sense of the beneficence of his work, even
+though it be such a coarse routine of manual labour as machinery
+should soon remove altogether from human hands. He will be habituated
+to regard his wages, not as a _quid pro quo_, but as the provision
+made by society to enable him to carry out his labour."[1246] Will the
+"sense of beneficence" induce men who are not satisfied with the
+condition and remuneration of labour to transport milk and other
+provisions during the night so that the townspeople may have them
+early in the morning? Will men be induced by their sense of duty to
+clean the sewers? To ask these questions is to answer them. Bebel
+puts the question, "What becomes of the difference between the
+industrious and the idle, the intelligent and the stupid?" and
+answers, "There will be no such difference, because that which we
+associate with these conceptions will have ceased to exist."[1247] "If
+there is one vice more certain than another to be unpopular in a
+Socialist community, it is laziness. The man who shirked would find
+his mates making his position intolerable even before he suffered the
+doom of expulsion."[1248] Arguments such as the above should really
+not be placed before grown-up people. They are only fit for the
+nursery.
+
+The tendency towards lazing and idling, the desire to make money
+without exertion, is strongly developed in Great Britain. "The essence
+of gambling is the craving to obtain something from others without
+giving an equivalent."[1249] Perhaps in no country is betting and
+gambling in every form so much in evidence as it is in Great Britain.
+Betting on the turf, missing-word competitions, limerick competitions,
+&c., draw every year many millions of pounds from the pockets of
+millions of British workers. How then can the natural tendency of men
+to loaf and idle and to live rather by their wits than by their work,
+which is strong in all men, be overcome in the Socialist State of the
+future? The fundamental book of the Fabian Society, the most
+scientific Socialist body in Great Britain, tells us: "A very small
+share of the profits arising from associated labour acts as a
+tremendous stimulus to each individual producer,"[1250] and it
+suggests, as do many Socialist writers, that the workers will do their
+best because they know that the more they produce the greater will be
+their individual share in the general production. Great Britain has
+12,000,000 workers. Therefore a worker will make as his own share an
+extra sovereign if by extra exertion he succeeds in producing an
+extra _12,000,000l._ worth of goods, a feat the accomplishment of
+which will require several thousand years. That is a "tremendous
+stimulus" to the individual producer! Can any argument be more foolish
+than the foregoing one?
+
+An influential Socialist writer tells us: "The credits granted to the
+citizens will be equal in all cases, without reference to skill,
+intelligence, or the nature of the service performed; but no credits
+will be given to the able-bodied shirkers, who will thus be starved
+into doing their share of the world's work without other
+compulsion."[1251] Other Socialist writers have put forth similar
+views. This is a cheerful outlook for the free citizens of the free
+Socialist Commonwealth. The workers will become "wage-slaves" in the
+fullest sense of the term. They will have to submit to forced labour,
+arbitrary wages, and arbitrary hours of labour, and those who do not
+produce as much as the official overseers require--and they may have a
+private grudge against some unfortunate worker who does his best--will
+be starved until they work harder. The lot of savages ruled by the
+knout, the kourbash, and the sjambok will be preferable to the lot of
+men ruled by starvation in the free Socialist Commonwealth of the
+future. The former have at least some liberty, while the latter will
+be kept by officials, who will distribute food and force them to work
+by rewards of food alternated by starvation, like performing dogs and
+apes.
+
+To carry on the business of the country the Socialist Government would
+have to drop the principle of perfect freedom and to rely on coercion,
+and it would be justified in doing so. If, as Mr. Blatchford has
+repeatedly told us, "man has no right to himself because he did not
+make himself," if man belongs not to himself and his family, but to
+"society," it logically follows that society may compel him to work,
+apportioning to him his task and his pay, without reference to his
+wishes. Society being represented by its officials, elected or
+appointed, these officials would absolutely dispose of the people.
+Great Britain would be ruled like a gigantic convict prison.
+
+The spirit in which even moderate Socialists already contemplate the
+freedom of the individual may be seen from an address on Sweated
+Labour which Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., delivered in Glasgow in
+autumn 1907. He said: "There was no use tinkering with the problem.
+Personally, he was not in favour of home work at all. To eliminate it
+might seem a cold-blooded way of dealing with sweating, but it was the
+only way that would give definite and final results. He would,
+however, proceed carefully and scientifically. Home work had got
+extremes, but one section was much riper for treatment than the other,
+and he would begin with the worst. The first difficulty was to find
+out the sweated workers. It was certain that a great percentage
+escaped detection by sanitary inspectors. Now his proposal was that,
+instead of the sanitary inspectors hunting for the home worker, the
+home worker should hunt for the inspector; and this he sought to
+accomplish under the Bill introduced last session, by making it
+necessary for the home worker to take out a licence and by making it
+obligatory on the employer to keep an absolutely complete list of his
+workers. The factory inspector must have right of access, and a
+certificate must be obtained from him for a separate licence. The
+casual home-worker would be discouraged." In other words, factory
+inspectors should apparently be authorised to break without a search
+warrant into private houses. They should certainly be empowered to
+prosecute a working man if he defended the privacy of his house by
+refusing the inspector admittance. That measure would abolish the
+sanctity of the home. The "Right to Work," which the Socialists so
+loudly champion, would be taken from the home-worker, and one cannot
+help asking: Is that high-handed measure devised for the benefit of
+the sweated or for that of the highly paid workers, represented by Mr.
+Macdonald, who wish to abolish the competition of underpaid
+home-workers? Sweated labour can be abolished and must be abolished,
+and it can be abolished, as I may show in another book, without
+destroying the home. If Mr. Macdonald should have his way, the
+Socialist principle, "Property is robbery," will have to be
+supplemented with the principle "Liberty is tyranny."
+
+The unchecked absolutism of a Socialist State will hardly be palatable
+to Socialist workers who have been told that Socialism means freedom,
+and these see the only solution in the establishment of Anarchism:
+"The damnable idea of being marshalled and drilled or numbered and
+docketed like any other merchandise in a state of glorified capitalism
+is not the Socialist's ideal, but its antithesis, no matter what the
+capitalists and their protagonists, the pseudo-Socialists, choose to
+name it. We don't want to be driven to the gate of the municipal or
+other factory to hustle and elbow our fellows out of the way so that
+we may catch the official's eye in the mad and sordid scramble for
+mere belly food, for a mere animal subsistence. With the advent of
+Socialism, the whole of the capitalist State and its superstructure
+will collapse, with its cant of living wages, its Brotherhoods of Man,
+and the rest of its nauseous humbug."[1252] "If the worker continues
+to be paid in wages, he necessarily will remain the slave or the
+subordinate of the one to whom he is forced to sell his labour force;
+be the buyer a private individual or the State--it would still be an
+odious tyranny."[1253] "Socialism will entail compulsory service on
+all able-bodied members of the community, or rather the State. For
+that is what we shall have; the State with its hosts of
+functionaries, its big pots and its little pots, and its never-ending
+officialism and petty tyrannies. Organisation must either be
+compulsory or free. If compulsory, you have the military spirit with
+all its attendant evils; if free, you have the Anarchist spirit with
+all the advantages that arise when the fetters that hinder individual
+initiative and development are removed."[1254]
+
+The foregoing should suffice to show that the Socialist State could
+organise work only by relying on forced labour and by creating the
+most unbearable despotism which the world has seen, or by "organising"
+the chaos of Anarchism, and it is difficult to say which of the two
+would be the more hideous solution.
+
+
+HOW WILL THE SOCIALIST STATE BE GOVERNED?
+
+Socialists tell us rather vaguely: "Socialism means the elevation of
+the struggle for existence from the material to the intellectual
+plane. Socialism will raise the struggle for existence into a sphere
+where competition shall be emulation, where the treasures are
+boundless and eternal, and where the abundant wealth of one does not
+cause the poverty of another."[1255] "State employment, when the State
+itself is only an organised democracy and class distinctions cease,
+means not slavery, but freedom."[1256] "Freedom and equality will then
+be no longer empty and cheap phrases, but will have a meaning; when
+all men are really free and equal, they will honour and advance one
+another."[1257] "In Socialistic administrations there are no
+employers, no superiors, no oppression; all are equals and enjoy equal
+rights."[1258] "Under Socialism all the work of the nation would be
+managed by the nation."[1259] "Under Socialism the State, as we have
+known the State in the past, will have disappeared; for under
+Socialism there will be no classes, but all the people will form one
+class, and the Government and organisation will be democratic, each
+individual having an equal voice in directing the affairs of the
+common life."[1260] "The State will no longer be the bureaucratic
+State of to-day, but a democratic State assisted directly by the whole
+people."[1261] "All adult members of the commune, without distinction
+of sex, take part in the necessary elections, and determine to what
+persons the conduct of affairs shall be entrusted. There is no such
+thing as a hierarchical system."[1262] "Appointments will be made from
+below. In the Post Office Department, for example, the letter carriers
+will elect their immediate superiors; these, we will say, the
+post-masters; and these, in their turn, the Post-Master
+General."[1263]
+
+In other and plainer words, the Socialist State would, according to
+the authorities quoted, be ruled by the same system by which it is
+ruled at present, although elections might be more numerous, and
+although the suffrage might be given a wider basis. Now if the system
+of government remains the same as it is at present, is there any
+reason for anticipating better results than those obtained at present?
+Will the elected administrators no longer place personal and party
+interests above national ones? And will not the infinitely greater
+range of administrative functions make it more difficult to exercise
+control and to allocate responsibilities, and thus make
+irresponsibility, favouritism, dishonesty, and the evasion of
+punishment more easy and more frequent? Is a larger number of voters
+likely to pick out abler administrators than a small one? Does not the
+elective system, according to the Socialists themselves, cause the
+scum to rise to the top, and result in the election of plausible
+windbags?[1264] Are the people's votes never won by any other means
+than the testimony of results? Will there no longer be the fascination
+of eloquence, the attraction of boundless promises, the glamour of
+prejudice, the tie of party, the pressure put by an Association upon
+its members? If amateurs show now little ability in administering a
+few comparatively simple things, is it likely that results will be
+better when they have to administer everything? Will not amateur
+government prove an absolute failure?
+
+Most thinking Socialists clearly foresee that the Socialist State of
+the future could not possibly be administered by amateurs; that it
+would have to be administered by experts, by permanent officials; that
+Socialism would mean the death-knell of elected governors, and
+therefore of democracy, as may be seen in Chapter XV. of this book.
+The philosopher of British Socialism tells us: "Socialism aims at the
+supersession of democracy, as of every other form of government. The
+will of the majority of an ideal democracy, a social democracy, must,
+as regards its special expressions, be subordinate to the general
+moral canon of a Socialist Commonwealth. That in affairs of
+management, of tactics, of administration, or in decisions requiring
+special knowledge, authority, in its nature dictatorial, is necessary,
+all must admit. There must be a controlling, an authoritative voice in
+direction; so much must be clear, one would think, to all practical or
+reasonable persons when once stated. The real point to determine is
+the nature and limits of that amount of dictatorial power which, we
+must admit, is essential in any organised community of which we can at
+present conceive. _Social Democracy_, while it means all _for_ the
+people, does not mean the impossible absurdity that everything should
+be directly regulated _by_ the people, _i.e._ by a direct popular
+vote."[1265] These views seem irrefutable, and it follows that not
+only for economic reasons, but for political reasons as well, the
+establishment of the Socialist State will lead to the establishment of
+a "dictatorial authority."
+
+If Socialism be introduced, the fall of democracy and the
+establishment of absolutism cannot possibly be avoided. Democratic
+States are ruled by public opinion. The voice of an individual does
+not carry very far. Therefore public opinion can be formed only by
+means of an independent Press. An independent Press is the strongest,
+one might almost say the only, guarantee of national liberty. As long
+as there are numerous independent papers owned by private people,
+papers which represent all shades of opinion, everyone who has
+something to say can always freely express his opinion in one set of
+papers or the other. A striking speech is read the next day by the
+whole nation; a striking injustice to a single individual, or a
+Government blunder, may be taken up by the whole nation. The
+disappearance of private property will necessarily mean the
+disappearance of the free Press, and therefore of public opinion. All
+newspapers would be owned, edited, and printed by the Government, and
+is any Government likely to assist a hostile opposition by printing
+its views, and to assist in bringing about a revolution, probably
+accompanied by bloodshed and its own destruction? Such a thing has
+never been. Such a thing will never be. People might be dissatisfied
+and be ill-treated by the Socialist Government; they might be starved
+to death or shot by the thousand; there might be risings and
+rebellions and civil war in some parts of the country; the fleet might
+be defeated and the colonies lost--yet not a word need appear in the
+Socialist Government Press.
+
+Some Socialists are childish enough to argue: "Though the printing
+press will be a collective institution, it will be available to all.
+Anyone, whatever unpopular opinions he may entertain, however hostile
+to the administrators he may be, will be entitled to have anything
+decent printed, provided he is ready to pay for the work done, or to
+guarantee, or induce his friends to guarantee, that the cost will be
+defrayed."[1266] "It would always be open to individuals or to groups
+of individuals to publish anything they pleased on covering the cost
+of publication. With the comparative affluence which would be enjoyed
+by each member of the community, anyone who really cared to reach the
+public ear would be able to do so by diminishing his expenditure in
+other directions."[1267]
+
+The Government would certainly neither print, nor circulate through
+its post-office and newsagents, matter which it would consider to be
+dangerous to its existence or seditious. The assertion that a private
+individual in the Socialist Commonwealth might at his own expense
+circulate his views throughout the country--there would be no more
+millionaires but only wage-earners--is like asserting that a
+bricklayer might with his savings pay off the British National Debt.
+
+Lacking an independent public opinion, elections could be managed by
+the officials through the official Press in their own interest;
+elections would become a sham, and would no doubt soon fall into
+disuse. The official class would become a caste of hereditary rulers
+governing millions of serfs.
+
+The foregoing makes it clear that in political as in economic matters
+the Socialist State must fall a prey to the most complete absolutism
+which the world has known, an absolutism which probably, through a
+series of revolutions and civil wars, would at last end in anarchy. At
+present a dissatisfied worker can change his employer, he can get
+justice in the Law Courts, and in extreme cases he can put his
+grievances before the nation. In the Socialist State there would be
+only one authority--the all-controlling and all-powerful State, or
+rather an all-controlling and all-powerful bureaucracy. The nation
+would be composed of two classes: permanent officials possessing
+absolute power, and ordinary citizens possessing neither power nor
+right; overseers and workers; slave-drivers and slaves; and the only
+way of escaping the tyranny of the State--for absolute and unchecked
+power has always led, and will always lead, to tyranny--would be by
+committing suicide. As in Rome under the rule of Nero and Caligula,
+suicide would be the only way to liberty.
+
+A leading Socialist wrote with unconscious humour: "The Utopist needs
+no knowledge of facts. Indeed such a knowledge is a hindrance. For him
+the laws of social evolution do not exist. He is a law unto himself;
+and his men are not the wayward, spasmodic, irregular organisms of
+daily life, but automata obeying the strings he pulls. In a word, he
+creates, he does not construct. He makes alike his materials and the
+laws within which they work, adapting them all to an ideal end. In
+describing a new Jerusalem the only limits to its perfection are the
+limits of the writer's imagination.... Humanity will rise to heights
+undreamed of now; and the most exquisite Utopias, as sung by the poet
+and idealist, shall to our children seem but dim and broken lights
+compared with their perfect day. All that we need are Courage,
+Prudence, and Faith. Faith above all."[1268] Every reader of this book
+will no doubt heartily agree with the latter remark. Socialists are
+wise to appeal rather to blind faith than to plain common-sense.
+
+The philosopher of British Socialism tells us: "Socialism is the great
+modern protest against _un_reality, against the delusive shams which
+now masquerade as verities."[1269] Another Socialist leader asserts:
+"Socialism is a scientific scheme of national government entirely
+wise, just, and practical."[1270] A third leader affirms: "Socialism
+is neither more nor less than the science of Sociology."[1271] The
+"Socialist Catechism" asks: "How may Socialists reply to the taunt
+that their scheme is impracticable? By quoting the opinion of John
+Stuart Mill that the difficulties of Socialism are greatly overrated;
+and they should declare that, so far from being an impracticable
+Utopian scheme, it is the necessary and inevitable result of the
+historical evolution of society."[1272]
+
+Socialism stands condemned, not so much by the criticism of its
+opponents as by the doctrines and proposals of its leaders, and these
+are the men who aspire to rule the universe and who claim: "We mean
+the establishment of a political power in place of the present
+class-State, which shall have for its conscious and definite aim the
+common ownership and control of the _whole_ of the world's industry,
+exchange, &c."[1273]
+
+I think the readers of the foregoing pages will be inclined to believe
+that Socialism is methodised insanity.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1203] Kautsky, _Social Revolution_, p. 41.
+
+[1204] Socialism, _For and Against_, p. 7.
+
+[1205] Clemenceau, in Jaures' _Practical Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[1206] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[1207] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 42.
+
+[1208] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 5.
+
+[1209] Macdonald, _Socialism and Society_, p. 126.
+
+[1210] Ethel Snowden, _The Woman Socialist_, p. 7.
+
+[1211] Ford, _Woman and Socialism_, p. 2.
+
+[1212] Macdonald, _Socialism and Society_, pp. 122, 123.
+
+[1213] Sir Oliver Lodge, _Public Service_ v. _Private Expenditure_, p.
+11.
+
+[1214] Blatchford, _Not Guilty_, p. 37.
+
+[1215] _Ibid._ p. 251.
+
+[1216] See _ante_, Chapter XXIII.
+
+[1217] Herbert Spencer, _The Man versus the State_, p. 43.
+
+[1218] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 9.
+
+[1219] Ben Tillett, _Trades Unionism and Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[1220] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 30.
+
+[1221] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, p. 43.
+
+[1222] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_, p. 14.
+
+[1223] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 11.
+
+[1224] _Ibid._ p. 18.
+
+[1225] Ward, _Religion and Labour_, pp. 7, 8.
+
+[1226] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 77.
+
+[1227] Kautsky, _The Social Republic_, p. 32.
+
+[1228] Hazell, _Summary Marx's Capital_, p. 6.
+
+[1229] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and the Future_, p. 193.
+
+[1230] Sir Oliver Lodge, _Public Service versus Private Expenditure_,
+p. 10.
+
+[1231] _New Age_, November 21, 1907.
+
+[1232] See _ante_, p. 61 ff.
+
+[1233] Bax, _Outlooks from the New Standpoint_, p. 81.
+
+[1234] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 163, 164.
+
+[1235] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 91.
+
+[1236] Davidson, _The Old Order and the New_, p. 170.
+
+[1237] Morris, _Communism_, pp. 14, 15.
+
+[1238] _Independent Labour Party Song Book_, p. 40.
+
+[1239] _Forward_, October 12, 1907.
+
+[1240] Bebel, _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future_, pp. 183, 184.
+
+[1241] Kautsky, _The Social Revolution_, pp. 16, 17.
+
+[1242] Sidney Webb, _Socialism True and False_, pp. 17, 18.
+
+[1243] _Socialism and Labour Policy_, p. 7.
+
+[1244] _The Economics of Direct Employment_, p. 6.
+
+[1245] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, pp. 102, 103.
+
+[1246] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 169.
+
+[1247] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 194.
+
+[1248] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 167.
+
+[1249] Ward, _The Ideal City_, p. 7.
+
+[1250] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 167.
+
+[1251] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 91.
+
+[1252] _Socialist_, December 1907.
+
+[1253] Kropotkin, _Anarchism, its Philosophy and Ideal_, p. 15.
+
+[1254] _Freedom_, October 1907.
+
+[1255] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 1.
+
+[1256] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, p. 10.
+
+[1257] Sorge, _Socialism and the Worker_, p. 14.
+
+[1258] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 199.
+
+[1259] Blatchford, _Real Socialism_, p. 14.
+
+[1260] Snowden, _The Individual under Socialism_, p. 12.
+
+[1261] Jaures, _Practical Socialism_, p. 6.
+
+[1262] Bebel, _Woman_, p. 181.
+
+[1263] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 126.
+
+[1264] Thompson, _Hail Referendum_, pp. 3, 4.
+
+[1265] Bax, _Essays in Socialism_, pp. 75, 76.
+
+[1266] Gronlund, _Co-operative Commonwealth_, p. 135.
+
+[1267] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, p. 159.
+
+[1268] _Fabian Essays in Socialism_, pp. 149, 169.
+
+[1269] Bax, _Religion of Socialism_, p. ix.
+
+[1270] Blatchford, _Merrie England_, p. 100.
+
+[1271] Hyndman, _Socialism and Slavery_, Preface.
+
+[1272] Joynes, _The Socialist Catechism_.
+
+[1273] Bax and Quelch, _A New Catechism_, p. 9.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXXVII
+
+CONCLUSION
+
+
+The leading Socialists claim that Socialism is at the same time a
+scientific doctrine and a practical policy. A perusal of this book
+should suffice to prove that it is neither the one nor the other. On
+its scientific side it consists of twenty catch-phrases which are very
+effective for propaganda purposes, but which are contrary to general
+experience and to common-sense. On its practical side it consists of a
+number of fantastic proposals which are likewise contrary to general
+experience and to common-sense.
+
+Socialism has two faces. The one which is turned towards the cultured
+and towards the non-Socialists of the middle class constantly asserts
+that Socialism is a scientific and perfect system of well-ordered
+government and co-operation, which will evolve order and harmony out
+of the chaos of individualism and of competition, and which will raise
+men to the highest level of perfection. The other, which is turned
+towards the masses, and which is by far the more important, is purely
+predatory in character. It appeals to all the passions of the
+multitude. It denounces law, religion, charity, thrift, temperance,
+and all existing institutions. It preaches envy, hatred, greed,
+selfishness, violence, civil war, and general plunder. It sets class
+against class, and creates among its supporters a frame of mind which
+makes not for harmony, order, and co-operation, but for disorder,
+revolution, and anarchy.
+
+The followers of Socialism do not see in it a science. "With the
+speculative side of Socialism the average man has but a small concern;
+it is its common-sense which appeals to him. By inherited instinct we
+are all communists at heart."[1274] The attraction of Socialism to the
+masses lies in its promise of the spoliation of the rich and of the
+general division of their wealth. It is true that Socialists
+habitually and very emphatically protest that Socialism is not a
+system of robbery and of general division. It is true that Socialists
+merely propose that all private property should be transferred to the
+State by expropriation--which is a euphemism for confiscation--and
+that the State should manage it for the general good of the masses.
+However, that is a distinction without a difference. Property is
+valuable because of the income which it yields. Therefore it comes for
+all practicable purposes to the same, whether the Socialist leaders
+propose dividing all the private property or all the income derived
+from that property. A prominent Socialist writer has asked: "Is not
+honesty--the sense of right of possession in the fruits of our
+labour--the very basis of Socialism?"[1275] Regretfully one must
+answer that question with a very emphatic "No."
+
+Socialism is not a system of organisation and of national
+co-operation, but merely a plan of spoliation and of general division.
+That may clearly be seen from the fact that the Socialist leaders have
+not the slightest desire to create a Socialistic model commonwealth,
+and thus demonstrate the practical value of their highly speculative
+doctrines, in a new country where Socialism could be introduced
+peacefully, easily, and without a revolution, where co-operation and
+exchange would be comparatively simple because wants are simple, the
+commodities produced are few, and the opposition of vested interests
+would be _nil_. In spite of all these great advantages, the Socialist
+leaders prefer introducing Socialism into old countries where the
+confiscation of the existing property seems a shorter way to wealth
+than work, and where confiscation will have the most satisfactory
+results to the despoilers.
+
+We have seen that the various Socialistic organisations agree on
+hardly one point in their constructive policy. However, they
+absolutely agree in their main purpose--spoliation. On that point
+there is absolute unanimity among all the British Socialists, and they
+condemn State Socialism (see Chapter XXXII.) because State Socialism
+would not mean confiscation and general division. Besides, it would
+not enable the Socialist leaders to overturn the State and to seize
+the reins of Government. British Socialism is purely destructive in
+character, and if Socialism should ever be established in Great
+Britain it would lead not to national co-operation, but to civil war
+among the various Socialistic sections for the spoils, and to a series
+of sanguinary _coups d'etat_ similar to those which arose out of the
+great French Revolution.
+
+The "scientific" proposal of transferring all private property to the
+State, and of using that property for the common good, merely
+circumscribes the word and act of confiscation and of general
+division. Therefore we may say that Socialism has no scientific basis,
+unless we choose to call science a collection of fallacies expressed
+in involved terms so as to deceive the simple. Karl Marx was not a
+scientist but a professional demagogue and revolutionist, and his
+merit from the Socialists' point of view consists only in this, that
+he elaborated a formula of roundabout spoliation and general division,
+which he took from his Anarchist predecessors, and gave it a much
+needed, though rather transparent, cloak of scientific respectability.
+
+Socialism is, in the first place, a business proposition. Therefore,
+if it were practical, it should appeal particularly to business men.
+However, it is noteworthy that the loudest champions of British
+Socialism are not business men, of whom but few are to be found in the
+Socialist ranks, but pushing writers in search of self-advertisement,
+whose special domain is the highly spiced and the sensational, writers
+who, knowing that many people mistake eccentricity for genius and
+paradoxical absurdity for brilliancy, have discarded common-sense, let
+their imaginations run riot, and outbid one another for notoriety.
+
+The complaints of the Socialists about the unequal distribution of
+wealth are as old as is humanity itself. Since the earliest times
+demagogues have endeavoured to obtain a following by working upon the
+misery, envy, short-sightedness, and passions of the poor, by
+promising them equality and boundless wealth to be obtained by the
+simple process of seizing and dividing up the property of the
+well-to-do. The identical arguments and proposals which are now put
+forward in the name of Marx, and of modern "scientific" Socialism, as
+something new and original may be found throughout literature since
+the very dawn of history.[1276] However, history teaches us that,
+although countless Socialistic experiments have been made, all
+attempts at enriching the poor by spoliation and at creating an
+artificial equality among men have proved a failure. They have
+invariably ended in national ruin, and have left the masses poorer and
+more miserable than ever. The reason of this universal failure is
+obvious. Man cannot reconstruct Nature. He may violate, but cannot
+alter, the laws of Nature. Inequality rules throughout Nature, and it
+seems as little possible to equalise the fortunes, as it is to
+equalise the bodily and mental powers, of men. We all are the slaves
+of Nature. The inequality of natural gifts and the division of labour
+are the principal causes of the division of men into classes and of
+the unequal distribution of wealth. Nature is only governed by obeying
+her. We can certainly diminish poverty, but we cannot, for any length
+of time, maintain an artificial equality among naturally unequal men.
+
+The first duty of the State, as of the individual, is
+self-preservation. British Socialism, being by those teachings which
+it addresses to its supporters a revolutionary doctrine in the worst
+sense of the term, and therefore a purely destructive factor, must
+unconditionally be resisted and combated. However, at the same time
+all that can be done must be done to alleviate the distress of the
+British masses, which is undoubtedly very great, and which makes them
+exceedingly receptive to the revolutionary doctrines of Socialism. As
+it would require too much space to deal with the social problem in
+Great Britain in its entirety, only a few of the most important points
+can be touched upon.
+
+The greatest scourge of the British worker is no doubt irregular and
+ill-paid employment. The first step to improve his position is
+therefore to improve employment. Hence the most urgent reform is the
+revision of Great Britain's economic policy. Great Britain's present
+economic policy, Free Trade, was based upon the supposition that Great
+Britain, as Cobden prophesied, was, and always would remain, the
+workshop of the world; that other countries were compelled to buy
+British manufactures because British manufactures were as necessary to
+them as foreign foodstuffs are now to Great Britain. In 1846, when
+Free Trade was introduced, there was some reason for that supposition.
+Before the advent of electricity manufacturing was based exclusively
+upon coal. Great Britain's absolute predominance in manufacturing for
+the markets of the whole world immediately before the introduction of
+Free Trade may therefore best be seen from the following table:
+
+PRODUCTION OF COAL IN 1845[1277]
+
+               Quantity produced.      Percentage of
+                       Tons           world's production
+  Great Britain      31,500,000             64.2
+  Belgium             4,960,077             10.1
+  United States       4,400,000              8.9
+  France              4,141,617              8.4
+  Prussian States     3,500,000              7.0
+  Austrian States       659,340              1.4
+                     ----------             ----
+                     49,161,034              100
+
+The above table shows that Great Britain produced two-thirds of the
+world's coal, and the coal of most other countries was supposed to be
+unsuitable for manufacturing purposes. However, Great Britain produced
+not only two-thirds of the world's coal, but she produced likewise
+two-thirds of the world's iron, she consumed two-thirds of the world's
+cotton, and she possessed two-thirds of the world's shipping. Her
+railway mileage was greater than that of the whole Continent of
+Europe.[1278]
+
+Times have changed. Great Britain is no longer the workshop of the
+world. British manufactures are no longer indispensable to foreign
+countries. In the present age of steel, the production of steel is the
+best index of a nation's manufacturing eminence, and how greatly
+conditions have changed, and are still changing, to England's
+disadvantage may be seen from the following figures:
+
+OUTPUT OF STEEL
+
+         United States.  Germany.       Great Britain.
+            Tons            Tons           Tons
+  1890    4,277,000       2,127,000      3,679,000
+  1906   23,246,000      11,135,000      6,462,000
+
+Great Britain, which formerly produced nine-tenths of the world's
+steel, produces now little more than one-tenth of the world's steel.
+
+As Great Britain has to buy vast quantities of food and raw material
+from foreign countries, she must sell to foreign countries vast
+quantities of manufactured goods. However, market after market is
+being closed to her industries by ever-rising tariff walls, and the
+profits from her exports have been greatly diminished through foreign
+competition. Her home market has been reduced through the decay of her
+agriculture and the shrinkage of her agricultural population, and it
+is systematically spoiled by combinations of foreign manufacturers.
+Foreign syndicates determine not only the price of British wheat and
+meat, but of British iron and other manufactures too, and they
+endeavour to ruin the British industries completely. Great Britain,
+far from being the world's manufacturer, has become the world's
+dumping ground. From the richest country in the world she is rapidly
+becoming one of the poorer countries of the world. Her industries are
+suffering, and the result is bad times, low wages, irregular
+employment, unemployment, poverty, and distress. It is noteworthy
+that, on an average, unemployment among the skilled workers in
+free-trade Great Britain is always five times greater than it is in
+protectionist Germany;[1279] that British emigration per million is
+eleven times larger than German emigration; that German savings-banks
+deposits are four times larger than British savings-banks deposits,
+and that the former increase ten times faster than the latter.[1280]
+
+What can be done to improve the position of the British workers?
+Emigration on the largest scale has proved a palliative, but no
+remedy. During the last twenty years almost five million people have
+left Great Britain. Yet the labour market is as over-stocked, and
+unemployment and poverty are as great, as ever. Besides, the United
+States and the British colonies may not always be able to absorb the
+vast and ever-growing numbers of British unemployed workers.
+Employment and wages depend upon the prosperity of industries, and the
+prosperity of industries depends on a sufficiency of markets. The
+British industries have not a sufficiency of markets. Therefore the
+British population suffers from irregular employment, unemployment,
+and consequent want and misery; and want and misery among the British
+masses are likely to continue increasing and ever increasing until
+Great Britain adapts her economic policy to the altered circumstances
+of the time, protects the industries by which her workers live, and
+secures a sufficient outlet for their productions by preferential
+arrangements with the self-governing Dominions. Under the shelter of
+Protection at home and with the aid of preferential arrangements
+throughout the empire, Great Britain will be able vastly to extend her
+manufacturing industries. Great Britain has unrivalled facilities for
+manufacturing. Whilst the manufacturing centres of the United States,
+Germany, France, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Italy, and other countries
+lie far inland near their coalfields, Great Britain has the unique
+advantage of being able to manufacture on the seashore, where coal,
+iron, great manufacturing towns, and excellent harbours lie in close
+proximity. The potentialities of the British industries under fair
+conditions and under the wise care of a fostering Government are
+boundless.
+
+Under the shelter of Protection the rural industries of Great Britain
+may be revived, especially if the British peasantry be re-created. A
+hundred years ago the great agricultural authority, Arthur Young,
+wrote: "The magic of property turns sand into gold. Give a man a bleak
+rock, and he will turn it into a garden. Give him a nine years' lease
+of a garden, and he will convert it into a desert." Since the time
+when these words were written most European countries have created a
+freehold peasantry by buying out the landed proprietors and settling
+the rural labourers on the land, and Great Britain will be wise in
+following their example.
+
+The tripartite question of Fiscal Protection for the home market, of
+an Imperial Customs Union, and of Imperial Federation is not a party
+question. It is a question of life or death for Great Britain. It may
+soon become a question of prosperity or starvation for the masses.
+Great Britain stands at the parting of the ways. She must either
+protect and re-create her industries, federate with her colonies, and
+make the British Empire a reality, or sink into insignificance, and
+history knows no instance of a great nation becoming a small one
+without the most intense suffering to the masses of the people. Great
+Britain must either adopt that constructive and protective national
+policy which the greatest statesmen and Empire builders of modern
+times--Richelieu, Cromwell, Colbert, Lord Chatham, George Washington,
+Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, Stein, and Bismarck--have
+pursued, or she will share the fate of the great commercial world
+empires of the past, from Phoenicia to the Netherlands. She must
+either follow the policy of Mr. Chamberlain, build up the Empire and
+make it strong and prosperous, or that of revolutionary demagogues,
+who will wreck the Empire and drag Great Britain through plunder and
+ruin to destruction and anarchy.
+
+The experience of other industrial nations allows us to conclude that
+a wisely framed protective tariff will save the British industries and
+improve employment and wages. But better wages alone will not improve
+the position of the workers. A large part of the British working class
+must alter their personal habits, and especially their drinking
+habits. At present every rise in wages leads immediately to a great
+increase in the Drink Bill, and therefore benefits rather the brewer
+than the worker. "The strongest answer to the theory that poverty
+causes drink is the statistical fact that as wages rise general
+drunkenness follows, insanity increases, and criminal disorders due to
+drink keep pace with all three. Wherever one seeks for information
+dispassionately, one sees that drink does cause poverty to a greater
+extent, overwhelmingly so, than that poverty causes drink. Poverty is
+due to intemperance in varying degrees from twenty-five to fifty-one
+per cent, of cases and areas investigated."[1281] "The Committee on
+Physical Deterioration in 1904 declared that if the drink question
+were removed three-fourths of the difficulty with regard to poverty
+and deterioration would disappear with it."[1282] The drinking section
+of the working class spends _18l. 15s. 4d._ per family on drink,[1283]
+a sum much larger than that spent on rent. "There are two great causes
+of physical deterioration--these are dirt and drink. The former is
+responsible for nearly every form of disease. The latter is the direct
+cause of the vast number of defects."[1284] "The most urgently needed
+public health reform of the present day is not so much one of
+environment as one of personal life."[1285]
+
+Many British workmen are incredibly wasteful. When one visits
+public-houses and working-men's clubs, when one goes to racecourses,
+football or other matches, and music-halls, the British workers seem
+to be the richest in the world. When one looks at their homes, their
+clothes, and especially their savings, they seem to be the poorest in
+the world. British working men drink, waste, and gamble to a much
+greater extent than foreign working men. Therefore not only the higher
+paid American workers, but also the lower paid French, German, and
+Swiss workers, are better housed, better clothed, and better fed--and
+are therefore better off and healthier--than British workers.[1286]
+Besides, as their savings are much larger they are better able to
+stand a short spell of ill-luck or of bad times. Whether a working man
+is prosperous or poor, happy or unhappy, depends--under fair
+conditions of employment, which Protection should create--perhaps more
+on his personal habits and on those of his wife than on the actual
+amount he receives in wages. Social reform, to be effective, must be
+assisted in the home. The worker must aid the social reformer. Outside
+assistance alone will little benefit wasteful and improvident men who
+refuse to help themselves.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1274] Keir Hardie, _From Serfdom to Socialism_, pp. 33, 34.
+
+[1275] Leatham, _Socialism and Character_, p. 96.
+
+[1276] See Mencius' Works in Legge's _Chinese Classics_; Euripides,
+_The Suppliants_; Aristotle, _Politics_, vii. 5; Aristophanes,
+_Ecclesiazusae_ and _Plutus_; Plutarch, _Tiberius Gracchus_, 9;
+Livius, ii. 32; Sallust, _Catiline's Conspiracy_, 20, 23, 37-39;
+Virgil, _Georgics_, i. 125; Tibullus, i. 3, 35 Propertius, ii. 13,
+iii. 5, 11; Seneca, _Epistles_, 90, &c.
+
+[1277] Taylor, _Statistics of Coal_, p. xxi.
+
+[1278] See _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, 8th edition, 1853-1860,
+articles: Cotton, Iron, Railways; Meyer, _Konversations Lexikon_,
+1839-1855, article: Grossbritannien; Porter, _Progress of the Nation_,
+1847; MacCulloch, _British Empire_, 1846; MacCulloch, _Dictionary of
+Commerce_, 1847; Macgregor, _Commercial Statistics_, 1844-1850, &c.
+
+[1279] See _Board of Trade Labour Gazette_ and _Reichs Arbeitsblatt_.
+
+[1280] Ellis Barker, _Modern Germany_, 546 ff.
+
+[1281] Burns, _Labour and Drink_, pp. 15, 18.
+
+[1282] Newman, _The Health of the State_, p. 189.
+
+[1283] Whittaker, _Drink Problem_, p. 10.
+
+[1284] McMillan, _The Child and the State_, p. 4.
+
+[1285] Newman, _Health of the State_, p. 194.
+
+[1286] See _Reports of the Mosely Industrial Commission to the United
+States_; _The Brassworkers of Berlin and of Birmingham_; _The
+Gainsborough Commission, Life and Labour in Germany_; Horsfall, _The
+Improvement of the Dwellings--The Example of Germany_; Marr, _Housing
+Conditions in Manchester_; _City of Birmingham, Report of the Housing
+Committee_; Steele, _The Working Classes in France_; Rowntree and
+Sherwell, _The Temperance Problem_; Rowntree, _Poverty_; the
+publication of Charles Booth, &c.
+
+
+
+
+APPENDIX
+
+OFFICIAL PROGRAMMES OF THE SOCIALISTIC ORGANISATIONS
+
+
+SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC FEDERATION
+
+    _Programme and Rules as revised previous to the Annual
+        Conference held at the Labour Institute, Bradford, Easter
+        1906_
+
+_Object._--The Social-Democratic Federation is a part of the
+International Social-Democracy. It believes:--
+
+1. That the emancipation of the working class can only be achieved
+through the socialisation of the means of production, distribution,
+and exchange, and their subsequent control by the organised community
+in the interests of the whole people.
+
+2. That, as the proletariat is the last class to achieve freedom, its
+emancipation will mean the emancipation of the whole of mankind,
+without distinction of race, nationality, creed, or sex.
+
+3. That this emancipation can only be the work of the working class
+itself,[1287] organised nationally and internationally into a distinct
+political party, consciously striving after the realisation of its
+ideals: and, finally,
+
+4. That, in order to ensure greater material and moral facilities for
+the working class to organise itself and to carry on the class war,
+the following reforms must immediately be carried through:--
+
+
+IMMEDIATE REFORMS
+
+_Political._--Abolition of the Monarchy.
+
+Democratisation of the Governmental machinery, viz. Abolition of the
+House of Lords, Payment of Members of Legislative and Administrative
+bodies. Payment of Official Expenses of Elections out of the Public
+Funds, Adult Suffrage, Proportional Representation, Triennial
+Parliaments, Second Ballot, Initiative, and Referendum. Foreigners to
+be granted rights of citizenship after two years' residence in the
+country, without any fees. Canvassing to be made illegal. All
+elections to take place on one day, such day to be made a legal
+holiday and all premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquors
+to be closed.
+
+Legislation by the people in such wise that no legislative proposal
+shall become law until ratified by the majority of the people.
+
+Legislative and Administrative independence for all parts of the
+Empire.
+
+_Financial and Fiscal._--Repudiation of the National Debt.
+
+Abolition of all indirect taxation and the institution of a cumulative
+tax on all incomes and inheritances exceeding _300l._
+
+_Administrative._--Extension of the principle of Local
+Self-Government.
+
+Systematisation and co-ordination of the local administrative bodies.
+
+Election of all administrators and administrative bodies by Equal
+Direct Adult Suffrage.
+
+_Educational._--Elementary education to be free, secular, industrial,
+and compulsory for all classes. The age of obligatory school
+attendance to be raised to 16.
+
+Unification and systematisation of intermediate and higher education,
+both general and technical, and all such education to be free.
+
+State Maintenance for all attending State schools.
+
+Abolition of school rates; the cost of education in all State schools
+to be borne by the National Exchequer.
+
+_Public Monopolies and Services._--Nationalisation of the land and the
+organisation of labour in agriculture and industry under public
+ownership and control on co-operative principles.
+
+Nationalisation of the Trusts.
+
+Nationalisation of Railways, Docks, and Canals, and all great means of
+transit.
+
+Public ownership and control of Gas, Electric Light, and Water
+supplies, as well as of Tramway, Omnibus, and other locomotive
+services.
+
+Public ownership and control of the food and coal supply.
+
+The establishment of State and municipal banks and pawnshops and
+public restaurants.
+
+Public ownership and control of the lifeboat service.
+
+Public ownership and control of hospitals, dispensaries, cemeteries,
+and crematoria.
+
+Public ownership and control of the drink traffic.
+
+_Labour._--A legislative eight-hour working day, or 48 hours per week,
+to be the maximum for all trades and industries. Imprisonment to be
+inflicted on employers for any infringement of the law.
+
+Absolute freedom of combination for all workers, with legal guarantee
+against any action, private or public, which tends to curtail or
+infringe it.
+
+No child to be employed in any trade or occupation until 16 years of
+age, and imprisonment to be inflicted on employers, parents, and
+guardians who infringe this law.
+
+Public provision of useful work at not less than trade union rates of
+wages for the unemployed.
+
+Free State Insurance against sickness and accident, and free and
+adequate State pensions or provision for aged and disabled workers.
+Public assistance not to entail any forfeiture of political rights.
+
+The legislative enactment of a minimum wage of _30s._ for all workers.
+Equal pay for both sexes for the performance of equal work.
+
+_Social._--Abolition of the present workhouse system, and reformed
+administration of the Poor Law on a basis of national co-operation.
+
+Compulsory construction by public bodies of healthy dwellings for the
+people; such dwellings to be let at rents to cover the cost of
+construction and maintenance alone, and not to cover the cost of the
+land.
+
+The administration of justice and legal advice to be free to all;
+justice to be administered by judges chosen by the people; appeal in
+criminal cases; compensation for those innocently accused, condemned,
+and imprisoned; abolition of imprisonment for contempt of court in
+relation to non-payment of debt in the case of workers earning less
+than _2l._ per week; abolition of capital punishment.
+
+_Miscellaneous._--The disestablishment and disendowment of all State
+Churches.
+
+The abolition of standing armies, and the establishment of national
+citizen forces. The people to decide on peace and war.
+
+The establishment of international courts of arbitration.
+
+The abolition of courts-martial; all offences against discipline to be
+transferred to the jurisdiction of civil courts.
+
+
+INDEPENDENT LABOUR PARTY
+
+_Constitution and Rules. 1907-8_
+
+_Object._--An Industrial Commonwealth founded upon the Socialisation
+of Land and Capital.
+
+_Methods._--The education of the community in the principles of
+Socialism.
+
+The Industrial and Political Organisation of the Workers.
+
+The Independent Representation of Socialist Principles on all elective
+bodies.
+
+_Programme._--The true object of industry being the production of the
+requirements of life, the responsibility should rest with the
+community collectively, therefore:
+
+The land, being the storehouse of all the necessaries of life, should
+be declared and treated as public property.
+
+The capital necessary for industrial operations should be owned and
+used collectively.
+
+Work, and wealth resulting therefrom, should be equitably distributed
+over the population.
+
+As a means to this end, we demand the enactment of the following
+measures:
+
+1. A maximum of 48 hours working week, with the retention of all
+existing holidays, and Labour Day, May 1, secured by law.
+
+2. The provision of work to all capable adult applicants at recognised
+trade union rates, with a statutory minimum of sixpence per hour.
+
+In order to remuneratively employ the applicants, Parish, District,
+Borough, and County Councils to be invested with powers to:
+
+      (_a_) Organise and undertake such industries as they may
+          consider desirable.
+
+      (_b_) Compulsorily acquire land; purchase, erect, or
+          manufacture buildings, stock, or other articles for
+          carrying on such industries.
+
+      (_c_) Levy rates on the rental values of the district, and
+          borrow money on the security of such rates for any of the
+          above purposes.
+
+3. State pensions for every person over 50 years of age, and adequate
+provision for all widows, orphans, sick, and disabled workers.
+
+4. Free secular, moral, primary, secondary, and university education,
+with free maintenance while at school or university.
+
+5. The raising of the age of child labour, with a view to its ultimate
+extinction.
+
+6. Municipalisation and public control of the drink traffic.
+
+7. Municipalisation and public control of all Hospitals and
+Infirmaries.
+
+8. Abolition of indirect taxation and the gradual transference of all
+public burdens on to unearned incomes with a view to their ultimate
+extinction.
+
+The Independent Labour Party is in favour of adult suffrage, with full
+political rights and privileges for women, and the immediate extension
+of the franchise to women on the same terms as granted to men; also
+triennial Parliaments and second ballot.
+
+
+THE LABOUR PARTY
+
+has no official programme. A semi-official programme, contained in a
+statement of its Secretary, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P., will be found
+on page 425 of this book.
+
+
+THE FABIAN SOCIETY
+
+_Basis._--The Fabian Society consists of Socialists.
+
+It therefore aims at the reorganisation of Society by the emancipation
+of Land and Industrial Capital from individual and class ownership,
+and the vesting of them in the community for the general benefit. In
+this way only can the natural and acquired advantages of the country
+be equitably shared by the whole people.
+
+The Society accordingly works for the extinction of private property
+in Land and of the consequent individual appropriation, in the form of
+Rent, of the price paid for permission to use the earth, as well as
+for the advantages of superior soils and sites.
+
+The Society, further, works for the transfer to the community of the
+administration of such industrial Capital as can conveniently be
+managed socially. For, owing to the monopoly of the means of
+production in the past, industrial inventions and the transformation
+of surplus income into Capital have mainly enriched the proprietary
+class, the worker being now dependent on that class for leave to earn
+a living.
+
+If these measures be carried out, without compensation (though not
+without such relief to expropriated individuals as may seem fit to the
+community), Rent and Interest will be added to the reward of labour,
+the idle class now living on the labour of others will necessarily
+disappear, and practical equality of opportunity will be maintained by
+the spontaneous action of economic forces with much less interference
+with personal liberty than the present system entails.
+
+For the attainment of these ends the Fabian Society looks to the
+spread of Socialist opinions, and the social and political changes
+consequent thereon, including the establishment of equal citizenship
+for men and women. It seeks to achieve these ends by the general
+dissemination of knowledge as to the relation between the individual
+and Society in its economic, ethical, and political aspects.
+
+
+THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF GREAT BRITAIN
+
+_Object._--The establishment of a system of society based upon the
+common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments
+for producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of the
+whole community.
+
+DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES
+
+The Socialist Party of Great Britain holds that society as at present
+constituted is based upon the ownership of the means of living (_i.e._
+land, factories, railways, &c.) by the capitalist or master class, and
+the consequent enslavement of the working class, by whose labour alone
+wealth is produced.
+
+That in society, therefore, there is an antagonism of interests,
+manifesting itself as a class struggle, between those who possess but
+do not produce, and those who produce but do not possess.
+
+That this antagonism can be abolished only by the emancipation of the
+working class from the domination of the master class, by the
+conversion into the common property of society of the means of
+production and distribution, and their democratic control by the whole
+people.
+
+That as in the order of social evolution the working class is the last
+class to achieve its freedom, the emancipation of the working class
+will involve the emancipation of all mankind, without distinction of
+race or sex.
+
+That this emancipation must be the work of the working class itself.
+
+That as the machinery of government, including the armed forces of the
+nation, exists only to conserve the monopoly by the capitalist class
+of the wealth taken from the workers, the working class must organise
+consciously and politically for the conquest of the powers of
+government, national and local, in order that this machinery,
+including these forces, may be converted from an instrument of
+oppression into the agent of emancipation, and the overthrow of
+privilege, aristocratic and plutocratic.
+
+That as all political parties are but the expression of class
+interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically
+opposed to the interests of all sections of the master class, the
+party seeking working-class emancipation must be hostile to every
+other party.
+
+The Socialist Party of Great Britain, therefore, enters the field of
+political action determined to wage war against all other political
+parties, whether alleged labour or avowedly capitalist, and calls upon
+the members of the working class of this country to muster under its
+banner to the end that a speedy termination may be wrought to the
+system which deprives them of the fruits of their labour, and that
+poverty may give place to comfort, privilege to equality, and slavery
+to freedom.
+
+
+PLATFORM OF THE SOCIALIST LABOUR PARTY
+
+The Socialist Labour Party is a political organisation seeking to
+establish political and social freedom for all, and seeing in the
+conquest by the Socialist Working Class of all the governmental and
+administrative powers of the nation the means to the attainment of
+that end.
+
+It affirms its belief that political and social freedom are not two
+separate and unrelated ideas, but are two sides of the one great
+principle, each being incomplete without the other.
+
+The course of society politically has been from warring but democratic
+tribes within each nation to a united government under an absolutely
+undemocratic monarchy. Within this monarchy again developed revolts
+against its power, revolts at first seeking to limit its prerogatives
+only, then demanding the inclusion of certain classes in the
+governing power, then demanding the right of the subject to criticise
+and control the power of the monarch, and finally, in the most
+advanced countries this movement culminated in the total abolition of
+the monarchical institution, and the transformation of the subject
+into the citizen.
+
+In industry a corresponding development has taken place. The
+independent producer, owning his own tools and knowing no master, has
+given way before the more effective productive powers of huge capital,
+concentrated in the hands of the great capitalist. The latter,
+recognising no rights in his workers, ruled as an absolute monarch in
+his factory. But within the realm of capital developed a revolt
+against the power of the capitalist. This revolt, taking the form of
+trade unionism, has pursued in the industrial field the same line of
+development as the movement for political freedom has pursued in the
+sphere of national government. It first contented itself with protests
+against excessive exactions, against all undue stretchings of the
+power of the capitalist; then its efforts broadened out to demands for
+restrictions upon the absolute character of such power, _i.e._, by
+claiming for trade unions the right to make rules for the workers in
+the workshop; then it sought to still further curb the capitalist's
+power by shortening the working day, and so limiting the period during
+which the toiler may be exploited. Finally, it seeks by Boards of
+Arbitration to establish an equivalent in the industrial world for
+that compromise in the political world by which, in constitutional
+countries, the monarch retains his position by granting a parliament
+to divide with him the duties of governing, and so hides while
+securing his power. And as in the political history of the race the
+logical development of progress was found in the abolition of the
+institution of monarchy, and not in its mere restriction, so in
+industrial history the culminating point to which all efforts must at
+last converge lies in the abolition of the capitalist class, and not
+in the mere restriction of its powers.
+
+The Socialist Labour Party, recognising these two phases of human
+development, unites them in its programme, and seeks to give them a
+concrete embodiment by its demand for a Socialist Republic.
+
+It recognises in all past history a preparation for this achievement,
+and in the industrial tendencies of to-day it hails the workings out
+of those laws of human progress which bring that object within our
+reach.
+
+The concentration of capital in the form of trusts at the same time as
+it simplifies the task we propose that society shall undertake, viz.
+the dispossession of the capitalist class, and the administration of
+all land and instruments of industry as social property, of which all
+shah be co-heirs and owners.
+
+As to-day the organised power of the State theoretically guarantees to
+every individual his political rights, so in the Socialist Republic
+the power and productive forces of organised society will stand
+between every individual and want, guaranteeing that right to life
+without which all other rights are but mockery.
+
+Short of the complete dispossession of the capitalist class which this
+implies there is no hope for the workers.
+
+SPEED THE DAY.
+
+
+THE CHRISTIAN SOCIAL UNION
+
+The Union consists of members of the Church of England who have the
+following objects at heart:--
+
+1. To claim for the Christian law the ultimate authority to rule
+social practice.
+
+2. To study in common how to apply the moral truths and principles of
+Christianity to the social and economic difficulties of the present
+time.
+
+3. To present Christ in practical life as the living Master and King,
+the enemy of wrong and selfishness, the power of righteousness and
+love.
+
+
+THE CHURCH SOCIALIST LEAGUE
+
+_Principles._--The Church has a mission to the whole of human life,
+Social and Individual, Material and Spiritual.
+
+2. The Church can best fulfil its social mission by acting together in
+its corporate capacity.
+
+3. To this end the members of the League accept the principles of
+Socialism.
+
+_Object._--To secure the corporate action of the Church on these
+principles.
+
+_Method._--1. To cultivate by the regular use of prayer and sacraments
+the life of brotherhood.
+
+2. Members undertake to help each other in fulfilling the object of
+the League by speaking and lecturing and in other ways.
+
+3. Members shall co-operate as far as possible to secure the
+consideration of social questions at their various Ruridecanal and
+Diocesan Conferences and the election of Socialists on these and other
+representative bodies.
+
+4. Members shall work for the disestablishment of the patron and the
+substitution of the Church in each parish in conjunction with the
+Church in the diocese in the patron's place.
+
+5. To secure the representation of the wage-earning classes upon all
+the representative bodies of the Church.
+
+
+GUILD OF ST. MATTHEW
+
+_Objects._--1. To get rid, by every possible means, of the existing
+prejudices, especially on the part of "Secularists," against the
+Church, her sacraments and her doctrines: and to endeavour to "justify
+God to the people."
+
+2. To promote frequent and reverent worship in the Holy Communion, and
+a better observance of the teaching of the Church of England as set
+forth in the Book of Common Prayer.
+
+3. To promote the study of social and political questions in the light
+of the Incarnation.
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1287] This paragraph is not to be understood as debarring individual
+members of the possessing classes from participating in the work of the
+movement.
+
+
+
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY
+
+OF BOOKS, PAMPHLETS, PERIODICALS, REPORTS, AND PAPERS QUOTED IN THIS
+VOLUME
+
+
+_Abolition of Poor Law Guardians._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+ADAMS, FRANCIS: "_The Mass of Christ._" Labour Press Society.
+  Manchester.
+
+_The Advance of Socialism._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_After Bread--Education._ Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+_Allotments, and How to Get Them._ Fabian Society. London. 1894.
+
+_An Appeal to Soldiers._ (Leaflet.) Social Democratic Federation.
+  London.
+
+_Are You a Socialist?_ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.
+  1907.
+
+AVELING, E.M.: _The Working-class Movement in England._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1896.
+
+BAKOUNINE: _Dieu et l'Etat._ Paris. 1895.
+
+_Ball, John, Priest and Prophet of the Peasants' Revolt._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London.
+
+BALL, SYDNEY: _The Moral Aspects of Socialism._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1896.
+
+BARKER, J. ELLIS: _Modern Germany._ Smith, Elder & Co. London. 1907.
+
+_Battersea Vanguard._ (Monthly Newspaper.) Battersea Socialist
+  Council, Battersea. London.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _Essays in Socialism._ Grant Richards. London.
+  1907.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _Ethics of Socialism._ Swan Sonnenschein. London.
+  1902.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _Outlooks from the New Standpoint._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London. 1903.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _The Religion of Socialism._ Swan Sonnenschein.
+  London. 1902.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT: _A Short History of the Paris Commune._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+BAX, E. BELFORT, and H. QUELCH: _New Catechism of Socialism._
+  Twentieth Century Press. 1907.
+
+BEBEL, AUGUST: _Woman in the Past, Present, and Future._ William
+  Reeves. London.
+
+BENSON, T.D.: _Socialism._ Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+BENSON, T.D.: _Socialism and Service._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+BENSON, T.D.: _Woman, the Communist._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+_A Bill to Provide Work through Public Authorities for Unemployed
+  Persons._ Independent Labour Party. London. 1907.
+
+_Birmingham Housing Committee, Report._ Jones Ltd. Birmingham. 1906.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Britain for the British._ Clarion Press. London.
+  1902.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Clarion Ballads._ Clarion Newspaper Co. London.
+  1896.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _"Competition": a Plain Lesson for the Workers._
+  Clarion Press. London. 1906.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _God and My Neighbour._ Clarion Press. London. 1907.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Land Nationalisation._ Clarion Press. London. 1906.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Merrie England._ Clarion Office. London. 1894.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Not Guilty: a Defence of the Bottom Dog._ Clarion
+  Press. London. 1906.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _The Pope's Socialism._ Clarion Office. London.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Real Socialism: What it Is, and what it is Not._
+  Clarion Press. London. 1907.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Socialism: a Reply to the Encyclical of the Pope._
+  Clarion Office. London.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _Some Tory Socialisms._ Clarion Newspaper. London.
+  1895.
+
+BLATCHFORD, R.: _What is this Socialism._ London Clarion Scouts.
+  London. 1907.
+
+BLISS: _Encyclopedia of Social Reform._ Funk & Wagnalls Company. New
+  York. 1897.
+
+BLOCK: _Dictionnaire General de la Politique._ O. Lorenz. Paris.
+  1863.
+
+BROCKHAUS: _Konversations-Lexikon._ Brockhaus. Berlin. 1901-1903.
+
+_Brassworkers, The, of Berlin and of Birmingham._ King & Son.
+  London. 1905.
+
+BURNS, JOHN: _Labour and Drink._ Lees and Raper Memorial Trustees.
+  London.
+
+_Burns, John, and the Unemployed._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+BURNS, JOHN: _The Man with the Red Flag._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+_Capital and Land._ Fabian Society. London. 1904.
+
+_The Case for an Eight Hours Bill._ Fabian Society. London. 1891.
+
+_The Case for a Legal Minimum Wage._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+"CASEY": _Who are the Bloodsuckers?_ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+_Christliche Arbeiterpflichten._ Buchhandlung Vorwaerts. Berlin.
+  1905.
+
+_The Church and Socialism._ The Church Family Newspaper. London.
+  1907.
+
+_Clarion_. (Weekly Paper.) Clarion Newspaper Co. London.
+
+_Clarion Song Book._ Clarion Press. London. 1907.
+
+_The Class War._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+
+_The Clerk._ (Monthly Paper.) Speaight & Sons. London.
+
+CLIFFORD, Rev. JOHN: _Socialism and the Teaching of Christ._ Fabian
+  Society. London. 1897 and 1906.
+
+_Commercialism and Child Labour: an Indictment and Some Remedies._
+  Independent Labour Party. London. 1900.
+
+CONNELL, JOHN: _Socialism and the Survival of the Fittest._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+_Cottage Plans and Common Sense._ Fabian Society. London. 1902.
+
+COX, HAROLD: _Socialism in the House of Commons._ Longmans, Green &
+  Co. London. 1907.
+
+_Daily Mail Year Book._ Associated Newspapers, Ltd. London. 1908.
+
+DAVIDSON, J. MORRISON: _Book of Lords._ Henderson's. London. 1907.
+
+DAVIDSON, J. MORRISON: _Christ, State, and Commune._ C.W. Daniel.
+  London. 1906.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _The Democrat's Address._ William Reeves. London.
+  1892.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _Free Rails and Trams._ William Reeves. London.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _Free Trade versus Fettered Transport._ Francis
+  Riddell Henderson, London. 1904.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _Gospel of the Poor._ 4th edit. Francis Riddell
+  Henderson. London.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _New Book of Kings._ Francis Riddell Henderson.
+  London. 1902.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _The Old Order and the New._ 7th edit. Francis
+  Riddell Henderson. London.
+
+DAVIDSON, J.M.: _Useless, Dangerous, Ought to be Abolished._ William
+  Reeves. London.
+
+DAW, GEORGE W., M.N.S.: _Socialism, Unmasked._ Anti-Socialist Press.
+  London.
+
+"_The Deadly Parallel._" (Monthly Paper.) Henderson. London.
+
+DEARMER, Rev. PERCY: _Socialism and Christianity._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_Debate, April 17, 1884_: _Will Socialism Benefit the English
+  People?_ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+DEBS, E.V.: _Industrial Unionism._ Socialist Labour Press.
+  Edinburgh. 1907.
+
+DE LEON, DANIEL: _Reform or Revolution._ Socialist Labour Press.
+  Edinburgh. 1906.
+
+_Deputation of Unemployed to the Right Hon. A.J. Balfour on November
+  6, 1905._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1905.
+
+DIACK, W.: _Socialism and Current Politics._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London.
+
+DODD, F. LAWSON: _Municipal Milk and Public Health._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1905.
+
+_The Economics of Direct Employment._ Fabian Society. London. 1900
+  and 1906.
+
+_Eight Hours by Law._ Fabian Society. London. 1893 and 1906.
+
+ELTZBACHER, PAUL: _Der Anarchismus._ Guttentag. Berlin. 1899.
+
+ENGELS, FREDERICK: _Socialism Utopian and Scientific._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London. 1892.
+
+_English Progress towards Social Democracy._ Fabian Society. London.
+  1892 and 1906.
+
+_Fabian Election Manifesto, 1892._ Fabian Society. London. 1892.
+
+_Fabian Essays in Socialism._ Walter Scott. London.
+
+_Fabian Society, Twenty-fourth Annual Report._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_Fabianism and the Fiscal Question: an Alternative Policy._ Fabian
+  Society. London. 1904.
+
+_Facts for Socialists._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+FISHER, F. VICTOR: "_The Babies' Tribute._" Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+FORD, Miss I.O.: _Women and Socialism._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+"_Forward._" (Weekly Newspaper.) Glasgow.
+
+_"Freedom": a Journal of Anarchist Communism._ (Monthly Newspaper.)
+  London.
+
+_The Free Feeding of School Children._ Reprinted from "The Lancet."
+  Offices of "The Lancet." London. 1907.
+
+_Gainsborough Commission: Report on Life and Labour in Germany._
+  Simpkin, Marshall. London. 1907.
+
+GLASIER, KATHERINE BRUCE: _Socialism for Children._ Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+GLASIER, LIZZIE, and RUSSELL, ALFRED: _Socialist Sunday Schools and
+  Our Methods_. Civic Press. Glasgow. 1907.
+
+GLYDE, Councillor: _Britain's Disgrace_. Wadsworth & Co., Rydal
+  Press. Keighley.
+
+GLYDE, Councillor: _Liberal and Tory Hypocrisy_. Wadsworth & Co.,
+  Rydal Press. Keighley.
+
+GLYDE, Councillor: _The Misfortune of being a Working Man_.
+  Wadsworth & Co., Rydal Press. Keighley.
+
+GLYDE, Councillor: _A Peep behind the Scenes on a Board of
+  Guardians_. Wadsworth & Co., Rydal Press. Keighley.
+
+GRIFFIN, T.H.: _A Municipal Bread Supply_. Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+GRONLUND, LAURENCE: _The Co-operative Commonwealth_. Edited by
+  George Bernard Shaw. William Reeves. London.
+
+GUYOT, YVES: _La Banqueroute du Socialisme Scientifique_. Felix
+  Alcan. Paris. 1907.
+
+GUYOT, YVES: _Les Principes du Collectivisme_. Bureau de l'Acacia.
+  Paris. 1907.
+
+GUYOT, YVES: _Pretensions of Socialism_. Liberty and Property
+  Defence League. London. 1895.
+
+HALL, LEONARD: _Land, Labour, and Liberty_. Clarion Newspaper Co.
+  London. 1899.
+
+HALL, LEONARD: _Old and New Unionism_. Labour Press Society.
+  Manchester. 1894.
+
+_Handbuch fuer Sozialdemokratische Waehler_. Buchhandlung Vorwaerts.
+  Berlin. 1903.
+
+HARDIE, KEIR: _Can a Man be a Christian on a Pound a Week?_
+  Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+HARDIE, KEIR: _The Citizenship of Women: a Plea for Women's
+  Suffrage_. Independent Labour Party. 1906.
+
+HARDIE, KEIR: _From Serfdom to Socialism_. George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+HARDIE, KEIR: _John Bull and His Unemployed_. Independent Labour
+  Party. London. 1905.
+
+HARE, W.L.: _Famine in India: its Causes and Effects._ P.S. King &
+  Son. London.
+
+HAZELL, A.P.: _The Red Catechism for Socialist Children._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+HAZELL, A.P.: _A Summary of Marx's "Capital."_ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1907.
+
+HEADLAM, STEWART D.: _Christian Socialism._ Fabian Society. London.
+  1907.
+
+HEADLAM, STEWART D.: _The Socialist's Church._ George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+HIRD, DENNIS: _From Brute to Brother._ Clarion Press. London. 1907.
+
+HOBART, H.W.: _Social-Democracy._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+  1907.
+
+HORSFALL, T.C.: _The Improvement of the Dwellings and Surroundings
+  of the People._ University Press. Manchester. 1904.
+
+_Houses for the People._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+_How to Finance Municipal Enterprises._ Co-operative Brotherhood
+  Trust, Limited. London.
+
+_How to Lose and How to Win an Election._ (Fabian Tract.) Fabian
+  Society. London.
+
+_How Trade Unions Benefit Workmen._ Fabian Society. London.
+
+HYDER, JOSEPH: _The Case for Land Nationalisation._ Land
+  Nationalisation Society. London. 1907.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Colonies and Dependencies._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1904.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Darkness and Dawn of May Day._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1907.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _The Historical Basis of Socialism in England._ Paul.
+  London. 1883.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: "_Real Reform._" Nuttall & Co. Burnley.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Social Democracy: The Basis of its Principles and
+  the Causes of its Success._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Socialism and Slavery._ William Reeves. London.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _The Transvaal War and the Degradation of England._
+  London. 1899.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Unrest in India._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+  1907.
+
+HYNDMAN, H.M.: _Will Socialism Benefit the English People?_
+  Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+_Imperialism: its Meaning and its Tendency._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London. 1900.
+
+_Independent Labour Party Report._ Independent Labour Party. London.
+  May 1907.
+
+_Independent Labour Party Song Book._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+_Independent Labour Party: a Statement of Principles._ (Leaflet.)
+  Independent Labour Party. London. 1907.
+
+_Independent Labour Party Year Book._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London. 1908.
+
+IRVING, DAN: _The Municipality, from a Worker's Point of View._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+JACKSON, HOLBROOK: _Bernard Shaw._ Grant Richards. London. 1907.
+
+JAMESON, WILLIAM: _Land Lessons for Town Folk._ Clarion Newspaper
+  Co. London. 1896.
+
+JAURES, JEAN: _Practical Socialism._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1906.
+
+JAURES, JEAN: _Studies in Socialism._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London. 1907.
+
+JOHNSTON, THOS., and HUGH ADAM: _The Railway Difficulty, and How to
+  Solve it._ Forward Printing and Publishing Co., Limited. Glasgow.
+
+JONES, T.I.: _Mining Royalties and all about Them._ Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+JOWETT, F.W.: _The Socialist and the City._ George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+JOYNES, J.L.: _The Socialist Catechism._ W. Reeves. London.
+
+_Justice._ (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Social-Democratic
+  Federation. London.
+
+KAUTSKY, KARL: _The Class Struggle._ Socialist Labour Press.
+  Edinburgh. 1907.
+
+KAUTSKY, KARL: _The Socialist Republic._ Socialist Labour Press.
+  Edinburgh. 1907.
+
+KAUTSKY, KARL: _The Social Revolution, and on the Morrow of the
+  Social Revolution._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+KESSACK, J.O. CONNOR: _The Capitalist Wilderness and the Way Out._
+  Glasgow Clarion Scouts. Glasgow. 1907.
+
+KIRTLAN, Rev. E.J.B.: _Socialism for Christians._ Northampton
+  Pioneer and Publishing Co. Northampton. 1907.
+
+KROPOTKIN, PETER: _Anarchism: its Philosophy and Ideal._ T.H. Keell.
+  London. 1907.
+
+KROPOTKIN, PETER: _La Conquete du Pain._ Paris. 1895.
+
+KROPOTKIN, PETER: _Paroles d'un Revolte._ Paris.
+
+KROPOTKIN, PETER: _Wage System._ T.H. Keell. London.
+
+_Labour Church Hymn Book._ Labour Church Union. Bradford. 1907.
+
+_Labour Gazette._ (Official Monthly.) Board of Trade. London.
+
+_Labour Leader._ (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Independent
+
+_Labour Party._ Labour Leader, Limited. London.
+
+_A Labour Policy for the Public Authorities._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1899.
+
+LAFARGUE, PAUL: _Right to Leisure._ Labour Literature Society.
+  Glasgow. 1893.
+
+LANSBURY, GEORGE: _The Principles of the English Poor Law._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London. 1897.
+
+L'AUTON, J.T.: _The Nationalisation of Society._ Modern Press.
+  London. 1887.
+
+LEAKEY, JAMES: _Co-operators and the Labour Platform._ Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _The Class War._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _Commune of Paris: its Story and Meaning._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _The Evolution of the Fourth Estate._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _Lives of the Chicago Martyrs._ Leatham. Aberdeen.
+  1891.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _Socialism and Character._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1897.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _An Up-to-date View of the French Revolution._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+LEATHAM, JAMES: _Was Jesus a Socialist?_ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+LEE, H.W.: _First of May: The International Labour Day._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1900.
+
+LISTER, The Hon. C.A.: _Riches and Poverty._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+_Local Government in Ireland._ Fabian Society. London. 1900.
+
+LODGE, Sir OLIVER: _Competition versus Co-operation._ Liverpool
+  Fabian Society. Liverpool. 1907.
+
+LODGE, Sir OLIVER: _Public Service versus Private Expenditure._
+  Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+MCCLURE, W.S.: _Socialism._ Socialist Labour Press. Edinburgh.
+  1906.
+
+MCCULLOCH: _British Empire._ Longman, Brown. London. 1846.
+
+MCCULLOCH: _Dictionary of Commerce._ Longman, Brown. London. 1847.
+
+MACDONALD, J.R.: _Labour and the Empire._ George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+MACDONALD, J.R.: _The New Unemployed Bill of the Labour Party._
+  Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+MACDONALD, J.R.: _Socialism._ T.C. & E.C. Jack. London. 1907.
+
+MACDONALD, J.R.: _Socialism and Society._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London. 1907.
+
+MACGREGOR, JOHN: _Commercial Statistics._ Charles Knight. London.
+  1844-1850.
+
+MCLACHLAN, J.M.: _The Tyranny of Usury._ McLachlan. Manchester.
+
+MCMILLAN, MARGARET: _The Child and the State._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+MCMILLAN, MARGARET: _Child Labour and the Half-time System._ Clarion
+  Newspaper. London. 1896.
+
+_Manifesto of the Socialist Party of Great Britain._ Socialist Party
+  of Great Britain. London.
+
+MANN, TOM: _The International Labour Movement._ Clarion Office.
+  London. 1697.
+
+MARR: _Housing Conditions in Manchester and Salford._ Sherratt &
+  Hughes. Manchester. 1904.
+
+MARTYN, CAROLINE E.D.: _Co-operation._ Labour Press Society.
+  Manchester.
+
+MARX, KARL: _Capital._ Swan Sonnenschein. London. 1888.
+
+MARX, KARL: _A Discourse on Free Trade._ W. Reeves. London. 1889.
+
+MARX, KARL: _Wage-labour and Capital._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1906.
+
+MARX, KARL, and ENGELS, F.: _Manifesto of the Communist Party._ W.
+  Reeves. London. 1888.
+
+MENGER, ANTON: _L'Etat Socialiste._ Societe Nouvelle de Librairie.
+  Paris. 1904.
+
+MILL, J. STUART: _Political Economy._ Routledge. London.
+
+MILLAR, F.: _Socialism, its Fallacies and Dangers._ Watts & Co.
+  London.
+
+_Minority Report of the Royal Commission on Labour, 1891-1894._
+  Labour Press Society. Manchester. 1894.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _Art, Labour, and Socialism._ Socialist Party of
+  Great Britain. London. 1907.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _Communism._ Fabian Society. London. 1903 and
+  1907.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _A Factory as it Might Be._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1907.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _Monopoly: or How Labour is Robbed._ W. Reeves.
+  London.
+
+MORRIS, WILLIAM: _Useful Work versus Useless Toil._ W. Reeves.
+  London.
+
+MORRIS and BAX: _Socialism, its Growth and Outcome._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London. 1897.
+
+_Mosely Industrial Commission Reports._ Cassell & Co. London. 1903.
+
+_Municipal Bakeries._ Fabian Society. London. 1900.
+
+_Municipal Bread Supply._ Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+_Municipal Drink Traffic._ Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+_Municipal Fire Insurance._ Fabian Society. London. 1901.
+
+_Municipal Slaughter-houses._ Fabian Society. London. 1899.
+
+_Municipal Socialism: a Series of Articles._ "The Times." London.
+  1902.
+
+_Municipal Steamboats._ Fabian Society. London. 1901.
+
+_Municipalisation by Provinces._ Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+_Municipalisation of the Gas Supply._ Fabian Society. London. 1900.
+
+MUSE, C.E.: _Poverty and Drunkenness._ Clarion Office. London.
+
+_Nation in Arms._ (Monthly Paper.) National Service League. London.
+
+_National Union Gleanings._ (Monthly.) Simpkin, Marshall. London.
+
+NEIL: _Songs of the Social Revolution._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+_Neue Gesellschaft, Die._ (Monthly Magazine.) Verlag der Neuen
+  Gesellschaft. Berlin.
+
+_New Age._ (Weekly Newspaper.) Organ of the Fabian Society. London.
+
+NEWMAN, GEORGE, M.D.: _The Health of the State._ Headley Brothers.
+  London. 1907.
+
+NORDHOFF: _Communistic Societies of the United States._ John Murray.
+  London. 1875.
+
+NORMAN, C.H.: _Empire and Murder._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+  1906.
+
+NORMAN, C.H.: _Our Factory Workers._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_Nouvelle Biographie Generale._ Paris. 1853-1865.
+
+NOYES, J.: _History of American Socialism._ Philadelphia. 1870.
+
+OAKESHOTT, J.F.: _Humanising of the Poor Law._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1894.
+
+_Overcrowding in London._ Fabian Society. London. 1900.
+
+PALGRAVE: _Dictionary of Political Economy._ Macmillan. London.
+  1891-1900.
+
+_Parish Council Cottages, and How to get them._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1900.
+
+_Parish and District Councils: What they are and What they can do._
+  Fabian Society. London. 1907.
+
+PEARSON, KARL: _The Ethic of Free Thought._ A. & C. Black. London.
+  1901.
+
+PEARSON, KARL: _Socialism and Sex._
+
+PEDDER, D.C.: _The Secret of Rural Depopulation._ Fabian Society
+  London. 1904.
+
+PENNY, JOHN: _The Political Labour Movement._ Clarion Press. London.
+
+_Platform, Constitution, Rules, and Standing Orders of the Socialist
+  Labour Party of Great Britain._ Glasgow.
+
+PLECHANOFF, GEORGE: _Anarchism and Socialism._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1906.
+
+_Poems for Socialists._ James Leatham. Aberdeen. 1891.
+
+PORTER, G.R.: _Progress of the Nation._ Murray. London. 1847.
+
+_Programme and Rules, Social-Democratic Federation._
+  Social-Democratic Federation. London, 1906.
+
+_Protect the Home._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+  1906.
+
+PROUDHON: _What is Property?_ William Reeves. London. 1899.
+
+_Public Control of Electric Power and Transit._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1905.
+
+QUELCH, H.: _Economics of Labour._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+  1906.
+
+QUELCH, H.: _Social Democracy and the Armed Nation._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1900.
+
+QUELCH, H.: _The Social-Democratic Federation: its Objects, its
+  Principles, and its Work._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+QUELCH, H.: _Trade Unionism, Co-operation, and Social Democracy._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+_Reformers' Year Book._ London.
+
+_Reichs Arbeitsblatt._ (Monthly Paper.) Carl Heyman's Verlag.
+  Berlin.
+
+REID, W.: _Socialism and the Drink Traffic._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1906.
+
+_Report of 27th Annual Conference (1907) of the Social-Democratic
+  Federation._ Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+
+_Report on Fabian Policy._ Fabian Society. London. 1896.
+
+_The Revival of Agriculture._ Fabian Society. London. 1905.
+
+_Rich and Poor._ Independent Labour Party. Blackburn.
+
+RICHARDSON, J.: _How it Can be Done; or, Constructive Socialism._
+  Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+_Ritual, A Socialist._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1893.
+
+ROGERS, THOROLD: _Six Centuries of Work and Wages._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London. 1906.
+
+ROSCHER: _Politik._ Cotta. Stuttgart. 1893.
+
+ROSCHER: _System der Volkswirtschaft._ Cotta. Stuttgart. 1906.
+
+ROTHSTEIN, TH.: _Socialist Annual._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+ROWNTREE, S.: _Poverty._ Macmillan & Co. London. 1903.
+
+ROWNTREE and SHERWELL: _The Temperance Problem._ Hodder & Stoughton.
+  London. 1901.
+
+SCHAEFFLE: _The Impossibility of Social Democracy._ Swan
+  Sonnenschein. London.
+
+SCHAEFFLE: _The Quintessence of Socialism._ Swan Sonnenschein. 1902.
+
+_S.D.F. Song-Book._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+SHAW, BERNARD: _The Fabian Society and its Early History._ Fabian
+  Society. London. 1892.
+
+SHAW, BERNARD: _The Impossibilities of Anarchism._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1893.
+
+SHAW, BERNARD: _Socialism for Millionaires._ Fabian Society. 1901.
+
+SHORT, A.W.: _Municipal Milk Supply._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+_Should the Working Class Support the Liberal Party?_ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1906.
+
+SIMKHOWITSCH: _Die Feldgemeinschaft._ 1898.
+
+_S.L.P. Bulletin._ (Periodical.) Socialist Labour Press. Edinburgh.
+  1907.
+
+SMART, H. RUSSELL: _The Right to Work._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+SMART, H. RUSSELL: _Socialism and the Budget._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+SNELL, HARRY: _Secular Education the Only Way._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+SNOWDEN, ETHEL: _The Woman Socialist._ George Allen. London. 1907.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _The Christ that is to be._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _The Individual under Socialism._ Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _Old Age Pensions._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _A Straight Talk to Ratepayers._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+SNOWDEN, PHILIP: _The Socialists' Budget._ George Allen. London.
+  1907.
+
+_The Social Crusade._ (Periodical.) Bradford.
+
+_Social Democrat._ (Monthly Magazine.) Twentieth Century Press.
+  London.
+
+_Social-Democratic Federation Annual Conference._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1906 and 1907.
+
+_Social-Democratic Federation Programme and Rules._
+  Social-Democratic Federation. London. 1906.
+
+_Socialism: a Cancerous Growth._ Coventry Clarion Fellowship.
+  Coventry. 1907.
+
+_Socialism: For and Against._ Independent Labour Party. Stockport.
+  1907.
+
+_Socialism and Labour Policy._ Fabian Society. London. 1906.
+
+_Socialism and the Single Tax: a Debate between Mr. W.C. Wright and
+  H. Quelch._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+_Socialism and Trade Unionism: Wherein do they Differ?_ Issued by
+  Socialistic Group of the London Society of Compositors. Twentieth
+  Century Press. London.
+
+_Socialism made Plain, and the Unemployed._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1895.
+
+_Socialist, The._ (Monthly Paper.) Organ of the Socialist Labour
+  Party. Edinburgh.
+
+_Socialist Annual, The._ Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+
+_Socialist Party of Great Britain: Manifesto and Declaration of
+  Principles._ Socialist Party of Great Britain. London.
+
+_Socialist Ritual, A._ Twentieth Century Press. London. 1893.
+
+_Socialist Standard._ (Monthly Newspaper.) Organ of the Socialist
+  Party of Great Britain. London.
+
+_Some Objections to Socialism Considered and Answered._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+_Some Socialistic Proposals: a Brief Analysis._ London Municipal
+  Society. London.
+
+_Songs of the Social Revolution._ Twentieth Century Press. London.
+
+SORGE, F.A.: _Socialism and the Worker._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1906.
+
+SOWERBY, W.: _The Agricultural Deadlock._ Clarion Newspaper Co.
+  London. 1896.
+
+_Sozialistische Monatshefte._ (Monthly Review.) Berlin.
+
+SPENCER, GEORGE: _Nationalisation of the Land._ Henderson. London.
+
+SPENCER, HERBERT: _The Man versus The State._ Williams & Norgate.
+  London. 1907.
+
+SQUIRE, JACK C.: _Socialism and Art._ Twentieth Century Press.
+  London. 1907.
+
+_State Maintenance of Children._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic
+  Federation. London.
+
+_State Railways for Ireland._ Fabian Society. London. 1899.
+
+STEELE, HENRY: _The Working Classes in France._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London. 1904.
+
+STEGMANN und HUGO: _Handbuch des Sozialismus._ Zurich. 1896.
+
+STIRNER: _Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum._ Leipzig. 1845.
+
+SUTHERS, R.B.: _"Killed by High Rates"--Or Rent?_ Clarion Press.
+  London. 1905.
+
+SUTHERS, R.B.: _Mind Your Own Business._ Clarion Press. London.
+  1907.
+
+SUTHERS, R.B.: _Municipal Debt and its Dangers._ Clarion Newspaper
+  CO. London.
+
+SUTHERS, R.B.: _My Right to Work._ Clarion Press. London. 1906.
+
+TAYLOR, R.C.: _Statistics of Coal._ John Chapman. London. 1848.
+
+THOMPSON, ALEX. M.: _Hail, Referendum_! Clarion Newspaper. London.
+  1896.
+
+THOMPSON, A.M.: _Internationalism and Peace._ Clarion Press. London.
+  1903.
+
+THOMPSON, A.M.: _The Only Way to Democracy._ Clarion Newspaper Co.
+  London. 1900.
+
+THOMPSON, A.M.: _The Referendum, and Initiative in Practice._
+  Clarion Newspaper Co. London. 1899.
+
+THOMPSON, A.M.: _That Blessed Word "Liberty."_ Clarion Newspaper Co.
+  London.
+
+TILLETT, BEN: _Trades Unionism and Socialism._ Clarion Newspaper.
+  London. 1897.
+
+"THE TIMES": _Municipal Socialism._ "The Times." London. 1902.
+
+_To the Man in the Street._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation.
+  London.
+
+_Twentieth Century Politics._ Fabian Society. London. 1901.
+
+_The Unemployed._ (Leaflet.) Social-Democratic Federation. London.
+
+VANDAL, A.: _Avenement de Bonaparte._ Plon-Nourrit et Cie. Paris.
+  1903.
+
+VANDERVELDE, EMIL: _Drink and Socialism._ Central Temperance Book
+  Room. London.
+
+VERITAS: _Did Jesus Christ teach Socialism?_ P. Lindley.
+  Manchester.
+
+VORWAERTS. (Daily Paper.) Berlin.
+
+WARD, W.: _All Things in Common._ Exeter Publishing Co. London.
+  1906.
+
+WARD, W.: _Are All Men Brothers?_ E. Dalton. London. 1907.
+
+WARD, W.: _Ideal City._ Exeter Publishing Co. London. 1906.
+
+WARD, W.: _Our Own Native Land._ Exeter Publishing Co. London. 1906.
+
+WARD, W.: _Prevention is Better than Cure._ E. Dalton. London. 1907.
+
+WARD, W.: _Religion and Labour._ Exeter Publishing Co. London. 1906.
+
+WARD, W.: _The War Drum Shall Throb No Longer._ Exeter Publishing
+  Co. London. 1906.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _A Corner in Flesh and Blood._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _Milk and Postage Stamps._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _A Nation of Slaves._ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _Simple Division._ Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+WASHINGTON, S.: _Whose Dog Art Thou?_ Independent Labour Party.
+  London.
+
+WATTS, J. HUNTER: _State Maintenance for Children._ Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1904.
+
+_Wealth Makers and Wealth Takers._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+WEBB, BEATRICE and SIDNEY: _Industrial Democracy._ Printed by the
+  Authors. London. 1901.
+
+WEBB, SIDNEY: _Difficulties of Individualism._ Fabian Society.
+  London. 1896.
+
+WEBB, S.: _Labour in the Longest Reign_, 1837-1897. Fabian Society.
+  London.
+
+WEBB, S.: _The London Programme._ Swan Sonnenschein & Co. London.
+  1892.
+
+WEBB, S.: _Socialism: True and False._ Fabian Society. London 1894.
+
+WELLS, H.G.: _Socialism and the Middle Classes, in "Fortnightly
+  Review," November 1906._ London.
+
+WELLS, H.G.: _This Misery of Boots._ Fabian Society. London. 1907.
+
+WEMYSS, EARL OF: _Socialist Spectre._ Watts & Co. London. 1907.
+
+_What Socialism Is._ Fabian Society. London.
+
+_What Socialism Means._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+_What Socialism Means for Women._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+_What the Farm Labourer Wants._ Fabian Society. London. 1894.
+
+_What Use is a Vote?_ (Leaflet.) Social Democratic Federation.
+  London.
+
+WHEATLEY, JOHN: "_How the Miners are Robbed._" Reformers' Bookstall.
+  Glasgow. 1907.
+
+WHITE, J.D.: _Island Economy._ F.R. Henderson. London. 1904.
+
+WHITTAKER, T.P.: _Economic Aspect of the Drink Problem._ Lees and
+  Raper Memorial Trustees. London.
+
+_Who are the Bloodsuckers?_ Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+_Why Labour Men should be on Town Councils._ (Leaflet.) Independent
+  Labour Party. London.
+
+WIDDUP, J.R.: _What Political Economy Teaches._ Twentieth Century
+  Press. London.
+
+WILDE, OSCAR: _The Soul of Man under Socialism, in "Fortnightly
+  Review" February 1891._ London.
+
+WILLIAMS, T.R.: _The Difficulties of Socialism._ Independent Labour
+  Party. London.
+
+_Will Socialism Benefit the English People?_ (Debate.) Twentieth
+  Century Press. London. 1907.
+
+WILSON, Rev. J. STITT: _The Social Crusade._ (Periodical.) Bradford.
+
+WOODWORTH: _Christian Socialism in England._ Swan Sonnenschein & Co.
+  London. 1903.
+
+_The Workers' Burden._ (Leaflet.) Independent Labour Party. London.
+
+
+
+
+ANALYTICAL INDEX
+
+     NOTE.--_The abbreviation "f." following a page number
+     signifies "and following page"; "ff." "and following pages."_
+
+
+ABSOLUTISM, Socialism makes for, 460 ff.
+
+ABSTINENCE, Co-operation, and Thrift denounced by Socialists, 131 ff.,
+  311 ff.
+
+ADMINISTRATION, Imperial, Socialist views regarding, 179 f.
+  National, Socialist views regarding, 213 f.
+
+ADULT suffrage demanded, 213
+
+ADULTERATION, cause of, 84 f.
+
+AGITATORS, Socialistic, appeal to passions, 10, 446, 470
+  Socialist wish to govern themselves, 411
+
+AGRICULTURE, Socialist views on, 261 ff., 288 ff.
+
+AIMS and policy of Socialists, 92 ff.
+
+ALCOHOLIC DRINK, expenditure of British workers on, 166, 319, 479
+
+ALLOTMENTS, 262 ff.
+
+ANANIAS, the story of, 385
+
+ANARCHISM and Socialism, similarity of views and aims of, and connection
+  between them, 81, 90, 118, 328, 381 f., 394 ff.
+
+ANARCHISTS, Chicago, and Socialists, 401 f.
+
+ANGLO-FRENCH agreements, views of Socialists on, 188
+
+ANTWERP DOCK strike, 295
+
+APPROPRIATION without adequate compensation is theft, 102
+
+ARBITRATION, international, Socialists on, 188, 190 f.
+
+ARMED nation, why many Socialists are in favour of, 193 ff.
+
+ARMIES, standing, are to be dissolved, 194 ff.
+
+ARMY reform of Mr. Haldane, condemned by Socialists, 197 ff.
+  Socialist propaganda to undermine discipline and cause revolt in, 200 ff.
+  Socialist proposals regarding the, 192 ff.
+
+ASSIGNATS, history of the, 283 f.
+
+ATHEISM, Socialism and, 354 ff.
+
+
+BANKS and banking, Socialist views on, 258 f., 278 ff.
+
+BARRICADES, Socialist views on, 258 f., 278 ff.
+
+BARTER, international, proposed by Socialists, 279
+
+BENEFICENCE, sense of, relied on by Socialists as principal motive in
+  men, 458 f.
+
+BETTING, expenditure of working men on, 166
+
+BLACKLEGS, British, in Antwerp and Hamburg, 295 f.
+
+BREMEN, Socialism in, 440
+
+BRITISH EMPIRE--_see_ Empire, British
+
+BROTHERHOOD OF MAN promised and proclaimed by Socialists, 25 f.,
+  185 ff., 370, 382, 444
+
+BUDGET, national, Socialist proposals regarding, 160 ff.
+
+
+CADE, JACK, 326 f.
+
+CAPITAL is theft, 81 f., 102, 370
+  national growth of, owing to savings of capitalists, 64 f.
+  private, cannot leave the country, 153 f.
+    is immoral, 80 ff.
+    is not to be tolerated, 152 ff.
+  why its constant increase is necessary, 45
+
+CAPITALISTS and landowners are thieves, 38, 102, 370 f.
+  and workers, division of national income between, 40 ff., 75 ff.
+    relations between, 30 ff., 75 ff.
+  are the managers and trustees of the national wealth, 35
+  employ labour only at a profit, 33
+  exploit the poor, 31, 75 ff.
+  greatest, were originally working men, 60
+  live in idleness, 30, 75 ff.
+  maintain the workers, not the workers the capitalists, 168
+  private, are responsible for commercial crises, 67 ff.
+    are responsible for unemployment, 65 ff., 125 f.
+      useless and unnecessary, 155, 168
+    benefit from unemployment, 69 f.
+    have no rights and no claims to consideration, 154
+    their disappearance would be a blessing, 155, 168
+    usefulness of, 64 f., 168, 315
+
+CARNEGIE, ANDREW, on drink, 321 f.
+
+CATECHISM for the mob, 367
+  the Red, 372 ff.
+
+CHEAPNESS, Socialist views on, 290 ff.
+
+CHICAGO Anarchists and Socialists, 401 f.
+
+CHILDREN, free maintenance of, demanded, 138
+  free meals for--_see_ Free Maintenance
+  production of, to be regulated by the State, 347 f.
+  will belong not to parents but to society, 345 f.
+  will belong to parents, 348
+
+CHRIST, name of, used for electioneering purposes, 363
+
+CHRISTIAN Socialism, 375 ff.
+  programmes of, 490 f.
+
+CHRISTIANITY and religion, Socialist attitude towards, 354 ff.
+
+CIVILISATION, Socialist views on, 11 ff.
+
+"CLARION," circulation of, 437
+
+CLASS war doctrine, the, 72 ff.
+  disproved, 79
+
+CLASSES of society, are there only two? 72 ff.
+
+CLERGY, Socialist views on the, 13
+
+COAL, production of, in 1845, 475
+
+COBDEN, Socialists on, 287
+
+CODE NAPOLEON, 329, 344
+
+COIN--_see_ Money
+
+COMMANDMENTS, the capitalists' ten, 368
+  the Socialist ten, 371 f.
+
+COMMONS, House of, Socialist views on the, 209 ff.
+
+COMMUNE of Paris, Socialists and the insurrection of the, 407 ff.
+
+COMMUNISM and Socialism, 381 ff.
+  early Christian, 386
+  in Sparta, 389
+  of Fourier, 392 f.
+  Socialist recommendations of, 21, 381 ff.
+  why it is impossible, 393
+
+COMMUNIST manifesto quoted, 77 f., 92, 103, 107, 112, 183 f., 332 f., 405
+
+COMMUNITY of women, 331 ff.
+
+COMPENSATION has no place in Socialist ethics, 100 f.
+  or no compensation in expropriating private property? 95 ff., 149 f.
+
+COMPETITION and co-operation, 82 ff., 312 ff., 444 ff., 470
+
+COMPLAINTS, the, of Socialists, 30 ff.
+
+COMPULSORY labour, necessity of, in Socialist commonwealth, 455 ff.
+
+CONFISCATION, plans of, 95 ff.
+  probable result of, 168 f., 251 f., 254
+
+CONTRACT, freedom of, useless to workers, 33
+
+CO-OPERATION and competition, 82 ff., 312 ff., 444 ff., 470
+  cannot benefit British worker, 31
+  greatly benefits British worker, 315 ff.
+  is opposed by Socialists, 84, 131 ff., 311 ff.
+  thrift and abstinence denounced by Socialists, 131 ff., 311 ff.
+
+CO-OPERATIVE societies, record and statistics of the British, 315 ff.
+
+COURTS-MARTIAL, Socialist agitation against, 201 f.
+
+CRIME--_see_ Justice, Theft
+
+CRIMES, sexual, Socialist views on, 340 ff.
+
+CRISES caused by private capitalists, 67 ff.
+  could they be prevented by Socialists? 70 f., 124 f.
+
+CROWN, the--_see_ also Monarchy
+  is unfit to administer the Empire, 179
+
+CURRENCY--_see_ Money
+
+
+DEBT, Local, huge increase and danger of, 246 ff.
+  Local, will it be repudiated? 248
+  National, repudiation of, 110, 156 ff.
+
+DEMONETISATION of gold and silver--see Money
+
+DESERTION of family, frequency of, 307
+
+DISARMAMENT, Socialists and, 189 ff.
+
+DISTRIBUTION, alteration of, will abolish misery, 65 ff.
+  is more important than production, 65 ff.
+    disproved, 70 f.
+
+DIVISION, general, of existing property disclaimed, 93
+  is the principal aim of Socialists, 471 f.
+
+DOCTRINES, fundamental, of Socialism, 50 ff.
+
+DOWNING STREET, Socialist views regarding government from, 179 f.
+
+DRINK, expenditure of workers on, 166, 319, 479
+
+DRUNKENNESS, condemned and combated by foreign Socialists, 322 ff.
+  excused and encouraged by British Socialists, 319 ff.
+
+DUTIES--_see_ Budget
+
+
+ECONOMIC policy of Great Britain, 474 ff.
+
+EDUCATION, Socialist views and proposals on, 302 ff.
+
+EMIGRATION, 476 f.
+
+EMPIRE, British, federation of, opposed by Socialists, 173 f.
+  federation of, is necessary, 478
+  German Socialists' views on the, 181 f.
+  has been a failure, 179
+  Socialists and the, 170 ff.
+
+EMPLOYERS and capitalists benefit from unemployment, 69 f.
+  and workers' interests are opposed, 77
+    identical, 79
+  are useless, 168
+
+ENGLAND--_see_ Great Britain
+
+ENTERPRISE, Governmental and municipal, inefficiency and wastefulness
+  of, 85 ff., 251 ff.
+  municipal, 240 ff.
+    is undertaken regardless of cost and profit, 252 ff.
+
+EQUALITY of all races proclaimed by Socialists, 185 ff.
+
+ESPERANTO, why studied by Socialists, 188
+
+ESTATE Duty--_see_ Budget
+
+EXPENDITURE, local, 246
+
+EXPROPRIATION of private property without compensation, 95 ff., 149 f.
+
+
+FABIAN SOCIETY, details regarding, 94, 418 ff.
+  programme of, 486 f.
+
+FAMILY, desertion of, very frequent, 307
+  Karl Marx on, 332
+  Socialism and the, 330 ff.
+
+FATALISM of Socialists, 327 f., 360 f.
+
+FEDERATION, Imperial, opposed by Socialists, 173 f.
+  why necessary, 478
+
+FEEDING of school-children--_see_ Free Maintenance
+
+FISCAL policy, Socialist views on, 285 ff.
+  reform, why it is necessary, 474 ff.
+
+FOOD--_see_ Agriculture and Protection
+
+FORCED labour, necessity of, in Socialist Commonwealth, 455 ff.
+
+FOREIGN policy, Socialist views on, 183 ff.
+
+FOURIER, Communism of, 392 f.
+
+FRANCE, aspect of, before the Revolution, 433
+
+FRANCHISE and suffrage in Great Britain and other countries, 213
+
+FREEDOM of contract useless to workers, 33
+
+FREE love, 330 ff.
+  maintenance for children, 138, 303 ff.
+  trade and protection, Karl Marx on, 300
+    Socialist views on, 285 ff.
+    why it must be abandoned, 474 ff.
+
+FRONTIERS are to be abolished, 184 ff.
+
+
+GAMBLING spirit in Englishmen, 459
+
+GERMAN and British Socialism compared, 88, 236, 432 f.
+  Socialists' patriotic and imperial attitude, 181 f., 190 f., 205, 433
+    views on colonial policy, 181 f, 190 f.
+      Great Britain, 181 f., 190 f.
+
+GERMANY, composition of electorate in, 440
+
+GLASGOW, vast Socialist plans regarding, 252
+
+GOD--_see_ Religion
+
+GOLD and silver money are to be abolished, 21, 258 f., 278 ff.
+
+GOVERNMENT--_see also_ Administration
+  complaints about, 11 f., 394 ff., 411 ff.
+  of Socialist State, 463 ff.
+
+GREAT BRITAIN, aspect of, resembles pre-Revolution France, 433
+  changed economic position of, 475 ff.
+  dangerous position of, 484 f.
+  German Socialists' views on, 181 f., 190 f.
+
+GRIEVANCES of Socialists, 30 ff.
+
+GRONLAND advises Socialists to appeal to the passions, 10
+
+
+HALDANE, Mr., and Woolwich Arsenal dismissals, 296
+
+HAMBURG DOCK strike, 295
+
+HISTORY, all, is untrue, 91
+
+HOME--_see_ Family
+
+HOME RULE, Socialists and, 180
+
+HOUSE OF COMMONS, Socialist views on the, 209 ff.
+
+HOUSE OF LORDS, Socialist views on the, 211
+    to be abolished, 109, 110, 216 i.
+
+HUMAN nature and Socialism, 444 ff.
+
+HUNGRY children--_see_ Free Maintenance
+
+
+IDLING, how it is to be prevented, 457 ff.
+
+IMMORALITY, sexual, Socialist views regarding, 336 ff.
+
+IMPERIAL federation opposed by Socialists, 173 f.
+
+INCOME, national, how divided between capitalists and workers, 40 ff.,
+  75 ff.
+  of workers and capitalists compared, 40 ff, 75 ff.
+
+INCOME-TAX--_see_ Budget
+
+INCREASING misery, law of, 56 ff.
+  disproved, 57 f.
+
+INDEBTEDNES, local, 246 ff.
+
+INDEPENDENT LABOUR PARTY, details regarding, 417 f., 435 f.
+  programme of, 485 f.
+
+INDIA, Socialist views and aims regarding, 174 ff.
+
+INHERITANCE, right of, 103 ff., 108
+
+INTEMPERANCE--_see_ Drink, Drunkenness, Temperance
+
+INTEREST, profit and rent are theft, 38, 80 ff., 102, 371, 374
+  Socialist objections to, 38, 80, 258 f., 280 f.
+
+INTERNATIONAL Arbitration, Socialists on, 188, 190 f.
+  relations, Socialist views on, 183 ff., 469
+
+INTOXICATING drink--_see_ Drink, Drunkenness, Temperance
+
+IRON law of wages, 53 ff., 245, 312 f., 319 f.
+  disproved, 54 ff., 313 f., 320
+
+
+JUDGES, English, Socialists on, 325 f.
+
+JUSTICE and Law, Socialist Views regarding, 100 f., 114, 325 ff., 396 f.
+
+
+KEIR HARDIE resembles John the Baptist, 28
+
+
+LABOUR CHURCH, the, and its teaching, 369
+  fewer hours of, promised by Socialists, 117 f.
+  forced, would be necessary in Socialist commonwealth, 455 ff.
+  is the only source of wealth, 50 ff.
+    disproved, 52
+  organisation of, in Socialist commonwealth, 455 ff.
+  Party, details regarding, 424 ff.
+    informal programme of, 425 f.
+  representation committee, details regarding, 424
+  remuneration of, in Socialist commonwealth, 450 ff.
+  sweated, proposals regarding, 461
+  time theory, 450 f.
+
+LABOURER is entitled to entire product of labour, 38, 61, 451
+    absurdity of demand, 62 ff., 451 ff.
+  receives only from one-third to one-fifth of his rightful wage, 30,
+  43, 48 f.
+
+LABOURERS, rural, 266 f.
+
+LAND--_see_ also Agriculture
+  and Landlords and Socialists, 145 ff.
+  belongs to all, 102 f., 145 ff.
+  individual men have no right to, 102 f., 145 ff.
+  is to be had rent free from Socialist State, 146
+  is not to be had rent free from Socialist State, 146 f.
+  is to be seized without compensation to owners, 95 ff., 149 f., 486
+  property in, is robbery, 38, 102, 145 ff., 370
+
+LAND settlement policy of Socialists, 262 ff.
+
+LAND Tax--_see_ Budget
+
+LANDOWNERS and capitalists are thieves, 38, 102
+
+LAW and Justice, Socialist views regarding, 100 f., 114, 325 ff., 396 f.
+  iron, of wages, 53 ff., 245, 312 f., 319 f.
+    disproved, 54 ff., 313 t, 320
+  of increasing misery, 56 ff.
+    disproved, 57 f.
+
+LAZINESS, how it is to be prevented, 457 ff.
+
+LIBERAL PARTY, Socialist dissatisfaction with, 233 ff.
+  views of and attitude towards the, 226 ff.
+
+LITERATURE, Socialist, increase of sales of, 435 ff.
+
+LOAFERS and tramps, ideal conditions for, to be created by Socialists, 254
+
+LOCAL expenditure, 245 f.
+  Government, Socialist views and proposals regarding, 166, 240 ff.
+  indebtedness, 246 ff.
+
+LONDON, fantastic schemes regarding, 249 ff.
+
+LORDS, abolition of the House of, demanded, 109, 110, 216 f.
+  House of, views of Socialists on the, 211
+
+LOVE, free, 330 ff.
+
+
+MAGDEBURG, Socialism in, 440
+
+MAINTENANCE, free, for children, demanded, 138, 303 ff.
+  why demanded, 138, 308
+
+MAN, brotherhood of, promised and proclaimed by Socialists, 25 f.,
+  185 ff., 370, 382, 444
+  has no right to himself, 102
+  is not responsible for his actions, 327 f.
+
+MAN, nature of, and Socialism, 444 ff.
+
+MARRIAGE--_see also_ Family, Women
+  is akin to prostitution, 335 f.
+
+MARX and Engels, Communists' manifesto quoted, 77 f., 92, 103, 107 f.,
+  112, 183 f., 332 f., 405
+
+MARX, KARL, appreciation of, 89
+  on Christianity and religion, 359, 366
+  on Free Trade and Protection, 300
+  on women and the family, 332 f.
+  political programme of, 107 f.
+  unmerited praise of, 88 f.
+  was not a scientist, but a demagogue and a revolutionary, 472
+
+MEALS, free, for school children--_see_ Free Maintenance
+
+MEMBERS of Parliament, payment of, advocated, 213, 216
+
+MIDDLE CLASS, importance of strengthening the, 441 ff.
+  Socialistic attempt to permeate the, 442 f.
+
+MIDDLEMAN, promised suppression of, by Socialists is illusory, 241 f.
+
+MILITARY LAW, Socialist agitation against, 201 f.
+
+MILLIONAIRES are criminals, 81
+
+MINES and minerals to be taken over without compensation, 149
+
+MIR, the, 388
+
+MIRABEAU on paper money, 283 f.
+
+MISERY, law of, increasing, 56 ff.
+  disproved, 57 f.
+
+MONARCHY, abolition of, 109, 110, 207 f.
+  Socialism and the, 207 f.
+
+MONEY, abolition of gold and silver proposed, 21, 258, 278 ff.
+    consequences of, 279 f.
+  banks and banking, Socialist views on, 258 f., 278 ff.
+
+MORALITY, sexual. Socialist views regarding, 336 ff.
+
+MUNICIPAL and national enterprise, inefficiency and wastefulness of,
+  85 ff., 251 ff.
+  enterprise, 240 ff.
+  enterprises are undertaken regardless of cost and profit, 252 ff.
+  Socialism, 240 ff.
+
+
+NATIONAL budget, Socialist views regarding, 160 ff.
+  debt, repudiation of, 110, 156 ff.
+  enterprise, inefficiency and wastefulness of, 85 ff., 251 ff.
+  income, how divided between capitalists and workers, 40 ff., 75 ff.
+
+NATIONALISATION of land--_see_ Land
+
+NATURE, human, and Socialism, 444 ff.
+
+
+OFFENCES, sexual, Socialist views on, 340 ff.
+
+OLD-AGE pensions, Socialist plans regarding, 19, 122 f.
+
+OPINION, public, under Socialism, 466 f.
+
+ORGANISATION of work proposed by Socialists, 17, 70 f., 124 I, 455 ff,
+  fallacies regarding, 70 f., 85 ff., 124 f., 241 f.
+
+ORGANISATIONS, Socialist, and their policy, 415 ff.
+
+OVER-PRODUCTION, complaints as to, 66 f.
+    are not justified, 70 f.
+  can it be prevented by Socialists? 70 f., 124 f.
+  is not the cause of crises and unemployment, but ill-balanced
+  production, 70 f.
+
+OVERWORK, complaints of, 16
+
+
+PAPER money, unlimited issues of, proposed, 258 f., 278 ff.
+  consequences of, 279 f.
+
+PARIS Commune, Socialists and the insurrection of the, 407 ff.
+
+PARLIAMENT, Socialism and, 209 ff.
+  Socialist spirit in, 437 f.
+  unofficial Socialists in, 438
+
+PARLIAMENTARY Government to be abolished, 218 ff.
+
+PARTIES, Socialist attitude towards the, 225 ff.
+  the Socialist and their policy, 415 ff.
+
+PASSIONS, Socialists appeal to the, 10, 446, 470
+
+PATRIOTISM, Socialism is destructive of, 114, 186 f., 202 ff.
+
+PAUPERISM and distress, growth of, under Socialist regime, 242 f.
+
+PAYMENT of Members of Parliament advocated, 213, 216
+
+PEACE conference, 189 ff.
+
+PEASANT proprietors are everywhere hostile to Socialism, 263
+  Socialists object to, 262 ff.
+
+PEASANTRY, importance of re-creating the, 443
+
+PENSIONS to workers, 19, 122
+
+POLICY, agricultural, of Socialists--_see_ Agriculture
+  and aims of Socialists, 92 ff.
+  fiscal, of Socialists--_see_ Free Trade and Protection
+  foreign, of Socialists--_see_ Foreign Policy
+
+POPLAR, 243
+
+POSTAGE, Socialist proposals regarding, 166 f.
+
+POST OFFICE, British, praised by Socialists, 21
+    condemned by Socialists, 411, 413
+  fallacies regarding business aptitude of, 85 ff.
+  servants, Socialist proposals regarding, 166 f.
+
+POVERTY and drink and gambling, 166, 319, 479 f.
+  extravagant Socialist estimates of, 165, 242, 302 f.
+  complaints about, 16, 33, 165
+  of the poor is caused by wealth of the rich, 30, 34 ff., 161
+    disproved, 35, 159
+
+PRESS, the, under Socialism, 466 f.
+
+PRIVATE trader to be abolished, 242 ff.
+
+PRODUCTION, ill-balanced, causes crises and unemployment, 70 f.
+  is carried on for the profit of a class, 36
+  is less important than distribution, 65 ff.
+  is more important than distribution, 71
+
+PROFIT, what it is and why it is necessary, 39, 45
+  interest and rent are theft, 38, 80 ff., 102, 371, 374
+  the working at a, objected to, 33, 38 ff., 252 ff.
+  sharing in Socialist commonwealth, 459
+
+PROGRAMME, political, of Karl Marx, 107 f.
+
+PROGRAMMES of Socialism, 92, 107 ff., 481 ff.
+
+PROPERTY--_see also_ Capital, Land, Mines
+  instinct of, is as old as humanity, 444
+
+"PROPERTY is theft," 81 f., 102, 370 f.
+
+PROPERTY, private, general division of, disclaimed, 93
+  is the real object of Socialism, 471 ff.
+  private, is immoral, 80 ff.
+    is to be acquired without compensation, 95 ff., 149 f., 486
+    ought to be abolished, 82, 92
+    Socialist plans regarding, 95 ff., 149 f.
+  right to, denned by Socialists, 80, 96 ff., 102, 145
+
+PROSTITUTION, 339 ff.
+  is akin to marriage, 335 f.
+
+PROTECTION, why it must be adopted, 474 ff.
+  and Free Trade, Karl Marx on, 300
+    Socialist views on, 285 ff.
+
+PROUDHON quoted, 81, 90
+
+PROVIDENCE--_see_ Thrift
+
+PUBLIC opinion under Socialism, 466 f.
+
+
+RAILWAY rates, preferential to foreigners denounced, 269 ff.
+
+RAILWAYS and shipping, Socialist views on, 269 ff.
+  nationalisation of, demanded, 271 f.
+    seems too speculative an undertaking, 277
+  should be run free of charge to all, 272 ff.
+  wastefulness and inefficiency of, 269 ff.
+
+RATES, alarming increase of, 245 f.
+  increase of, means increase of rent, 243, 245
+
+RED CATECHISM, the, 372 ff.
+
+REFERENDUM demanded by Socialists, 217 ff.
+  opposed by Socialists, 220
+
+REFORM, fiscal, why it is necessary, 474 ff.
+  social, the true, 480
+
+RELIGION and Christianity, Socialist attitude towards, 354 ff.
+  Socialism is a, 26, 364 ff.
+  Socialist views on present, 13, 354 ff.
+  the, of Socialism, 364 ff.
+
+RENT, interest and profit are theft, 38, 80 ff., 102, 371, 374
+
+REVOLUTION, French, parallels furnished to Socialist proposals by the,
+  168 f., 283 f, 352 f., 365 f.
+  aspect of France before the, 433
+  Socialists and, 404 ff.
+
+REVOLUTIONARY aims and plans of Socialists, 77 ff., 112 ff., 183 ff.,
+  200 ff., 394 ff., 403, 404 ff., 410, 470 ff.
+
+REVOLUTIONS always cause depravity of morals, 450
+
+RICH, the, are the managers and trustees of the national wealth, 35
+  are thieves, 80, 102, 370 f.
+  cause poverty of the poor, 30, 34 ff., 161
+    disproved, 35, 159
+
+RICHES of the rich are the cause of poverty, 30, 34 ff., 161
+  disproved, 35, 159
+
+RIGHT to work, sinister aim of Socialists in proclaiming, 128 f.
+  disregarded by Socialists, 461
+
+RIGHTS of individual defined, 102
+
+ROBBERY encouraged by Socialists, 82, 114
+
+ROCHDALE Pioneers, history of the, 315 f.
+
+RURAL labourers, 266 f.
+
+
+SAVING--_see_ Thrift
+
+SAVINGS, contemplated confiscation of, 157 ff.
+
+SAVINGS banks deposits, 46
+
+SELFISHNESS and Socialism, 444 ff.
+
+SEXUAL crimes. Socialist views on, 340 ff.
+  offences and crimes, 340 ff.
+
+SMALL holdings, 262 ff.
+
+SOCIAL-Democratic Federation, details regarding, 415 ff.
+  programme of, 481 ff.
+
+SOCIALISM and Anarchism, similarity of views and aims of, and connection
+    between, 81, 90, 118, 328, 381 f., 394 ff.
+  and Christianity and religion, 354 ff.
+  and Communism, 381 ff.
+  and education, 302 ff.
+  and Free Trade and Protection, 285 ff.
+  and law and justice, 325 ff.
+  and the monarchy, 207 f.
+  and Parliament, 209 ff.
+  and revolution, 395 ff., 404 ff.
+  appeals to passions, 10, 446, 470
+  British and German compared, 88, 206
+  Christian, 375 ff.
+  definitions of, I ff., 390, 469
+  flourishes on dissatisfaction and misery, 131
+  fundamental doctrines of, 50 ff.
+  growth and danger of, 431 ff.
+  is a religion, 2, 26 ff., 364 ff.
+  is a science, 1, 2, 3, 87
+  is based, not on science, but on deception, 91
+  is destructive of patriotism, 114, 186 f., 202 ff.
+  is it possible? 444 ff.
+  is merely a plan of spoliation and of general division, 471 f.
+  is not a science, 87, 89 f., 470 ff.
+  means absolutism, 460 ff.
+  municipal, 240 ff.
+    disregards cost and profit, 252 ff.
+  presupposes perfect men, 444 ff.
+  principal demand of, 92
+  programme of, 92 ff.
+  progress of, how it may be checked, 440 ff.
+  promises to alter human nature, 448 f.
+    to abolish war, 186 f., 189
+    to make all races equal, 185 ff.
+    why it is impossible, 390 f., 444 ff.
+
+SOCIALIST and Anarchist doctrines compared, 81, 90 f.
+  Labour Party, details regarding, 428
+    programme of, 488 ff.
+  literature, increase of sales of, 435 ff.
+  organisations, the, and their policy, 415 ff.
+  Party of Great Britain, details regarding, 428
+    programme of, 487 f.
+  spirit in Parliament, 437 f.
+  State, how will it be governed? 463 ff.
+    of the future, 5 f., 17 ff., 444 ff.
+    -enterprise, will it be more efficient than private enterprise? 85 ff.
+  Sunday schools, 369 ff.
+
+SOCIALISTS, aims and policy of, 92 ff.
+  and Chicago Anarchists, 401 f.
+  and land and landlords, 145 ff.
+  and revolution, 395 ff., 404 ff.
+  and rural labourers, 266 f.
+  and terrorist outrages, 402 f.
+  and the Empire, 170 ff.
+  and the two Parties, 225 ff.
+  and the working masses, 115 ff.
+  and Trade Unionists, official connection between, 141 ff., 434 f.
+    relations between, 131 ff., 424 ff., 434 f.
+  are antagonistic to providence, thrift, and temperance, 312 ff.
+  are hostile to the Empire, 170 ff.
+    to their own country, 114, 186 f.
+  assert that all history is garbled, 91
+  assert that man has no right to himself, 102
+  condemn imperial administration, 179 f.
+    national administration, 213 f., 394 ff., 411 ff.
+    State Socialism, 411 ff.
+  consist of two classes, revolutionaries and visionaries, 183
+  demand free maintenance for children, 138
+    Government purchase of all British railways and shipping, 271 ff.
+  denounce co-operation, thrift, and abstinence, 131 ff.
+  desire the destruction of the State, 381 f., 394 ff., 411 ff.
+  different aims, proposals, and views of, 6 f.
+  disregard right to work, 461
+  encourage theft, 82
+  excuse and encourage drunkenness, 319 ff.,
+  grievances of the, 30 ff.
+  numbers of, in various countries, 432
+  on Free Trade and Protection, 285 ff.
+  oppose co-operation, 84, 312
+  promise brotherhood of man, 25 f., 185 ff., 370, 382, 444
+    equal wages for all, 22
+    gratis amusements, 22
+      baths, 250
+      clothing, 21
+      concerts, 250
+      food, 21
+      fuel, 21
+      libraries, 250
+      lodging, 21
+      travel and transport on railways and tramways, 22, 250, 272 S.
+        on ships, 275 f.
+      wash-houses, 250
+      working men's clubs, 250
+    to transform the world into a paradise, 19 ff.
+  propose issuing paper money in unlimited quantities, 258 f., 278 ff.
+  revolutionary aims and plans of, 77 ff., 112 ff., 183 ff., 200 ff.,
+  394 ff., 403, 404 ff., 410
+  try to destroy discipline in the army and so cause it to revolt, 200 ff.
+  unofficial in Parliament, 438
+  wish for an international language, 188
+    to abolish parliamentary government, 218 ff.,
+      the army, 192 ff.
+      the existing languages, 310
+      the monarchy, 109, 110, 207 f.
+    to capture or abolish Parliament, 209 ff.
+    to conquer Parliament, 238 f.
+    to dissolve the army, 192 ff.
+  German, on Peace Conferences, disarmament, and international
+  arbitration, 190 f.
+    patriotic and imperial attitude of, 181 f., 190 f., 205, 433
+    views of, on colonial policy, 181 f., 190 f.
+      regarding Great Britain, 181 f., 190 f.
+
+SOCIETY, Socialist views on, 10 ff.
+
+SPARTA, Communism in, 389
+
+SPENCER, Herbert, 447 f.
+
+SPOLIATION, plans of, 95 if., 149 f.
+  probable result of, 168 f., 251 f., 254
+
+STAMP duties, proposals regarding, 166 f.
+
+STATE enterprise usually inefficient, 85 ff., 251 ff.
+  Socialism, Socialist attitude towards, 411 ff.
+  Socialist, of the future, 5 f., 17 ff., 444 ff.
+    how will it be governed? 463 ff.
+  Socialists are hostile to the, and desire its destruction, 381 f.,
+  394 ff., 411 ff.
+
+STOCKS, Municipal, are no longer first-class investments, 258
+
+STUTTGART, International Socialist Congress at, 90, 177
+
+SUFFRAGE, adult, demanded, 213
+  and franchise in Great Britain and other countries, 213
+  reform demanded, 213 f.
+
+SUNDAY, will it be abolished? 365
+  schools, Socialist, 369 ff.
+
+SURPLUS-VALUE doctrine, 58 ff., 244 f.
+  disproved, 59 f.
+
+SWEATED labour proposals of Socialists, 461
+
+
+TARIFF reform, Socialist views on, 285 ff.
+
+TAXATION, indirect, condemned by Socialists, 165 f.
+  leading Socialist principle of, 255
+  local--_see_ Rates
+  national--_see_ Budget
+
+TAXING private property out of existence, plans for, 99 f., 149, 153,
+  160 ff., 244 f., 255
+
+TEMPERANCE condemned by British Socialists, 319 ff.
+  praised and encouraged by foreign Socialists, 322 ff.
+  providence, and thrift are antagonistic to Socialism, 131 ff., 312 ff.
+    Socialistic views on, 131 ff., 311 ff.
+
+TEN COMMANDMENTS, the capitalists', 368
+  the Socialist, 371 f.
+
+TERRORIST outrages. Socialist views on, 402 f.
+
+THEFT encouraged by Socialists, 82, 114
+
+THRIFT denounced by Socialists, 131 ff., 155, 311 ff.
+  is immoral, 314 f.
+  is theft, 155
+  providence, and temperance are antagonistic to Socialism, 131 ff.,
+  312 ff.
+    Socialist views on, 131 ff., 311 ff.
+
+TRADE Unionists and Socialists, official connection between, 141 ff.,
+  434 f.
+      relations between, 131 ff., 424 ff., 434 f.
+  Unions and unemployed problem, 127 ff.
+    have become Socialistic, 141 ff., 434 f., 471
+    secretaries are to administer the Empire, 179
+
+TRADER, private, to be abolished, 242 ff.
+
+TRAMPS and loafers, ideal conditions for, to be created by Socialists, 254
+
+
+UNDERFEEDING--_see_ Free Maintenance
+
+UNEMPLOYED, the, 37, 474 ff.
+  and agriculture, 266
+
+UNEMPLOYMENT benefits employers, 69 f.
+  could it be prevented by Socialists? 124 f.
+  is due to private capital, 65 ff., 125 f.
+    disproved, 126 f.
+  real causes of, 70 f., 124 ff., 474 ff.
+  sinister aims of Socialists regarding, 128 f.
+  Socialist plans regarding, 123 ff.
+    views on, 67 ff., 123 ff.
+
+USURY--_see_ Interest
+
+
+VOTES for women, 222 ff.
+
+
+WAGES, amount and purchasing-power of, depends on production, 120 f.
+  are to be abolished, 6, 21
+  are not to be abolished, 22, 278, 386 f., 450 ff.
+  are to be equal for all, 22, 278, 386 f., 450 ff.
+  are not to be equal for all, 390, 450 ff.
+  different views of Socialists regarding, 6, 450 ff.
+  factors determining amount of, 54 ff., 313 f.
+  great increase of, in Socialist State promised by Socialists, 118 ff.
+    doubted by German Socialists, 120
+  iron law of, 53 ff., 245, 312 f., 319 f.
+    disproved, 54 ff., 313 f., 320
+  rise in, 57 f.
+
+WAR will be abolished by Socialists, 186 f., 189
+
+WEALTH creates poverty, 30, 34 ff., 161
+    disproved, 35, 159
+  is a crime, 80 ff.
+  labour is the only source of, 50 ff.
+    disproved, 52
+  love of, will disappear, 23, 448
+  various sources of, 52
+  why unequally distributed, 473
+
+WEST HAM, 243, 363
+
+WOMAN, the family, and the home. Socialism and, 330 ff.
+  will be given the vote, 222 ff., 349
+  will be made equal to man, 349 f.
+  will be made free, 349
+  will have to work for a living, 349 f.
+  will her privileges be abolished? 350 f.
+  will receive wages for childbearing, 345
+
+WOMEN, community of, 331
+  Karl Marx on, 332 f.
+
+WOMEN'S Freedom League, 429
+  Social and Political Union, 429
+    split in, 429
+  suffrage. Socialist views on, 222 ff.
+
+WOOLWICH Arsenal dismissals, 296.
+
+WORK, fewer hours of, promised by Socialists, 117 f.
+  is a curse, 115
+  organisation of, in Socialist Commonwealth, 455 ff.
+  remuneration of, in Socialist Commonwealth, 450 ff.
+  Socialist views regarding, 115 ff.
+
+WORKERS and capitalists, division of national income between, 40 ff.,
+  75 ft.
+    relations between, 30 ff.
+  are entitled to entire produce of their labour, 38, 61 ff., 451
+    absurdity of demand, 62 ff., 451 ff.
+  are most prosperous where capitalists are richest, 35, 159
+  are swindled out of their earnings, 34
+  become capitalists every day, 60
+  British, are slaves, 15, 18, 31 f.
+    how to improve conditions of, 474 ff.
+  cannot acquire capital, 31 ff.
+  expenditure of, on betting, 166, 479 f.
+  on drink, 106, 319, 479 f.
+  miserable state of, 13 ff.
+  possess absolutely nothing, 33
+  poverty of, 16, 33, 165
+  receive only from one-third to one-fifth of their rightful wages,
+  30, 43, 48 f.
+  value of property owned by, 46
+
+WORKING masses and Socialists, 115 ff.
+
+
+PRINTED BY
+SPOTTISWOODE AND C. LTD., NEW-STREET SQUARE
+LONDON
+
+
+
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+
+
+
+    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
+    | Typographical errors corrected in text:                   |
+    |                                                           |
+    | Page  84: reponsible replaced with responsible            |
+    | Page  89: Britian replaced with Britain                   |
+    | Page 103: repected replaced with respected                |
+    | Page 108: furthur replaced with further                   |
+    | Page 112: Social-Democrary replaced with Social-Democracy |
+    | Page 157: MacLachlan replaced with McLachlan              |
+    | Page 167: interefere replaced with interfere              |
+    | Page 178: self-goverment replaced with self-government    |
+    | Page 212: parasities replaced with parasites              |
+    | Page 217: 'which will be be made' replaced with           |
+    |           'which will be made'                            |
+    | Page 260: Parliamentry replaced with Parliamentary        |
+    | Page 279: Co-opervative replaced with Co-operative        |
+    | Page 280: irreligous replaced with irreligious            |
+    | Page 290: beleagured replaced with beleaguered            |
+    | Page 322: democrary replaced with democracy               |
+    | Page 328: L'Etat replaced with L'Etat                     |
+    | Page 334: (fn 905) Fornightly replaced with Fortnightly   |
+    | Page 337: marrige replace with marriage                   |
+    | Page 350: L'Etat replaced with L'Etat                     |
+    | Page 406: Parlement replaced with Parliament              |
+    | Page 425: indentical replaced with identical              |
+    | Page 446: enconomic replaced with economic                |
+    | Page 419: Progessives replaced with Progressives          |
+    |                                                           |
+    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BRITISH SOCIALISM***
+
+
+******* This file should be named 28361.txt or 28361.zip *******
+
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/6/28361
+
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
diff --git a/28361.zip b/28361.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b25a9a2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28361.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7d29cd7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #28361 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/28361)