diff options
Diffstat (limited to '75859-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 75859-h/75859-h.htm | 26483 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 75859-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 0 -> 255373 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 75859-h/images/fig1.jpg | bin | 0 -> 215221 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 75859-h/images/fig2.jpg | bin | 0 -> 12879 bytes |
4 files changed, 26483 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/75859-h/75859-h.htm b/75859-h/75859-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8da52fc --- /dev/null +++ b/75859-h/75859-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,26483 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html> +<html lang="en"> +<head> + <meta charset="UTF-8"> + <title> + The Intelligent Woman’s Guide To Socialism and Capitalism | Project Gutenberg + </title> + <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover"> + <style> + +body { + margin-left: 15%; + margin-right: 15%; +} + + h1,h2 { + text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ + clear: both; +} + +h1 {font-weight: normal; + font-size: 140%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + word-spacing: 0.3em; + } + +h2 {font-weight: normal; + font-size: 120%; + margin-top: 2em; + word-spacing: 0.3em; + } + +p { + margin-top: .51em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .49em; +} + +.p2 {margin-top: 2em;} + +.p1 {margin-top: 1em;} + +hr { + width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: 33.5%; + margin-right: 33.5%; + clear: both; +} + + +hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} + +hr.full {width: 95%; margin-left: 2.5%; margin-right: 2.5%;} + + + +div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} +h2.nobreak {page-break-before: avoid;} + +ul.index { list-style-type: none; } +li.ifrst { + margin-top: 1em; + text-indent: -2em; + padding-left: 1em; +} +li.indx { + margin-top: .5em; + text-indent: -2em; + padding-left: 1em; +} +li.isub1 { + text-indent: -2em; + padding-left: 2em; +} + +.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ + /* visibility: hidden; */ + position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: small; + text-align: right; + font-style: normal; + font-weight: normal; + font-variant: normal; + text-indent: 0; +} /* page numbers */ + +.blockquot { + margin-left: 5%; + margin-right: 10%; +} + +.up {font-size: 170%;} +.xlarge {font-size: 140%;} +.large {font-size: 120%;} +.less {font-size: 90%;} +.med {font-size: 70%;} +.mid {font-size: 60%;} +.half {font-size: 50%;} + +.c {text-align: center;} + +.sp {word-spacing: 0.3em;} + +.sp1 {word-spacing: .85em;} + +.pad1 {padding-left: 2em; + padding-right: 2em;} + +.pad2 {padding-left: 18em; + } + + + +.ph2 {text-align: center; text-indent: 0em; + font-size: 100%; + margin-top: 1em; + word-spacing: 0.3em; + letter-spacing: 0.2em;} + +.r {text-align: right; + margin-right: 2em;} + +.lsp {letter-spacing: 0.2em;} + +.dropcap {float: left; width: auto; padding-right: 1px; font-size: 390%; line-height: 80%;} + +.dropcap1 {float: left; width: auto; padding-right: 5px; font-size: 390%; line-height: 80%;} + + +.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + +.allsmcap {font-variant: small-caps; text-transform: lowercase;} + + +/* Images */ + +img { + max-width: 100%; + height: auto; +} +img.w100 {width: 100%;} + + +.figcenter { + margin: auto; + text-align: center; + page-break-inside: avoid; + max-width: 100%; +} + +.figcenter1 { + padding-top: 2em; + margin: auto; + text-align: center; + page-break-inside: avoid; + max-width: 100%; +} + + +/* Poetry */ +.poetry-container {display: flex; justify-content: center;} +.poetry-container {text-align: center;} +.poetry {text-align: left; margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 5%; font-size:90%;} +.poetry .stanza {margin: 1em auto;} +.poetry .verse {text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em;} + +/* Transcriber's notes */ +.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; + color: black; + font-size:small; + padding:0.5em; + margin-bottom:5em; + margin-top:3em; + font-family:sans-serif, serif; + border: .3em double gray; + padding: 1em; +} +.poetry .indent0 {text-indent: -3em;} + + </style> +</head> +<body> +<div style='text-align:center'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75859 ***</div> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/cover.jpg" alt="cover"> +</div> + +<h1> +THE INTELLIGENT WOMAN’S GUIDE<br> +TO SOCIALISM AND CAPITALISM +</h1> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="lady"> +</div> + + +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p class="sp up"> +THE INTELLIGENT WOMAN’S GUIDE<br> +<span class="sp1">TO SOCIALISM AND CAPITALISM</span><br> +BY BERNARD SHAW +</p> +</div> + +<div class="figcenter1"> +<img src="images/fig2.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + + + +<p class="c p2 xlarge"> +BRENTANO’S <span class="pad1">PUBLISHERS</span> NEW YORK</p> + +<p class="c large">1928 +</p> + + +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p class="c sp med">COPYRIGHT, 1928, BY BRENTANO’S INC.</p> +</div> + +<p class="c sp mid p2"><i>First printing, June, 1928</i></p> + +<p class="c sp half p2">MANUFACTURED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA</p> +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p class="c sp"> +TO<br> +<br> +MY SISTER-IN-LAW<br> +<br> +<span class="large">MARY STEWART CHOLMONDELY</span><br> +<br> +THE INTELLIGENT WOMAN TO WHOSE QUESTION<br> +THIS BOOK IS THE BEST ANSWER I CAN MAKE<br> +</p> +</div> +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_vii">[Pg vii]</span></p> + +<p class="ph2">A FOREWORD FOR AMERICAN READERS</p> +</div> + + +<p>I have never been in America; therefore I am free from the +delusion, commonly entertained by the people who happen to +have been born there, that they know all about it, and that America +is their country in the same sense that Ireland is my country +by birth, and England my country by adoption and conquest. +You, dear madam, are an American in the sense that I am a +European, except that the American States have a language in +common and are federated, and the European states are still on +the tower of Babel and are separated by tariff fortifications. +When I hear people asking why America does not join the League +of Nations I have to point out to them that America <i>is</i> a League +of Nations, and sealed the covenant of her solidity as such by her +blood more than sixty years ago, whereas the affair at Geneva +is not a League of Nations at all, but only a so far unsuccessful +attempt to coax Europe to form one at the suggestion of a late +American President, with the result that the British Secretary of +State for Foreign Affairs makes occasional trips to Geneva, and, +on returning, reassures the British House of Commons by declaring +that in spite of all Woodrow-Wilsonic temptations to +combine with other nations he remains an Englishman first, last, +and all the time; that the British Empire comes before everything +with him; and that it is on this understanding and this alone that +he consents to discuss with foreigners any little matters in which +he can oblige them without detriment to the said reserved interests. +And this attitude seems to us in England so natural, so +obvious, so completely a matter of course, that the newspapers +discuss the details of Mr Chamberlain’s report of his trip without +a word about the patriotic exordium which reduces England’s +membership of the League to absurdity.</p> + +<p>Now your disadvantage in belonging to a league of nations +instead of to a nation is that if you belong to New York or Massachusetts, +and know anything beyond the two mile radius of which +you are the centre, you probably know much more of England, +France, and Italy than you do of Texas or Arizona, though you +are expected, as an American, to know all about America. Yet +I never met an American who knew anything about America except<span class="pagenum" id="Page_viii">[Pg viii]</span> +the bits she had actually set eyes on or felt with her boots; +and even of that she could hardly see the wood for the trees. +By comparison I may be said to know almost all about America. +I am far enough off to get a good general view, and, never +having assumed, as the natives do, that a knowledge of America +is my intuitional birthright, I have made enquiries, read books, +availed myself of the fact that I seem to be personally an irresistible +magnet for every wandering American, and even gathered +something from the recklessly confidential letters which every +American lady who has done anything unconventional feels +obliged to write me as a testimony to the ruinous efficacy of my +books and plays. I could and should have drawn all the instances +in this book from American life were it not that America is such +a fool’s paradise that no American would have believed a word of +them, and I should have been held up, in exact proportion to my +accuracy and actuality, as a grossly ignorant and prejudiced Britisher, +defaming the happy West as ludicrously as the capitalist +West defames Russia. What I tell you of England you will believe. +What I could tell you of America might provoke you to call +on me with a gun. Also it would lead you to class me as a bitter +enemy to America, whereas I assure you that though I do not +adore your country with the passion professed by English visitors +at public banquets when you have overwhelmed them with your +reckless hospitality, I give it a good deal of my best attention as a +very interesting if still very doubtful experiment in civilization.</p> + +<p>But this much I will permit myself to say. Do not imagine that +because at this moment certain classes of American workmen are +buying bathtubs and Ford cars, and investing in building societies +and the like the money that they formerly spent in the saloons, +that America is doing as well as can be expected. If you were +at this moment a miner’s wife in South Wales you would be half +starving; but the wife of a Colorado miner might think you very +lucky in having nothing more violent than half starving to endure. +The sweated women workers in the tenements of your big cities +are told that in America anyone can make a fortune who wants +to. Here we spare them that mockery, at least. You must take it +from me, without driving me to comparisons that between nations<span class="pagenum" id="Page_ix">[Pg ix]</span> +wound as personalities do between individuals, that Capitalism +is the same everywhere, and that if you look for its evils +at home you will miss nothing of them except perhaps some of the +socialistic defences which European States have been forced to +set up against their worst extremities.</p> + +<p>In truth it is odd that this book should not have been written +by an American. Its thesis is the hopelessness of our attempts to +build up a stable civilization with units of unequal income; and +it was in America that this inequality first became monstrous not +only in money but in its complete and avowed dissociation from +character, rank, and the public responsibility traditionally attached +to rank. On the eastern shores of the Atlantic the money +makers formed a middle class between the proletariat, or manual +working class, and the aristocracy, or governing class. Thus labor +was provided for; business was provided for; and government +was provided for; and it was possible to allow and even encourage +the middle class to make money without regard to public interests, +as these were the business of the aristocracy.</p> + +<p>In America, however, the aristocracy was abolished; and the +only controlling and directing force left was business, with +nothing to restrain it in its pursuit of money except the business +necessity for maintaining property in land and capital and enforcing +contracts, the business prudence which perceives that it +would be ruinous to kill outright the proletarian goose that lays +the golden eggs, and the fear of insurrection. There was no +longer a king and an aristocratic governing class to say to the +tradesman “Never mind the public interest: that is our business: +yours is to get as rich as you can, incidentally giving employment +to the proletariat and increasing our rent rolls”. All that remained +was the tradition of unscrupulous irresponsibility in business; +and when the American millionaires first began to astonish Europe +with their wealth it was possible for the most notorious of them, +in the course of an enquiry into the proceedings of a Trust with +which he was connected, to reply to a criticism as to the effect of +his business policy on the public with a simple “Damn the public!”. +Had he been a middle class man in a country where there +was a governing class outside and above business, or a monarch<span class="pagenum" id="Page_x">[Pg x]</span> +with a council in the same position, or even a State Church, his +answer would have been entirely in order apart from its verbal +profanity. Duly bowdlerized it would have run “I am a man of +business, not a ruler and a lawgiver. The public interest is not my +job: I do not presume to meddle with it. My sole function is to +make as much money as I can”. Queen Elizabeth would have +applauded such an attitude as socially sound and highly becoming: +nothing angered her more than presumptuous attempts on the +part of common persons to concern themselves with <i>her</i> business +of high politics.</p> + +<p>When America got rid of monarchs and prelates and popes +and British cabinets and the like, and plunged into the grand +republican experiment which has become the rule instead of the +exception in Europe since the war swept all the emperors into +the dustbin of history, she raised the middle classes to the top +of the social structure and thus delivered its civilization into their +hands without ennobling their traditions. Naturally they raced +for money, for more money, and still more money, and damned +the public when they were not doping it with advertisements which +were by tacit agreement exempted from the law against obtaining +money by false pretences or practising medicine without qualifications. +It is true that they were forced to govern as well by the +impossibility of maintaining civilization without government; but +their government was limited and corrupted by their principle of +letting nothing stand in the way of their getting rich quickly. +And the ablest of them at that game (which has no attraction for +the ability that plays the higher games by which finally civilization +must live) soon became rich at a rate that made the European +middle classes envious. In my youth I heard little of great men +arising in America—not that America did not produce them, but +that her money masters were more apt to persecute than to advertize +them—but I heard much of the great fortunes that were +being made there. Vanderbilt, Jay Gould, Carnegie, Rockefeller +became famous by bringing our civilization to the point to which +Crassus and the other millionaire contemporaries of Sulla and +Julius Cæsar brought the civilization of ancient republican Rome +just before it set up Emperor idolatry as a resting place on the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xi">[Pg xi]</span> +road to ruin. Nowadays we have multimillionaires everywhere; +but they began in America; and that is why I wonder this book +of mine was not written in America by an American fifty years +ago. Henry George had a shot at it: indeed it was his oratory (to +which I was exposed for fortyfive minutes fortyfive years ago +by pure chance) that called my attention to it; but though George +impressed his generation with the outrageous misdistribution of +income resulting from the apparently innocent institution of private +property in land, he left untouched the positive problem of +how else income was to be distributed, and what the nation was +to do with the rent of its land when it was nationalized, thus +leaving the question very much where it had been left a century +earlier by the controversy between Voltaire and the elder Mirabeau, +except for the stupendous series of new illustrations furnished +by the growth of the great cities of the United States. +Still, America can claim that in this book I am doing no more +than finishing Henry George’s job.</p> + +<p>Finally, I have been asked whether there are any intelligent +women in America. There must be; for politically the men there +are such futile gossips that the United States could not possibly +carry on unless there were some sort of practical intelligence back +of them. But I will let you into a secret which bears on this point. +By this book I shall get at the American men through the +American women. In America as in England every male citizen +is supposed to understand politics and economics and finance and +diplomacy and all the rest of a democratic voter’s business on the +strength of a Fundamentalist education that excites the public +scorn of the Sioux chiefs who have seen their country taken from +them by palefaced lunatics. He is ashamed to expose the depths +of his ignorance by asking elementary questions; and I dare not +insult him by volunteering the missing information. But he has +no objection to my talking to his wife as to one who knows +nothing of these matters: quite the contrary. And if he should +chance to overhear——!!!</p> + +<p class="r">G. B. S.</p> + +<p> +<span class="smcap">Conway, North Wales</span><br> +<i>17th April 1928</i> +</p> +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xiii">[Pg xiii]</span></p> + +<p class="large sp lsp c">TABLE OF CONTENTS</p> +</div> + + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c p2"><a href="#c1">1</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">A CLOSED QUESTION OPENS</p> + +<p>Socialism is an opinion as to how the income of the country should be +distributed. Its distribution is not a natural phenomenon: it is a matter +for arrangement, subject to change like any other arrangement. It has +been changed within living memory to an extent that would have seemed +incredible and scandalous to Queen Victoria, and is still being changed +from year to year. Therefore what we have to consider is not whether +our distribution shall be altered or not, but what further changes are desirable +to attain a prosperous stability. This is the closed question which +re-opened in the nineteenth century under the banner of Socialism; but it +is one on which everyone should try to form an original personal opinion +without prompting from Socialists. +<span class="allsmcap">PAGE 1</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c2">2</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">DIVIDING-UP</p> + +<p>Dividing-up is neither a revolutionary novelty nor a Mosaic jubilee: it +is a necessary and unpostponable daily and hourly event of civilized +life. As wealth consists of food that becomes uneatable unless immediately +consumed, and of articles that wear out in use and perish if kept +unused, it must be divided-up and consumed at once. Saving is impossible: +the things will not keep. What is called saving is a bargain whereby +a person in possession of spare food allows another to consume it in +return for an undertaking to reverse the transaction at some future time. +Between the two nothing is saved, as one consumes what the other saves. +A proposal that everybody should save is pure nonsense. A nation which +stopped working would perish within a fortnight even if every member +of it had “saved” a million. 6</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c3">3</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW MUCH FOR EACH?</p> + +<p>This question does not settle itself. It has to be settled by law and enforced +by the police. If the shares are to be altered the law must be +altered. Examples of existing distribution. This has today become so +repugnant to the general moral conception of fairness and so incompatible +with the public health that there is a general revulsion of feeling against +it. But the revulsion can have no political effect until it becomes +arithmetically precise. It cannot be dealt with in terms of more or less: +the question of how much more or less must be exactly determined. +And as wealth is measured in money, distribution must be dealt with in +terms of income. 7</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xiv">[Pg xiv]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c4">4</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">NO WEALTH WITHOUT WORK</p> + +<p>As a nation lives from hand to mouth there must be continuous productive +labor or there will be no food to distribute. But though everyone +must eat, everyone need not work, because under modern conditions each +of us can produce much more than enough to support one person. If +everyone worked everyone would have a good deal of leisure. But it is +possible to arrange that some people shall do all the work and have no +leisure in order that others should have all leisure and no work. These +two extremes are represented by complete Socialism and complete Slavery. +Serfdom and Feudalism and Capitalism are intermediate stages. The continual +struggle of persons and classes to alter the allotment of the labor +task and the distribution of wealth and leisure in their own favor is the +key to the history of revolutions. Enormous increase of the stakes in this +game through modern discoveries and inventions. 9</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c5">5</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">COMMUNISM</p> + +<p>Communism must be considered without personal, political, or religious +prejudice as a plan of distribution like any other. It was the plan of the +apostles, and is universally practised in the family. It is indispensable in +modern cities. All services and commodities which are paid for by a +common fund and are at the disposal of everyone indiscriminately are +examples of communism in practice. Roads and bridges, armies and +navies, street lighting and paving, policemen, dustmen, and sanitary inspectors +are familiar and obvious instances. 11</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c6">6</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">LIMITS TO COMMUNISM</p> + +<p>Communism is so satisfactory and unquestioned as far as it has gone +that those who are conscious of it may ask why everything should not be +communized. Reasons why this cannot be done. Communism is applicable +only to commodities and services which, being necessary or useful to +everybody, enjoy general moral approval. It can be extended to matters +in which the citizens are willing to give and take, as when the oarsman +pays rates for a cricket pitch in consideration of the cricketer paying +rates for the lake. But services as to which there is any serious difference +of opinion, such as church services, and commodities which some people +believe to be deleterious, such as alcoholic liquors, are excluded from the +scope of Communism. Surreptitious communism is necessary in the case +of science, and of learning generally, because the ordinary citizen does +not understand their importance sufficiently to be willing to pay for their +endowment. Governments are therefore obliged to endow them without<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xv">[Pg xv]</span> +consulting the electors, who are left to believe that Greenwich Observatories, +National Galleries, British Museums and the like are provided +gratuitously by Nature. 14</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c7">7</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SEVEN WAYS PROPOSED</p> + +<p>Seven plans of distribution are at present advocated or practised. 1. To +each what he or she produces. 2. To each what he or she deserves. 3. To +each what he or she can get and hold. 4. To the common people enough to +keep them alive whilst they work all day, and the rest to the gentry. 5. +Division of society into classes, the distribution being equal or thereabouts +within each class, but unequal as between the classes. 6. Let us go on as +we are. 7. Socialism: an equal share to everybody. 19</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c8">8</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">TO EACH WHAT SHE PRODUCES</p> + +<p>Apparent fairness of this plan. Two fatal objections to it: (<i>a</i>) it is +impossible to ascertain how much each person produces even when the +product is a material object; and (<i>b</i>) most people’s work consists, not in +the production of material objects, but in services. The clearest case of +individual production is that of a baby by its mother; but a baby is an +expense, not a source of income. In practice production and service are +made commensurate by paying the workers according to the time taken +in producing the commodity or rendering the service; but this does not +carry out the plan, as, when the time spent in qualifying the worker is +taken into account, the calculation becomes impossible. Illustrative cases. +Case of the married woman keeping a house and bringing up a family. +The plan is impossible, and, at bottom, nonsensical. 21</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c9">9</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">TO EACH WHAT SHE DESERVES</p> + +<p>Tendency of those who are comfortably off to believe that this is what +is actually happening. Circumstances which support this view. Facts +which reduce it to absurdity. Proposals to adopt the principle and make +it happen in future. The first and final objection is that it cannot be +done. Merit cannot be measured in money. The truth of this can be +ascertained at once by taking any real case of two human beings, and +attempting to fix the proportion of their incomes according to their +merits or faults. 26</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c10">10</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">TO EACH WHAT SHE CAN GRAB</p> + +<p>This plan postulates equal grabbing power as between children, old +people, invalids, and ablebodied persons in the prime of life. That is,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xvi">[Pg xvi]</span> +it presupposes a state of things that does not exist. Otherwise it is simple +amorality, which even pirates find impossible if they are to hold together +for any length of time. It is, however, tolerated at present in trade. +Lawless robbery and violence are barred; but the tradesman may get as +much and give as little for it as he can; and the landlord may even use +legalized violence to get the utmost for the use of his land. The results +of this limited toleration of grab are so unsatisfactory that laws are +continually being made to palliate them. The plan, which is really no plan +at all, must be dismissed as disastrous. 29</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c11">11</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">OLIGARCHY</p> + +<p>The plan of making the few rich and the many poor has worked for a +long time and is still working. The advantages claimed for it. The rich +class as a preserve of culture. The incomes of the rich as a reservoir of +money which provides by its overflow the socially necessary fund of +spare money called capital. The privileges of the rich as a means of +securing a governing class. Efficacy of the plan when organized as the +Feudal System. How it works in villages and Highland clans. How it +fails in cities. Modern urbanized civilization has no use for it, all our +governing work being done by paid public servants. This leaves it with +only one pretension: that of providing capital by satiation and overflow. +But the satiation is too costly even when it is achieved. There is no +guarantee that the rich will use any part of their income as capital, or +that when they do so they will invest it at home where it is most needed. +The accumulation of capital can be provided for in other ways. The plan +is breaking under the weight of its enormous abuses. 30</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c12">12</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">DISTRIBUTION BY CLASS</p> + +<p>This happens to some extent at present. We are accustomed to think +that monarchs, as a class, should receive more than manual laborers; +and as a rule they do. But monarchs receive much less than Steel Kings +and Pork Barons; and unskilled laborers receive more than great mathematicians, +who, as such, receive nothing, and have to live by poorly paid +professorships. Clergymen get very little; and racing bookmakers get a +good deal. Nobody can determine what they ought to get; yet nobody +can defend what they do get on any rational ground. Those who think it +a matter of course that scavengers should receive less than bank managers +cannot say how much less, without which determination their +opinion can have no effect in a political settlement of distribution. The +main argument for enriching a class is that it enabled them to produce +an idolatrous illusion of superiority which gives them authority, which is +necessary in organizing society. But in modern society the persons in authority<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xvii">[Pg xvii]</span> +are often much poorer in money than those whom they command. +Illustrative cases. Real authority has nothing to do with money. 35</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c13">13</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">LAISSER-FAIRE</p> + +<p>Letting things alone is now called letting them slide: an admission that +they will not stay where they are. Change is a law of nature; and when +parliaments neglect it and Churches try to ignore it, the effect is not to +avert the changes but to make them hasty, ill-considered, and often +catastrophic. Unless laws and Articles of Religion change as often and +as quickly as the activities they control, a strain is set up which, if not +relieved by the prevalence of up-to-date ideas in government and the +Churches, must wreck civilization. 38</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c14">14</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH?</p> + +<p>The study of poverty. Poverty does not produce unhappiness: it produces +degradation: that is why it is dangerous to society. Its evils are +infectious, and cannot be avoided by any possible isolation of the rich. +The attractions of poverty. The folly of tolerating it as a punishment. +We cannot afford to have the poor always with us. The statute of Elizabeth. +What constitutes poverty. The sufferings of the rich. They are +avoidable only by voluntarily foregoing idleness and gluttony: that is, +foregoing the only privileges that riches confer. Poor and rich being +equally objectionable, the question arises how much is enough? What +is enough for savage life. What was enough for our grandmothers is not +enough for ourselves. There is no limit to the higher requirements of +mankind. The question is therefore unanswerable as applied to civilized +life. The problem of distribution cannot be solved by giving everyone +enough: nobody can ever have enough of everything. But it is possible +to give everybody the same. 41</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c15">15</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">WHAT WE SHOULD BUY FIRST</p> + +<p>The effect of distribution on industry. Political economy, or the art +of spending the national income to the greatest general advantage. Importance +of the order in which goods are produced. Those which are +wanted most should be produced first. Food, clothes, and houses should +come before scent and jewellery, babies’ needs before the needs of lapdogs. +Nothing but equality of purchasing power can preserve this vital +order in the industries which cater for purchasers. Inequality of income +upsets it hopelessly: the labor which should feed starving children is +expended in the production of trivial luxuries. This is excused on the +ground that the purchasers give employment. Absurdity of this plea. 49</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xviii">[Pg xviii]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c16">16</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">EUGENICS</p> + +<p>Effect of distribution on the quality of people as human beings. The +problem of breeding the nation. In breeding animals the problem is simple +though the art is uncertain and difficult, because the animal is bred for +some single specific purpose, such as the provision of food or for racing +or haulage. The stockbreeder knows exactly what sort of animal is +wanted. Nobody can say what sort of human being is wanted. It is not +enough to say that certain sorts are not wanted. The stockbreeders’ +methods are therefore not applicable: the keeper of a human stud farm, +if such a thing were established by a mad professor of eugenics, would +not know what to aim at or how to begin. We are therefore thrown +back on natural sexual attraction as our only guide. Sexual attraction +in human beings is not promiscuous: it is always specific: we choose our +mates. But this choice is defeated by inequality of income, which restricts +our choice to members of our own class: that is, persons with similar +incomes or no incomes. Resultant prevalence of bad breeding and domestic +unhappiness. The most vital condition of good distribution is that it shall +widen the field of sexual selection to the extent of making the nation +completely intermarriageable. Only equality of income can do this. 53</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c17">17</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE COURTS OF LAW</p> + +<p>Though Justice should not be a respecter of persons, the courts must +respect persons if they have different incomes. Trial by jury is trial by a +jury of peers, not only the peers of the accused but of the accusers and +of the whole body of citizens. This is in practice impossible in a civilized +society of persons with unequal incomes, as the person with a large +income has not the same interests and privileges as the person with a +small one. As access to the courts of justice costs money the poor are +cut off from them by their poverty or terrorized by the threats of the +rich to drag them there. The abuses of divorce and alimony. Sale of +husbands and wives. Blackmail. Abuses in the criminal courts. Corruption +of the law itself at its source in Parliament by the rich majority there. +Severity of the laws against theft practised by the poor on the rich. +Complete exemption of the crime of rich idling, which is the form of +theft practised by the rich on the poor. Inequality of income thus effects +a divorce of law from justice, leading to an anarchic disrespect for the +law and a general suspicion of the good faith of lawyers. 56</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c18">18</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE IDLE RICH</p> + +<p>Idleness does not mean inactivity. Over-exertion and “rest cures” of +the rich. Their dangerous and exhausting sports. The flapper dances<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xix">[Pg xix]</span> +harder than the postman walks. Spartan training of the old rich. It is +soon acquired by the new rich, who begin by trying to loaf. The diplomatic +and military services as preserves for the energetic rich. The unpaid +magistry. Estate management. Parliament. Effect of contraception and +hotel life in service flats in extending the possibilities of complete uselessness +and self-indulgence. Exceptional cases of eminent workers with +unearned incomes. Florence Nightingale and John Ruskin. Not inactivity +but consuming without producing is what is meant by economic idleness. +Ironic vanity of the attempt to secure happiness and freedom by having +plenty of money and nothing to do. 59</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c19">19</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">CHURCH, SCHOOL, AND PRESS</p> + +<p>The Church school in the village. Deference to the rich taught as +loyalty and religion. Persecution of schoolmasters for teaching equalitarian +morality. Corruption of the universities and of the newspapers. +Difficulty of separating the mass of falsehood inculcated and advertized +in the interest of the rich from the genuine learning and information in +which rich and poor have a common interest. 63</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c20">20</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">WHY WE PUT UP WITH IT</p> + +<p>We endure misdistribution and even support it because it is associated +with many petty personal benefits and amusements which come to us by +way of charity and pageantry, and with the chance of winning the Calcutta +Sweep or inheriting a fortune from an unknown relative. These +pageants and prizes are apprehensible by the narrowest minds in the +most ignorant classes, whereas the evils of the system are great national +evils, apprehensible only by trained minds capable of public affairs. +Without such training the natural supply of broad minds is wasted. +Poverty, by effecting this waste on an appalling scale, produces an artificial +dearth of statesmanlike brains, compelling us to fill up first-rate +public posts with second-rate and often sixth-rate functionaries. We tolerate +the evils of inequality of income literally through want of thought. 65</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c21">21</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">POSITIVE REASONS FOR EQUALITY</p> + +<p>Equal division has been tested by long experience. Practically all the +work of the world has been done and is being done by bodies of persons +receiving equal incomes. The inequality that exists is between classes and +not between individuals. This arrangement is quite stable: there is no +tendency for the equality to be upset by differences of individual character. +Here and there abnormal individuals make their way into a better<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xx">[Pg xx]</span> +paid class or are thrown out into an unpaid vagrancy; but the rule is that +each class either keeps its economic level or rises and falls as a class, its +internal equality being maintained at every level. As people are put so +they will stay. Equality of income, far from being a novelty, is an established +practice, and the only possible one as between working individuals +in organized industry. The problem is therefore not one of its introduction, +but of its extension from the classes to the whole community. 68</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c22">22</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">MERIT AND MONEY</p> + +<p>Equality of income has the advantage of securing promotion by merit. +When there is inequality of income all merits are overshadowed by the +merit of having a large income, which is not a merit at all. Huge incomes +are inherited by nincompoops or made by cunning traders in vice or +credulity; whilst persons of genuine merit are belittled by the contrast +between their pence and the pounds of fools and profiteers. The person +with a thousand a year inevitably takes precedence of the person with a +hundred in popular consideration, no matter how completely this may +reverse their order of merit. Between persons of equal income there can +be no eminence except that of personal merit. Hence the naturally +eminent are the chief preachers of equality, and are always bitterly +opposed by the naturally ordinary or inferior people who have the larger +shares of the national income. 70</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c23">23</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">INCENTIVE</p> + +<p>It is urged against equality that unless a person can earn more than +another by working harder she will not work harder or longer. The reply +is that it is neither fair nor desirable that she should work harder or +longer. In factory and machine industry extra exertion is not possible: +collective work goes on at the engine’s speed and stops when the engine +stops. The incentive of extra pay does not appeal to the slacker, whose +object is to avoid work at any cost. The cure for that is direct compulsion. +What is needed is an incentive to the community as a whole to +choose a high standard of living rather than a lazy and degraded one, +all standards being possible. Inequality of income is not merely useless +for this purpose, but defeats it. The problem of the Dirty Work. On +examination we discover that as it is done mostly by the worst paid +people it is not provided for at present by the incentive of extra pay. +We discover also that some of the very dirtiest work is done by professional +persons of gentle nurture without exceptional incomes. The objection +to dirty work is really an objection to work that carries a stigma of +social inferiority. The really effective incentive to work is our needs, +which are equal, and include leisure. 72</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxi">[Pg xxi]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c24">24</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE TYRANNY OF NATURE</p> + +<p>The race must perish through famine if it stops working. Nobody calls +this natural obligation to work slavery, the essence of which is being +compelled to carry another ablebodied person’s burden of work as well +as one’s own. Pleasurable toil and toilsome pleasure. General ignorance +of the art of enjoying life. The imposture of our commercially provided +amusements. Working for fun is more recreative than wasting time and +money. Monotonous work makes even a painful change welcome: hence +our hideous excursion train holidays. Labor is doing what we must; +leisure is doing what we like; rest, or doing nothing, is a necessity imposed +by work, and is not leisure. Work can be so absorbing that it can +become a craze like the craze for drink. Herbert Spencer’s warning. 80</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c25">25</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE POPULATION QUESTION</p> + +<p>To every proposal for a general increase of incomes it is objected that +its benefits will be swallowed up by married people having too many +children. It is also alleged that existing poverty is due to the world being +too small to produce food enough for all the people in it. The real cause +is that there are too many people living as parasites on their fellows +instead of by production. Illustrations from domestic service. Increase +of population, leading to division of labor, enriches the community +instead of impoverishing it. Limits to this law of increasing return. +Possibilities of human multiplication. The question is not one of food +alone but of space. The speed at which population increases has to be +considered as well as the ultimate desirability of the increase. Too many +unproductive children may starve a family though the country as a whole +may have unlimited employment for adults; therefore the cost of bearing +and bringing up children should be borne by the State. Checks +to population. War, pestilence, and poverty. Contraception, or artificial +birth control. Exposure of female infants. Mahomet’s view of it. Capitalism, +by producing parasitism on an enormous scale has produced +premature overpopulation, kept under by excessive infant mortality and +the diseases of poverty and luxury. Equality of income can get rid of +this, and place population on its natural basis. University teaching on the +subject, which alleges that a natural law of diminishing return is now +in operation, is merely one of the corruptions of political science by +Capitalism. Possibility of local overpopulation in an underpopulated +world. Examples. 83</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxii">[Pg xxii]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c26">26</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE DIAGNOSTIC OF SOCIALISM</p> + +<p>Socialism entirely independent of Socialists or their writings and utterances. +“Joining the Socialists”. Many professed Socialists are so because +they believe in a delusion called Equality of Opportunity, and would +recant if they discovered that Socialism means unconditional equality of +income for everyone without regard to character, talent, age, or sex. +This is the true diagnostic of Socialism, and the touchstone by which +Socialists may be distinguished from Philanthropists, Liberals, Radicals, +Anarchists, Nationalists, Syndicalists, and malcontents of all sorts. Henri +Quatre’s prescription of “a chicken in the pot for everybody” is amiable +and kindly; but it is not Socialism. 92</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c27">27</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">PERSONAL RIGHTEOUSNESS</p> + +<p>Amateur reformers who believe that the world can be made good by +individual effort. Ordering the servants to dine with you. Inequality is not +the fault of the rich. Poverty is not the fault of the poor. Socialism +has nothing to do with almsgiving or personal generosity or kindness to +the poor. Socialism abhors poverty and the poor, and has no more to do +with relieving them than with relieving riches and the rich: it means to +abolish both ruthlessly. Questionableness of the virtues that feed on suffering. +Doles and almsgiving are necessary at present as an insurance +against rebellion; but they are dangerous social evils. <i>Panem et circenses.</i> +Government cannot suppress this abuse until it possesses the powers of +employment now in private hands. It must become the national landlord, +employer, and financier. It is not enough to know the object of Socialism +and to be convinced of its possibility. Commandments are no use without +laws; and Socialism is from beginning to end a matter of law and not of +personal righteousness. 95</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c28">28</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">CAPITALISM</p> + +<p>Capitalism might more properly be called Proletarianism. Its abolition +does not involve the destruction of capital. The social theory of Capitalism. +The Manchester School. Property, private or real, and personal. +Powers of landlords. Distinction between private property and personal +possession. Private property an integral part of Capitalism. Incompatible +with Socialism. Conservative and Labor parties are at bottom parties +for the maintenance and abolition respectively of private property. Literary +property. 100</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxiii">[Pg xxiii]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c29">29</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">YOUR SHOPPING</p> + +<p>Incidence of unequal distribution in the shop. Nothing obtainable at +cost price: every price is loaded with a tribute to private property. +Averaging the cost of production of the entire national supply gives the +real cost price. This is the price aimed at by Socialism. Under Capitalism +the cost of production of that part of the supply which is produced under +the most unfavorable circumstances fixes the price of the entire supply. +The coal supply. By nationalizing the coal industry the public can be +supplied at the averaged cost price per ton. Examples from our numerous +existing nationalizations. 105</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c30">30</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">YOUR TAXES</p> + +<p>Grumbling about the taxes. Government gives value at the cost price +to itself; but this includes loaded prices paid by it to profiteers and landlords +for materials, services, and sites. Taxation of unearned income as +a method of avoiding these overcharges and even of providing the +service at the cost of the landlords and capitalists. Income tax, supertax, +and death duties. The National Debt. Taxation as a means of redistributing +income. The War Loan. The failure of private enterprise and +the success of National Factories during the war. 111</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c31">31</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">YOUR RATES</p> + +<p>The method of rating makes every rate a roughly graduated income +tax. How the ratepayers are exploited. Illustrations: the charwoman, the +Dock Companies, and the Drink Trade. The Poor Law, Municipal trading, +and the Post Office as instruments of exploitation. 117</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c32">32</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">YOUR RENT</p> + +<p>Rent is the most simple and direct form of exploitation. Difference +between house rent and cost of house. Ground rents in great cities. +Powers of life and death and of exile enjoyed by landlords. Sheep runs. +Deer forests. The value of all improvements is finally appropriated by +the landlords. The Single Tax. 122</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c33">33</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">WHAT CAPITAL IS</p> + +<p>Definition of Capital. Spare money. Pathological character of Capitalist +civilization. Wickedness of preaching thrift to the poor. Capital, being<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxiv">[Pg xxiv]</span> +perishable, must be consumed promptly, disappearing in the process. +Danger of Hoarding. Instability of money values. Inflation. Debasing the +currency. Constant expenditure necessary. 127</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c34">34</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">INVESTMENT AND ENTERPRISE</p> + +<p>The nature of investment. Not deferred consumption, but transferred +and postponed claim to be fed. Exploitation of the hungry by the intelligent. +Estate Development. Illustrative case of a country house and park +developed into a suburb. Proprietors without the necessary business ability +can hire it. Big business. The magic of capital. 131</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c35">35</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">LIMITATIONS OF CAPITALISM</p> + +<p>Capital is indispensable to civilization; but its private appropriation is +finally a hindrance to it, and perverts the order of its application. Examples: +Distilleries <i>versus</i> lighthouses and harbors. Error of assuming +that low prices with large sales are more profitable than high prices with +restricted sales. Cases in point: telegraph and telephone services. Snowball +letters. Commercial profit is no index to social utility. 113</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c36">36</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION</p> + +<p>Capital, though beginning at the wrong end, is driven finally to the right +end. Invention and inventors. Labor-saving machinery. Power: water, +steam, and electric. Handmade and machine-made goods. Cheapness. The +industrial revolution, though it has wrought evil, is not evil in itself. +Retrogression is neither possible nor desirable. 137</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c37">37</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SENDING CAPITAL OUT OF THE COUNTRY</p> + +<p>Capital has no country, being at home everywhere. Restrictions on trade +at home, however beneficial, drive it abroad. Example: the trade in +intoxicating drink may be driven to Africa by high excise in England +and prohibition in America. Superior attraction of the slave trade. Suppression +of slave trading followed by indirect enforcement of compulsory +labor by means of hut taxes and the like. Development of other countries +by English capital accompanied by neglect of home industrial resources +and of the improvement of our towns. The foreign competition of which +capitalists complain is often created by their own exports of capital. 140</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxv">[Pg xxv]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c38">38</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">DOLES, DEPOPULATION, AND PARASITIC PARADISES</p> + +<p>Investments of our capital abroad bring in gratuitous imports as interest. +The expenditure of this tribute gives employment. It is, however, +parasitic employment. The employees may be more pampered than productive +employees; and this, combined with the disappearance of manufacturing +towns and their replacement by attractive residential resorts, +may produce an air of increased prosperity and refinement in all classes; +but it does not provide suitable employment for the rougher workers +discharged by the discarded factories, who have to be got rid of by +Assisted Emigration or kept quiet by doles. If the process were unchecked +England would become a country of luxurious hotels and pleasure cities +inhabited by wealthy hotel guests and hotel servants with their retinue of +importers and distributors, all completely dependent on foreign tribute +from countries which might at any moment tax the incomes of absentee +capitalists to extinction, and leave us to starve. 145</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c39">39</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">FOREIGN TRADE AND THE FLAG</p> + +<p>Only freshly saved capital can be exported. The capital consumed in +the establishment of mines, railways, and fixed industrial plant cannot be +shipped abroad. When the home market supplied by them dries up through +change or exhaustion of demand, the plant must either close down or seek +markets abroad. This is the beginning of foreign trade. Trade with +civilized nations is hampered by foreign protective duties or by the competition +of the manufacturers on the spot. Undeveloped countries which +have no tariffs and no manufactures are the most lucrative markets; but +the ships’ crews and cargoes must be defended against massacre and +plunder by the natives. This leads to the establishment of trading stations +where British law is enforced. The annexation of the station makes it an +outpost of the British Empire; and its boundary becomes a frontier. The +policing of the frontier soon necessitates the inclusion of the lawless +district beyond the frontier; and thus the empire grows without premeditation +until its centre shifts to the other side of the earth. 150</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c40">40</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">EMPIRES IN COLLISION</p> + +<p>Collision of the expanding empires. Fashoda incidents. The German +demand for a place in the sun. The war of 1914-18. Expansion of professional +soldiering into conscription. The strains set up automatically +by the pressure of capitalistic commerce, and not the depravity of human +nature, are the causes of modern wars. Its horrors are therefore not a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxvi">[Pg xxvi]</span> +ground for despair of political mankind. We celebrate the end of the +Great War, not the beginning of it. The real origin of the mischief. 152</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c41">41</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE</p> + +<p>Foreign trade not objectionable as such. Need for international institutions +as well as national ones. Supernational federations and Commonwealths +highly desirable: the fewer frontiers the better. Combination +obstructed by the hard fact that Capitalism creates universal rivalry, +seeking, not to combine for the common benefit, but to appropriate for +the individual benefit. Its resistance to national self-determination and +independence arises from its reluctance to relinquish its booty. Our +colonies and our conquests. Being by its nature insatiable Capital cannot +stop fighting until it is killed. Hence the comparison of our civilization to +the magician’s apprentice who set demons to work for him, but could not +stop them when his life depended on his getting rid of them. 157</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c42">42</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW WEALTH ACCUMULATES AND MEN DECAY</p> + +<p>Personal helplessness produced by division of labor. Illustration from +pin manufacture. Optimism of Adam Smith. The various qualifications +and accomplishments of the complete individual craftsman. The relative +incompetence and ignorance of the employed through division of labor. +Total technical ignorance of the machine minder. Misgivings of Oliver +Goldsmith, Ruskin, and Morris. The remedy not retrogression but equal +distribution of the leisure made possible by mass production. Ignorance +and helplessness as great in the modern household as in the factory. 161</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c43">43</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">DISABLEMENT ABOVE AND BELOW</p> + +<p>As the disablement does not extend to the workers’ leisure it is important +that they should have plenty of it. Unfortunately it is as ill distributed +as income, the tendency of Capitalism being to separate the population +into a class doing all the work with no leisure and a class doing no +work and having all the leisure. The feudal system avoided this by placing +all the public services on the shoulders of the landlords. The transfer +of these services to a bureaucracy leaves the proprietary or capitalist class +even more completely disabled than the proletariat for the conduct of +industry. This disablement increases with the development of capitalist +civilization, and maybe regarded as a function of it. 164</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxvii">[Pg xxvii]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c44">44</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE MIDDLE STATION IN LIFE</p> + +<p>The industrial disablement of the proletariat and the proprietariat necessitates +the intervention of a middle class to direct industrial operations +and transact the business they involve. How this necessity was met. +Primogeniture. The propertyless younger sons. The professions. The men +of business. The clerks. The breakdown of the monopoly of education by +the middle class now opens it to capable proletarians as well as to younger +sons and their descendants. The resultant hardening of the lot of the +younger sons. The propertyless daughters. Opening of the professions to +them. Woman’s natural monopoly of housekeeping. It creates not only a +Woman Question but a Man Question. 168</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c45">45</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">DECLINE OF THE EMPLOYER</p> + +<p>The employer was master of the situation in the days of small firms with +modest capitals. Modern big business has outgrown their resources. Joint +stock companies have succeeded to firms, and Trusts to joint stock companies. +Multiple shops are conquering the retail trade. Enormous capitals +now required. Resultant rise of the financier, whose special function it is +to procure such capitals and promote companies to exploit them. Thus the +owner-employer becomes the employed employer, and, as an employee, +falls into the proletariat. His son cannot succeed him, as he could when +the employer was also the owner. This disappearance of the old nepotism +in business is a public advantage, but abolishes heredity in the business +class. “The Middle Station in Life” so highly praised by Defoe is now +the least eligible in the community. 177</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c46">46</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE PROLETARIAT</p> + +<p>The slogan of Karl Marx. The reduction of the middle class employer +to a proletarian employee produces Socialism. The Fabian Society. Its +success as a middle class society. Failure of its Socialist rivals as working +class societies. Working class organization against Capitalism. Trade +Unionism, or the Capitalism of the working class proletariat. 183</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c47">47</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE LABOR MARKET AND THE FACTORY ACTS</p> + +<p>Employers and employed alike buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest +markets open to them. Resultant opposition of interest between the buyer +of labor and the seller of it. The Class War. Its atrocities. Slaves better +cared for than “free” vendors of their own labor. Exposures by Karl +Marx. Restraints imposed by factory legislation. Opposition by employers.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxviii">[Pg xxviii]</span> +Their apprehension not justified by the effect of the Acts. Opposition of +the proletariat. Its parental interest in child labor. The parish apprentices. +Prices in the labor market. The value of labor falls to zero. The +theory of Capitalism. The Manchester school. Failure of the Capitalist +system to make good its guarantees. The reserve army of unemployed. +The Statute of Elizabeth. The workhouse. Child sweating practically compulsory +on parents. 187</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c48">48</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">WOMEN IN THE LABOR MARKET</p> + +<p>Men’s wages are family wages, women’s wages individual wages. The +effect is to make the proletarian married woman the slave of a slave, and +to establish conventions that the man is the breadwinner; that the woman’s +work in the home being apparently gratuitous, is not work at all; and that +women, when they are directly paid for their work, should be paid less +than men. Protection of women in the propertied class by marriage settlements, +and in the middle class by the Married Women’s Property Acts. +The sweating of daughters living partly on their father’s wages enables +one trade to sweat another, and produces a class of women who work for +less than subsistence wages without starving. Their competition brings +down the wages of all women of their class below subsistence level, with +the result that women who have neither husband nor father to make up +the shortage must make it up by prostitution or suffer the extremity of +excessive toil and insufficient food. The wages of sin often much higher +than the wages of virtue. The affiliation laws and the advantages of having +illegitimate children. The Song of the Shirt and the Mind The Paint +Girl. Male prostitution: dancing partners, barristers, clerks, journalists, +parliamentary careerists, doctors, etc. Difference in quality between the +physical prostitution forced on the woman and the mental prostitution +forced on the man. 196</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c49">49</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">TRADE UNION CAPITALISM</p> + +<p>Resistance of the proletariat to the capitalists. Combination the first +condition of effective resistance. Combination difficult or impossible as between +segregated workers (domestic servants and agricultural laborers) +and workers differing greatly in class (actors). Easy as between factory +operatives, miners, and railway workers. The weapon of the combinations +is the strike: that of the employers’ counter-combinations the lock-out. +The warfare at its worst. Rattening. The Manchester and Sheffield outrages. +“Ca’ canny”, and “restricting output”. The cost of this warfare to +the community. Capitalism cannot check it because Trade Unionism is +only the application of the Capitalist principle to labor as well as to land +and capital. Resistance of the employers. Attempt to suppress the Unions<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxix">[Pg xxix]</span> +as criminal conspiracies. Refusal to employ unionists. Combinations of +employers into employers’ federations. Victimization. The disablement of +labor by machinery obliges the Unions to insist on piecework wages instead +of time wages. Machine minding by girls’ and women’s Unions. +Failure of the proletariat to secure any considerable share of the increase +in the national output produced by machinery. 204</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c50">50</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">DIVIDE AND GOVERN</p> + +<p>The impermanence of the concessions wrested by the Unions from the +employers by strikes makes it necessary for the proletariat to have them +established as laws (Factory Acts, etc.): hence the appearance in Parliament +of Labor members, and finally of an Independent Labor Party. The +Factory Acts, beginning with the protection of children and women, acted +as a protection for the men also. In factories, when the women and children +stop the engine stops; and when the engine stops the men must stop. +How these concessions were wrung from Parliament through a split in +the Capitalist ranks whilst Labor was in a negligible minority there. The +manufacturers in 1832 break the monopoly of Parliament by the landlords. +The Factory Acts as the revenge of the landlords. These two Capitalist +parties compete for popular support by bribing the proletariat with votes. +Final complete enfranchisement of the proletariat. Meanwhile Socialism, +having sprung into existence under middle class leadership, had undertaken +the political education of the proletariat. Romantic illusions of the +middle class about the industrial proletariat. Failure of the Socialist societies +to supplant Trade Unionism. Success of the Fabian Society as a middle +class body permeating all existing political organizations. Establishment +of the Labor Party in Parliament as a political federation of Socialist +societies and Trade Unions. Its history up to 1927. On the Trade Union +side the tendency is not to Socialism but to Capitalism controlled by +Labor, with the middle and propertied classes reduced to subjection in +the interest of the proletariat. As the proletariat has the advantage of +numbers this arrangement would profit the majority; but it would be so +unpalatable to the propertied and learned classes that they may conceivably +be driven to clamor for Socialism to save them from it. 213</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c51">51</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">DOMESTIC CAPITAL</p> + +<p>The conversion of capital into machines, vehicles, and other aids to +labor. The delusion that this operation can be reversed, and the machines +and vehicles converted into spare ready money. Why this impossible operation +seems to practical business men to be not only possible but an everyday +occurrence. The real nature of the transactions which delude them. +As these transactions can be effected only by a few people at a time, an<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxx">[Pg xxx]</span> +attempt to force them on the whole Capitalist class simultaneously by a +tax on capital must fail. The income of the capitalist is real: her capital, +once invested, is imaginary, as it has been consumed in the act of converting +it into aids to labor. Death Duties, nominally taxes on capital, are +not really so, and are as objectionable in practice as they are unsound in +theory. Insanity of estimates of the wealth of the country in terms of +capital values. 225</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c52">52</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE MONEY MARKET</p> + +<p>The Money Market is not a market for the sale and purchase of spare +money, but for its hire. Difference between hiring and borrowing. Payment +for the hire of spare money is called in business interest, and in old-fashioned +economic treatises “the reward of abstinence”. In the case of +spare cash in the money market the obligation of the owner to the hirer +is as great as that of the hirer to the owner, since capital not hired perishes +by natural decay. Negative interest. The real business of the money +market is to sell incomes for lump sums of spare ready money. Enormous +rates of interest paid by the poor. The Bank Rate. Lending to companies. +Limited liability. Varieties of shares and debentures. Jobbers and brokers. +The connection of Stock Exchange transactions with industry is mostly +only nominal. Warnings. Bogus companies. Genuine companies which are +smoked out. “Coming in on the third reconstruction.” Perils of enterprise, +of public spirit, of conscience, and of imaginative foresight. 231</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c53">53</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SPECULATION</p> + +<p>Risk of becoming a gambler’s wife. Selling and buying imaginary shares +for phantom prices. How this is possible. Settling day on the Stock Exchange. +Fluctuations. Bulls, bears, and stags. Contango and Backwardation. +Cornering the bears. The losses risked are only net, not gross. +Cover. Bucket shops. Unreality of the transactions. An extraordinary +daily waste of human energy, audacity, and cunning. 239</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c54">54</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">BANKING</p> + +<p>Spare money for business purposes is mostly hired from bankers. Overdrafts. +Discounted bills of exchange. The Bank Rate. How the bankers +get the spare money they deal in. Customers must not draw their balances +simultaneously. The word credit. Credit is not capital: it is a purely +abstract opinion formed by a bank manager as to the ability of a customer +to repay an advance of goods. Credit, like invested capital, is a phantom +category. Its confusion with real capital is a dangerous delusion of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxi">[Pg xxxi]</span> +practical business man. “Bubbles” founded on this delusion. The Bank +Rate depends on the supply and demand of spare subsistence available. +Effective demand. Proposals to tax invested capital and credit. A hypothetical +example. 243</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c55">55</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">MONEY</p> + +<p>Money as a tool for buying and selling. As a measure of value. As +material available for other purposes and therefore valuable apart from +its use as money. The latter a guarantee against the dishonesty of governments. +Debasing the currency. Paper money. Inflation. Post-war examples. +Deflation. Stability the main desideratum. How to maintain this. Fluctuations +in the value of money indicated by a general rise or fall of prices. +Cheques and clearing houses as economisers of currency. Communism +dispenses with pocket money. The Bank of England as the bankers’ bank. +An intrinsically valuable coinage the safest and most stable. 251</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c56">56</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">NATIONALIZATION OF BANKING</p> + +<p>The nationalization of minting is necessary because only a Government +can establish a legal tender currency. Cheques and the like, circulating as +private currency, are not legal tender money but only private and insecure +title deeds to such money; but legal tender money is a Government title +deed to goods. Cheques and bills of exchange are senseless unless expressed +in terms of money. The nationalization of the manufacture of +money is a matter of course. The case for nationalization of banking, +though less obvious, is equally strong. Profiteering in spare money. Municipal +banks. There is no mystery about banking; and those who now +conduct it are as available for public as for private employment. 264</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c57">57</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">COMPENSATION FOR NATIONALIZATION</p> + +<p>The fate of the shareholder when the banks are nationalized. Purchase +of their shares no expense to the nation if the cost be levied on the whole +body of capitalists. The apparent compensation is really distributed confiscation. +The process a well established and familiar one. Candidates who +advocate expropriation without compensation do not know their business +and should not be voted for. Alternative of Government entering competitively +into industries and beating private enterprises out of them. +Objections. Wastefulness of competition. A competing State enterprise +would have to allow competition with itself, which is often inadmissible +in the case of ubiquitous services. The private competitor is indifferent to +the ruin of a defeated rival; but the State must avoid this. 268</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxii">[Pg xxxii]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c58">58</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">PRELIMINARIES TO NATIONALIZATION</p> + +<p>Nationalization, though theoretically sound, and its expense a bogey, is +practically an arduous undertaking, involving the organization of a central +department with local services throughout the country. It is possible +only in stable and highly organized States. Revolutions and proclamations +cannot by themselves nationalize anything. Governments may plunder and +wreck State industries to avoid imposing unpopular direct taxes. 274</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c59">59</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">CONFISCATION WITHOUT COMPENSATION</p> + +<p>There is always a clamor by indignant idealists for direct retributive +confiscation without compensation. Its possibilities. Taxation of capital as +a means of forcing defaulters to surrender their title deeds and share certificates +to the Government is plausible and not physically impossible. 276</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c60">60</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">REVOLT OF THE PARASITIC PROLETARIAT</p> + +<p>The expropriation of the rich is objected to on the ground that the +rich give employment. The sense in which this is true. The parasitic proletariat. +Bond Street and Bournemouth. All transfers of purchasing power +from the rich to the Government depress the parasitic trades and their +employees. A sudden wholesale transfer would produce an epidemic of +bankruptcy and unemployment. Governments must immediately expend +the incomes they confiscate. 277</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c61">61</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SAFETY VALVES</p> + +<p>Doles. Throwing the confiscated money into nationalized banks. Raising +wages in confiscated industries. War. Would these act quickly enough? +An uninterrupted circulation of money is as necessary to a nation as an +uninterrupted circulation of blood to an animal. Any general and simultaneous +confiscation of income would produce congestion in London. Grants-in-aid +to municipalities an important safety valve. Public works. Roads, +forests, water power, reclamation of land from the sea, garden cities. +Examination of these activities shews that none of them would act quickly +enough. They would provoke a violent reaction which would give a serious +set-back to Socialism. Nationalizations must be effected one at a time, +and be compensated. 279</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxiii">[Pg xxxiii]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c62">62</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">WHY CONFISCATION HAS SUCCEEDED HITHERTO</p> + +<p>Direct confiscation of income without compensation is already in vigorous +operation. Income tax, super tax, and estate duties. The Chancellor +of the Exchequer and his budget. Gladstone’s attitude towards income tax. +General agreement of Capitalist parties that all other means of raising +money shall be exhausted before levying taxes on income. Contrary +assumption of the proletarian Labor Party that the Capitalists should pay +first, not last. This issue underlies all the Budget debates. Estate duties +(“death duties”), though unsound economically, and often cruel and unfair +in operation, succeed in carrying Socialistic confiscation further in +England under Conservative Governments than some avowedly Socialistic +ones have been able to carry it abroad. The success of the operation is +due to the fact that the sums confiscated, though charged as percentages +on capital values, can be paid out of income directly or indirectly (by +insuring or borrowing), and are immediately thrown back into circulation +by Government expenditure. Thus income can be safely confiscated +if immediately redistributed; but the basic rule remains that the Government +must not confiscate more than it can spend productively. This is the +Socialist canon of taxation. 284</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c63">63</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW THE WAR WAS PAID FOR</p> + +<p>War must be paid for on the nail: armies cannot be fed nor slaughtered +by promissory notes. Men are obtained by conscription, and money +partly by direct taxation and inflation, but mainly by borrowing from the +capitalists in spite of the protests of the Labor Party against the exemption +of capital from conscription. The quaint result is that in order to pay +the capitalists the interest on their loans, the Chancellor of the Exchequer +has to tax them so heavily that, as a class, they are losing by the transaction. +Robbing Peter, who did not lend, to pay Paul, who did. As the +property owners who hold War Loan Stock gain at the expense of those +who do not, a unanimous Capitalist protest is impossible. An illustration. +But the Labor contention that it would pay the propertied class as a whole +to cancel the National Debt is none the less sound. Financing war by +“funded” loans. As capital invested in war is utterly and destructively +consumed it does not, like industrial capital, leave the nation better +equipped for subsequent production. The War Loan, though registered in +the books of the Bank of England as existing capital, is nothing but +debt. The country is therefore impoverished to meet interest charges on +7000 millions of non-existent capital. There are reasons for not repudiating +this debt directly; but as the war produced an enormous consumption<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxiv">[Pg xxxiv]</span> +of capital and yet left the world with less income to distribute than +before, a veiled repudiation of at least part of the debt is inevitable. Our +method of repudiation is to redistribute income as between the holders of +War Loan and the other capitalists. But as the huge borrowing and confiscation +of capital that was feasible when the Government had war +employment ready for an unlimited number of proletarians leaves them +destitute now that the Government has demobilized them without providing +peace employment, the capitalists have now to pay doles in addition +to finding the money to pay themselves their own interest. 289</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c64">64</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">NATIONAL DEBT REDEMPTION LEVIES</p> + +<p>Though taxation of capital is nonsensical, all proposals in that form +are not necessarily impracticable. A Capitalist Government could, without +requiring ready money or disturbing the Stock Exchange or the Bank +Rate, cancel the domestic part of the National Debt to relieve private +industry from taxation by veiling the repudiation as a levy on capital +values and accepting loan and share scrip at face value in payment. Illustration. +The objection to such a procedure is that levies, as distinguished +from established annual taxes, are raids on private property. As such, +they upset the sense of security which is essential to social stability, and +are extremely demoralizing to Governments when once they are accepted +as legitimate precedents. A raiding Chancellor of the Exchequer would +be a very undesirable one. The regular routine of taxation of income and +compensated nationalizations is available and preferable. 294</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c65">65</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE CONSTRUCTIVE PROBLEM SOLVED</p> + +<p>Recapitulation. The difficulty of applying the constructive program of +Socialism lies not in the practical but in the metaphysical part of the +business: the will to equality. When the Government finally acquires a +virtually complete control of the national income it will have the power +to distribute it unequally; and this possibility may enlist, and has to a +certain extent already enlisted, the most determined opponents of Socialism +on the side of its constructive political machinery. Thus Socialism +ignorantly pursued may lead to State Capitalism instead of to State +Socialism, the same road leading to both until the final distributive stage +is reached. The solution of the constructive problem of Socialism does +not allay the terrors of the alarmists who understand neither problem nor +solution, and connect nothing with the word Socialism except red ruin +and the breaking up of laws. Some examination of the effect of Socialism +on institutions other than economic must therefore be appended. 297</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxv">[Pg xxxv]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c66">66</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SHAM SOCIALISM</p> + +<p>The War, by shewing how a Government can confiscate the incomes of +one set of citizens and hand them over to another set with or without the +intention of equalizing distribution or nationalizing industries or services, +shewed also how any predominant class, trade, or clique which can nobble +our Cabinet Ministers can use the power of the State for selfish ends +by measures disguised as reforms or political necessities. All retrogressions +and blunders, like all genuine reforms, are lucrative to somebody, +and so never lack plausible advocates. Illustrative cases of exploitation of +the rates and taxes and of private benevolence by Capitalism and Trade +Unionism. Public parks, endowed schools, garden cities, and subsidies. +The Government subsidy to the coal owners in 1925 not Socialistic nor +even Capitalistic, but simply unbusinesslike. Poplarism. Mischief done by +subsidies and doles. Subsidies plus Poplarism burn the candle at both +ends. The danger of conscious and deliberate exploitation of the coercive +and confiscatory powers of the Government by private or sectional interests +is greatly increased by the modern American practice of employing +first-rate brains as such in industrial enterprise. The American Trade +Unions are following this example. Surprising results. What its adoption +by English Trade Unions will mean. Socialists will still have to +insist on equalization of income to prevent Capitalist big business and +the aristocracy of Trade Unionism controlling Collectivist Governments +for their private ends. 299</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c67">67</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">CAPITALISM IN PERPETUAL MOTION</p> + +<p>Nothing stays put. Literal Conservatism impossible. Human society is +like a glacier, apparently stationary, always in motion, always changing. +To understand the changes that are happening, and the others that are +coming, it is necessary to understand the changes that have gone before. +Examples of every phase in economic evolution still survive and can be +studied from life. Without such study we are liable to be misguided and +corrupted or exasperated. Those adventures of Capitalism in pursuit of +profits which took the form of thrilling exploits by extraordinary individuals +with no sordid aims are narrated as the splendid history of our +race. On the other hand, the more shameful episodes in that pursuit may +be imputed to the greed of capitalists instead of to the ferocity and bigotry +of their agents. Both views may be discounted as special pleadings. +A capitalist may accidentally be a genius just as she may be a fool or a +criminal. But a capitalist as such is only a person with spare money and +a legal right to withhold it from the hungry. No special ability or quality +of any sort beyond ordinary prudence and selfishness is involved in the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxvi">[Pg xxxvi]</span> +capitalist’s function: the solicitor and stockbroker, the banker and employer, +will carry the capital to the proletarians and see that when consuming +it they replace it with interest. The most intelligent woman can +do no better than invest her money, which does far more good when +invested than when spent in charity. But the employers and financiers +who exploit her capital are pressed by the exhaustion of home markets +and old industries to finance adventurous and experimental geniuses who +explore and invent and conquer. They cannot concern themselves with +the effect of these enterprises on the world or even on the nation provided +they bring back money to the shareholders. Capital, to save itself +from rotting, has to be ruthless in its ceaseless search for investment; +and mere Conservatism is of no avail against this iron necessity. Its +chartered companies. It adds India, Borneo, Rhodesia to the white Englishman’s +burden of its naval and military defence. It may yet shift our +capital from Middlesex to Asia or West Africa. Our helplessness in such +an event. No need to pack up yet; but we must get rid of static conceptions +of civilization and geography. 308</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c68">68</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE RUNAWAY CAR OF CAPITALISM</p> + +<p>Controlled motion is a good thing; but the motion of Capital is uncontrollable +and dangerous. As the future of civilization depends on Governments +gaining control of the forces that are running away with Capitalism +an understanding of them is necessary. Very few people do understand +them. The Government does not: neither do the voters. The difference +between Governments and governed. The Governments know the need for +government and want to govern. The governed have no such knowledge: +they resent government and desire freedom. This resentment, which is +the central weakness of Democracy, was not of great importance when +the people had no votes, as under Queen Elizabeth and Cromwell. But +when great extensions of government and taxation came to be required +to control and supplant Capitalism, bourgeois Democracy produced an +increase of electoral resistance to government; and proletarian Democracy +has continued the bourgeois tradition. The resultant paralysis of +Parliament has produced a demand for dictatorships; and Europe has +begun to clamor for political disciplinarians. Between our inability to +govern well and our unwillingness to be governed at all, we furnish +examples of the abuses of power and the horrors of liberty without ascertaining +the limits of either. 314</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c69">69</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE NATURAL LIMIT TO LIBERTY</p> + +<p>We are not born free: Nature is the supreme tyrant, and in our latitudes +a hard taskmaster. Commercial progress has been at root nothing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxvii">[Pg xxxvii]</span> +more than inventing ways of doing Nature’s tasks with less labor: in +short, saving labor and winning leisure. Some examples. Actually Liberty +is Leisure. Political liberations cannot add to liberty unless they add +to leisure. For example: woman’s daily routine. Sleep, feeding, resting, +and locomotion are not leisure: they are compulsory. A seven hour working +day gives at most six hours leisure out of the seventeen non-working +hours. The woman of property. Leisure is the incentive to attain her +position. All wage workers value leisure more than money. Property +coveted because it confers the maximum of leisure. Nevertheless, as +leisure brings freedom, and freedom brings responsibility and self-determination, +it is dreaded by those accustomed to tutelage: for instance, +soldiers and domestic servants. The national fund of leisure. Its present +misdistribution. Description of a hypothetical four hours working day. +Exceptions to intermittent labor at regular hours. Pregnancy and nursing. +Artistic, scientific, and political work. Fixed daily hours only a basis +for calculation. A four hours day may mean in practice six days a month, +two months a year, or an earlier retirement. Difference between routine +work and creative work. Complete freedom impossible even during leisure. +Legislative restraints on religion, sport, and marriage. The Inhibition +Complex and the Punch baby. The contrary or Anarchic Complex. +The instinctive resistance to Socialism as slavery obscures its aspect as a +guarantee of the maximum possible of leisure and therefore of liberty. 319</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c70">70</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">RENT OF ABILITY</p> + +<p>The proper social use of brains. Methods of making exceptional personal +talents lucrative. When the talents are popular, as in the case of +artists, surgeons, sports champions and the like, they involve hard work +and confer no political or industrial power. As their lucrativeness is a +function of their scarcity their power to enrich their possessors is not +formidable and is controllable by taxation. Occasional freak incomes +would not matter if equality of income were general. Impossibility of +living more expensively than the richest class. Millionaires give away +money for this reason. Special case of the talent for exploitation, which +is a real social danger. Its forms. Administrative ability. The ability to +exercise authority and enforce discipline. Both are indispensable in industry +and in all organized activities. When tactfully exercised they are +not unpopular, as most of us like to be saved the trouble of thinking for +ourselves and so are not averse from being directed. Authority and subordination +in themselves are never unpopular; but Capitalism, by creating +class differences and associating authority with insolence, destroys +the social equality which is indispensable to voluntary subordination. +Scolding, slave driving, cursing, kicking, and slacking. Reluctance to +obey commanders who are trusted and liked is less likely to give trouble<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxviii">[Pg xxxviii]</span> +than reluctance to command. Fortunately, persons of exceptional ability +do not need any special inducement to exercise it. Instances of their +failure in subordinate employment. In our socialized services they do not +demand excessive incomes. The demand of the real lady or gentleman. +Both are compelled to act as cads in capitalist commerce, in which organizers +and financiers, by reason of their special cunning, are able to extort +prodigious shares of the country’s output as “rent of ability.” The meaning +of rent. It cannot be abolished but it can be nationalized. Futility of +recriminations as to indispensability between employers and employed. +The talent of the exploiter is as indispensable to the landlord and capitalist +as to the proletarian. Directed labor is indispensable to all three. +Nationalization and equalization socializes rent of ability as well as rent +of land and capital by defeating its private appropriation. 331</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c71">71</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">PARTY POLITICS</p> + +<p>The steps to Socialism will not necessarily be taken by Socialist Governments. +Many of them may be taken, as some already have, by anti-Socialist +Cabinets. The growth of the Labor Party and the enormous +electoral preponderance of the proletarian electorate promises a complete +Labor conquest of the House of Commons. In that case the victorious +Labor Party would split into several irreconcilable groups and make +parliamentary government impossible unless it contained a unanimous +Socialist majority of members really clear in their minds as to what +Socialism exactly means. Precedent in the Long Parliament. The danger +is not peculiar to Labor. Any political party obtaining complete possession +of Parliament may go to pieces and end in a dictatorship. The Conservative +triumph produced by the anti-Russian scare of 1924 made it +almost impossible to hold the party together. Large majorities in Parliament, +far from enabling Cabinets to do what they like, destroy their +cohesion and enfeeble their party. Demoralization of Parliament during +the period of large majorities brought in by the South African war. +Concealment of preparations for the war of 1914-18. Parliamentary value +of the fact that Socialism cannot be shaken by political storms and +changes. 343</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c72">72</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">THE PARTY SYSTEM</p> + +<p>Popular ignorance of what the term Party System really means. Enslavement +of voters by the system, in and out of Parliament. Its advantage +is that if the House of Commons has good leaders the quality of +the rank and file does not matter. How it was introduced as a war measure +by William III. Under it the upshot of the General Elections is +determined not by the staunch party voters but by the floating body of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xxxix">[Pg xxxix]</span> +independent electors who follow their impulses without regard to the +Party System. The system is essentially a two-party system of solid +majority Government party <i>versus</i> solid minority Opposition party. +When independence prevails, groups form, each in a minority in the +House; and only by combining enough groups to form a majority can +any leader form a Cabinet and carry on. Such combinations are called +Blocks. They have little cohesion, and do not last. The French Chamber +exhibits this phenomenon. Possibility of its occurring in the House of +Commons. Alternative systems. Government by committees without a +Cabinet as practised by our municipalities. This is a local survival of the +old system of separate King’s cabinets upon which the Party System +was imposed. The non-party methods of local government are quite efficient. +Increasing tendency to lessen the rigidity of the Party System in +Parliament by declaring more and more questions non-party. Tendency +of Governments to resign on defeated votes of confidence only. Inadequacy +of our two Houses of Parliament for the work put upon them by +modern conditions. Need for changes involving the creation of new +chambers. The Webb proposals. 348</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c73">73</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">DIVISIONS WITHIN THE LABOR PARTY</p> + +<p>Questions on which the present apparent unanimity in the parliamentary +Labor Party is delusive: for instance, the Right to Strike. Socialism +and Compulsory Social Service <i>versus</i> Trade Unionism and Freedom of +Contract. A Bill to enforce social service and penalize strikes would +split the party. Magnitude of modern strikes through the extension of +Trade Unionism from crafts to industries. Modern strikes tend to become +devastating civil wars. Arguments for Compulsory Labor. Military and +civil service. When the issue is joined the non-Socialist Trade Unionists +will combine with the Conservatives against the Socialists. 354</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c74">74</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">RELIGIOUS DISSENSIONS</p> + +<p>The nation’s children. Religious teaching in public schools. Impossibility +of expressing the multifarious conflict of opinions on this subject +by a two-party conflict in the House of Commons. Sectarian private +schools. Roman Catholic and Nonconformist scruples. Passive resistance. +Impracticable solutions. Cowper-Templeism. The Bible and Copernican +astronomy. Modern physics and evolutional biology. Men professing science +are as bigoted as ecclesiastics. Secular education impossible because +children must be taught conduct, and the ultimate sanctions of conduct +are metaphysical. Weakness of the punishment system. Conceptions of +God. Personifications of God as the Big Papa and the Roman Catholic +Big Mamma needed for children. Voltaire and Robespierre anticipated<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xl">[Pg xl]</span> +in the nursery. Comte’s law of the three stages of belief. Tendency of +parents, voters, elected persons, and governments to impose their religions, +customs, names, institutions, and even their languages on everyone +by force. Such substitutions may be progressive. Toleration is incompatible +with complete sectarian conviction: the historic tolerations were +only armistices or exhaustions after drawn battles. Examples of modern +bigotry. Toleration is impossible as between Capitalism and Socialism. +It is therefore necessary to demonstrate that a Labor Party can neither +establish Socialism by exterminating its opponents, nor its opponents +avert it by exterminating the Socialists. 359</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c75">75</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">REVOLUTIONS</p> + +<p>Difference between revolutions and elections or ordinary reforms. +Revolutions transfer political power from one faction or leader to +another by violence or the threat of violence. Examples from English +history. The transfer of political power from our capitalists to our proletarians +has already taken place in form but not in substance, because, +as our proletariat is half parasitic on Capitalism, and only half productive +and self-supporting, half the proletarians are on the side of Capitalism. +“Ye are many: they are few” is a dangerously misleading slogan. +Consciousness of their formidable proletarian backing may embolden the +capitalists to refuse to accept a parliamentary decision on any issue which +involves a serious encroachment of Socialism on Private Property. The +case of Ireland, and the simultaneous post-war repudiations of parliamentary +supremacy in several continental countries forbid us to dismiss +this possibility as unlikely. But whether our political decisions are made +by votes or by blood and iron the mere decisions to make changes +and the overruling of their opponents cannot effect any changes except +nominal ones. The Russian Revolution effected a complete change from +absolute monarchy to proletarian republicanism and proclaimed the substitution +of Communism for Capitalism; but the victorious Communists +found themselves obliged to fall back on Capitalism and do their best to +control it. Their difficulties were greatly increased by the destruction +involved by violent revolution. Communism can spread only as a development +of existing economic civilization and must be thrown back by any +sudden overthrow of it. “The inevitability of gradualness” does not imply +any inevitability of peaceful change; but Socialists will be strongly +opposed to civil war if their opponents do not force it on them by repudiating +peaceful methods, because though civil war may clear the way it +can bring the goal no nearer. The lesson of history on this point. The +French Revolution and the <i>mot</i> of Fouquier Tinville. Socialism must +therefore be discussed on its own merits as an order of society apart +from the methods by which the necessary political power to establish it +may be attained. 370</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xli">[Pg xli]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c76">76</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">CHANGE MUST BE PARLIAMENTARY</p> + +<p>As peaceful settlement of the struggle for political supremacy between +the Capitalists and the Socialists cannot be guaranteed we must resign +ourselves to the unpleasant possibilities of our sedulously glorified pugnacity. +But as destructive quarreling must be followed by constructive +co-operation if civilization is to be maintained the consummation of +Socialism can proceed when the fighting is over. A civil war can therefore +be only an interruption and need not be further considered. Socialism +in Parliament. How a series of properly prepared and compensated +nationalizations may be voted for by intelligent politicians who are not +Socialists, and carried out without disturbing the routine to which the +unthinking masses are accustomed. Importance of the preparations: every +nationalization will require extensions of the civil and municipal services. +Socialism at one stroke is impossible. How far it must stop short of its +logical completion. 380</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c77">77</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SUBSIDIZED PRIVATE ENTERPRISE</p> + +<p>Private commercial enterprise will not be completely superseded by +nationalization; but it may become bankrupt; and in that case it may +demand and receive subsidies from the Government. A simple instance. +This process, long familiar in cultural institutions, has now begun in big +business: for example the Government subsidy to coal owners in 1925, +the Capitalists thus themselves establishing the practice, and providing +precedents for the subsidizing of private experimental ventures by Socialist +Governments. Direct industrial nationalizations must be confined +to well-established routine services. When State-financed private ventures +succeed, and thereby cease to be experimental, they can be nationalized, +throwing back private enterprise on its proper business of novelty, +invention, and experiment. The objections of doctrinaire nationalizers. +The Socialist objective is not nationalization but equalization of income, +nationalization being only a means to that end. The abuse of subsidies. +Looting the taxpayer. Subsidies as mortgages. The national war factories. +Their sale to private bidders after the war as an illustration of the +impossibility of nationalizing or retaining anything for which the Government +cannot find immediate use. 386</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c78">78</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE?</p> + +<p>If it takes too long a revolutionary explosion may wreck civilization. +Equality of income can be attained and maintained only in a settled and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xlii">[Pg xlii]</span> +highly civilized society under a Government with a highly trained civil +service and an elaborate code of laws, fortified by general moral approval. +The process of its establishment will necessarily be dangerously +slow rather than dangerously quick; for we are not educated to be Socialists: +we teach children that Socialism is wicked. The material advantages +of the steps towards Socialism are, however, biassing proletarian parents, +who are in a huge majority, more and more in favor of the movement +towards Socialism. This tendency is helped by the moral revolt +against the cruelty of Capitalism in its operation and the sordidness of +its principle. In a Socialist State economic selfishness would probably +stand on the moral level now occupied by cardsharping instead of being +held up as the key to social eminence. 391</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c79">79</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SOCIALISM AND LIBERTY</p> + +<p>Nervous dread of over-regulation produced by the endless inspections +and restrictions needed to protect the proletariat from unbridled Capitalist +exploitation. These would have no sense in a Socialist state. Examples. +Preoccupation of the police with the enforcement of private property +rights and with the crimes and disorder caused by poverty. The drink +question. Drink the great anæsthetic. Artificial happiness indispensable +under Capitalism. Dutch courage. Drugs. Compulsory prophylactics as +substitutes for sanitation. Direct restrictions of liberty by private property. +“The right to roam.” Deer forests and sheep runs. Existing liberties +which Socialism would abolish. The liberty to be idle. Nonsense +about capital and not labor being source of wealth. The case of patents +and copyrights. Unofficial tyrannies. Fashion. Estate rules. The value of +conventionality. 393</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c80">80</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SOCIALISM AND MARRIAGE</p> + +<p>Socialists apt to forget that people object to new liberties more than +to new laws. Marriage varies from frontier to frontier. Civil marriage. +Religious and communist celibacy, or the negation of marriage. Socialism +has nothing to do with these varieties, as equality of income applies impartially +to them all. Why there is nevertheless a rooted belief that +Socialism will alter marriage. The legend of Russian “nationalization of +women”. Where women and children are economically dependent on husbands +and fathers marriage is slavery for wives and home a prison for +children. Socialism, by making them economically independent, would +break the chain and open the prison door. Probable results. Improvement +in domestic manners. The State should intervene to divorce separated +couples, thus abolishing the present power of the parties to enforce a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xliii">[Pg xliii]</span> +broken tie vindictively or religiously. Clash of Church and State on marriage. +The State must intervene to control population. As Socialism +would clear away the confusion into which Capitalism, with its inevitable +result of parasitic labor and premature overpopulation, has plunged the +subject, a Socialist state is more likely to interfere than a Capitalist one. +Expedients. Limitation of families. Encouragement of families. Polygamy. +Experience of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons) on this point. +Bounties for large families plus persecution of birth control. State endowment +of parentage. Compulsory parentage. Monogamy practicable +only when the numbers of the sexes are equal. Case of a male-destroying +war. Conflicting domestic ideals affecting population. The Bass Rock +ideal. The Boer ideal. The bungalow ideal. The monster hotel ideal. 406</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c81">81</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SOCIALISM AND CHILDREN</p> + +<p>The State school child. Need for the protection of children against +parents. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. The new +Adoption Act. Need for the organization of child life as such. Schools +essentially prisons. General ignorance after nine years of enforced elementary +schooling. Limits of child liberty. The real nature and purpose +of education. Our stupidities about it. Injury done by forcing children to +learn things beyond their capacity or foreign to their aptitudes. Girls +and compulsory Beethoven. Boys and compulsory classics and mathematics. +Eton began by forbidding play and now makes it compulsory. +Children as animals to be tamed by beating and sacks to be filled with +learning. Opportunities for the Sadist and child fancier. Children in +school are outlawed. Typical case of assault. Unendurable strain of the +relations between teachers and children. Schools, though educationally +disastrous, have the incidental advantage of encouraging promiscuous +social intercourse. University manners. Middle class manners. Garden +City and Summer School manners. Need for personal privacy and free +choice of company not supplied by the snobbery and class segregations +of Capitalism. Socialism preferable on this score. Technical education +for citizenship. As knowledge must not be withheld on the ground that +it is as efficient for evil as for good, it must be accompanied by moral +instruction and ethical inculcation. Doctrines a Socialist state could not +tolerate. Variety and incompatibility of British religions. Original sin. +Brimstone damnation. Children’s souls need protection more than their +bodies. The Bible. A common creed necessary to citizenship. Certain +prejudices must be inculcated. Need for an official second nature. Limits +to State proselytizing. Beyond the irreducible minimum of education the +hand should be left to find its own employment and the mind its own +food. 412</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xliv">[Pg xliv]</span></p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c82">82</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">SOCIALISM AND THE CHURCHES</p> + +<p>Will a Socialist State tolerate a Church? This question must be discussed +objectively. Survey of the age-long struggle between Church and +State for the control of political and social institutions. The Inquisition +and the Star Chamber. Theocracy has not lost its power. Mormon Theocracy. +Christian Science. Both have come into conflict with the secular +government. New Churches capture secular Governments by denying that +they are Churches. The persecutions and fanaticisms of today rage in +the name of Science. The avowed Church of Christ Scientist <i>versus</i> the +masked Church of Jenner and Pasteur, Scientists. Tests for public office, +governing bodies, and professions. Church of England tests broken by +the English people refusing to remain in one Church. The Quakers. Admission +to Parliament of Dissenters, then of Jews, finally of Atheists, +leading to civil marriage and burial and the substitution of civil registration +of birth for baptism, leaves the State in the grip of pseudo-scientific +orthodoxy. Extravagances of this new faith in America and the +new European republics. The assets of religion are also the assets of +science. The masses, indifferent to both, are ungovernable without an +inculcated faith (the official second nature). Modern conflicts between +secular authority and Church doctrine. Cremation. Rights of animals. +Use of cathedrals. The Russian situation: the State tolerating the Church +whilst denouncing its teaching as dope. Such contemptuously tolerant +anti-clericalism is necessarily transient: positive teaching being indispensable. +Subjective religion. Courage. Redskin ideals. Man as hunter-warrior +with Woman as everything else. Political uselessness of ferocity +and sportsmanship. Fighting men cowardly and lazy as thinkers. Women +anxious lest Socialism should attack their religion. It need not do so unless +inequality of income is part of their religion. But they must beware of +attempts to constitute Socialism as a Catholic Church with an infallible +prophet and Savior. The Moscow Third International is essentially such +a Church, with Karl Marx as its prophet. It must come into conflict with +the Soviet and be mastered by it. We need not, however, repudiate its +doctrine and vituperate its prophet on that account any more than we +need repudiate the teaching of Christ and vilify his character when we +insist that the State and not the Church shall govern England. The +merits of Marx. 429</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c83">83</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">CURRENT CONFUSIONS</p> + +<p>The Intelligent Woman must resist the impulse to intervene in conversational +bickerings and letters to the Press about Socialism and Capitalism +by people who understand neither. Meaningless vituperation and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xlv">[Pg xlv]</span> +general misuse of nomenclature. Politicians misname themselves as well +as oneanother. Self-contradictory names such as Communist-Anarchist. +Real distinctions. Direct Action <i>versus</i> Fabianism. Poor Man’s Capitalism: +its forms. It often masquerades as Socialism. The assumption of the +name Communist by the cruder sort of Direct-Actionists produces the +anomaly of a Labor Party expelling Communists whilst advocating Communist +legislation. Fascism, produced by impatient disgust with Parliament +as an institution, is common to the extreme Right and the extreme +Left. Methods of Direct Action. The General Strike. Its absurdity. Its +futility as a preventive of war. Pacifism. Supernational social organization. +Empires and Commonwealths. Confusions as to Democracy. Proletarian +jealousy of official power. Resultant autocracy in the Trade +Unions. Labor leaders more arbitrary than Peers, and much more cynical +as to working class political capacity than middle class and aristocratic +idealists. Democracy in practice has never been democratic; and the millennial +hopes based on every extension of the franchise, from the Reform +Bill of 1832 to Votes for Women, have been disappointed. The reaction. +Discipline for everybody and votes for nobody. Why women should stick +resolutely to their votes. Proportional Representation opposed by the +Labor Party. Need for a scientific test of political capacity. Those who +use democracy as a stepping stone to political power oppose it as a +dangerous nuisance when they get there. Its real object is to establish a +genuine aristocracy. To do this we must first ascertain which are the +aristocrats; and it is here that popular voting fails. Mrs Everybody votes +for Mrs Somebody only to discover that she has elected Mrs Noisy +Nobody. 443</p> + + +<p class="c p1"><a href="#c84">84</a></p> + +<p class="c less sp">PERORATION</p> + +<p>A last word. Danger of discouragement through excessive sympathy. +Public evils are fortunately not millionfold evils. Suffering is not cumulative; +but waste is; and the Socialist revolt is against waste. Honor, +health, and joy of heart are impossible under Capitalism: rich and poor +are alike detestable: both must cease to exist. Our need for neighbors +whose interests do not compete with ours is against the principle of Capitalism. +Waiting for dead men’s shoes. The professions. Husband hunting. +The social friction is intense: Capitalism puts sand instead of oil in all +the bearings of our machinery. The remonstrance of the optimist. Natural +kindliness. Capitalism itself was better-intentioned in its inception than +early Christianity. Goodwill is not enough: it is dangerous until it finds +the right way. Unreasoning sentiment an unsafe guide. We believe what +we want to believe: if a pecuniary bias is given to our activities it will +corrupt them in institution, teaching, and practice until the best intentioned +citizens will know no honest methods and doctrines. In our search<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xlvi">[Pg xlvi]</span> +for disinterested service we come up against profiteering and Trade +Unionism at every turn. Resultant cynicism and pessimism. Gulliver’s +Travels and Candide. Equality of income would make these terrible books +mere clinical lectures on an extinct disease. The simple and noble meaning +of gentility. 455</p> + + +<p class="c less sp p1"><a href="#c85">APPENDIX</a></p> + +<p>Instead of a bibliography. The technical literature of Capitalism and +Socialism mostly abstract, inhuman, and written in an academic jargon +which only specialists find readable. Failure to define either capital or +Socialism. The early Capitalist economists: their candor. Ricardo, +De Quincey, and Austin. The Socialist reaction: Proudhon and Marx. +The academic reaction: John Stuart Mill, Cairnes, and Maynard Keynes. +The artistic reaction: Ruskin, Carlyle, and Morris. The reaction of the +novelists: Dickens and Wells, Galsworthy and Bennett. The reaction in +the theatre: Ibsen and Strindberg. Henry George and Land Nationalization. +Literature of the conversion of Socialism from an insurrectionary +movement in the Liberal tradition to a constitutional one. Fabian Essays. +Sidney and Beatrice Webb. The author’s contributions. 465</p> + +<p><a href="#c86"><span class="smcap">Index</span></a> <span class="pad2">471</span></p> +</div> +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">[Pg 1]</span></p> + +<p class="c sp" id="c1">THE INTELLIGENT WOMAN’S GUIDE TO<br> +SOCIALISM AND CAPITALISM</p> +</div> + +<h2 class="nobreak">1</h2> + + +<p class="c less sp">A CLOSED QUESTION OPENS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>T would be easy, dear madam, to refer you to the many books +on modern Socialism which have been published since it became +a respectable constitutional question in this country in the +eighteen-eighties. But I strongly advise you not to read a line +of them until you and your friends have discussed for yourselves +how wealth should be distributed in a respectable civilized +country, and arrived at the best conclusion you can.</p> + +<p>For Socialism is nothing but an opinion held by some people +on that point. Their opinion is not necessarily better than your +opinion or anyone else’s. How much should you have and how +much should your neighbors have? What is your own answer?</p> + +<p>As it is not a settled question, you must clear your mind of the +fancy with which we all begin as children, that the institutions +under which we live, including our legal ways of distributing income +and allowing people to own things, are natural, like the +weather. They are not. Because they exist everywhere in our +little world, we take it for granted that they have always existed +and must always exist, and that they are self-acting. That is a +dangerous mistake. They are in fact transient makeshifts; and +many of them would not be obeyed, even by well-meaning +people, if there were not a policeman within call and a prison +within reach. They are being changed continually by Parliament, +because we are never satisfied with them. Sometimes they are +scrapped for new ones; sometimes they are altered; sometimes +they are simply done away with as nuisances. The new ones have +to be stretched in the law courts to make them fit, or to prevent +them fitting too well if the judges happen to dislike them. +There is no end to this scrapping and altering and innovating. +New laws are made to compel people to do things they never +dreamt of doing before (buying insurance stamps, for instance). +Old laws are repealed to allow people to do what they used to be +punished for doing (marrying their deceased wives’ sisters and +husbands’ brothers, for example). Laws that are not repealed are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">[Pg 2]</span> +amended and amended and amended like a child’s knickers until +there is hardly a shred of the first stuff left. At the elections some +candidates get votes by promising to make new laws or to get rid +of old ones, and others by promising to keep things just as they +are. This is impossible. Things will not stay as they are.</p> + +<p>Changes that nobody ever believed possible take place in a +few generations. Children nowadays think that spending nine +years in school, old-age and widows’ pensions, votes for women, +and short-skirted ladies in Parliament or pleading in barristers’ +wigs in the courts, are part of the order of Nature, and always +were and ever shall be; but their greatgrandmothers would have +set down anyone who told them that such things were coming as +mad, and anyone who wanted them to come as wicked.</p> + +<p>When studying how the wealth we produce every year should +be shared among us, we must not be like either the children or +the greatgrandmothers. We must bear constantly in mind that +our shares are being changed almost every day on one point or +another whilst Parliament is sitting, and that before we die the +sharing will be different, for better or worse, from the sharing of +today, just as the sharing of today differs from the nineteenth +century sharing more than Queen Victoria could have believed +possible. The moment you begin to think of our present sharing +as a fixture, you become a fossil. Every change in our laws takes +money, directly or indirectly, out of somebody’s pocket (perhaps +yours) and puts it into somebody else’s. This is why one set of +politicians demands each change and another set opposes it.</p> + +<p>So what you have to consider is not whether there will be +great changes or not (for changes there certainly will be) but +what changes you and your friends think, after consideration and +discussion, would make the world a better place to live in, and +what changes you ought to resist as disastrous to yourself and +everyone else. Every opinion you arrive at in this way will become +a driving force as part of the public opinion which in the long +run must be at the back of all the changes if they are to abide, +and at the back of the policemen and jailers who have to enforce +them, right or wrong, once they are made the law of the land.</p> + +<p>It is important that you should have opinions of your own on +this subject. Never forget that the old law of the natural philosophers,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</span> +that Nature abhors a vacuum, is true of the human head. +There is no such thing as an empty head, though there are heads +so impervious to new ideas that they are for all mental purposes +solid, like billiard balls. I know that you have not that sort of +head, because, if you had, you would not be reading this book. +Therefore I warn you that if you leave the smallest corner of your +head vacant for a moment, other people’s opinions will rush in +from all quarters, from advertisements, from newspapers, from +books and pamphlets, from gossip, from political speeches, from +plays and pictures—and, you will add, from this book!</p> + +<p>Well, of course I do not deny it. When I urge you to think for +yourself (as all our nurses and mothers and schoolmistresses do +even though they clout our heads the moment our conclusions +differ from theirs) I do not mean that you should shut your eyes +to everyone else’s opinions. I myself, though I am by way of +being a professional thinker, have to content myself with secondhand +opinions on a great many most important subjects on which +I can neither form an opinion of my own nor criticize the opinions +I take from others. I take the opinion of the Astronomer Royal as +to when it is twelve o’clock; and if I am in a strange town I take +the opinion of the first person I meet in the street as to the way to +the railway station. If I go to law I have to consent to the absurd +but necessary dogma that the king can do no wrong. Otherwise +trains would be no use to me, and lawsuits could never be finally +settled. We should never arrive anywhere or do anything if we +did not believe what we are told by people who ought to know +better than ourselves, and agree to stand by certain dogmas of +the infallibility of authorities whom we nevertheless know to be +fallible. Thus on most subjects we are forced by our ignorance +to proceed with closed minds in spite of all exhortations to think +boldly for ourselves, and be, above all things, original.</p> + +<p>St Paul, a rash and not very deep man, as his contempt for +women shews, cried “Prove all things: hold fast that which is +good”. He forgot that it is quite impossible for one woman to +prove all things: she has not the time even if she had the knowledge. +For a busy woman there are no Open Questions: everything +is settled except the weather; and even that is settled +enough for her to buy the right clothes for summer and winter.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</span> +Why, then, did St Paul give a counsel which he must have known +to be impracticable if he ever thought about it for five minutes?</p> + +<p>The explanation is that the Settled Questions are never really +settled, because the answers to them are never complete and final +truths. We make laws and institutions because we cannot live in +society without them. We cannot make perfect institutions because +we are not perfect ourselves. Even if we could make perfect +institutions, we could not make eternal and universal ones, because +the conditions change, and the laws and institutions that +work well with fifty enclosed nuns in a convent would be impossible +in a nation of forty million people at large. So we have +to do the best we can at the moment, leaving posterity free to do +better if it can. When we have made our laws in this makeshift +way, the questions they concern are settled for the moment only. +And in politics the moment may be twelve months or twelve hundred +years, a mere breathing space or a whole epoch.</p> + +<p>Consequently there come crises in history when questions +that have been closed for centuries suddenly yawn wide open. It +was in the teeth of one of these terrible yawns that St Paul cried +that there are no closed questions, that we must think out everything +for ourselves all over again. In his Jewish world nothing +was more sacred than the law of Moses, and nothing more indispensable +than the rite of circumcision. All law and all religion +seemed to depend on them; yet St Paul had to ask the Jews to +throw over the law of Moses for the contrary law of Christ, declaring +that circumcision did not matter, as it was baptism that was +essential to salvation. How could he help preaching the open mind +and the inner light as against all laws and institutions whatever?</p> + +<p>You are now in the position of the congregations of St Paul. +We are all in it today. A question that has been practically closed +for a whole epoch, the question of the distribution of wealth and +the nature of property, has suddenly yawned wide open before +us; and we all have to open our closed minds accordingly.</p> + +<p>When I say that it has opened suddenly, I am not forgetting +that it never has been closed completely for thoughtful people +whose business it was to criticize institutions. Hundreds of years +before St Paul was born, prophets crying in the wilderness had +protested against the abominations that were rampant under the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</span> +Mosaic law, and prophesied a Savior who would redeem us +from its inhumanity. I am not forgetting either that for hundreds +of years past our own prophets, whom we call poets or philosophers +or divines, have been protesting against the division of the +nation into rich and poor, idle and overworked. But there comes +finally a moment at which the question that has been kept ajar only +by persecuted prophets for a few disciples springs wide open for +everybody; and the persecuted prophets with their tiny congregations +of cranks grow suddenly into formidable parliamentary +Oppositions which presently become powerful Governments.</p> + +<p>Langland and Latimer and Sir Thomas More, John Bunyan +and George Fox, Goldsmith and Crabbe and Shelley, Carlyle +and Ruskin and Morris, with many brave and faithful preachers, +in the Churches and out of them, of whom you have never heard, +were our English prophets. They kept the question open for +those who had some spark of their inspiration; but prosaic everyday +women and men paid no attention until, within my lifetime +and yours, quite suddenly ordinary politicians, sitting on the +front benches of the House of Commons and of all the European +legislatures, with vast and rapidly growing bodies of ordinary respectable +voters behind them, began clamoring that the existing +distribution of wealth is so anomalous, monstrous, ridiculous, +and unbearably mischievous, that it must be radically changed +if civilization is to be saved from the wreck to which all the older +civilizations we know of were brought by this very evil.</p> + +<p>That is why you must approach the question as an unsettled +one, with your mind as open as you can get it. And it is from my +own experience in dealing with such questions that I strongly +advise you not to wait for a readymade answer from me or anyone +else, but to try first to solve the problem for yourself in your own +way. For even if you solve it all wrong, you will become not only +intensely interested in it, but much better able to understand and +appreciate the right solution when it comes along.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c2">2</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">DIVIDING-UP</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">E</span>VERYBODY knows now that Socialism is a proposal to +divide-up the income of the country in a new way. What you +perhaps have not noticed is that the income of the country +is being divided-up every day and even every minute at present, +and must continue to be divided-up every day as long as +there are two people left on earth to divide it. The only possible +difference of opinion is not as to whether it shall be divided or not, +but as to how much each person should have, and on what conditions +he should be allowed to have it. St Paul said “He that will +not work, neither shall he eat”; but as he was only a man with a +low opinion of women, he forgot the babies. Babies cannot work, +and are shockingly greedy; but if they were not fed there would +soon be nobody left alive in the world. So that will not do.</p> + +<p>Some people imagine that because they can save money the +wealth of the world can be stored up. Stuff and nonsense. Most +of the wealth that keeps us alive will not last a week. The world +lives from hand to mouth. A drawingroom poker will last a lifetime; +but we cannot live by eating drawingroom pokers; and +though we do all we can to make our food keep by putting eggs +into water-glass, tinning salmon, freezing mutton, and turning +milk into dry goods, the hard fact remains that unless most of our +food is eaten within a few days of its being baked or killed it will +go stale or rotten, and choke or poison us. Even our clothes will +not last very long if we work hard in them; and there is the washing. +You may put india-rubber patches on your boot soles to prevent +the soles wearing out; but then the patches will wear out.</p> + +<p>Every year must bring its own fresh harvest and its new generations +of sheep and cattle: we cannot live on what is left of last +year’s harvest; and as next year’s does not yet exist, we must live +in the main on this year’s, making things and using them up, +sowing and reaping, brewing and baking, breeding and butchering +(unless we are vegetarians like myself), soiling and washing, +or else dying of dirt and starvation. What is called saving is only +making bargains for the future. For instance, if I bake a hundred +and one loaves of bread, I can eat no more than the odd one; and I<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</span> +cannot save the rest, because they will be uneatable in a week. +All I can do is to bargain with somebody who wants a hundred +loaves to be eaten on the spot by himself and his family and persons +in his employment, that if I give my hundred spare loaves to him +he will give me, say, five new loaves to eat every year in future. +But that is not saving up the loaves. It is only a bargain between +two parties: one who wants to provide for the future, and another +who wants to spend heavily in the present. Consequently I cannot +save until I find somebody else who wants to spend. The +notion that we could all save together is silly: the truth is that +only a few well-off people who have more than they need can +afford to provide for their future in this way; and they could not +do it were there not others spending more than they possess. +Peter must spend what Paul saves, or Paul’s savings will go +rotten. Between the two nothing is saved. The nation as a whole +must make its bread and eat it as it goes along. A nation which +stopped working would be dead in a fortnight even if every man, +woman, and child in it had houses and lands and a million of +money in the savings bank. When you see the rich man’s wife +(or anyone else’s wife) shaking her head over the thriftlessness of +the poor because they do not all save, pity the lady’s ignorance; +but do not irritate the poor by repeating her nonsense to them.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c3">3</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW MUCH FOR EACH?</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU now realize that a great baking and making and +serving and counting must take place every day; and that +when the loaves and other things are made they must be +divided-up immediately, each of us getting her or his legally +appointed share. What should that share be? How much is +each of us to have; and why is each of us to have that much and +neither more nor less? If the hardworking widow with six children +is getting two loaves a week whilst some idle and dissolute +young bachelor is wasting enough every day to feed six working +families for a month, is that a sensible way of dividing-up? Would +it not be better to give more to the widow and less to the bachelor? +These questions do not settle themselves: they have to be settled<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</span> +by law. If the widow takes one of the bachelor’s loaves the police +will put her in prison, and send her children to the workhouse. +They do that because there is a law that her share is only two +loaves. That law can be repealed or altered by parliament if the +people desire it and vote accordingly. Most people, when they +learn this, think the law ought to be altered. When they read in +the papers that an American widow left with one baby boy, and +an allowance of one hundred and fifty pounds a week to bring +him up on, went to the courts to complain that it was not enough, +and had the allowance increased to two hundred, whilst other +widows who had worked hard early and late all their lives, and +brought up large families, were ending their days in the workhouse, +they feel that there is something monstrously unjust and +wicked and stupid in such a dividing-up, and that it must be +changed. They get it changed a little by taking back some of the +rich American widow’s share in taxes, and giving it to the poor +in old-age pensions and widows’ pensions and unemployment +doles and “free” elementary education and other things. But if the +American widow still has more than a hundred pounds a week for +the keep of her baby boy, and a large income for herself besides, +whilst the poor widow at the other end of the town has only ten +shillings a week pension between her and the workhouse, the +difference is still so unfair that we hardly notice the change. +Everybody wants a fairer division except the people who get the +best of it; and as they are only one in ten of the population, and +many of them recognize the injustice of their own position, we +may take it that there is a general dissatisfaction with the existing +daily division of wealth, and a general intention to alter it as soon +as possible among those who realize that it can be altered.</p> + +<p>But you cannot alter anything unless you know what you want +to alter it to. It is no use saying that it is scandalous that Mrs A. +should have a thousand pounds a day and poor Mrs B. only half +a crown. If you want the law altered you must be prepared to say +how much you think Mrs A. should have, and how much Mrs B. +should have. And that is where the real trouble begins. We are +all ready to say that Mrs B. ought to have more, and Mrs A. less; +but when we are asked to say exactly how much more and how +much less, some say one thing; others say another; and most of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</span> +us have nothing to say at all except perhaps that Mrs A. ought +to be ashamed of herself or that it serves Mrs B. right.</p> + +<p>People who have never thought about the matter say that the +honest way is to let everyone have what she has the money to pay +for, just as at present. But that does not get us out of the difficulty. +It only sets us asking how the money is to be allotted. +Money is only a bit of paper or a bit of metal that gives its owner +a lawful claim to so much bread or beer or diamonds or motor-cars +or what not. We cannot eat money, nor drink money, nor +wear money. It is the goods that money can buy that are being +divided-up when money is divided-up. Everything is reckoned +in money; and when the law gives Mrs B. her ten shillings when +she is seventy years old and young Master A. his three thousand +shillings before he is seven minutes old, the law is dividing-up +the loaves and fishes, the clothes and houses, the motor-cars and +perambulators between them as if it were handing out these +articles directly instead of handing out the money that buys them.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c4">4</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">NO WEALTH WITHOUT WORK</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">B</span>EFORE there can be any wealth to divide-up, there must +be labor at work. There can be no loaves without farmers +and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of +miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun +and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. +But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily +labor we should starve. If anyone is idle someone else must be +working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to +eat. That was why St Paul said “If a man will not work neither +shall he eat”. The burden of labor is imposed on us by Nature, +and has to be divided-up as well as the wealth it produces.</p> + +<p>But the two divisions need not correspond to oneanother. One +person can produce much more than enough to feed herself. +Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old +people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing +to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on +her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</span> +besides making rent for a ground landlord as well. And with the +help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern +machinery, labor can be so organized that one woman can turn +out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.</p> + +<p>This saving of labor by harnessing machines to natural forces, +like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, +which also has to be divided-up. If one person’s labor for ten +hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in +several different ways. They can put the ten hours’ work on one +person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free +rations. Or they can each do one hour’s work a day and each have +nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. +They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten +hours a day each, producing enough for thirty people, so that the +other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to +eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on +them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.</p> + +<p>Another possible arrangement would be that they should all +work much longer every day than was necessary to keep them, on +condition that they were not required to work until they were +fully grown and well educated, and were allowed to stop working +and amuse themselves for the rest of their lives when they were +fifty. Scores of different arrangements are possible between out-and-out +slavery and an equitable division of labor, leisure, and +wealth. Slavery, Serfdom, Feudalism, Capitalism, Socialism, +Communism are all at bottom different arrangements of this +division. Revolutionary history is the history of the effects of a +continual struggle by persons and classes to alter the arrangement +in their own favor. But for the moment we had better stick to the +question of dividing-up the income the labor produces; for the +utmost difference you can make between one person and another +in respect of their labor or leisure is as nothing compared to the +enormous difference you can make in their incomes by modern +methods and machines. You cannot put more than 24 hours into +a rich man’s day; but you can put 24 million pounds into his +pocket without asking him to lift his little finger for it.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c5">5</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">COMMUNISM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>F I have made this clear to you, will you try to make up your +mind how you would like to see the income of your country +divided-up day by day? Do not run to the Socialists or the +Capitalists, or to your favorite newspaper, to make up your mind +for you: they will only unsettle and bewilder you when they are +not intentionally misleading you. Think it out for yourself. Conceive +yourself as a national trustee with the entire income of the +country placed in your hands to be distributed so as to produce the +greatest social wellbeing for everybody in the country.</p> + +<p>By the way, you had better leave your own share and that of +your children and relations and friends out of the question, lest +your personal feelings upset your judgment. Some women would +say “I never think of anyone else: I don’t know anyone else”. But +that will never do in settling social questions. Capitalism and +Socialism are not schemes for distributing wealth in one lady’s +circle only, but for distributing wealth to everybody; and as the +quantity to be distributed every year is limited, if Mrs Dickson’s +child, or her sister’s child, or her dearest and oldest friend gets +more, Mrs Johnson’s child or sister’s child or dearest friend must +get less. Mrs Dickson must forget not only herself and her family +and friends, but her class. She must imagine herself for the moment +a sort of angel acting for God, without any earthly interests +and affections to corrupt her integrity, concerned solely with the +task of deciding how much everybody should have out of the +national income for the sake of the world’s greatest possible welfare +and the greatest possible good of the world’s soul.</p> + +<p>Of course I know that none of us can really do this; but we must +get as near it as we can. I know also that there are few things more +irritating than the glibness with which people tell us to think for +ourselves when they know quite well that our minds are mostly +herd minds, with only a scrap of individual mind on top. I am +even prepared to be told that when you paid the price of this book +you were paying me to think for you. But I can no more do that +than I can eat your dinner for you. What I can do is to cook your +mental dinner for you by putting you in possession of the thinking<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</span> +that has been done already on the subject by myself and others, +so that you may be saved the time and trouble and disappointment +of trying to find your way down blind alleys that have been +thoroughly explored, and found to be no-thoroughfares.</p> + +<p>Here, then, are some plans that have been tried or proposed.</p> + +<p>Let us begin with the simplest: the family plan of the apostles +and their followers. Among them everybody threw all that she or +he had into a common stock; and each took from it what she or he +needed. The obligation to do this was so sacred that when Ananias +and Sapphira kept back something for themselves, St Peter +struck them dead for “lying to the Holy Ghost”.</p> + +<p>This plan, which is Communism in its primitive purity, is practised +to this day in small religious communities where the people +live together and are all known to one another. But it is not so +simple for big populations where the people do not live together +and do not know each other. Even in the family we practise it +only partially; for though the father gives part of his earnings to +the mother, and the children do the same when they are earning +anything, and the mother buys food and places it before all of +them to partake in common, yet they all keep some of their earnings +back for their separate use; so that family life is not pure +Communism, but partly Communism and partly separate property. +Each member of the family does what Ananias and Sapphira +did; but they need not tell lies about it (though they sometimes +do) because it is understood between them that the children +are to keep back something for pocket money, the father for beer +and tobacco, and the mother for her clothes if there is any left.</p> + +<p>Besides, family Communism does not extend to the people next +door. Every house has its own separate meals; and the people in +the other houses do not contribute to it, and have no right to +share it. There are, however, exceptions to this in modern cities. +Though each family buys its own beer separately, they all get +their water communistically. They pay what they call a water +rate into a common fund to pay for a constant supply to every +house; and they all draw as much or as little water as they need.</p> + +<p>In the same way they pay for the lighting of the streets, for paving +them, for policemen to patrol them, for bridges across the +rivers, and for the removal and destruction of dustbin refuse.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</span> +Nobody thinks of saying “I never go out after dark; I have never +called a policeman in my life; I have no business on the other side +of the river and never cross the bridge; and therefore I will not +help to pay the cost of these things”. Everybody knows that town +life could not exist without lighting and paving and bridges and +police and sanitation, and that a bedridden invalid who never +leaves the house, or a blind man whose darkness no street lamp +can dispel, is as dependent on these public services for daily +supplies of food and for safety and health as any healthy person. +And this is as true of the army and navy as of the police force, of +a lighthouse as of a street lamp, of a Town Hall as of the Houses +of Parliament: they are all paid for out of the common stock made +up by our rates and taxes; and they are for the benefit of everybody +indiscriminately. In short, they are Communistic.</p> + +<p>When we pay our rates to keep up this Communism we do not, +like the apostles, throw all we have into the common stock: we +make a contribution according to our means; and our means are +judged by the value of the house we live in. But those who pay +low contributions have just the same use of the public services as +those who pay high ones; and strangers and vagrants who do not +pay any contributions at all enjoy them equally. Young and old, +prince and pauper, virtuous and vicious, black and white and +yellow, thrifty and wasteful, drunk and sober, tinker, tailor, soldier, +sailor, rich man, poor man, beggarman and thief, all have +the same use and enjoyment of these communistic conveniences +and services which cost so much to keep up. And it works perfectly. +Nobody dreams of proposing that people should not be +allowed to walk down the street without paying and producing a +certificate of character from two respectable householders. Yet +the street costs more than any of the places you pay to go into, +such as theatres, or any of the places where you have to be introduced, +like clubs.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c6">6</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">LIMITS TO COMMUNISM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>OULD you ever have supposed from reading the newspapers +that Communism, instead of being a wicked +invention of Russian revolutionaries and British and +American desperadoes, is a highly respectable way of sharing +our wealth, sanctioned and practised by the apostles, and +an indispensable part of our own daily life and civilization? The +more Communism, the more civilization. We could not get on +without it, and are continually extending it. We could give up +some of it if we liked. We could put turnpike gates on the roads +and make everybody pay for passing along them: indeed we may +still see the little toll houses where the old turnpike gates used to +be. We could abolish the street lamps, and hire men with torches +to light us through the streets at night: are not the extinguishers +formerly used by hired linkmen still to be seen on old-fashioned +railings? We could even hire policemen and soldiers by the job to +protect us, and then disband the police force and the army. But we +take good care to do nothing of the sort. In spite of the way people +grumble about their rates and taxes they get better value for them +than for all the other money they spend. To find a bridge built +for us to cross the river without having to think about it or pay +anyone for it is such a matter of course to us that some of us come +to think, like the children, that bridges are provided by nature, +and cost nothing. But if the bridges were allowed to fall down, +and we had to find out for ourselves how to cross the river by +fording it or swimming it or hiring a boat, we should soon realize +what a blessed thing Communism is, and not grudge the few +shillings that each of us has to pay the rate collector for the upkeep +of the bridge. In fact we might come to think Communism +such a splendid thing that everything ought to be communized.</p> + +<p>But this would not work. The reason a bridge can be communized +is that everyone either uses the bridge or benefits by it. It +may be taken as a rule that whatever is used by everybody or +benefits everybody can be communized. Roads, bridges, street +lighting, and water supply are communized as a matter of course +in cities, though in villages and country places people have to buy<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</span> +and carry lanterns on dark nights and get their water from their +own wells. There is no reason why bread should not be communized: +it would be an inestimable benefit to everybody if there +were no such thing in the country as a hungry child, and no +housekeeper had to think of the cost of providing bread for the +household. Railways could be communized. You can amuse yourself +by thinking of lots of other services that would benefit everyone, +and therefore could and should be communized.</p> + +<p>Only, you will be stopped when you come to services that are +not useful to everyone. We communize water as a matter of +course; but what about beer? What would a teetotaller say if he +were asked to pay rates or taxes to enable his neighbors to have as +much beer as they want for the asking? He would have a double +objection: first, that he would be paying for something he does +not use; and second, that in his opinion beer, far from being a +good thing, causes ill-health, crime, drunkenness, and so forth. +He would go to prison rather than pay rates for such a purpose.</p> + +<p>The most striking example of this difficulty is the Church. The +Church of England is a great communistic institution: its property +is held in trust for God; its temples and services are open to +everybody; and its bishops sit in Parliament as peers of the realm. +Yet, because we are not all agreed as to the doctrines of the +Church of England, and many of us think that a communion +table with candles on it is too like a Roman Catholic altar, we +have been forced to make the Church rate a voluntary one: that +is, you may pay it or not as you please. And when the Education +Act of 1902 gave some public money to Church schools, many +people refused to pay their rates, and allowed their furniture to +be sold year after year, sooner than allow a penny of theirs to go +to the Church. Thus you see that if you propose to communize +something that is not used or at least approved of by everybody, +you will be asking for trouble. We all use roads and bridges, and +agree that they are useful and necessary things; but we differ +about religion and temperance and playgoing, and quarrel +fiercely over our differences. That is why we communize roads +and bridges without any complaint or refusal to pay rates, but +have masses of voters against us at once when we attempt to +communize any particular form of public worship, or to deal with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</span> +beer or spirits as we deal with water, and as we should deal with +milk if we had sense enough to value the nation’s health.</p> + +<p>This difficulty can be got round to some extent by give-and-take +between the people who want different things. For instance, +there are some people who care for flowers and do not care for +music, and others who care for games and boating and care neither +for flowers nor music. But these differently minded people do +not object to paying rates for the upkeep of a public park with +flower-beds, cricket pitches, a lake for boating and swimming, +and a band. Laura will not object to pay for what Beatrice wants +if Beatrice does not object to pay for what Laura wants.</p> + +<p>Also there are many things that only a few people understand +or use which nevertheless everybody pays for because without +them we should have no learning, no books, no pictures, no high +civilization. We have public galleries of the best pictures and +statues, public libraries of the best books, public observatories +in which astronomers watch the stars and mathematicians make +abstruse calculations, public laboratories in which scientific men +are supposed to add to our knowledge of the universe. These +institutions cost a great deal of money to which we all have to +contribute. Many of us never enter a gallery or a museum or +a library even when we live within easy reach of them; and not +one person in ten is interested in astronomy or mathematics or +physical science; but we all have a general notion that these +things are necessary; and so we do not object to pay for them.</p> + +<p>Besides, many of us do not know that we pay for them: we think +we get them as kind presents from somebody. In this way a good +deal of Communism has been established without our knowing +anything about it. This is shewn by our way of speaking about +communized things as free. Because we can enter the National +Gallery or the British Museum or the cathedrals without paying +at the doors, some of us seem to think that they grew by the roadside +like wildflowers. But they cost us a great deal of money from +week to week. The British Museum has to be swept and dusted +and scrubbed more than any private house, because so many +more people tramp through it with mud on their boots. The +salaries of the learned gentlemen who are in charge of it are a +trifle compared with the cost of keeping it tidy. In the same way<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</span> +a public park needs more gardeners than a private one, and has +to be weeded and mown and watered and sown and so forth at a +great cost in wages and seeds and garden implements. We get +nothing for nothing; and if we do not pay every time we go into +these places, we pay in rates and taxes. The poorest tramp, +though he may escape rent and rates by sleeping out, pays whenever +he buys tobacco, because he pays about eight times as much +for the tobacco as it costs to grow and put on the market; and the +Government gets the difference to spend on public purposes: +that is, to maintain Communism. And the poorest woman pays +in the same way, without knowing it, whenever she buys an +article of food that is taxed. If she knew that she was stinting herself +to pay the salary of the Astronomer Royal, or to buy another +picture for the National Gallery, she might vote against the Government +at the next election for making her do it; but as she does +not know, she only grumbles about the high prices of food, and +thinks they are all due to bad harvests or hard times or strikes or +anything else that must be put up with. She might not grudge what +she has to pay for the King and Queen; but if she knew that she +was paying the wages of the thousands of charwomen who scrub +the stone staircases in the Houses of Parliament and other great +public buildings, she would not get much satisfaction out of helping +to support them better than she can afford to support herself.</p> + +<p>We see then that some of the Communism we practise is imposed +on us without our consent: we pay for it without knowing +what we are doing. But, in the main, Communism deals with things +that are either used by all of us or necessary to all of us, whether +we are educated enough to understand the necessity or not.</p> + +<p>Now let us get back to the things as to which tastes differ. We +have already seen that Church of England services and beer and +wine and spirits and intoxicants of all sorts are considered necessary +to life by some people, and pernicious and poisonous by +others. We are not agreed even about tea and meat. But there are +many things that no one sees any harm in; yet everybody does +not want them. Ask a woman what little present she would like; +and one woman will choose a pet dog, another a gramophone. A +studious girl will ask for a microscope when an active girl will +ask for a motor bicycle. Indoor people want books and pictures<span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</span> +and pianos: outdoor people want guns and fishing-rods and horses +and motor cars. To communize these things in the way that we +communize roads and bridges would be ridiculously wasteful. +If you made enough gramophones and bred enough pet dogs +to supply every woman with both, or enough microscopes and +motor bicycles to provide one each for every girl, you would +have heaps of them left on your hands by the women and girls +who did not want them and would not find house room for them. +They could not even sell them, because everybody who wanted +one would have one already. They would go into the dustbin.</p> + +<p>There is only one way out of this difficulty. Instead of giving +people things you must give them money and let them buy what +they like with it. Instead of giving Mrs Smith, who wants a +gramophone, a gramophone and a pet dog as well, costing, say, +five pounds apiece, and giving Mrs Jones, who wants a pet dog, +a pet dog and a gramophone as well, with the certainty that Mrs +Smith will drive her pet dog out of her house and Mrs Jones will +throw her gramophone into the dustbin, so that the ten pounds +they cost will be wasted, you can simply give Mrs Smith and Mrs +Jones five pounds apiece. Then Mrs Smith buys a gramophone; +Mrs Jones buys a pet dog; and both live happily ever after. And, +of course, you will take care not to manufacture more gramophones +or breed more dogs than are needed to satisfy them.</p> + +<p>That is the use of money: it enables us to get what we want instead +of what other people think we want. When a young lady is +married, her friends give her wedding presents instead of giving +her money; and the consequence is that she finds herself loaded +up with six fish-slices, seven or eight travelling clocks, and not a +single pair of silk stockings. If her friends had the sense to give +her money (I always do), and she had the sense to take it (she +always does), she would have one fish-slice, one travelling clock +(if she wanted such a thing), and plenty of stockings. Money is +the most convenient thing in the world: we could not possibly do +without it. We are told that the love of money is the root of all +evil; but money itself is one of the most useful contrivances ever +invented: it is not its fault that some people are foolish or miserly +enough to be fonder of it than of their own souls.</p> + +<p>You now see that the great dividing-up of things that has to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</span> +take place year by year, quarter by quarter, month by month, +week by week, day by day, hour by hour, and even minute by +minute, though some of it can be done by the ancient simple +family communism of the apostles, or by the modern ratepayers’ +communism of the roads and bridges and street lamps and so +forth, must in the main take the form of a dividing-up of money. +And as this throws you back again on the old questions: how +much is each of us to have? what is my fair share? what is your +fair share? and why? Communism has only partly solved the problem +for you; so we must have another shot at it.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c7">7</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SEVEN WAYS PROPOSED</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span> PLAN which has often been proposed, and which seems +very plausible to the working classes, is to let every person +have that part of the wealth of the country which she +has herself produced by her work (the feminine pronoun here +includes the masculine). Others say let us all get what we +deserve; so that the idle and dissolute and weak shall have nothing +and perish, and the good and industrious and energetic +shall have all and survive. Some believe in “the good old rule, the +simple plan, that they shall take who have the power, and they +shall keep who can”, though they seldom confess it nowadays. +Some say let the common people get enough to keep them alive +in that state of life to which it has pleased God to call them; and +let the gentry take the rest, though that, too, is not now said so +openly as it was in the eighteenth century. Some say let us divide +ourselves into classes; and let the division be equal in each class +though unequal between the classes; so that laborers shall get +thirty shillings a week, skilled workers three or four pounds, +bishops two thousand five hundred a year, judges five thousand, +archbishops fifteen thousand, and their wives what they can get +out of them. Others say simply let us go on as we are.</p> + +<p>What the Socialists say is that none of these plans will work +well, and that the only satisfactory plan is to give everybody an +equal share no matter what sort of person she is, or how old she +is, or what sort of work she does, or who or what her father was.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</span></p> + +<p>If this, or any of the other plans, happens to startle and scandalize +you, please do not blame me or throw my book into the fire. +I am only telling you the different plans that have been proposed +and to some extent actually tried. You are not bound to approve +of any of them; and you are quite free to propose a better plan +than any of them if you can think one out. But you are not free to +dismiss it from your mind as none of your business. It is a question +of your food and lodging, and therefore part of your life. If +you do not settle it for yourself, the people who are encouraging +you to neglect it will settle it for you; and you may depend on it +they will take care of their own shares and not of yours, in which +case you may find yourself some day without any share at all.</p> + +<p>I have seen that happen very cruelly during my own lifetime. +In the country where I was born, which is within an hour’s run of +England at the nearest point, many ladies of high social standing +and gentle breeding, who thought that this question did not concern +them because they were well off for the moment, ended very +pitiably in the workhouse. They felt that bitterly, and hated those +who had brought it about; but they never understood why it +happened. Had they understood from the beginning how and +why it might happen, they might have averted it, instead of, as +they did, doing everything in their power to hasten their own ruin.</p> + +<p>You may very easily share their fate unless you take care to understand +what is happening. The world is changing very quickly, +as it was around them when they thought it as fixed as the mountains. +It is changing much more quickly around you; and I +promise you that if you will be patient enough to finish this book +(think of all the patience it has cost me to finish it instead of writing +plays!) you will come out with much more knowledge of how +things are changing, and what your risks and prospects are, than +you are likely to have learnt from your schoolbooks.</p> + +<p>Therefore I am going to take all these plans for you one after +another, and examine them chapter by chapter until you know +pretty well all that is to be said for and against them.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c8">8</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">TO EACH WHAT SHE PRODUCES</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE first plan: that of giving to every person exactly what +he or she has made by his or her labor, seems fair; but +when we try to put it into practice we discover, first, that +it is quite impossible to find out how much each person has produced, +and, second, that a great deal of the world’s work is neither +producing material things nor altering the things that Nature +produces, but doing services of one sort or another.</p> + +<p>When a farmer and his laborers sow and reap a field of wheat +nobody on earth can say how much of the wheat each of them has +grown. When a machine in a factory turns out pins by the million +nobody can say how many pins are due to the labor of the person +who minds the machine, or the person who invented it, or the +engineers who made it, to say nothing of all the other persons +employed about the factory. The clearest case in the world of a person +producing something herself by her own painful, prolonged, +and risky labor is that of a woman who produces a baby; but then +she cannot live on the baby: the baby lives greedily on her.</p> + +<p>Robinson Crusoe on his desert island could have claimed that +the boats and shelters and fences he made with the materials supplied +by Nature belonged to him because they were the fruit of +nobody’s labor but his own; but when he returned to civilization +he could not have laid his hand on a chair or table in his +house which was not the work of dozens of men: foresters who +had planted the trees, woodmen who had felled them, lumbermen +and bargemen and sailors and porters who had moved them, +sawyers who had sawn them into planks and scantlings, upholsterers +and joiners who had fashioned them into tables and chairs, +not to mention the merchants who had conducted all the business +involved in these transactions, and the makers of the shops and +ships and all the rest of it. Anyone who thinks about it for a few +minutes must see that trying to divide-up by giving each worker +exactly what she or he has produced is like trying to give every +drop of rain in a heavy shower exactly the quantity of water it +adds to the supply in your cistern. It just cannot be done.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</span></p> + +<p>What can be done is to pay every person according to the time +she or he spends at the work. Time is something that can be +measured in figures. It is quite easy to pay a worker twice as much +for two hours work as for one. There are people who will work for +sixpence an hour, people who will work for eighteenpence an +hour, people who will work for two guineas an hour, people who +will work for a hundred and fifty guineas an hour. These prices +depend on how many competitors there are in the trade looking +for the work, and whether the people who want it done are rich +or poor. You pay a sempstress a shilling to sew for an hour, or +a laborer to chop wood, when there are plenty of unemployed +sempstresses and laborers starving for a job, each of them trying +to induce you to give it to her or him rather than to the next +applicant by offering to do it at a price that will barely keep body +and soul together. You pay a popular actress two or three hundred +pounds a week, or a famous opera singer as much a night, +because the public will pay more than that to hear her. You pay +a famous surgeon a hundred and fifty guineas to cut out your appendix, +or a famous barrister the same to plead for you, because +there are so few famous surgeons or barristers, and so many +patients and clients offering them large sums to work for them +rather than for you. This is called settling the price of a worker’s +time, or rather letting it settle itself, by supply and demand.</p> + +<p>Unfortunately, supply and demand may produce undesirable +results. A division in which one woman gets a shilling and another +three thousand shillings for an hour of work has no moral +sense in it: it is just something that happens, and that ought not +to happen. A child with an interesting face and pretty ways, and +some talent for acting, may, by working for the films, earn a hundred +times as much as its mother can earn by drudging at an +ordinary trade. What is worse, a pretty girl can earn by vice far +more than her plain sister can earn as an honest wife and mother.</p> + +<p>Besides, it is not so easy to measure the time spent on a piece of +work as it seems at first. Paying a laborer twice as much for two +hours work as for one is as simple as twice one are two; but when +you have to divide between an opera singer and her dresser, or an +unskilled laborer and a doctor, you find that you cannot tell how +much time you have to allow for. The dresser and the laborer are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</span> +doing what any ablebodied person can do without long study or +apprenticeship. The doctor has to spend six years in study and +training, on top of a good general education, to qualify himself +to do his work. He claims that six years of unpaid work are behind +every minute of his attendance at your bedside. A skilled +workman may claim in the same way that seven years of apprenticeship +are behind every stroke of his hammer. The opera +singer has had to spend a long time learning her parts, even when, +as sometimes happens, she has never learnt to sing. Everybody +acknowledges that this makes a difference; but nobody can +measure exactly what the difference is, either in time or money.</p> + +<p>The same difficulty arises in attempting to compare the value +of the work of a clever woman with that of a stupid one. You may +think that the work of the clever woman is worth more; but when +you are asked how much more in pounds, shillings, and pence +you have to give it up and fall back on supply and demand, confessing +that the difference cannot be measured in money.</p> + +<p>In these examples I have mixed up making things with doing +services; but I must now emphasize this distinction, because +thoughtless people are apt to think a brickmaker more of a producer +than a clergyman. When a village carpenter makes a gate +to keep cattle out of a field of wheat, he has something solid in his +hand which he can claim for his own until the farmer pays him +for it. But when a village boy makes a noise to keep the birds off +he has nothing to shew, though the noise is just as necessary as +the gate. The postman does not make anything: he only delivers +letters and parcels. The policeman does not make anything; and +the soldier not only does not make things: he destroys them. The +doctor makes pills sometimes; but that is not his real business, +which is to tell you when you ought to take pills, and what pills +to take, unless indeed he has the good sense to tell you not to take +them at all, and you have the good sense to believe him when he is +giving you good advice instead of bad. The lawyer does not make +anything substantial, nor the clergyman, nor the member of +Parliament, nor the domestic servant (though she sometimes +breaks things), nor the Queen or King, nor an actor. When their +work is done they have nothing in hand that can be weighed or +measured: nothing that the maker can keep from others until<span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</span> +she is paid for it. They are all in service: in domestic service like +the housemaid, or in commercial service like the shop assistant, +or in Government service like the postman, or in State service like +the King; and all of us who have fullsize consciences consider +ourselves in what some of us call the service of God.</p> + +<p>And then, beside the persons who make the substantial things +there must be persons to find out how they should be made. Beside +the persons who do things there must be persons who know +how they should be done, and decide when they should be done, +and how much they should be done. In simple village life both +the making or the doing and the thinking may be done by the +same person when he is a blacksmith, carpenter, or builder; but +in big cities and highly civilized countries this is impossible: one +set of people has to make and do whilst another set of people +thinks and decides what, when, how much, and by whom.</p> + +<p>Our villages would be improved by a little of this division of +labor; for it is a great disadvantage in country life that a farmer is +expected to do so many different things: he has not only to grow +crops and raise stock (two separate arts to begin with, and difficult +ones too), but to be a man of business, keeping complicated +accounts and selling his crops and his cattle, which is a different +sort of job, needing a different sort of man. And, as if this were +not enough, he has to keep his dwelling house as part of his business; +so that he is expected to be a professional man, a man of +business, and a sort of country gentleman all at once; and the +consequence is that farming is all a muddle: the good farmer is +poor because he is a bad man of business; the good man of business +is poor because he is a bad farmer; and both of them are +often bad husbands because their work is not separate from their +home, and they bring all their worries into the house with them +instead of locking them up in a city office and thinking no more +about them until they go back there next morning. In a city business +one set of men does the manual work; another set keeps the +accounts; another chooses the markets for buying and selling; and +all of them leave their work behind them when they go home.</p> + +<p>The same trouble is found in a woman’s housekeeping. She is +expected to do too many different things. She may be a very good +housekeeper and a very bad cook. In a French town this would<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</span> +not matter, because the whole family would take all the meals +that require any serious cooking in the nearest restaurant; but in +the country the woman must do both the housekeeping and the +cooking unless she can afford to keep a cook. She may be both a +good housekeeper and a good cook, but be unable to manage +children; and here again, if she cannot afford a capable nurse, she +has to do the thing she does badly along with the things she does +well, and has her life muddled and spoilt accordingly. It is a +mercy both to her and the children that the school (which is a bit +of Communism) takes them off her hands for most of the day. It +is clear that the woman who is helped out by servants or by +restaurants and schools has a much better chance in life than the +woman who is expected to do three very different things at once.</p> + +<p>Perhaps the greatest social service that can be rendered by anybody +to the country and to mankind is to bring up a family. But +here again, because there is nothing to sell, there is a very general +disposition to regard a married woman’s work as no work at all, +and to take it as a matter of course that she should not be paid for +it. A man gets higher wages than a woman because he is supposed +to have a family to support; yet if he spends the extra +money in drink or betting, the woman has no remedy against him +if she is married to him. But if she is his hired housekeeper she +can recover her wages at law. And the married man is in the same +predicament. When his wife spends the housekeeping money in +drink he has no remedy, though he could have a hired housekeeper +imprisoned for theft if she did the very same thing.</p> + +<p>Now with these examples in mind, how can an Intelligent +Woman settle what her time is worth in money compared to her +husband’s? Imagine her husband looking at it as a matter of business, +and saying “I can hire a housekeeper for so much, and a +nursemaid for so much, and a cook for so much, and a pretty lady +to keep company with for so much; and if I add up all this the +total will be what a wife is worth; but it is more than I can afford +to pay”! Imagine her hiring a husband by the hour, like a taxi cab!</p> + +<p>Yet the income of the country has to be divided-up between +husbands and wives just as it has between strangers; and as most +of us are husbands and wives, any plan for dividing-up that +breaks down when it is applied to husbands and wives breaks in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</span> +the middle and is no use. The old plan of giving the man everything, +and leaving the woman to get what she could out of him, +led to such abuses that it had to be altered by the Married +Women’s Property Acts, under which a rich woman with a poor +husband can keep all her property to herself whilst her husband +is imprisoned for life for not paying her taxes. But as nine +families out of ten have no property, they have to make the best +of what the husband can earn at his trade; and here we have the +strangest muddles: the wife getting nothing of her own, and +the bigger children making a few shillings a week and having the +difference between it and a living wage made up by the father’s +wage; so that the people who are employing the children cheaply +are really sweating the father, who is perhaps being sweated badly +enough by his own employer. Of this, more later on.</p> + +<p>Try to straighten out this muddle on the plan of giving the +woman and the children and the man what they produce each by +their own work, or what their time is worth in money to the +country; and you will find the plan nonsensical and impossible. +Nobody but a lunatic would attempt to put it into practice.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c9">9</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">TO EACH WHAT SHE DESERVES</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE second plan we have to examine is that of giving to +each person what she deserves. Many people, especially +those who are comfortably off, think that this is what happens +at present: that the industrious and sober and thrifty are +never in want, and that poverty is due to idleness, improvidence, +drink, betting, dishonesty, and bad character generally. They +can point to the fact that a laborer whose character is bad finds +it more difficult to get employment than one whose character is +good; that a farmer or country gentleman who gambles and bets +heavily, and mortgages his land to live wastefully and extravagantly, +is soon reduced to poverty; and that a man of business +who is lazy and does not attend to it becomes bankrupt. But this +proves nothing but that you cannot eat your cake and have it +too: it does not prove that your share of the cake was a fair one. +It shews that certain vices and weaknesses make us poor; but it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</span> +forgets that certain other vices make us rich. People who are +hard, grasping, selfish, cruel, and always ready to take advantage +of their neighbors, become very rich if they are clever enough not +to overreach themselves. On the other hand, people who are +generous, public-spirited, friendly, and not always thinking of +the main chance, stay poor when they are born poor unless they +have extraordinary talents. Also, as things are today, some are +born poor and others are born with silver spoons in their mouths: +that is to say, they are divided into rich and poor before they are +old enough to have any character at all. The notion that our +present system distributes wealth according to merit, even +roughly, may be dismissed at once as ridiculous. Everyone can +see that it generally has the contrary effect: it makes a few idle +people very rich, and a great many hardworking people very poor.</p> + +<p>On this, Intelligent Lady, your first thought may be that if +wealth is not distributed according to merit, it ought to be; and +that we should at once set to work to alter our laws so that in +future the good people shall be rich in proportion to their goodness +and the bad people poor in proportion to their badness. +There are several objections to this; but the very first one settles +the question for good and all. It is, that the proposal is impossible. +How are you going to measure anyone’s merit in money? Choose +any pair of human beings you like, male or female, and see +whether you can decide how much each of them should have on +her or his merits. If you live in the country, take the village blacksmith +and the village clergyman, or the village washerwoman and +the village schoolmistress, to begin with. At present the clergyman +often gets less pay than the blacksmith: it is only in some +villages he gets more. But never mind what they get at present: +you are trying whether you can set up a new order of things in +which each will get what he deserves. You need not fix a sum of +money for them: all you have to do is to settle the proportion +between them. Is the blacksmith to have as much as the clergyman? +or twice as much as the clergyman? or half as much as the +clergyman? or how much more or less? It is no use saying that one +ought to have more and the other less: you must be prepared to +say exactly how much more or less in calculable proportion.</p> + +<p>Well, think it out. The clergyman has had a college education;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</span> +but that is not any merit on his part: he owes it to his father; so +you cannot allow him anything for that. But through it he is able +to read the New Testament in Greek; so that he can do something +the blacksmith cannot do. On the other hand, the blacksmith can +make a horse-shoe, which the parson cannot. How many verses +of the Greek Testament are worth one horse-shoe? You have only +to ask the silly question to see that nobody can answer it.</p> + +<p>Since measuring their merits is no use, why not try to measure +their faults? Suppose the blacksmith swears a good deal, and gets +drunk occasionally! Everybody in the village knows this; but the +parson has to keep his faults to himself. His wife knows them; +but she will not tell you what they are if she knows that you intend +to cut off some of his pay for them. You know that as he is only a +mortal human being he must have some faults; but you cannot +find them out. However, suppose he has some faults that you can +find out! Suppose he has what you call an unfortunate manner; +that he is a hypocrite; that he is a snob; that he cares more for +sport and fashionable society than for religion! Does that make +him as bad as the blacksmith, or twice as bad, or twice and a +quarter as bad, or only half as bad? In other words, if the blacksmith +is to have a shilling, is the parson to have a shilling also, +or is he to have sixpence, or fivepence and one-third, or two +shillings? Clearly these are fools’ questions: the moment they +bring us down from moral generalities to business particulars +it becomes plain to every sensible person that no relation can be +established between human qualities, good or bad, and sums +of money, large or small. It may seem scandalous that a prize-fighter, +for hitting another prize-fighter so hard at Wembley +that he fell down and could not rise within ten seconds, received +the same sum that was paid to the Archbishop of Canterbury +for acting as Primate of the Church of England for nine +months; but none of those who cry out against the scandal can +express any better in money the difference between the two. +Not one of the persons who think that the prize-fighter should get +less than the Archbishop can say how much less. What the prize-fighter +got for his six or seven minutes boxing would pay a +judge’s salary for two years; and we are all agreed that nothing +could be more ridiculous, and that any system of distributing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</span> +wealth which leads to such absurdities must be wrong. But to +suppose that it could be changed by any possible calculation that +an ounce of archbishop or three ounces of judge is worth a pound +of prize-fighter would be sillier still. You can find out how many +candles are worth a pound of butter in the market on any particular +day; but when you try to estimate the worth of human +souls the utmost you can say is that they are all of equal value +before the throne of God. And that will not help you in the least +to settle how much money they should have. You must simply +give it up, and admit that distributing money according to merit +is beyond mortal measurement and judgment.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c10">10</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">TO EACH WHAT SHE CAN GRAB</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE third plan: that of letting everyone have what she can +lay her hands on, would produce a world in which there +would be no peace and no security. If we were all equally +strong and cunning we should all have an equal chance; but +in a world where there are children and old people and invalids, +and where able-bodied adults of the same age and strength vary +greatly in greediness and wickedness, it would never do: we +should get tired of it in no time. Even pirate crews and bands of +robbers prefer a peaceful settled understanding as to the division +of their plunder to the Kilkenny cat plan.</p> + +<p>Among ourselves, though robbery and violence are forbidden, +we still allow business to be conducted on the principle of letting +everyone make what he can out of it without considering anyone +but himself. A shopkeeper or a coal merchant may not pick your +pocket; but he may overcharge you as much as he likes. Everyone +is free in business to get as much and give as little for his +money as he can induce his customers to put up with. House rent +can be raised without any regard to the cost of the houses or the +poverty of the tenant. But this freedom produces such bad results +that new laws are continually being made to restrain it; and +even when it is a necessary part of our freedom to spend our +money and use our possessions as seems best to us, we still have +to settle how much money and what possessions we should be<span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</span> +given to start with. This distribution must be made according to +some law or other. Anarchy (absence of law) will not work. We +must go on with our search for a righteous and practicable law.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c11">11</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">OLIGARCHY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE fourth plan is to take one person in every ten (say), +and make her rich without working by making the other +nine work hard and long every day, giving them only +enough of what they make to keep them alive and enable them +to bring up families to continue their slavery when they grow +old and die. This is roughly what happens at present, as one-tenth +of the English people own nine-tenths of all the property in the +country, whilst most of the other nine-tenths have no property, +and live from week to week on wages barely sufficient to support +them in a very poor way. The advantage claimed for this plan +is that it provides us with a gentry: that is, with a class of rich +people able to cultivate themselves by an expensive education; so +that they become qualified to govern the country and make and +maintain its laws; to organize and officer the army for national +defence; to patronize and keep alive learning, science, art, literature, +philosophy, religion, and all the institutions that distinguish +great civilizations from mere groups of villages; to raise magnificent +buildings, dress splendidly, impose awe on the unruly, +and set an example of good manners and fine living. Most important +of all, as men of business think, by giving them much +more than they need spend, we enable them to save those great +sums of spare money that are called capital, and are spent in making +railways, mines, factories full of machinery, and all the other +contrivances by which wealth is produced in great quantities.</p> + +<p>This plan, which is called Oligarchy, is the old English plan of +dividing us into gentry living by property and common people +living by work: the plan of the few rich and the many poor. It has +worked for a long time, and is still working. And it is evident that +if the incomes of the rich were taken from them and divided +among the poor as we stand at present, the poor would be only +very little less poor; the supply of capital would cease because<span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</span> +nobody could afford to save; the country houses would fall into +ruins; and learning and science and art and literature and all the +rest of what we call culture would perish. That is why so many +people support the present system, and stand by the gentry although +they themselves are poor. They see that if ten women can +produce only £110 a year each by their labor, it may be wiser for +nine of them to be content with £50 apiece, and make the other +one an educated lady, mistress, and ruler by giving her £500 +a year without any obligation to work at all, or any inducement +to work except the hope of finding how to make their work +more fruitful for her own benefit, rather than to insist on having +£110 a year each. Though we make this sort of arrangement at +present because we are forced to, and indeed mostly without +knowing that we are making it, yet it is conceivable that if we +understood what we were doing and were free to carry it out or +not as we thought best, we might still do it for the sake of having +a gentry to keep up finer things in the world than a miserable +crowd all equally poor, and all tied to primitive manual labor.</p> + +<p>But the abuses that arise from this plan are so terrible that the +world is becoming set against it. If we decide to go on with it, +the first step is to settle who is to be the tenth person: the lady. +How is that to be decided? True, we could begin by drawing lots; +and after that the gentry could intermarry and be succeeded by +their firstborns. But the mischief of it is that when we at last got +our gentry established we should have no guarantee that they +would do any of the things we intended them to do and paid them +to do. With the best intentions, the gentry govern the country +very badly because they are so far removed from the common +people that they do not understand their needs. They use their +power to make themselves still richer by forcing the common +people to work still harder and accept still less. They spend enormous +sums on sport and entertainment, gluttony and ostentation, +and very little on science and art and learning. They produce +poverty on a vast scale by withdrawing labor from production to +waste it in superfluous menial service. They either shirk military +duties or turn the army into a fashionable retinue for themselves +and an instrument of oppression at home and conquest abroad. +They corrupt the teaching in the universities and schools to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</span> +glorify themselves and hide their misdeeds. They do the same +with the Church. They try to keep the common people poor and +ignorant and servile so as to make themselves more indispensable. +At last their duties have to be taken out of their hands and +discharged by Parliament, by the Civil Service, by the War Office +and the Admiralty, by city corporations, by Poor Law Guardians, +by County and Parish and District Councils, by salaried servants +and Boards of paid directors, by societies and institutions of all +kinds depending on taxation or on public subscription.</p> + +<p>When this occurs, as it actually has occurred, all the cultural and +political reasons for the maintenance of a gentry vanish. It always +does occur when city life grows up and takes the place of country +life. When a peeress resides on her estates in a part of the country +where life is still very simple, and the nearest thing to a town +is a village ten miles from the railway station, the people look to +her ladyship for everything that is not produced by their daily +toil. She represents all the splendor and greatness and romance +of civilization, and does a good deal for them which they would +not know how to do for themselves. In this way a Highland clan, +before Scotland became civilized, always had a chief. The clansmen +willingly gave him the lion’s share of such land and goods as +they could come by, or of the plunder they took in their raids. +They did this because they could not fight successfully without +a leader, and could not live together without a lawgiver. Their +chief was to them what Moses was to the Israelites in the desert. +The Highland chief was practically a king in his clan, just as the +peeress is a queen on her estates. Loyalty to him was instinctive.</p> + +<p>But when a Highland chief walked into a city he had less power +than the first police constable he met: in fact it sometimes happened +that the police constable took him in charge, and the city +authorities hanged him. When the peeress leaves her estate and +goes up to London for the season, she becomes a nobody except +to her personal acquaintances. Everything that she does for her +people in the country is done in London by paid public servants +of all sorts; and when she leaves the country and settles in +America or on the Continent to evade British income tax she is +not missed in London: everything goes on just as before. But her +tenants, who have to earn the money she spends abroad, get nothing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</span> +by her, and revile her as a fugitive and an Absentee.</p> + +<p>Small wonder then that Oligarchy is no longer consented to +willingly. A great deal of the money the oligarchs get is now +taken back from them by taxation and death duties; so that the +old families are being reduced very rapidly to the level of ordinary +citizens; and when their estates are gone, as they will be after +a few generations more of our present heavy death duties, their +titles will only make their poverty ridiculous. Already many of +their most famous country houses are occupied either by rich +business families of quite ordinary quality, or by Co-operative +Societies as Convalescent Homes or places for conference and +recreation, or as hotels or schools or lunatic asylums.</p> + +<p>You must therefore face the fact that in a civilization like ours, +where most of the population lives in cities; where railways, +motor cars, posts, telegraphs, telephones, gramophones and radio +have brought city ways and city culture into the country; and +where even the smallest village has its parish meeting and its communal +policeman, the old reasons for making a few people very +rich whilst all the others work hard for a bare subsistence have +passed away. The plan no longer works, even in the Highlands.</p> + +<p>Still, there is one reason left for maintaining a class of excessively +rich people at the expense of the rest; and business men +consider it the strongest reason of all. That reason is that it provides +capital by giving some people more money than they can +easily spend; so that they can save money (capital is saved money) +without any privation. The argument is that if income were more +equally distributed, we should all have so little that we should +spend all our incomes, and nothing would be saved to make +machinery and build factories and construct railways and dig +mines and so forth. Now it is certainly necessary to high civilization +that these savings should be made; but it would be hard to +imagine a more wasteful way of bringing it about.</p> + +<p>To begin with, it is very important that there should be no +saving until there has been sufficient spending: spending comes +first. A nation which makes steam engines before its little children +have enough milk to make their legs strong enough to carry +them is making a fool’s choice. Yet this is just what we do by this +plan of making a few rich and the masses poor. Again, even if we<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</span> +put the steam engine before the milk, our plan gives us no security +that we shall get the steam engine, or, if we get it, that it will +be set up in our country. Just as a great deal of the money that +was given to the country gentlemen of England on the chance of +their encouraging art and science was spent by them on cock-fighting +and horse-racing; so a shocking proportion of the money +we give our oligarchs on the chance of their investing it as capital +is spent by them in self-indulgence. Of the very rich it may be +said that they do not begin to save until they can spend no more, +and that they are continually inventing new and expensive extravagances +that would have been impossible a hundred years ago. +When their income outruns their extravagance so far that they +must use it as capital or throw it away, there is nothing to prevent +them investing it in South America, in South Africa, in Russia, +or in China, though we cannot get our own slums cleaned up for +want of capital kept in and applied to our own country. Hundreds +of millions of pounds are sent abroad every year in this way; and +we complain of the competition of foreigners whilst we allow our +capitalists to provide them at our expense with the very machinery +with which they are taking our industries from us.</p> + +<p>Of course the capitalists plead that we are none the poorer, because +the interest on their capital comes back into this country +from the countries in which they have invested it; and as they +invest it abroad only because they get more interest abroad than +at home, they assure us that we are actually the richer for their +export of capital, because it enables them to spend more at home +and thus give British workers more employment. But we have no +guarantee that they will spend it at home: they are as likely to +spend it in Monte Carlo, Madeira, Egypt, or where not? And +when they do spend it at home and give us employment, we have +to ask what sort of employment? When our farms and mills and +cloth factories are all ruined by our importing our food and cloth +from abroad instead of making them ourselves, it is not enough +for our capitalists to shew us that instead of the farms we have the +best golf courses in the world; instead of mills and factories splendid +hotels; instead of engineers and shipwrights and bakers and +carpenters and weavers, waiters and chambermaids, valets and +ladies’ maids, gamekeepers and butlers and so forth, all better<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</span> +paid and more elegantly dressed than the productive workers +they have replaced. We have to consider what sort of position we +shall be in when our workers are as incapable of supporting themselves +and us as the idle rich themselves. Suppose the foreign +countries stop our supplies either by a revolution followed by flat +repudiation of their capitalistic debts, as in Russia, or by taxing +and supertaxing incomes derived from investments, what will +become of us then? What is becoming of us now as taxation of +income spreads more and more in foreign countries? The English +servant may still be able to boast that England can put a more +brilliant polish on a multi-millionaire’s boots than any foreigner +can; but what use will that be to us when the multi-millionaire is an +expropriated or taxed-out pauper with no boots to have polished?</p> + +<p>We shall have to go into this question of capital more particularly +later on; but for the purposes of this chapter it is enough to +shew that the plan of depending on oligarchy for our national +capital is not only wasteful on the face of it, but dangerous with +a danger that increases with every political development in the +world. The only plea left for it is that there is no other way of +doing it. But that will not hold water for a moment. The Government +can, and to a considerable extent actually does, check personal +expenditure and enforce the use of part of our incomes as +capital, far less capriciously and more efficiently than our oligarchy +does. It can nationalize banking, as we shall see presently. This +leaves oligarchy without its sole economic excuse.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c12">12</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">DISTRIBUTION BY CLASS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">N</span>OW for the fifth plan, which is, that though everybody +should work, society should be divided into as many +classes as there are different sorts of work, and that the +different classes should receive different payment for their work: +for instance, the dustmen and scavengers and scullery-maids and +charwomen and ragpickers should receive less than the doctors +and clergymen and teachers and opera singers and professional +ladies generally, and that these should receive less than the judges +and prime ministers and kings and queens.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</span></p> + +<p>You will tell me that this is just what we have at present. Certainly +it happens so in many cases; but there is no law that people +employed in different sorts of work should be paid more or less +than oneanother. We are accustomed to think that schoolmistresses +and clergymen and doctors, being educated ladies and +gentlemen, must be paid more than illiterate persons who work +with their hands for weekly wages; but at the present time an +engine driver, making no pretension to be a gentleman, or to +have had a college education, is paid more than many clergymen +and some doctors; and a schoolmistress or governess is very +lucky indeed when she is as well off as a firstrate cook. Some of +our most famous physicians have had to struggle pitiably against +insufficient means until they were forty or fifty; and many a parson +has brought up a family on a stipend of seventy pounds a +year. You must therefore be on your guard against the common +mistake of supposing that we need nowadays pay more for gentility +and education than for bodily strength and natural cunning, +or that we always do pay more. Very learned men often make +little money or none; and gentility without property may prove +rather a disadvantage than otherwise to a man who wants to earn +a living. Most of the great fortunes are made in trade or finance, +often by men without any advantages of birth or education. Some +of the great poverties have been those of saints, or of geniuses +whose greatness was not recognized until they were dead.</p> + +<p>You must also get rid of the notion (if you have it: if not, forgive +me for suspecting you of it) that it costs some workers more +than others to live. The same allowance of food that will keep a +laborer in health will keep a king. Many laborers eat and drink +much more than the King does; and all of them wear out their +clothes much faster. Our King is not rich as riches go nowadays. +Mr Rockefeller probably regards His Majesty as a poor man, +because Mr Rockefeller not only has much more money, but is +under no obligation to spend it in keeping up a great establishment: +that is, spending it on other people. But if you could find +out how much the King and Mr Rockefeller spend on their own +personal needs and satisfaction, you would find it came to no +more than is now spent by any other two persons in reasonably +comfortable circumstances. If you doubled the King’s allowance<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</span> +he would not eat twice as much, drink twice as much, sleep twice +as soundly, build a new house twice as big as Buckingham Palace, +or marry another queen and set up two families instead of one. +The late Mr Carnegie, when his thousands grew to hundreds +of thousands and his hundreds of thousands to millions, gave +his money away in heaps because he already had everything he +cared for that money could buy for himself or his household.</p> + +<p>Then, it may be asked, why do we give some men more than +they need and some less? The answer is that for the most part we +do not give it to them: they get it because we have not arranged +what anyone shall get, but have left it to chance and grab. But in +the case of the King and other public dignitaries we have arranged +that they shall have handsome incomes because we intend +that they shall be specially respected and deferred to. Yet experience +shews that authority is not proportionate to income. No person +in Europe is approached with such awe as the Pope; but nobody +thinks of the Pope as a rich man: sometimes his parents and +brothers and sisters are very humble people, and he himself is +poorer than his tailor or grocer. The captain of a liner sits at table +every day with scores of people who could afford to throw his pay +into the sea and not miss it; yet his authority is so absolute that +the most insolent passenger dares not treat him disrespectfully. +The village rector may not have a fifth of the income of his +farmer churchwarden. The colonel of a regiment may be the +poorest man at the mess table: everyone of his subalterns may +have far more than double his income; but he is their superior in +authority for all that. Money is not the secret of command.</p> + +<p>Those who exercise personal authority among us are by no +means our richest people. Millionaires in expensive cars obey +policemen. In our social scale noblemen take precedence of +country gentlemen, country gentlemen take precedence of professional +men, professional men of traders, wholesale traders of +retail traders, retail traders of skilled workmen, and skilled workmen +of laborers; but if social precedence were according to income +all this would be completely upset; for the tradesmen would take +precedence of everybody; and the Pope and the King would have +to touch their hats to distillers and pork packers.</p> + +<p>When we speak of the power of the rich, we are speaking of a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</span> +very real thing, because a rich man can discharge anyone in his +employment who displeases him, and can take away his custom +from any tradesman who is disrespectful to him. But the advantage +a man gets by his power to ruin another is a quite different +thing from the authority that is necessary to maintain law and +order in society. You may obey the highwayman who puts a +pistol to your head and demands your money or your life. Similarly +you may obey the landlord who orders you to pay more rent +or take yourself and your brats into the street. But that is not +obedience to authority: it is submission to a threat. Real authority +has nothing to do with money; and it is in fact exercised by +persons who, from the King to the village constable, are poorer +than many of the people who obey their orders.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c13">13</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">LAISSER-FAIRE</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>ND now, what about leaving things just as they are?</p> + +<p>That is just what most people vote for doing. Even when +they dont like what they are accustomed to, they dread +change, lest it should make matters worse. They are what they +call Conservative, though it is only fair to add that no Conservative +statesman in his senses ever pretends (except perhaps occasionally +at election times, when nobody ever tells the truth) that +you can conserve things by simply letting them alone.</p> + +<p>It seems the easiest plan and the safest; but as a matter of hard +fact it is not only difficult but impossible. When Joshua told the +sun to stand still on Gibeon, and the moon in the valley of Ajalon, +for a trifle of twentyfour hours, he was modest in comparison +with those who imagine that the world will stay put if they take +care not to wake it up. And he knew he was asking for a miracle.</p> + +<p>It is not that things as they are are so bad that nobody who +knows how bad they are will agree to leave them as they are; for +the reply to that may be that if they dont like them they must +lump them, because there seems to be no way of changing them. +The real difficulty is that things will not stay as they are, no matter +how careful you are not to meddle with them. You might as well +give up dusting your rooms and expect to find them this time<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</span> +next year just as they are now. You might as well leave the cat +asleep on the hearthrug and assume that you would find her +there, and not in the dairy, when you came back from church.</p> + +<p>The truth is that things change much faster and more dangerously +when they are let alone than when they are carefully +looked after. Within the last hundred and fifty years the most +astounding changes have taken place in this very business that +we are dealing with (the production and distribution of the +national income) just because what was everybody’s business was +nobody’s business, and it was let run wild. The introduction of +machinery driven by steam, and later on of electric power distributed +from house to house like water or gas, and the invention +of engines that not only draw trains along the ground and ships +over and under the sea, but carry us and our goods flying through +the air, has increased our power to produce wealth and get +through our work easily and quickly to such an extent that there +is no longer any need for any of us to be poor. A labor-saving +house with gas stoves, electric light, a telephone, a vacuum +cleaner, and a wireless set, gives only a faint notion of a modern +factory full of automatic machines. If we each took our turn and +did our bit in peace as we had to do during the war, all the +necessary feeding and clothing and housing and lighting could be +done handsomely by less than half our present day’s work, leaving +the other half free for art and science and learning and playing +and roaming and experimenting and recreation of all sorts.</p> + +<p>This is a new state of things: a change that has come upon us +when we thought we were leaving things just as they were. And +the consequence of our not attending to it and guiding and +arranging it for the good of the country is that it has actually left +the poor much worse off than they used to be when there was no +machinery at all, and people had to be more careful of pence than +they now are of shillings; whilst the rich have become rich out of +all reason, and the people who should be employed in making +bread for the hungry and clothes for the naked, or building +houses for the homeless, are wasting their labor in providing service +and luxuries for idle rich people who are not in the old sense +of the words either gentle or noble, and whose idleness and frivolity +and extravagance set a most corrupting moral example.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</span></p> + +<p>Also it has produced two and a half revolutions in political power, +by which the employers have overthrown the landed gentry, the +financiers have overthrown the employers, and the Trade Unions +have half overthrown the financiers. I shall explain this fully later +on; meanwhile, you have seen enough of its effects in the rise of +the Labor Party to take my word for it that politics will not stand +still any more than industry merely because millions of timid old-fashioned +people vote at every election for what they call Conservatism: +that is, for shutting our eyes and opening our mouths.</p> + +<p>If King Alfred had been told that the time would come in +England when one idle family would have five big houses and a +steam yacht to live in whilst hard-working people were living six +in a room, and half starving at that, he would have said that God +would never allow such things to happen except in a very wicked +nation. Well, we have left God out of the question and allowed it +to happen, not through wickedness, but through letting things +alone and fancying that they would let themselves alone.</p> + +<p>Have you noticed, by the way, that we no longer speak of +letting things alone in the old-fashioned way? We speak of letting +them slide; and this is a great advance in good sense; for it shews +that we at last see that they slide instead of staying put; and it +implies that letting them slide is a feckless sort of conduct. So you +must rule out once for all the notion of leaving things as they are +in the expectation that they will stay where they are. They wont. +All we can do in that line is to sit idly and wonder what will +happen next. And this is not like sitting on the bank of the stream +waiting for the water to go by. It is like sitting idly in a carriage +when the horse is running away. You can excuse it by saying +“What else can I do?”; but your impotence will not avert a smash. +People in that predicament must all think hard of some way of +getting control of the horse, and meanwhile do all they can to keep +the carriage right side up and out of the ditch.</p> + +<p>The policy of letting things alone, in the practical sense that the +Government should never interfere with business or go into business +itself, is called Laisser-faire by economists and politicians. It +has broken down so completely in practice that it is now discredited; +but it was all the fashion in politics a hundred years ago, +and is still influentially advocated by men of business and their<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</span> +backers who naturally would like to be allowed to make money as +they please without regard to the interests of the public.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c14">14</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH?</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>E seem now to have disposed of all the plans except +the Socialist one. Before grappling with that, may +I call your attention to something that happened in +our examination of most of the others. We were trying to find +out a sound plan of distributing money; and every time we +proposed to distribute it according to personal merit or achievement +or dignity or individual quality of any sort the plan reduced +itself to absurdity. When we tried to establish a relation +between money and work we were beaten: it could not be done. +When we tried to establish a relation between money and character +we were beaten. When we tried to establish a relation between +money and the dignity that gives authority we were beaten. +And when we gave it up as a bad job and thought of leaving +things as they are we found that they would not stay as they are.</p> + +<p>Let us then consider for a moment what any plan must do to be +acceptable. And first, as everybody except the Franciscan Friars +and the Poor Clares will say that no plan will be acceptable unless +it abolishes poverty (and even Franciscan poverty must be voluntary +and not compelled) let us study poverty for a moment.</p> + +<p>It is generally agreed that poverty is a very uncomfortable misfortune +for the individual who happens to be poor. But poor +people, when they are not suffering from acute hunger and severe +cold, are not more unhappy than rich people: they are often +much happier. You can easily find people who are ten times as +rich at sixty as they were at twenty; but not one of them will tell +you that they are ten times as happy. All the thoughtful ones will +assure you that happiness and unhappiness are constitutional, +and have nothing to do with money. Money can cure hunger: it +cannot cure unhappiness. Food can satisfy the appetite, but not +the soul. A famous German Socialist, Ferdinand Lassalle, said +that what beat him in his efforts to stir up the poor to revolt +against poverty was their wantlessness. They were not, of course,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</span> +content: nobody is; but they were not discontented enough to +take any serious trouble to change their condition. It may seem +a fine thing to a poor woman to have a large house, plenty of +servants, dozens of dresses, a lovely complexion and beautifully +dressed hair. But the rich woman who has these things often +spends a good deal of her time travelling in rough places to get +away from them. To have to spend two or three hours a day +washing and dressing and brushing and combing and changing +and being messed about generally by a lady’s maid is not on the +face of it a happier lot than to have only five minutes to spend on +such fatigues, as the soldiers call them. Servants are so troublesome +that many ladies can hardly talk about anything else when +they get together. A drunken man is happier than a sober one: +that is why unhappy people take to drink. There are drugs that +will make you ecstatically happy whilst ruining your body and +soul. It is our quality that matters: take care of that, and our +happiness will take care of itself. People of the right sort are +never easy until they get things straight; but they are too healthy +and too much taken up with their occupations to bother about +happiness. Modern poverty is not the poverty that was blest in +the Sermon on the Mount: the objection to it is not that it makes +people unhappy, but that it degrades them; and the fact that they +can be quite as happy in their degradation as their betters are in +their exaltation makes it worse. When Shakespear’s king said</p> + + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">Then happy low, lie down:</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown,</div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + + +<p>he forgot that happiness is no excuse for lowness. The divine +spark in us flashes up against being bribed to submit to degradation +by mere happiness, which a pig or a drunkard can achieve.</p> + +<p>Such poverty as we have today in all our great cities degrades +the poor, and infects with its degradation the whole neighborhood +in which they live. And whatever can degrade a neighborhood +can degrade a country and a continent and finally the whole +civilized world, which is only a large neighborhood. Its bad +effects cannot be escaped by the rich. When poverty produces +outbreaks of virulent infectious disease, as it always does sooner +or later, the rich catch the disease and see their children die of +it. When it produces crime and violence the rich go in fear of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</span> +both, and are put to a good deal of expense to protect their persons +and property. When it produces bad manners and bad language +the children of the rich pick them up no matter how carefully +they are secluded; and such seclusion as they get does them more +harm than good. If poor and pretty young women find, as they do, +that they can make more money by vice than by honest work, they +will poison the blood of rich young men who, when they marry, +will infect their wives and children, and cause them all sorts of +bodily troubles, sometimes ending in disfigurement and blindness +and death, and always doing them more or less mischief. +The old notion that people can “keep themselves to themselves” +and not be touched by what is happening to their neighbors, or +even to the people who live a hundred miles off, is a most dangerous +mistake. The saying that we are members one of another +is not a mere pious formula to be repeated in church without any +meaning: it is a literal truth; for though the rich end of the town +can avoid living with the poor end, it cannot avoid dying with it +when the plague comes. People will be able to keep themselves to +themselves as much as they please when they have made an end +of poverty; but until then they will not be able to shut out the +sights and sounds and smells of poverty from their daily walks, +nor to feel sure from day to day that its most violent and fatal +evils will not reach them through their strongest police guards.</p> + +<p>Besides, as long as poverty remains possible we shall never be +sure that it will not overtake ourselves. If we dig a pit for others +we may fall into it: if we leave a precipice unfenced our children +may fall over it when they are playing. We see the most innocent +and respectable families falling into the unfenced pit of poverty +every day; and how do we know that it will not be our turn next?</p> + +<p>It is perhaps the greatest folly of which a nation can be guilty to +attempt to use poverty as a sort of punishment for offences that it +does not send people to prison for. It is easy to say of a lazy man +“Oh, let him be poor: it serves him right for being lazy: it will +teach him a lesson”. In saying so we are ourselves too lazy to +think a little before we lay down the law. We cannot afford to +have poor people anyhow, whether they be lazy or busy, drunken +or sober, virtuous or vicious, thrifty or careless, wise or foolish. If +they deserve to suffer let them be made to suffer in some other<span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</span> +way; for mere poverty will not hurt them half as much as it will +hurt their innocent neighbors. It is a public nuisance as well as a +private misfortune. Its toleration is a national crime.</p> + +<p>We must therefore take it as an indispensable condition of a +sound distribution of wealth that everyone must have a share +sufficient to keep her or him from poverty. This is not altogether +new. Ever since the days of Queen Elizabeth it has been the law +of England that nobody must be abandoned to destitution. If +anyone, however undeserving, applies for relief to the Guardians +of the Poor as a destitute person, the Guardians must feed and +clothe and house that person. They may do it reluctantly and unkindly; +they may attach to the relief the most unpleasant and +degrading conditions they can think of; they may set the pauper +to hateful useless work if he is able-bodied, and have him sent to +prison if he refuses to do it; the shelter they give him may be that +of a horrible general workhouse in which the old and the young, +the sound and the diseased, the innocent girl and lad and the +hardened prostitute and tramp are herded together promiscuously +to contaminate one another; they can attach a social stigma +to the relief by taking away the pauper’s vote (if he has one), and +making him incapable of filling certain public offices or being +elected to certain public authorities; they may, in short, drive the +deserving and respectable poor to endure any extremity rather +than ask for relief; but they must relieve the destitute willy nilly +if they do ask for it. To that extent the law of England is at its +root a Communistic law. All the harshnesses and wickednesses +with which it is carried out are gross mistakes, because instead of +saving the country from the degradation of poverty they actually +make poverty more degrading than it need be; but still, the principle +is there. Queen Elizabeth said that nobody must die of +starvation and exposure. We, after the terrible experience we +have had of the effects of poverty on the whole nation, rich or +poor, must go further and say that nobody must be poor. As we +divide-up our wealth day by day the first charge on it must be +enough for everybody to be fairly respectable and well-to-do. If +they do anything or leave anything undone that gives ground for +saying that they do not deserve it, let them be restrained from +doing it or compelled to do it in whatever way we restrain or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</span> +compel evildoers of any other sort; but do not let them, as poor +people, make everyone else suffer for their shortcomings.</p> + +<p>Granted that people should not on any account be allowed to be +poor, we have still to consider whether they should be allowed to +be rich. When poverty is gone, shall we tolerate luxury and extravagance? +This is a poser, because it is much easier to say what +poverty is than what luxury is. When a woman is hungry, or +ragged, or has not at least one properly furnished room all to +herself to sleep in, then she is clearly suffering from poverty. +When the infant mortality in one district is much greater than in +another; when the average age of death for fully grown persons +in it falls far short of the scriptural threescore-and-ten; when the +average weight of the children who survive is below that reached +by well-fed and well-cared-for children, then you can say confidently +that the people in that district are suffering from poverty. +But suffering from riches is not so easily measured. That rich +people do suffer a great deal is plain enough to anyone who has an +intimate knowledge of their lives. They are so unhealthy that +they are always running after cures and surgical operations of +one sort or another. When they are not really ill they imagine +they are. They are worried by their property, by their servants, by +their poor relations, by their investments, by the need for keeping +up their social position, and, when they have several children, +by the impossibility of leaving these children enough to enable +them to live as they have been brought up to live; for we must not +forget that if a married couple with fifty thousand a year have five +children, they can leave only ten thousand a year to each after +bringing them up to live at the rate of fifty thousand, and launching +them into the sort of society that lives at that rate, the result +being that unless these children can make rich marriages they +live beyond their incomes (not knowing how to live more cheaply) +and are presently head over ears in debt. They hand on their costly +habits and rich friends and debts to their children with very little +else; so that the trouble becomes worse and worse from generation +to generation; and this is how we meet everywhere with ladies +and gentlemen who have no means of keeping up their position, +and are therefore much more miserable than the common poor.</p> + +<p>Perhaps you know some well-off families who do not seem to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</span> +suffer from their riches. They do not overeat themselves; they +find occupations to keep themselves in health; they do not worry +about their position; they put their money into safe investments +and are content with a low rate of interest; and they bring up +their children to live simply and do useful work. But this means +that they do not live like rich people at all, and might therefore +just as well have ordinary incomes. The general run of rich +people do not know what to do with themselves; and the end of it +is that they have to join a round of social duties and pleasures +mostly manufactured by West End shopkeepers, and so tedious +that at the end of a fashionable season the rich are more worn out +than their servants and tradesmen. They may have no taste for +sport; but they are forced by their social position to go to the +great race meetings and ride to hounds. They may have no taste +for music; but they have to go to the Opera and to the fashionable +concerts. They may not dress as they please nor do what they +please. Because they are rich they must do what all the other rich +people are doing, there being nothing else for them to do except +work, which would immediately reduce them to the condition of +ordinary people. So, as they cannot do what they like, they must +contrive to like what they do, and imagine that they are having a +splendid time of it when they are in fact being bored by their +amusements, humbugged by their doctors, pillaged by their +tradesmen, and forced to console themselves unamiably for being +snubbed by richer people by snubbing poorer people.</p> + +<p>To escape this boredom, the able and energetic spirits go into +Parliament or into the diplomatic service or into the army, or +manage and develop their estates and investments instead of +leaving them to solicitors and stockbrokers and agents, or explore +unknown countries with great hardship and risk to themselves, +with the result that their lives are not different from the lives of +the people who have to do these things for a living. Thus riches +are thrown away on them; and if it were not for the continual +dread of falling into poverty which haunts us all at present they +would refuse to be bothered with much property. The only people +who get any special satisfaction out of being richer than others +are those who enjoy being idle, and like to fancy that they are +better than their neighbors and be treated as if they were. But no<span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</span> +country can afford to pamper snobbery. Laziness and vanity are +not virtues to be encouraged: they are vices to be suppressed. +Besides, the desire to be idle and lazy and able to order poor +people about could not be satisfied, even if it were right to satisfy +it, if there were no poor people to order about. What we should +have would be, not poor people and rich people, but simply +people with enough and people with more than enough. And that +brings up at last the knotty question, what is enough?</p> + +<p>In Shakespear’s famous play, King Lear and his daughters have +an argument about this. His idea of enough is having a hundred +knights to wait on him. His eldest daughter thinks that fifty +would be enough. Her sister does not see what he wants with any +knights at all when her servants can do all he needs for him. +Lear retorts that if she cuts life down to what cannot be done +without, she had better throw away her fine clothes, as she +would be warmer in a blanket. And to this she has no answer. +Nobody can say what is enough. What is enough for a gipsy is +not enough for a lady; and what is enough for one lady leaves another +very discontented. When once you get above the poverty +line there is no reason why you should stop there. With modern +machinery we can produce much more than enough to feed, +clothe, and house us decently. There is no end to the number of +new things we can get into the habit of using, or to the improvements +we can make in the things we already use. Our grandmothers +managed to get on without gas cookers, electric light, +motor cars, and telephones; but today these things are no longer +curiosities and luxuries: they are matter-of-course necessities; +and nobody who cannot afford them is considered well-off.</p> + +<p>In the same way the standard of education and culture has +risen. Nowadays a parlormaid as ignorant as Queen Victoria +was when she came to the throne would be classed as mentally +defective. As Queen Victoria managed to get on very well in +spite of her ignorance it cannot be said that the knowledge in +which the parlormaid has the advantage of her is a necessity of +civilized life any more than a telephone is; but civilized life and +highly civilized life are different: what is enough for one is not +enough for the other. Take a half-civilized girl into a house; and +though she may be stronger and more willing and goodnatured<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</span> +than many highly civilized girls are, she will smash everything +that will not stand the roughest handling. She will be unable to +take or send written messages; and as to understanding or using +such civilized contrivances as watches, baths, sewing machines, +and electric heaters and sweepers, you will be fortunate if you can +induce her to turn off a tap instead of leaving the water running. +And your civilized maid who can be trusted with all these things +would be like a bull in a china shop if she were let loose in the +laboratories where highly trained scientific workers use machines +and instruments of such delicacy that their movements are as +invisible as that of the hour hands of our clocks, handling and controlling +poisons and explosives of the most dangerous kind; or in +the operating rooms where surgeons have to do things in which +a slip of the hand might prove fatal. If every housemaid had the +delicacy of touch, the knowledge, and the patience that are +needed in the laboratories and operating theatres (where they +are unfortunately not always forthcoming), the most wonderful +changes could be made in our housekeeping: we could not only +have the present work done much more quickly, perfectly, and +cleanly, but we could do a great deal that is now quite impossible.</p> + +<p>Now it costs more to educate and train a laboratory worker than +a housemaid, and more to train a housemaid than to catch a savage. +What is enough in one case is not enough in another. Therefore +to ask baldly how much is enough to live on is to ask an unanswerable +question. It all depends on what sort of life you propose +to live. What is enough for the life of a tramp is not enough for a +highly civilized life, with its personal refinements and its atmosphere +of music, art, literature, religion, science, and philosophy. +Of these things we can never have enough: there is always something +new to be discovered and something old to be bettered. In +short, there is no such thing as enough civilization, though there +may be enough of any particular thing like bread or boots at any +particular moment. If being poor means wanting something +more and something better than we have—and it is hard to say +what else feeling poor means—then we shall always feel poor no +matter how much money we have, because, though we may have +enough of this thing or of that thing, we shall never have enough +of everything. Consequently if it be proposed to give some people<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</span> +enough, and others more than enough, the scheme will break +down; for all the money will be used up before anybody will be +content. Nobody will stop asking for more for the sake of setting +up and maintaining a fancy class of pampered persons who, after +all, will be even more discontented than their poorer neighbors.</p> + +<p>The only way out of this difficulty is to give everybody the +same, which is the Socialist solution of the distribution problem. +But you may tell me that you are prepared to swallow this difficulty +rather than swallow Socialism. Most of us begin like that. +What converts us is the discovery of the terrible array of evils +around us and dangers in front of us which we dare not ignore. +You may be unable to see any beauty in equality of income. But +the least idealistic woman can see the disasters of inequality when +the evils with which she is herself in daily conflict are traced to it; +and I am now going to shew you the connexion.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c15">15</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">WHAT WE SHOULD BUY FIRST</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>O test the effects of our unequal division of the nation’s +income on our national institutions and on the life and +prosperity of the whole people we must view the industry +of the country, and see how it is affected by inequality of income. +We must view one by one the institution of marriage, the working +of the courts of justice, the honesty of our Houses of Parliament, +the spiritual independence of the Church, the usefulness of our +schools, and the quality of our newspapers, and consider how each +of them is dependent on the way in which money is distributed.</p> + +<p>Beginning with industry, we are at once plunged into what we +call political economy, to distinguish it from the domestic economy +with which we are all only too familiar. Men find political +economy a dry and difficult subject: they shirk it as they shirk +housekeeping; yet it means nothing more abstruse than the art of +managing a country as a housekeeper manages a house. If the +men shirk it the women must tackle it. The nation has a certain +income to manage on just as a housekeeper has; and the problem +is how to spend that income to the greatest general advantage.</p> + +<p>Now the first thing a housekeeper has to settle is what things are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</span> +wanted most, and what things can be done without at a pinch. +This means that the housekeeper must settle the order in which +things are desirable. For example, if, when there is not enough +food in the house, she goes out and spends all her money on a +bottle of scent and an imitation pearl necklace, she will be called +a vain and silly woman and a bad mother. But a stateswoman +would call her simply a bad economist: one who does not know +what should come first when money has to be spent. No woman +is fit to have charge of a household who has not sense and self-control +enough to see that food and clothing and housing and +firing come first, and that bottles of scent and pearl necklaces, +imitation or real, come a long way afterwards. Even in the jeweller’s +shop a wrist watch comes before a necklace as being more +useful. I am not saying that pretty things are not useful: they are +very useful and quite right in their proper order; but they do not +come first. A Bible may be a very proper present to give to a +child; but to give a starving child a Bible instead of a piece of +bread and a cup of milk would be the act of a lunatic. A woman’s +mind is more wonderful than her flesh; but if her flesh is not fed +her mind will perish, whereas if you feed her flesh her mind will +take care of itself and of her flesh as well. Food comes first.</p> + +<p>Think of the whole country as a big household, and the whole +nation as a big family, which is what they really are. What do we +see? Half-fed, badly clothed, abominably housed children all over +the place; and the money that should go to feed and clothe and +house them properly being spent in millions on bottles of scent, +pearl necklaces, pet dogs, racing motor cars, January strawberries +that taste like corks, and all sorts of extravagances. One sister of +the national family has a single pair of leaking boots that keep her +sniffing all through the winter, and no handkerchief to wipe her +nose with. Another has forty pairs of high-heeled shoes and +dozens of handkerchiefs. A little brother is trying to grow up on +a penn’orth of food a day, and is breaking his mother’s heart and +wearing out her patience by asking continually for more, whilst +a big brother, spending five or six pounds on his dinner at a +fashionable hotel, followed by supper at a night club, is in the +doctor’s hands because he is eating and drinking too much.</p> + +<p>Now this is shockingly bad political economy. When thoughtless<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</span> +people are asked to explain it they say “Oh, the woman with +the forty shoes and the man drinking at the night club got their +money from their father who made a fortune by speculating in +rubber; and the girl with the broken boots, and the troublesome +boy whose mother has just clouted his head, are only riffraff from +the slums”. That is true; but it does not alter the fact that the +nation that spends money on champagne before it has provided +enough milk for its babies, or gives dainty meals to Sealyham +terriers and Alsatian wolf-hounds and Pekingese dogs whilst the +infant mortality rate shews that its children are dying by thousands +from insufficient nourishment, is a badly managed, silly, +vain, stupid, ignorant nation, and will go to the bad in the long +run no matter how hard it tries to conceal its real condition from +itself by counting the pearl necklaces and Pekingese dogs as +wealth, and thinking itself three times as rich as before when all +the pet dogs have litters of six puppies a couple. The only way in +which a nation can make itself wealthy and prosperous is by good +housekeeping: that is, by providing for its wants in the order of +their importance, and allowing no money to be wasted on whims +and luxuries until necessities have been thoroughly served.</p> + +<p>But it is no use blaming the owners of the dogs. All these mischievous +absurdities exist, not because any sane person ever +wanted them to exist, but because they must occur whenever +some families are very much richer than others. The rich man, +who, as husband and father, drags the woman with him, begins +as every one else begins, by buying food, clothing, and a roof to +shelter them. The poor man does the same. But when the poor man +has spent all he can afford on these necessaries, he is still short of +them: his food is insufficient; his clothes are old and dirty; his +lodging is a single room or part of one, and unwholesome even at +that. But when the rich man has fed himself, and dressed himself, +and housed himself as sumptuously as possible, he has still +plenty of money left to indulge his tastes and fancies and make a +show in the world. Whilst the poor man says “I want more bread, +more clothes, and a better house for my family; but I cannot pay +for them”, the rich man says “I want a fleet of motor cars, a yacht, +diamonds and pearls for my wife and daughters, and a shooting-box +in Scotland. Money is no object: I can pay and overpay for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</span> +them ten times over”. Naturally men of business set to work at once +to have the cars and the yacht made, the diamonds dug out in Africa, +the pearls fished for, and the shooting lodge built, paying no +attention to the poor man with his crying needs and empty pockets.</p> + +<p>To put the same thing in another way, the poor man needs to +have labor employed in making the things he is short of: that is, +in baking, weaving, tailoring, and plain building; but he cannot +pay the master bakers and weavers enough to enable them to pay +the wages of such labor. The rich man meanwhile is offering +money enough to provide good wages for all the work required to +please him. All the people who take his money may be working +hard; but their work is pampering people who have too much +instead of feeding people who have too little; therefore it is misapplied +and wasted, keeping the country poor and even making +it poorer for the sake of keeping a few people rich.</p> + +<p>It is no excuse for such a state of things that the rich give employment. +There is no merit in giving employment: a murderer +gives employment to the hangman; and a motorist who runs over +a child gives employment to an ambulance porter, a doctor, an +undertaker, a clergyman, a mourning-dressmaker, a hearse driver, +a gravedigger: in short, to so many worthy people that when he +ends by killing himself it seems ungrateful not to erect a statue to +him as a public benefactor. The money with which the rich give +the wrong sort of employment would give the right sort of employment +if it were equally distributed; for then there would be +no money offered for motor cars and diamonds until everyone +was fed, clothed, and lodged, nor any wages offered to men and +women to leave useful employments and become servants to +idlers. There would be less ostentation, less idleness, less wastefulness, +less uselessness; but there would be more food, more +clothing, better houses, more security, more health, more virtue: +in a word, more real prosperity.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c16">16</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">EUGENICS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE question has been asked, would the masses be any +better for having more money? One’s first impulse on +hearing such a silly question is to take the lady who asks it +by the shoulders and give her a violent shaking. If a fully fed, +presentably clothed, decently housed, fairly literate and cultivated +and gently mannered family is not better than a half-starved, +ragged, frowsy, overcrowded one, there is no meaning in words.</p> + +<p>Still, let us not lose our tempers. A well-fed, clean, decently +lodged woman is better than one trying to live on tea and rashers +in dirty clothes in a verminous garret. But so is a well-fed clean +sow better than a hungry dirty one. She is a sow all the same; +and you cannot make a silk purse out of her ear. If the common +women of the future were to be no better than our rich ladies today, +even at their best, the improvement would leave us deeply +dissatisfied. And that dissatisfaction would be a divine dissatisfaction. +Let us consider, then, what effect equality of income +would have on the quality of our people as human beings.</p> + +<p>There are some who say that if you want better people you must +breed them as carefully as you breed thoroughbred horses and +pedigree boars. No doubt you must; but there are two difficulties. +First, you cannot very well mate men and women as you mate +bulls and cows, stallions and mares, boars and sows, without giving +them any choice in the matter. Second, even if you could, you +would not know how to do it, because you would not know what +sort of human being you wanted to breed. In the case of a horse +or a pig the matter is very simple: you want either a very fast +horse for racing or a very strong horse for drawing loads; and in +the case of the pig you want simply plenty of bacon. And yet, +simple as that is, any breeder of these animals will tell you that he +has a great many failures no matter how careful he is.</p> + +<p>The moment you ask yourself what sort of child you want, +beyond preferring a boy or a girl, you have to confess that you +do not know. At best you can mention a few sorts that you dont +want: for instance, you dont want cripples, deaf mutes, blind, imbecile, +epileptic, or drunken children. But even these you do not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</span> +know how to avoid as there is often nothing visibly wrong with the +parents of such unfortunates. When you turn from what you dont +want to what you do want you may say that you want good children; +but a good child means only a child that gives its parents +no trouble; and some very useful men and women have been +very troublesome children. Energetic, imaginative, enterprising, +brave children are never out of mischief from their parents’ point +of view. And grown-up geniuses are seldom liked until they are +dead. Considering that we poisoned Socrates, crucified Christ, +and burnt Joan of Arc amid popular applause, because, after a +trial by responsible lawyers and Churchmen, we decided that +they were too wicked to be allowed to live, we can hardly set up +to be judges of goodness or to have any sincere liking for it.</p> + +<p>Even if we were willing to trust any political authority to select +our husbands and wives for us with a view to improving the race, +the officials would be hopelessly puzzled as to how to select. They +might begin with some rough idea of preventing the marriage of +persons with any taint of consumption or madness or syphilis or +addiction to drugs or drink in their families; but that would end +in nobody being married at all, as there is practically no family +quite free from such taints. As to moral excellence, what model +would they take as desirable? St Francis, George Fox, William +Penn, John Wesley, and George Washington? or Alexander, +Caesar, Napoleon, and Bismarck? It takes all sorts to make a +world; and the notion of a Government department trying to +make out how many different types were necessary, and how +many persons of each type, and proceeding to breed them by appropriate +marriages, is amusing but not practicable. There is +nothing for it but to let people choose their mates for themselves, +and trust to Nature to produce a good result.</p> + +<p>“Just as we do at present, in fact,” some will say. But that is +just what we do not do at present. How much choice has anyone +among us when the time comes to choose a mate? Nature may +point out a woman’s mate to her by making her fall in love at +first sight with the man who would be the best mate for her; but +unless that man happens to have about the same income as her +father, he is out of her class and out of her reach, whether above +her or below her. She finds she must marry, not the man she likes,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</span> +but the man she can get; and he is not often the same man.</p> + +<p>The man is in the same predicament. We all know by instinct +that it is unnatural to marry for money or social position instead +of for love; yet we have arranged matters so that we must all +marry more or less for money or social position or both. It is easy +to say to Miss Smith or Miss Jones “Follow the promptings of +your heart, my dear; and marry the dustman or marry the duke, +whichever you prefer”. But she cannot marry the dustman; and +the duke cannot marry her; because they and their relatives have +not the same manners and habits; and people with different +manners and habits cannot live together. And it is difference of +income that makes difference of manners and habits. Miss Smith +and Miss Jones have finally to make up their minds to like what +they can get, because they can very seldom get what they like; +and it is safe to say that in the great majority of marriages at +present Nature has very little part in the choice compared to +circumstances. Unsuitable marriages, unhappy homes, ugly children +are terribly common; because the young woman who ought +to have all the unmarried young men in the country open to her +choice, with dozens of other strings to her bow in the event of her +first choice not feeling a reciprocal attraction, finds that in fact +she has to choose between two or three in her own class, and has +to allow herself to be much petted and tempted by physical endearments, +or made desperate by neglect, before she can persuade +herself that she really loves the one she dislikes least.</p> + +<p>Under such circumstances we shall never get a well-bred race; +and it is all the fault of inequality of income. If every family were +brought up at the same cost, we should all have the same habits, +manners, culture, and refinement; and the dustman’s daughter +could marry the duke’s son as easily as a stockbroker’s son now +marries a bank manager’s daughter. Nobody would marry for +money, because there would be no money to be gained or lost by +marriage. No woman would have to turn her back on a man she +loved because he was poor, or be herself passed by for the same +reason. All the disappointments would be natural and inevitable +disappointments; and there would be plenty of alternatives and +consolations. If the race did not improve under these circumstances, +it must be unimprovable. And even if it be so, the gain in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</span> +happiness by getting rid of the heartbreak that now makes the +world, and especially its women, so miserable, would make the +equalization of income worth while even if all the other arguments +for it did not exist.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c17">17</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE COURTS OF LAW</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>HEN we come to the courts of law the hopeless incompatibility +of inequality of income with justice is +so plain that you must have been struck by it if you +ever notice such things. The very first condition of legal justice +is that it shall be no respecter of persons; that it shall +hold the balance impartially between the laborer’s wife and the +millionairess; and that no person shall be deprived of life or liberty +except by the verdict of a jury of her peers, meaning her equals. +Now no laborer is ever tried by a jury of his peers: he is tried by a +jury of ratepayers who have a very strong class prejudice against +him because they have larger incomes, and consider themselves +better men on that account. Even a rich man tried by a common +jury has to reckon with their envy as well as their subservience to +wealth. Thus it is a common saying with us that there is one law for +the rich and another for the poor. This is not strictly true: the law +is the same for everybody: it is the incomes that need changing. +The civil law by which contracts are enforced, and redress given +for slanders and injuries that are not dealt with by the police, +requires so much legal knowledge and artistic eloquence to set it +in motion that an ordinary woman with no legal knowledge or +eloquence can get the benefit of it only by employing lawyers +whom she has to pay very highly, which means, of course, that +the rich woman can afford to go to law and the poor woman cannot. +The rich woman can terrorize the poor woman by threatening +to go to law with her if her demands are not complied with. +She can disregard the poor woman’s rights, and tell her that if she +is dissatisfied she can take her complaint into court, knowing +very well that her victim’s poverty and ignorance will prevent +her from obtaining proper legal advice and protection. When a +rich woman takes a fancy to a poor woman’s husband, and persuades<span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</span> +him to abandon her, she can practically buy him by starving +the abandoned wife into divorcing him for a sufficient allowance. +In America, where the wife can sue for damages, the price +of the divorce is higher: that is all. When the abandoned wife +cannot be starved into the divorce court she can stand out for an +exorbitant price before setting her husband free to remarry; and +an abandoned husband can sell out likewise. Men and women +now trap one another into marriage with this object to such an +extent that in some States the word alimony has come to mean +simply blackmail. Mind: I am not disparaging either divorce or +alimony. What is wrong is that any woman should by mere +superiority of income be able to make another woman’s husband +much more comfortable than his wife can, or that any man should +be able to offer another man’s wife luxuries that her husband +cannot afford: in short, that money should have any weight whatever +either in contracting or dissolving a marriage.</p> + +<p>The criminal law, though we read murder trials and the like so +eagerly, is less important than the civil law, because only a few +exceptional people commit crimes, whilst we all marry and make +civil contracts. Besides, the police set the criminal law in motion +without charging the injured party anything. Nevertheless, rich +prisoners are favored by being able to spend large sums in engaging +famous barristers to plead for them, hunting up evidence +all over the country or indeed over the world, bribing or intimidating +witnesses, and exhausting every possible form of appeal +and method of delay. We are fond of pointing to American cases +of rich men at large who would have been hanged or electrocuted +if they had been poor. But who knows how many poor people +are in prison in England who might have been acquitted if they +could have spent a few hundred pounds on their defence?</p> + +<p>The laws themselves are contaminated at their very source by +being made by rich men. Nominally all adult men and women are +eligible to sit in Parliament and make laws if they can persuade +enough people to vote for them. Something has been done of late +years to make it possible for poor persons to avail themselves of +this right. Members of Parliament now receive salaries; and certain +election expenses formerly borne by the candidate are now +public charges. But the candidate must put down £150 to start<span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</span> +with; and it still costs from five hundred to a thousand pounds to +contest a parliamentary election. Even when the candidate is successful, +the salary of four hundred a year, which carries with it no +pension and no prospects when the seat is lost (as it may be at +the next election) is not sufficient for the sort of life in London a +member of Parliament is obliged to lead. This gives the rich such +an advantage that though the poor are in a nine-to-one majority +in the country their representatives are in a minority in Parliament; +and most of the time of Parliament is taken up, not by discussing +what is best for the nation, and passing laws accordingly, +but by the class struggle set up by the rich majority trying to +maintain and extend its privileges against the poor minority trying +to curtail or abolish them. That is, in pure waste of it.</p> + +<p>By far the most unjust and mischievous privilege claimed by +the rich is the privilege to be idle with complete legal impunity; +and unfortunately they have established this privilege so firmly +that we take it as a matter of course, and even venerate it as the +mark of a real lady or gentleman, without ever considering that +a person who consumes goods or accepts services without producing +equivalent goods or performing equivalent services in +return inflicts on the country precisely the same injury as a thief +does: in fact, that is what theft means. We do not dream of allowing +people to murder, kidnap, break into houses, sink, burn, and +destroy at sea or on land, or claim exemption from military service, +merely because they have inherited a landed estate or a +thousand a year from some industrious ancestor; yet we tolerate +idling, which does more harm in one year than all the legally +punishable crimes in the world in ten. The rich, through their +majority in Parliament, punish with ruthless severity such forms +of theft as burglary, forgery, embezzlement, pocket-picking, +larceny, and highway robbery, whilst they exempt rich idling, +and even hold it up as a highly honorable way of life, thereby +teaching our children that working for a livelihood is inferior, +derogatory, and disgraceful. To live like a drone on the labor and +service of others is to be a lady or a gentleman: to enrich the +country by labor and service is to be base, lowly, vulgar, contemptible, +fed and clothed and lodged on the assumption that +anything is good enough for hewers of wood and drawers of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</span> +water. This is nothing else than an attempt to turn the order of +Nature upside down, and to take “Evil: be thou my good” as the +national motto. If we persist in it, it must finally bring upon us +another of those wrecks of civilization in which all the great empires +in the past have crashed. Yet nothing can prevent this happening +where income is unequally distributed, because the laws +will inevitably be made by the rich; and the law that all must +work, which should come before every other law, is a law that +the rich never make.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c18">18</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE IDLE RICH</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">D</span>O not let yourself be put out at this point by the fact that +people with large unearned incomes are by no means +always loafing or lolling. The energetic ones often overexert +themselves, and have to take “rest cures” to recover. +Those who try to make life one long holiday find that they +need a holiday from that too. Idling is so unnatural and boresome +that the world of the idle rich, as they are called, is a world of +ceaseless activities of the most fatiguing kind. You may find on +old bookshelves a forgotten nineteenth century book in which a +Victorian lady of fashion defended herself against the charge of +idleness by describing her daily routine of fashion both as hostess +and visitor in London. I would cheerfully sweep a crossing +rather than be condemned to it. In the country, sport is so elaborately +organized that every month in the year has its special +variety: the necessary fishes and birds and animals are so carefully +bred and preserved for the purpose that there is always +something to be killed. Risks and exposures and athletic feats of +which the poor in towns know nothing are matters of course in +the country house, where broken collar bones are hardly exceptional +enough to be classed as accidents. If sports fail there are +always games: ski-ing and tobogganing, polo, tennis, skating on +artificial ice, and so forth, involving much more exhausting physical +exercise than many poor women would care to face. A young +lady, after a day of such exercise, will, between dinner and bedtime, +dance a longer distance than the postman walks. In fact the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</span> +only people who are disgustingly idle are the children of those +who have just become rich, the new rich as they are called. As +these unfortunate fortunates have had neither the athletic training +nor the social discipline of the old rich, with whom what we +call high life is a skilled art needing a stern apprenticeship, they +do not know what to do with themselves; and their resourceless +loafing and consumption of chocolate creams, cigarets, cocktails, +and the sillier sort of novels and illustrated papers whilst they +drift about in motor cars from one big hotel to another, is pitiable. +But in the next generation they either relapse into poverty or go +to school with the class they can now afford to belong to, and +acquire its accomplishments, its discipline, and its manners.</p> + +<p>But beside this Spartan routine invented to employ people who +have not to work for their living, and which, you will notice, is a +survival of the old tribal order in which the braves hunted and +fought whilst the squaws did the domestic work, there is the +necessary public work which must be done by a governing class +if it is to keep all political power in its own hands. By not paying +for this work, or paying so little for it that nobody without an +unearned income can afford to undertake it, and by attaching to +the upper division of the civil service examination tests that only +expensively educated persons can pass, this work is kept in the +hands of the rich. That is the explanation of the otherwise unaccountable +way in which the proprietary class has opposed every +attempt to attach sufficient salaries to parliamentary work to make +those who do it self-supporting, although the proprietors themselves +were the holders of the main parliamentary posts. Though +they officered the army, they did everything they could to make +it impossible for an officer to live on his pay. Though they contested +every parliamentary seat, they opposed the public payment +of members of Parliament and their election expenses. Though +they regarded the diplomatic service as a preserve for their +younger sons, they attached to it the condition that no youth +should be eligible for it without a private income of four hundred +a year. They fought, and still fight, against making government a +self-supporting occupation, because the effect would be to throw +it open to the unpropertied, and destroy their own monopoly of it.</p> + +<p>But as the work of government must be done, they must do it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</span> +themselves if they will not let other people do it. Consequently +you find rich men working in Parliament, in diplomacy, in the +army, in the magistracy, and on local public bodies, to say nothing +of the management of their own estates. Men so working +cannot accurately be called the idle rich. Unfortunately they do all +this governing work with a bias in favour of the privilege of their +class to be idle. From the point of view of the public good, it would +be far better if they amused themselves like most of their class, and +left the work of governing to be done by well-paid officials and +ministers whose interests were those of the nation as a whole.</p> + +<p>The stamina of the women of the idle class was formerly maintained +by their work in childbearing and family housekeeping. +But at present many of them resort to contraception (called birth +control) not to regulate the number of their children and the time +of their birth, but to avoid bearing any children at all. Hotel life, +or life in service flats, or the delegation of household management +to professional ladies who are practically private hotel managers, +is more and more substituted for old-fashioned domestic housekeeping. +If this were an ordinary division of labor to enable a +woman to devote herself entirely to a professional career of some +sort, it would be defensible; for many women, as you must often +have noticed, have no aptitude for domestic work, and are as much +out of place in the kitchen and nursery as all men are conventionally +supposed to be; but when you have women with unearned +and excessive incomes its possibility involves an equal possibility +of complete uselessness and self-indulgence, of which many rich +women, knowing no better, take the fullest advantage.</p> + +<p>There are always a few cases in which exceptional men and +women with sufficient unearned income to maintain them handsomely +without a stroke of work are found working harder than +most of those who have to do it for a living, and spending most +of their money on attempts to better the world. Florence Nightingale +organized the hospital work of the Crimean war, including +the knocking of some sense into the heads of the army medical +staff, and much disgusting and dangerous drudgery in the wards, +when she had the means to live comfortably at home doing +nothing. John Ruskin published accounts of how he had spent +his comfortable income and what work he had done, to shew that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_62">[Pg 62]</span> +he, at least, was an honest worker and a faithful administrator of +the part of the national income that had fallen to his lot. This was +so little understood that people concluded that he must have gone +out of his mind; and as he afterwards did, like Dean Swift, succumb +to the melancholia and exasperation induced by the wickedness +and stupidity of capitalistic civilization, they joyfully persuaded +themselves that they had been quite right about him.</p> + +<p>But when every possible qualification of the words Idle Rich +has been made, and it is fully understood that idle does not mean +doing nothing (which is impossible), but doing nothing useful, +and continually consuming without producing, the term applies +to the class, numbering at the extreme outside one-tenth of the +population, to maintain whom in their idleness the other nine-tenths +are kept in a condition of slavery so complete that their +slavery is not even legalized as such: hunger keeps them sufficiently +in order without imposing on their masters any of those +obligations which make slaves so expensive to their owners. What +is more, any attempt on the part of a rich woman to do a stroke of +ordinary work for the sake of her health would be bitterly resented +by the poor because, from their point of view, she would +be a rich woman meanly doing a poor woman out of a job.</p> + +<p>And now comes the crowning irony of it all, which many intelligent +women to whom irony means nothing will prefer to call +the judgment of God. When we have conferred on these people +the coveted privilege of having plenty of money and nothing to +do (our idiotic receipt for perfect happiness and perfect freedom) +we find that we have made them so wretched and unhealthy that +instead of doing nothing they are always doing something “to +keep themselves fit” for doing nothing; and instead of doing +what they like, they bind themselves to a laborious routine of +what they call society and pleasure which you could not impose +on a parlormaid without receiving notice instantly, or on a Trappist +without driving him to turn atheist to escape from it. Only +one part of it, the Red Indian part, the frank return to primitive +life, the hunting and shooting and country life, is bearable; and +one has to be by nature half a savage to enjoy that continually. So +much for the exertions of the idle rich!</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_63">[Pg 63]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c19">19</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">CHURCH, SCHOOL, AND PRESS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">J</span>UST as Parliament and the Courts are captured by the rich, so +is the Church. The average parson does not teach honesty and +equality in the village school: he teaches deference to the +merely rich, and calls that loyalty and religion. He is the ally +of the squire, who, as magistrate, administers the laws made in +the interests of the rich by the parliament of rich men, and calls +that justice. The villagers, having no experience of any other sort +of religion or law, soon lose all respect for both, and become +merely cynical. They may touch their hats and curtsey respectfully; +but they whisper to oneanother that the squire, no matter +how kind his wife may be at Christmas by way of ransom, is a +despoiler and oppressor of the poor, and the parson a hypocrite. +In revolutions, it is the respectful peasants who burn the country +houses and parsonages, and rush to the cathedrals to deface the +statues, shatter the stained windows, and wreck the organ.</p> + +<p>By the way, you may know parsons who are not like that. At +least I do. There are always men and women who will stand out +against injustice, no matter how prosperous and well-spoken-of +it may be. But the result is that they are ill-spoken-of themselves +in the most influential quarters. Our society must be judged, not +by its few rebels, but by its millions of obedient subjects.</p> + +<p>The same corruption reaches the children in all our schools. +Schoolmasters who teach their pupils such vital elementary truths +about their duty to their country as that they should despise and +pursue as criminals all able-bodied adults who do not by personal +service pull their weight in the social boat, are dismissed from +their employment, and sometimes prosecuted for sedition. And +from this elementary morality up to the most abstruse and philosophic +teaching in the universities, the same corruption extends. +Science becomes a propaganda of quack cures, manufactured by +companies in which the rich hold shares, for the diseases of the +poor who need only better food and sanitary houses, and of the +rich who need only useful occupation, to keep them both in +health. Political economy becomes an impudent demonstration +that the wages of the poor cannot be raised; that without the idle<span class="pagenum" id="Page_64">[Pg 64]</span> +rich we should perish for lack of capital and employment; and +that if the poor would take care to have fewer children everything +would be for the best in the worst of all possible worlds.</p> + +<p>Thus the poor are kept poor by their ignorance; and those +whose parents are too well-off to make it possible to keep them +ignorant, and who receive what is called a complete education, +are taught so many flat lies that their false knowledge is more +dangerous than the untutored natural wit of savages. We all +blame the ex-Kaiser for banishing from the German schools and +universities all teachers who did not teach that history, science, +and religion all prove that the rule of the house of Hohenzollern: +that is, of his own rich family, is the highest form of +government possible to mankind; but we do the same thing ourselves, +except that the worship of rich idleness in general is substituted +for the worship of the Hohenzollern family in particular, +though the Hohenzollerns have family traditions (including the +learning of a common craft by every man of them) which make +them much more responsible than any Tom or Dick who may +happen to have made a huge fortune in business.</p> + +<p>As people get their opinions so largely from the newspapers +they read, the corruption of the schools would not matter so +much if the Press were free. But the Press is not free. As it costs +at least quarter of a million of money to establish a daily newspaper +in London, the newspapers are owned by rich men. And +they depend on the advertisements of other rich men. Editors +and journalists who express opinions in print that are opposed to +the interests of the rich are dismissed and replaced by subservient +ones. The newspapers therefore must continue the work begun +by the schools and colleges; so that only the strongest and most +independent and original minds can escape from the mass of false +doctrine that is impressed on them by the combined and incessant +suggestion and persuasion of Parliament, the law-courts, the +Church, the schools, and the Press. We are all brought up +wrongheaded to keep us willing slaves instead of rebellious ones.</p> + +<p>What makes this so hard to discover and to believe is that the +false teaching is mixed up with a great deal of truth, because up to +a certain point the interests of the rich are the same as the interests +of everybody else. It is only where their interests differ<span class="pagenum" id="Page_65">[Pg 65]</span> +from those of their neighbors that the deception begins. For +example, the rich dread railway accidents as much as the poor; +consequently the law on railway accidents, the sermons about +railway accidents, the school teaching about railway accidents, +and the newspaper articles about them are all quite honestly +directed to the purpose of preventing railway accidents. But +when anyone suggests that there would be fewer railway accidents +if the railwaymen worked fewer hours and had better +wages, or that in the division of the railway fares between the +shareholders and the workers the shareholders should get less +and the workers more, or that railway travelling would be safer if +the railways were in the hands of the nation like the posts and the +telegraphs, there is an immediate outcry in the Press and in Parliament +against such suggestions, coupled with denunciations of +those who make them as Bolsheviks or whatever other epithet +may be in fashion for the moment as a term of the most infamous +discredit.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c20">20</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">WHY WE PUT UP WITH IT</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU may ask why not only the rich but the poor put up +with all this, and even passionately defend it as an entirely +beneficial public morality. I can only say that the defence +is not unanimous: it is always being attacked at one point or +another by public-spirited reformers and by persons whose wrongs +are unbearable. But taking it in the lump I should say that the +evil of the corruption and falsification of law, religion, education, +and public opinion is so enormous that the minds of ordinary +people are unable to grasp it, whereas they easily and eagerly grasp +the petty benefits with which it is associated. The rich are very +charitable: they understand that they have to pay ransom for their +riches. The simple and decent village woman whose husband is +a woodman or gardener or gamekeeper, and whose daughters +are being taught manners as domestic servants in the country +house, sees in the lord of the manor only a kind gentleman who +gives employment, and whose wife gives clothes and blankets and +little comforts for the sick, and presides over the Cottage Hospital +and all the little shows and sports and well-meant activities that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_66">[Pg 66]</span> +relieve the monotony of toil, and rob illness of some of its terrors. +Even in the towns, where the rich and poor do not know oneanother, +the lavish expenditure of the rich is always popular. It +provides much that people enjoy looking at and gossiping about. +The tradesman is proud of having rich customers, and the servant +of serving in a rich house. At the public entertainments of +the rich there are cheap seats for the poor. Ordinary thoughtless +people like all this finery. They will read eagerly about it, and look +with interest at the pictures of it in the illustrated papers, whereas +when they read that the percentage of children dying under the +age of five years has risen or fallen, it means nothing to them but +dry statistics which make the paper dull. It is only when people +learn to ask “Is this good for all of us all the time as well as amusing +to me for five minutes?” that they are on the way to understand +how one fashionably dressed woman may cost the life of ten babies.</p> + +<p>Even then it seems to them that the alternative to having the +fashionably dressed rich ladies is that all women are to be dowdy. +They need not be afraid. At present nine women out of ten are +dowdy. With a reasonable distribution of income every one of the +ten could afford to look her best. That no woman should have +diamonds until all women have decent clothes is a sensible rule, +though it may not appeal to a woman who would like to have +diamonds herself and does not care a rap whether other women +are well-dressed or not. She may even derive a certain gratification +from seeing other women worse dressed than herself. But +the inevitable end of that littleness of mind, that secret satisfaction +in the misfortunes of others which the Germans call <i>Schadenfreude</i> +(we have no word for it), is that sooner or later a revolution +breaks out as it did in Russia; the diamonds go to the +pawnbroker, who refuses to advance any money on them because +nobody can afford diamonds any longer; and the fine ladies have +to wear old clothes and cheaper and worse readymades until there +is nothing left for them to wear. Only, as this does not happen all +at once, the thoughtless do not believe that the police will ever let +it come; and the littlehearted do not care whether it comes or not, +provided it does not come until they are dead.</p> + +<p>Another thing that makes us cling to this lottery with huge +money prizes is the dream that we may become rich by some<span class="pagenum" id="Page_67">[Pg 67]</span> +chance. We read of uncles in Australia dying and leaving +£100,000 to a laborer or a charwoman who never knew of his +existence. We hear of somebody no better off than ourselves +winning the Calcutta Sweep. Such dreams would be destroyed +by an equal distribution of income. And people cling all the +more to dreams when they are too poor even to back horses! +They forget the million losses in their longing for the one gain +that the million unlucky ones have to pay for.</p> + +<p>Poor women who have too much natural good sense to indulge +in these gambler’s dreams often make sacrifices in the hope that +education will enable their sons to rise from the slough of poverty; +and some men with an exceptional degree of the particular +sort of cleverness that wins scholarships owe their promotion to +their mothers. But exceptional cases, dazzling as some of them +are, hold out no hope to ordinary people; for the world consists of +ordinary people: indeed that is the meaning of the word ordinary. +The ordinary rich woman’s child and the ordinary poor woman’s +child may be born with equally able brains; but by the time they +begin life as grown men the rich woman’s son has acquired the +speech, manners, personal habits, culture, and instruction without +which all the higher employments are closed to him; whilst +the poor woman’s son is not presentable enough to get any job +which brings him into contact with refined people. In this way a +great deal of the brain power of the country is wasted and spoiled; +for Nature does not care a rap for rich and poor. For instance, she +does not give everybody the ability to do managing work. Perhaps +one in twenty is as far as she goes. But she does not pick out +the children of the rich to receive her capricious gifts. If in every +two hundred people there are only twenty rich, her gift of +management will fall to nine poor children and one rich one. But +if the rich can cultivate the gift and the poor cannot, then nine-tenths +of the nation’s natural supply of managing ability will be +lost to it; and to make up the deficiency many of the managing +posts will be filled up by pigheaded people only because they +happen to have the habit of ordering poor people about.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_68">[Pg 68]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c21">21</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">POSITIVE REASONS FOR EQUALITY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">S</span>O far, we have not found one great national institution that +escapes the evil effects of a division of the people into rich +and poor: that is, of inequality of income. I could take you +further; but we should only fare worse. I could shew you how +rich officers and poor soldiers and sailors create disaffection in +the army and navy; how disloyalty is rampant because the relation +between the royal family and the bulk of the nation is the +relation between one rich family and millions of poor ones; how +what we call peace is really a state of civil war between rich and +poor conducted by disastrous strikes; how envy and rebellion +and class resentments are chronic moral diseases with us. But if +I attempted this you would presently exclaim “Oh, for goodness’ +sake dont tell me everything or we shall never have done”. +And you would be quite right. If I have not convinced you by +this time that there are overwhelming reasons of State against +inequality of income, I shall begin to think that you dislike me.</p> + +<p>Besides, we must get on to the positive reasons for the Socialist +plan of an equal division. I am specially interested in it because it +is my favorite plan. You had therefore better watch me carefully +to see that I play fairly when I am helping you to examine what +there is to be said for equality of income over and above that +there is to be said against inequality of income.</p> + +<p>First, equal division is not only a possible plan, but one which +has been tested by long experience. The great bulk of the daily +work of the civilized world is done, and always has been done, +and always must be done, by bodies of persons receiving equal pay +whether they are tall or short, fair or dark, quick or slow, young +or getting on in years, teetotallers or beer drinkers, Protestants or +Catholics, married or single, short tempered or sweet tempered, +pious or worldly: in short, without the slightest regard to the +differences that make one person unlike another. In every trade +there is a standard wage; in every public service there is a standard +pay; and in every profession the fees are fixed with a view to +enable the man who follows the profession to live according to a +certain standard of respectability which is the same for the whole<span class="pagenum" id="Page_69">[Pg 69]</span> +profession. The pay of the policeman and soldier and postman, +the wages of the laborer and carpenter and mason, the salary of +the judge and the member of Parliament, may differ, some of +them getting less than a hundred a year and others five thousand; +but all the soldiers get the same, all the judges get the same, all +the members of Parliament get the same; and if you ask a doctor +why his fee is half a crown or five shillings, or a guinea or three +guineas, or whatever it may be, instead of five shillings or ten +shillings, or two guineas or six guineas or a thousand guineas, he +can give you no better reason than that he is asking what all the +other doctors ask, and that they ask it because they find they cannot +keep up their position on less.</p> + +<p>Therefore when some inconsiderate person repeats like a parrot +that if you gave everybody the same money, before a year was out +you would have rich and poor again just as before, all you have to +do is to tell him to look round him and see millions of people who +get the same money and remain in the same position all their lives +without any such change taking place. The cases in which poor +men become rich are most exceptional; and though the cases in +which rich men become poor are commoner, they also are accidents +and not ordinary everyday circumstances. The rule is that +workers of the same rank and calling are paid alike, and that they +neither sink below their condition nor rise above it. No matter +how unlike they are to oneanother, you can pay one of them two +and sixpence and the other half a crown with the assurance that as +they are put so they will stay, though here and there a great rogue +or a great genius may surprise you by becoming much richer or +much poorer than the rest. Jesus complained that he was poorer +than the foxes and birds, as they had their holes and nests whilst +he had not a house to shelter him; and Napoleon became an emperor; +but we need take no more account of such extraordinary +persons in forming our general plan than a maker of readymade +clothes takes of giants and dwarfs in his price list. You may with +the utmost confidence take it as settled by practical experience +that if we could succeed in distributing income equally to all the +inhabitants of the country, there would be no more tendency on +their part to divide into rich and poor than there is at present +for postmen to divide into beggars and millionaires. The only<span class="pagenum" id="Page_70">[Pg 70]</span> +novelty proposed is that the postmen should get as much as the +postmasters, and the postmasters no less than anybody else. If +we find, as we do, that it answers to give all judges the same income, +and all navy captains the same income, why should we go +on giving judges five times as much as navy captains? That is +what the navy captain would like to know; and if you tell him that +if he were given as much as the judge he would be just as poor as +before at the end of a year he will use language unfit for the ears +of anyone but a pirate. So be careful how you say such things.</p> + +<p>Equal distribution is then quite possible and practicable, not +only momentarily but permanently. It is also simple and intelligible. +It gets rid of all squabbling as to how much each person +should have. It is already in operation and familiar over great +masses of human beings. And it has the tremendous advantage of +securing promotion by merit for the more capable.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c22">22</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">MERIT AND MONEY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HAT last sentence may puzzle even the most Intelligent +Woman if she has never before given her mind seriously +to the subject; so I had better enlarge on it a little.</p> + +<p>Nothing hides the difference in merit between one person +and another so much as differences in income. Take for example a +grateful nation making a parliamentary grant of twenty thousand +pounds to a great explorer, or a great discoverer, or a great military +commander (I have to make my example a man: women +get only statues after their death). Before he has walked half way +down the street on his way home to tell his wife about it he may +meet some notorious fool or scandalous libertine, or some quite +ordinary character, who has not merely twenty thousand pounds +but twenty thousand a year or more. The great man’s twenty +thousand pounds will bring him in only a thousand a year; and +with this he finds himself in our society regarded as “a poor devil” +by tradesmen and financiers and quacks who are ten times as rich +because they have never in their lives done anything but make +money for themselves with entire selfishness, possibly by trading +in the vices or on the credulity of their fellow-countrymen. It<span class="pagenum" id="Page_71">[Pg 71]</span> +is a monstrous thing that a man who, by exercising a low sort of +cunning, has managed to grab three or four millions of money +selling bad whiskey, or forestalling the wheat harvest and selling +it at three times its cost, or providing silly newspapers and +magazines for the circulation of lying advertisements, should be +honored and deferred to and waited on and returned to Parliament +and finally made a peer of the realm, whilst men who have +exercised their noblest faculties or risked their lives in the furtherance +of human knowledge and welfare should be belittled by the +contrast between their pence and the grabbers’ pounds.</p> + +<p>Only where there is pecuniary equality can the distinction of +merit stand out. Titles, dignities, reputations do more harm than +good if they can be bought with money. Queen Victoria shewed +her practical common sense when she said that she would not give +a title to anyone who had not money enough to keep it up; but the +result was that the titles went to the richest, not to the best. Between +persons of unequal income all other distinctions are thrown +into the background. The woman with a thousand a year inevitably +takes precedence of women with only a hundred, no matter +how inferior she may be to them; and she can give her children +advantages qualifying them for higher employments than those +open to poor children of equal or greater natural capacity.</p> + +<p>Between persons of equal income there is no social distinction +except the distinction of merit. Money is nothing: character, +conduct, and capacity are everything. Instead of all the workers +being levelled down to low wage standards and all the rich +levelled up to fashionable income standards, everybody under a +system of equal incomes would find her and his own natural level. +There would be great people and ordinary people and little +people; but the great would always be those who had done great +things, and never the idiots whose mothers had spoiled them and +whose fathers had left them a hundred thousand a year; and the +little would be persons of small minds and mean characters, and +not poor persons who had never had a chance. That is why idiots +are always in favor of inequality of income (their only chance of +eminence), and the really great in favour of equality.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_72">[Pg 72]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c23">23</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">INCENTIVE</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>HEN we come to the objections to equal division of +income we find that most of them come to no more +than this: that we are not accustomed to it, and have +taken unequal division between classes so much for granted that +we have never thought any other state of things possible, not +to mention that the teachers and preachers appointed for us by +the rich governing class have carefully hammered into us from +our childhood that it is wicked and foolish to question the right +of some people to be much better off than others.</p> + +<p>Still, there are other objections. So many of them have been +already disposed of in our examination of the schemes for unequal +distribution that we need deal now with two only.</p> + +<p>The first is that unless a woman were allowed to get more money +than another she would have no incentive to work harder.</p> + +<p>One answer to this is that nobody wants her to work harder +than another at the national task. On the contrary, it is desirable +that the burden of work, without which there could be no income +to divide, should be shared equally by the workers. If those who +are never happy unless they are working insist on putting in extra +work to please themselves, they must not pretend that this is a +painful sacrifice for which they should be paid; and, anyhow, they +can always work off their superfluous energy on their hobbies.</p> + +<p>On the other hand, there are people who grudge every moment +they have to spend in working. That is no excuse for letting them +off their share. Anyone who does less than her share of work, and +yet takes her full share of the wealth produced by work, is a thief, +and should be dealt with as any other sort of thief is dealt with.</p> + +<p>But Weary Willie may say that he hates work, and is quite willing +to take less, and be poor and dirty and ragged or even naked +for the sake of getting off with less work. But that, as we have +seen, cannot be allowed: voluntary poverty is just as mischievous +socially as involuntary poverty: decent nations must insist on +their citizens leading decent lives, doing their full share of the +nation’s work, and taking their full share of its income. When +Weary Willie has done his bit he can be as lazy as he likes. He<span class="pagenum" id="Page_73">[Pg 73]</span> +will have plenty of leisure to lie on his back and listen to the birds, +or watch his more impetuous neighbors working furiously at +their hobbies, which may be sport, exploration, literature, the +arts, the sciences, or any of the activities which we pursue for +their own sakes when our material needs are satisfied. But poverty +and social irresponsibility will be forbidden luxuries. Poor Willie +will have to submit, not to compulsory poverty as at present, but +to the compulsory well-being which he dreads still more.</p> + +<p>However, there are mechanical difficulties in the way of freedom +to work more or less than others in general national production. +Such work is not nowadays separate individual work: it is +organized associated work, carried on in great factories and +offices in which work begins and ends at fixed hours. Our clothes, +for instance, are mostly washed in steam laundries in which all +the operations which used to be performed by one woman with +her own tub, mangle, and ironing board are divided among +groups of women using machinery and buildings which none of +them could use single-handed even if she could afford to buy +them, assisted by men operating a steam power plant. If some of +these women or men were to offer to come an hour earlier or stay +two hours later for extra wages the reply would be that such an +arrangement was impossible, as they could do nothing without +the co-operation of the rest. The machinery would not work for +them unless the engine was going. It is a case of all or nobody.</p> + +<p>In short, associated work and factory work: that is to say, the +sort of work that makes it possible for our great modern civilized +populations to exist, would be impossible if every worker could +begin when she liked and leave off when she liked. In many +factories the pace is set for the lazy and energetic alike by the +engine. The railway service would not be of much use if the engine +driver and the guard were to stop the train to look at a football +match when they felt inclined that way. Casual people are +useless in modern industry; and the other sort: those who want +to work longer and harder than the rest, find that they cannot do +it except in comparatively solitary occupations. Even in domestic +service, where the difference between the unpunctual slacker and +sloven and the model servant is very perceptible, the routine of +the household keeps everybody up to a certain mark below which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_74">[Pg 74]</span> +a servant is discharged as unemployable. And the slacker neither +accepts lower wages nor can be cured by higher.</p> + +<p>No external incentive is needed to make first-rate workers do +the best work they can: their trouble is that they can seldom +make a living by it. First-rate work is done at present under the +greatest discouragement. There is the impossibility of getting +paid as much for it as for second-rate work. When it is not paid +for at all, there is the difficulty of finding leisure for it whilst +earning a living at common work. People seldom refuse a higher +employment which they feel capable of undertaking. When they +do, it is because the higher employment is so much worse paid or +so unsuitable to their social position that they cannot afford to +take it. A typical case is that of a non-commissioned officer in the +army refusing a commission. If the quartermaster-sergeant’s +earnings and expenses came to no more than those of the officer, +and both men were of the same class, no inducement in the way of +extra money would be needed to make any soldier accept promotion +to the highest rank in which he felt he could do himself credit. +When he refuses, as he sometimes does, it is because he would be +poorer and less at home in the higher than in the lower rank.</p> + +<p>But what about the dirty work? We are so accustomed to see +dirty work done by dirty and poorly paid people that we have +come to think that it is disgraceful to do it, and that unless a dirty +and disgraced class existed it would not be done at all. This is +nonsense. Some of the dirtiest work in the world is done by titled +surgeons and physicians who are highly educated, highly paid, +and move in the best society. The nurses who assist them are +often their equals in general education, and sometimes their +superiors in rank. Nobody dreams of paying nurses less or respecting +them less than typists in city offices, whose work is +much cleaner. Laboratory work and anatomical work, which involves +dissecting dead bodies, and analysing the secretions and +excretions of live ones, is sometimes revoltingly dirty from the +point of view of a tidy housekeeper; yet it has to be done by +gentlemen and ladies of the professional class. And every tidy +housekeeper knows that houses cannot be kept clean without +dirty work. The bearing and nursing of children are by no means +elegant drawingroom amusements; but nobody dares suggest<span class="pagenum" id="Page_75">[Pg 75]</span> +that they are not in the highest degree honorable, nor do the most +fastidiously refined women shirk their turn when it comes.</p> + +<p>It must be remembered too that a great deal of work which is +now dirty because it is done in a crude way by dirty people can be +done in a clean way by clean people. Ladies and gentlemen who +attend to their own motor cars, as many of them do, manage to do +it with less mess and personal soiling than a slovenly general servant +will get herself into when laying a fire. On the whole, the +necessary work of the world can be done with no more dirt than +healthy people of all classes can stand. The truth of the matter is +that it is not really the work that is objected to so much as its +association with poverty and degradation. Thus a country gentleman +does not object to drive his car; but he would object very +strongly to wear the livery of his chauffeur; and a lady will tidy up +a room without turning a hair, though she would die rather than +be seen in a parlormaid’s cap and apron, neat and becoming as +they are. These are as honorable as any other uniform, and much +more honorable than the finery of an idle woman: the parlormaids +are beginning to object to them only because they have been +associated in the past with a servile condition and a lack of respect +to which parlormaids are no longer disposed to submit. But they +have no objection to the work. Both the parlormaid and her employer +(I dare not say her mistress), if they are fond of flowers +and animals, will grub in a garden all day, or wash dogs or rid +them of vermin with the greatest solicitude, without considering +the dirt involved in these jobs in the least derogatory to their dignity. +If all dustmen were dukes nobody would object to the dust: +the dustmen would put little pictures on their notepaper of their +hats with flaps down the backs just as now dukes put little pictures +of their coronets; and everyone would be proud to have a dustman +to dinner if he would condescend to come. We may take it that +nobody objects to necessary work of any kind because of the work +itself; what everybody objects to is being seen doing something +that is usually done only by persons of lower rank or by colored +slaves. We sometimes even do things badly on purpose because +those who do them well are classed as our inferiors. For example, +a foolish young gentleman of property will write badly +because clerks write well; and the ambassador of a republic will<span class="pagenum" id="Page_76">[Pg 76]</span> +wear trousers instead of knee-breeches and silk stockings at +court, because, though breeches and stockings are handsomer, +they are a livery; and republicans consider liveries servile.</p> + +<p>Still, when we have put out of our heads a great deal of nonsense +about dirty work, the fact remains that though all useful +work may be equally honorable, all useful work is most certainly +not equally agreeable or equally exhausting. To escape facing +this fact we may plead that some people have such very queer +tastes that it is almost impossible to mention an occupation that +you will not find somebody with a craze for. There is never any +difficulty in finding a willing hangman. There are men who are +happy keeping lighthouses on rocks in the sea so remote and +dangerous that it is often months before they can be relieved. +And a lighthouse is at least steady, whereas a lightship may never +cease rolling about in a way that would make most of us wish ourselves +dead. Yet men are found to man lightships for wages and +pensions no better than they could find in good employment on +shore. Mining seems a horrible and unnatural occupation; but it +is not unpopular. Children left to themselves do the most uncomfortable +and unpleasant things to amuse themselves, very much +as a blackbeetle, though it has the run of the house, prefers the +basement to the drawingroom. The saying that God never made a +job but He made a man or woman to do it is true up to a certain +point.</p> + +<p>But when all possible allowances are made for these idiosyncrasies +it remains true that it is much easier to find a boy who +wants to be a gardener or an engine driver, and a girl who wants +to be a film actress or a telephone operator, than a boy who wants +to be a sewerman, or a girl who wants to be a ragpicker. A great +deal can be done to make unpopular occupations more agreeable; +and some of them can be got rid of altogether, and would have +been got rid of long ago if there had been no class of very poor and +rough people to put them upon. Smoke and soot can be done +away with; sculleries can be made much pleasanter than most +solicitors’ offices; the unpleasantness of a sewerman’s work is +already mostly imaginary; coal mining may be put an end to by +using the tides to produce electric power; and there are many +other ways in which work which is now repulsive can be made no<span class="pagenum" id="Page_77">[Pg 77]</span> +irksomer than the general run of necessary labor. But until this +happens all the people who have no particular fancy one way or +the other will want to do the pleasanter sorts of work.</p> + +<p>Fortunately there is a way of equalizing the attraction of different +occupations. And this brings us to that very important part of +our lives that we call our leisure. Sailors call it their liberty.</p> + +<p>There is one thing that we all desire; and that is freedom. By +this we mean freedom from any obligation to do anything except +just what we like, without a thought of tomorrow’s dinner or any +other of the necessities that make slaves of us. We are free only as +long as we can say “My time is my own”. When workers working +ten hours a day agitate for an eight-hour day, what they really +want is not eight hours work instead of ten, but sixteen hours +off duty instead of fourteen. And out of this sixteen hours must +come eight hours sleep and a few hours for eating and drinking, +dressing and undressing, washing and resting; so that even with +an eight hours working day the real leisure of the workers: that +is, the time they have after they are properly rested and fed and +cleaned up and ready for any adventures or amusements or +hobbies they care for, is no more than a few hours; and these few +are reduced in value by the shortness of daylight in winter, and +cut down by the time it takes to get into the country or wherever +is the best place to enjoy oneself. Married women, whose working +place is the man’s home, want to get away from home for recreation, +just as men want to get away from the places where they +work; in fact a good deal of our domestic quarrelling arises because +the man wants to spend his leisure at home whilst the woman +wants to spend hers abroad. Women love hotels: men hate them.</p> + +<p>Take, however, the case of a man and his wife who are agreed in +liking to spend their leisure away from home. Suppose the man’s +working day is eight hours, and that he spends eight hours in bed +and four over his breakfast, dinner, washing, dressing, and resting. +It does not follow that he can have four hours to spare for +amusement with his wife every day. Their spare four hours are +more likely to be half wasted in waiting for the theatre or picture +show to begin; for they must leave the open air amusements, +tennis, golf, cycling, and the seaside, for the week-end or Bank +Holiday. Consequently he is always craving for more leisure.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_78">[Pg 78]</span> +This is why we see people preferring rough and strict employments +which leave them some time to themselves to much more +gentle situations in which they are never free. In a factory town it +is often impossible to get a handy and intelligent domestic servant, +or indeed to get a servant at all. That is not because the servant +need work harder or put up with worse treatment than the +factory girl or the shop assistant, but because she has no time she +can call her own. She is always waiting on the doorbell even when +you dare not ring the drawingroom bell lest she should rush up +and give notice. To induce her to stay, you have to give her an +evening out every fortnight; then one every week; then an afternoon +a week as well; then two afternoons a week; then leave to +entertain her friends in the drawingroom and use the piano occasionally +(at which times you must clear out of your own house); +and the end is that, long before you have come to the end of the +concessions you are expected to make, you discover that it is not +worth keeping a servant at all on such terms, and take to doing +the housework yourself with modern labor saving appliances. +But even if you put up with the evenings out and all the rest of it, +the girl has still no satisfying sense of freedom; she may not want +to stay out all night even for the most innocent purposes; but she +wants to feel that she might if she liked. That is human nature.</p> + +<p>We now see how we can make compensatory arrangements as +between people who do more or less agreeable and easy sorts of +work. Give more leisure, earlier retirement into the superannuated +class, more holidays, in the less agreeable employments, and +they will be as much sought after as the more agreeable ones with +less leisure. In a picture gallery you will find a nicely dressed lady +sitting at a table with nothing to do but to tell anyone who asks +what is the price of any particular picture, and take an order for it +if one is given. She has many pleasant chats with journalists and +artists; and if she is bored she can read a novel. Her desk chair is +comfortable; and she takes care that it shall be near the stove. But +the gallery has to be scrubbed and dusted every day; and its windows +have to be kept clean. It is clear that the lady’s job is a much +softer one than the charwoman’s. To balance them you must +either let them take their turns at the desk and at the scrubbing +on alternate days or weeks; or else, as a first-rate scrubber and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_79">[Pg 79]</span> +duster and cleaner might make a very bad business lady, and a +very attractive business lady might make a very bad scrubber, +you must let the charwoman go home and have the rest of the day +to herself earlier than the lady at the desk.</p> + +<p>Public picture galleries, in which the pictures are not sold, require +the services of guardians who have nothing to do but wear +a respectable uniform and see that people do not smoke nor steal +the pictures, nor poke umbrellas through them when pointing +out their beauties. Compare this work with that of the steel +smelter, who has to exercise great muscular strength among blast +furnaces and pools of molten metal; that is to say, in an atmosphere +which to an unaccustomed person would seem the nearest +thing to hell on earth! It is true that the steel smelter would very +soon get bored with the gallery attendant’s job, and would go +back to the furnaces and the molten metal sooner than stick it; +whilst the gallery attendant could not do the steel smelter’s job at +all, being too old, or too soft, or too lazy, or all three combined. +One is a young man’s job and the other an old man’s job. We +balance them at present by paying the steel smelter more wages. +But the same effect can be produced by giving him more leisure, +either in holidays or shorter hours. The workers do this themselves +when they can. When they are paid, not by time, but by the +piece; and when through a rise in prices or a great rush of orders +they find that they can earn twice as much in a week as they are +accustomed to live on, they can choose between double wages +and double leisure. They usually choose double leisure, taking +home the same money as before, but working from Monday to +Wednesday only, and taking a Thursday to Saturday holiday. +They do not want more work and more money: they want more +leisure for the same work, which proves that money is not the +only incentive to work, nor the strongest. Leisure, or freedom, is +stronger when the work is not pleasurable in itself.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_80">[Pg 80]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c24">24</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE TYRANNY OF NATURE</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE very first lesson that should be taught us when we are +old enough to understand it is that complete freedom from +the obligation to work is unnatural, and ought to be +illegal, as we can escape our share of the burden of work only by +throwing it on someone else’s shoulders. Nature inexorably ordains +that the human race shall perish of famine if it stops +working. We cannot escape from this tyranny. The question +we have to settle is how much leisure we can afford to allow +ourselves. Even if we must work like galley slaves whilst we are +at it, how soon may we leave off with a good conscience, knowing +that we have done our share and may now go free until tomorrow? +That question has never been answered, and cannot +be answered under our system because so many of the workers +are doing work that is not merely useless but harmful. But if by +an equal distribution of income and a fair division of work we +could find out the answer, then we should think of our share of +work as earning us, not so much money, but so much freedom.</p> + +<p>And another curious thing would happen. We now revolt +against the slavery of work because we feel ourselves to be the +slaves, not of Nature and Necessity, but of our employers and +those for whom they have to employ us. We therefore hate work +and regard it as a curse. But if everyone shared the burden and +the reward equally, we should lose this feeling. Nobody would +feel put upon; and everybody would know that the more work +was done the more everybody would get, since the division of +what the work produced would be equal. We should then discover +that haymaking is not the only work that is enjoyable. +Factory work, when it is not overdriven, is very social and can be +very jolly: that is one of the reasons why girls prefer working in +weaving sheds in a deafening din to sitting lonely in a kitchen. +Navvies have heavy work; but they are in the open air: they talk, +fight, gamble, and have plenty of change from place to place; and +this is much better fun than the sort of clerking that means only +counting another man’s money and writing it down in figures in +a dingy office. Besides the work that is enjoyable from its circumstances<span class="pagenum" id="Page_81">[Pg 81]</span> +there is the work that is interesting and enjoyable in itself, +like the work of the philosophers and of the different kinds of +artists who will work for nothing rather than not work at all; but +this, under a system of equal division, would probably become a +product of leisure rather than of compulsory industry.</p> + +<p>Now consider the so-called pleasures that are sold to us as more +enjoyable than work. The excursion train, the seaside lodgings, +the catchpenny shows, the drink, the childish excitement about +football and cricket, the little bands of desperately poor Follies +and Pierrots pretending to be funny and cute when they are only +vulgar and silly, and all the rest of the attempts to persuade the +Intelligent Woman that she is having a glorious treat when she +is in fact being plundered and bored and tired out and sent home +cross and miserable: do not these shew that people will snatch at +anything, however uneasy, for the sake of change when their few +whole days of leisure are given to them at long intervals on Bank +Holidays and the like? If they had enough real leisure every day +as well as work they would learn how to enjoy themselves. At +present they are duffers at this important art. All they can do is +to buy the alluringly advertized pleasures that are offered to them +for money. They seldom have sense enough to notice that these +pleasures have no pleasure in them, and are endured only as a +relief from the monotony of the daily leisureless drudgery.</p> + +<p>When people have leisure enough to learn how to live, and to +know the difference between real and sham enjoyment, they will +not only begin to enjoy their work, but to understand why Sir +George Cornewall Lewis said that life would be tolerable but for +its amusements. He was clever enough to see that the amusements, +instead of amusing him, wasted his time and his money +and spoiled his temper. Now there is nothing so disagreeable to +a healthy person as wasting time. See how healthy children pretend +to be doing something or making something until they are +tired! Well, it would be as natural for grown-up people to build +real castles for the fun of it as for children to build sand castles. +When they are tired they do not want to work at all, but just to do +nothing until they fall asleep. We never want to work at pleasure: +what we want is work with some pleasure and interest in it to +occupy our time and exercise our muscles and minds. No slave<span class="pagenum" id="Page_82">[Pg 82]</span> +can understand this, because he is overworked and underrespected; +and when he can escape from work he rushes into gross +and excessive vices that correspond to his gross and excessive +labor. Set him free, and he may never be able to shake off his old +horror of labor and his old vices; but never mind: he and his +generation will die out; and their sons and daughters will be able +to enjoy their freedom. And one way in which they will enjoy it +will be to put in a great deal of extra work for the sake of making +useful things beautiful and good things better, to say nothing of +getting rid of bad things. For the world is like a garden: it needs +weeding as well as sowing. There is use and pleasure in destruction +as well as in construction: the one is as necessary as the other.</p> + +<p>To have a really precise understanding of this matter you must +distinguish not merely between labor and leisure but between +leisure and rest. Labor is doing what we must; leisure is doing +what we like; rest is doing nothing whilst our bodies and minds +are recovering from their fatigue. Now doing what we like is +often as laborious as doing what we must. Suppose it takes the +form of running at the top of our speed to kick a ball up and down +a field! That is harder than many forms of necessary labor. Looking +at other people doing it is a way of resting, like reading a book +instead of writing it. If we all had a full share of leisure we could +not spend the whole of it in kicking balls, or whacking them +about with golf clubs, or in shooting and hunting. Much of it +would be given to useful work; and though our compulsory labor, +neglect to perform which would be treated as a crime, might possibly +be reduced to two or three hours a day, we should add +much voluntary work to that in our leisure time, doing for fun +a huge mass of nationally beneficial work that we cannot get +done at present for love or money. Every woman whose husband +is engaged in interesting work knows the difficulty of getting him +away from it even to his meals; in fact, jealousy of a man’s work +sometimes causes serious domestic unhappiness; and the same +thing occurs when a woman takes up some absorbing pursuit, +and finds it and its associations more interesting than her husband’s +company and conversation and friends. In the professions +where the work is solitary and independent of office and +factory hours and steam engines, the number of people who injure<span class="pagenum" id="Page_83">[Pg 83]</span> +their health and even kill themselves prematurely by overwork +is so considerable that the philosopher Herbert Spencer +never missed an opportunity of warning people against the craze +for work. It can get hold of us exactly as the craze for drink can. +Its victims go on working long after they are so worn out that +their operations are doing more harm than good.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c25">25</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE POPULATION QUESTION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE second of the two stock objections to equal division +of income is that its benefits, if any, would soon be +swallowed up by married couples having too many children. +The people who say this always declare at the same time that +our existing poverty is caused by there being already too many +people in the world, or, to put it the other way round, that the +world is too small to produce food enough for all the people in it.</p> + +<p>Now even if this were true, it would be no objection to an equal +division of income; for the less we have, the more important it is +that it should be equally divided, so as to make it go as far as +possible, and avoid adding the evils of inequality to those of +scarcity. But it is not true. What is true is that the more civilized +people there are in the world the poorer most of them are relatively; +but the plain cause of this is that the wealth they produce +and the leisure they provide for are so unequally divided between +them that at least half of them are living parasitically on the other +half instead of producing maintenance for themselves.</p> + +<p>Consider the case of domestic servants. Most people who can +afford to keep a servant keep one only; but in Mayfair a young +couple moving in the richest society cannot get on without nine +servants, even before they have any children to be attended to. +Yet everyone knows that the couples who have only one servant, +or at most two (to say nothing of those who have none), are +better attended to and more comfortable in their homes than the +unfortunate young people who have to find room for nine grown-up +persons downstairs, and keep the peace between them.</p> + +<p>The truth is, of course, that the nine servants are attending +mostly to one another and not to their employers. If you must<span class="pagenum" id="Page_84">[Pg 84]</span> +have a butler and footman because it is the fashion, you must +have somebody to cook their meals and make their beds. Housekeepers +and ladies’ maids need domestic service as much as the +lady of the house, and are much more particular about not putting +their hands to anything that is not strictly their business. It is +therefore a mistake to say that nine servants are ridiculous with +only two people to be attended. There are eleven people in the +house to be attended; and as nine of them have to do all this attendance +between them, there is not so much to spare for the odd +two as might be imagined. That is why couples with nine servants +are continually complaining of the difficulty of getting on +with so few, and supplementing them with charwomen and jobbing +dressmakers and errand boys. Families of ordinary size and +extraordinary income find themselves accumulating thirty servants; +and as the thirty are all more or less waiting on oneanother +there is no limit except that of sleeping room to the number +wanted; the more servants you have, the less time they have to +attend to you, and therefore, the more you need, or rather the +more they need, which is much jollier for them than for you.</p> + +<p>Now it is plain that these hordes of servants are not supporting +themselves. They are supported by their employer; and if he is +an idle rich man living on rents and dividends: that is, being +supported by the labor of his tenants and of the workers in the +companies in which he has shares, then the whole establishment, +servants, employer and all, is not self-supporting, and would not +be even if the world were made ten times as large as it is to accommodate +them. Instead of too many people in the world there +are too many idlers, and much too many workers wasting their +time in attending to idlers. Get rid of the idlers, and set these +workers to useful work, and we shall hear no more for a long time +yet about the world being overcrowded. Perhaps we shall never +hear of it again. Nature has a way with her in these matters.</p> + +<p>Some people will find it easier to understand this if I put it to +them like a sum in arithmetic. Suppose 20 men are producing by +their labor £100 a year each, and they agree, or are forced by law, +to give up £50 of it to the owner of the estate on which they work. +The owner will receive £1000 a year, not for work, but for owning. +The owner can afford to spend £500 a year on himself,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_85">[Pg 85]</span> +which makes him ten times as rich as any of the twenty workers, +and use the other £500 to hire six men and a boy at £75 a year +each to wait on him as servants and act as an armed force to deal +with any of the twenty men who may attempt to rebel and withhold +the £50 from him. The six men will not take the part of the +men with £50 a year because they themselves get £75; and they +are not clever enough to see that if they all joined to get rid of the +owner and do useful work, they could have £100 a year apiece.</p> + +<p>You have only to multiply the twenty workers and the six or +seven retainers by millions to get the ground plan of what exists +in every country where there is a class of owners, with a great +police force and an army to protect their property, great numbers +of servants to wait on them, and masses of workers making luxuries +for them, all supported by the labor of the really useful +workers who have to support themselves as well. Whether an increase +of population will make the country richer or poorer depends, +not on the natural fruitfulness of the earth, but on whether +the additional people are set to do useful work or not. If they are, +then the country will be richer. If, however, the additional people +are set to work unproductively for the property owners as servants, +or armed guardians of the rights of property, or in any of +the other callings and professions to minister only to the owners, +then the country will be poorer, though the property owners may +become richer, the display of diamonds and fine dresses and cars +much more splendid, and the servants and other retainers receiving +higher wages and more schooling than their grandfathers.</p> + +<p>In the natural course of things the more people there are in a +country the richer it ought to be, because of the advantage of +division of labor. Division of labor means that instead of every +man having to do everything for himself like Robinson Crusoe, +the different sorts of work are done by different sets of men, who +become very quick and skilful at their job by doing nothing else. +Also their work can be directed by others who give their whole +minds to directing it. The time saved in this way can be used in +making machinery, roads, and all sorts of contrivances for saving +more time and labor later on. That is how twenty workers can +produce more than twice what ten can produce, and a hundred +much more than five times what twenty can produce. If wealth<span class="pagenum" id="Page_86">[Pg 86]</span> +and the labor of producing it were equally shared, a population +of a hundred would be much better off than a population of ten, +and so on up to modern populations of millions, which ought to +be enormously better off than the old communities of thousands. +The fact that they are either very little better off or sometimes +actually worse off, is due wholly to the idlers and idlers’ parasites +who are plundering them as we plunder the poor bees.</p> + +<p>I must not, however, let you believe that if we all shared equally +the increase of wealth per head could go on for ever. Human beings +can multiply very fast under favorable conditions. A single +pair, if their posterity managed their affairs well enough to avoid +war, pestilence, and premature death, might have twenty million +descendants alive at the end of four hundred years. If all the +couples now alive were to multiply at that rate there would soon +not be standing room on the earth, much less fields to grow wheat +in. There is a limit to the quantity of food the earth can yield to +labor; and if there were no limit to the increase of population we +should at last find that instead of increasing our shares of food by +breeding more human beings, we should diminish them.</p> + +<p>Though we now cultivate the skies by extracting nitrogen from +the air, other considerations than that of food will check our +multiplication. Man does not live by bread alone; and it is possible +for people to be overfed and overcrowded at the same time. After +the war there was no exceptional scarcity of food in England; but +there was a terrible scarcity of houses. Our cities are monstrously +overcrowded: to provide every family they contain with a comfortably +spacious house and garden some of our streets would have to +be spread over miles of country. Some day we may have to make +up our minds how many people we need to keep us all healthy, and +stick to that number until we see reason to change it.</p> + +<p>In this matter the women who have to bear the children must be +considered. It is possible for a woman to bear twenty children. In +certain country districts in Europe families of fifteen are not uncommon +enough to be regarded as extraordinary. But though a +properly cared-for woman of vigorous constitution, with her confinements +reasonably spaced out, can apparently stand this strain +without permanent disablement or damage, and remain as well +and strong as women who have borne no children at all, yet the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_87">[Pg 87]</span> +bearing of each child involves a long period of discomfort and +sickness, culminating in temporary disablement, severe pain, and +a risk of death. The father escapes this; but at present he has to +earn wages to support the children while they are growing; and +though there may be plenty of employment for them when they +come to working age, that does not provide any bread and butter +for them in the meantime. Consequently an increase of population +that benefits the country and the world may be an almost +unbearable burden to the parents. They therefore restrict their +families to the number the father can afford, or the mother cares +to bear, except when they do not know how this can be done, or +are forbidden by their religion to practise birth control.</p> + +<p>This has a very important bearing on the equal distribution of +income. To understand this I must go back a little, and seem to +change the subject; but the connexion will soon be plain.</p> + +<p>If the workers in all occupations are to receive the same income, +how are we to deal with the fact that though the cost of living +is the same for all workers, whether they are philosophers or +farm hands, the cost of their work varies very greatly. A woman +in the course of a day’s work may use up a reel of cotton costing a +few pence whilst her husband, if a scientific worker, may require +some radium, which costs £16,000 an ounce. The gunners on +the battle-fields in Flanders, working at a dreadful risk of life and +limb, needed very little money for themselves; but the cost of the +materials they used up in a single day was prodigious. If they had +had to pay on the nail, out of their wages, for the cannons they +wore out and the shells they fired, there would have been no war.</p> + +<p>This inequality of expense cannot be got over by any sort of +adjustment of leisure or holidays or privileges of any sort between +worker and worker. Still less can it be met by unequal wages. +Even the maddest upholder of our wage system will not propose +that the man who works a steam hammer costing many thousands +of pounds should have wages proportionately higher than +the wages of the navvy who swings a sledgehammer or the woodcutter +who wields a beetle costing shillings instead of thousands +of pounds. The worker cannot bear the cost of his materials and +implements if he is to have only an equal share of the national +income: he must either be supplied with them, or repaid for them<span class="pagenum" id="Page_88">[Pg 88]</span> +in the cases in which he has to supply them at his own cost.</p> + +<p>Applying this to the labor of child-bearing and the cost of supporting +children, it is clear that the expenses of both should not +be borne by the parents. At present they are repaid very insufficiently +by maternity benefits and by an allowance off income tax +for each child in the family. Under a system of equal division of +income each child would be entitled to its share from birth; and +the parents would be the trustees for the children, subject, no +doubt, to the obligation of satisfying the Public Trustee, if any +neglect were reported, that the children were getting the full +benefit of their incomes. In this way a family of growing children +would always be in easy circumstances; and the mother could +face the labor and risk of bearing them for the sake of motherhood’s +natural privileges, dignities, and satisfaction.</p> + +<p>But it is conceivable that such pleasant conditions, combined +with early marriages and the disappearance of the present terrible +infant mortality, would lead to a greater increase of population +than might seem desirable, or, what is equally inconvenient, a +faster increase; for the pace of the increase is very important: it +might be desirable to double the population in a hundred years +and very undesirable to double it in fifty. Thus it may become +necessary to control our numbers purposely in new ways.</p> + +<p>What are the present ways? How is the population kept down +to the numbers our system of unequal sharing can support? They +are mostly very dreadful and wicked ways. They include war, +pestilence, and poverty that causes multitudes of children to die +of bad feeding and clothing and housing before they are a year +old. Operating side by side with these horrors, we have the practice +of artificial birth control by the parents on such an enormous +scale that among the educated classes which resort to it, including +the skilled artisan class, population is actually decreasing seriously. +In France the Government, dreading a dearth of soldiers, +urges the people to have more children to make up a deficiency of +twenty millions as compared with Germany. To such restrictions +on population must be added the criminal practice of abortion, +which is terribly prevalent, and, in eastern countries, the more +straightforward custom of frank infanticide by literally throwing +away the unwanted child, especially the female child, and leaving<span class="pagenum" id="Page_89">[Pg 89]</span> +it to perish of exposure. The humane Mahomet could not convince +the Arabs that this was sinful; but he told them that on the +Day of Judgment the female child that was exposed would rise +up and ask “What fault did I commit?” In spite of Mahomet +children are still exposed in Asia; and when exposure is effectually +prevented by law as it is in nominally Christian countries, the +unwanted children die in such numbers from neglect, starvation, +and ill-usage, that they, too, may well ask on the Day of Judgment +“Would it not have been kinder to expose us?”</p> + +<p>Of all these methods of keeping down the population there can +be no doubt that artificial birth control: that is, the prevention of +conception, is the most humane and civilized, and by far the least +demoralizing. Bishops and cardinals have denounced it as sinful; +but their authority in the matter is shaken by their subjection to +the tradition of the early Christians, for whom there was no population +question. They believed also that marriage is sinful in itself, +whether conception be prevented or not. Thus our Churchmen +are obliged to start by assuming that sex is a curse imposed on us +by the original sin of Eve. But we do not get rid of a fact by calling +it a curse and trying to ignore it. We must face it with one eye +on the alternatives to birth control, and the other on the realities +of our sexual nature. The practical question for the mass of mankind +is not whether the population shall be kept down or not, but +whether it shall be kept down by preventing the conception of +children or by bringing them into the world and then slaughtering +them by abortion, exposure, starvation, neglect, ill-usage, +plague, pestilence and famine, battle, murder and sudden death. +I defy any bishop or cardinal to choose the latter alternatives. St +Paul abhorred marriage; but he said “Better marry than burn”. +Our bishops and cardinals may abhor contraception (so do I, by +the way); but which of them would not say, when put to it like St +Paul, “Better have no children, by whatever means, than have +them and kill them as we are killing them at present”.</p> + +<p>We have seen how our present unequal sharing of the national +income has forced this question of Birth Control prematurely on +us whilst there is still plenty of room left in the world. Canada +and Australia seem underpopulated; but the Australians say that +their waste spaces are uninhabitable, though the overcrowded<span class="pagenum" id="Page_90">[Pg 90]</span> +Japanese are restrained only by our military prestige from saying +“Well, if you will not inhabit them, we will”. We have birth +control even where the Churches struggle hardest against it. +The only thing that can check it is the abolition of the artificial +poverty that has produced it prematurely. As equal division of +income can do this, those who dislike birth control and would +defer it to the latest possible moment, have that reason as well as +all the others we have studied, for advocating equal division.</p> + +<p>When the last possible moment comes, nobody can foresee how +the necessary restriction of the population will be effected. It may +be that Nature will interfere and take the matter out of our hands. +This possibility is suggested by the fact that the number of children +born seems to vary according to the need for them. When +they are exposed to such dangers and hard conditions that very +few of them can be expected to survive, Nature, without any +artificial interference, produces enormous numbers to provide +against the complete extinction of the species. We have all heard +of the codfish with its million eggs and of the queen bee laying +four thousand eggs a day. Human beings are less prolific; +but even within human limits Nature apparently distinguishes +between poor, undernourished, uncultivated, defective people +whose children die early and in great numbers, and people who +are fully cultivated mentally and physically. The defectives are +appallingly prolific: the others have fewer children even when +they do not practise birth control. It is one of the troubles of our +present civilization that the inferior stocks are outbreeding the +superior ones. But the inferior stocks are really starved stocks, +slum stocks, stocks not merely uncultivated but degraded by +their wretched circumstances. By getting rid of poverty we +should get rid of these circumstances and of the inferior stocks +they produce; and it is not at all unlikely that in doing so we +should get rid of the exaggerated fertility by which Nature tries +to set off the terrible infant mortality among them.</p> + +<p>For if Nature can and does increase fertility to prevent the extinction +of a species by excessive mortality, need we doubt that +she can and will decrease it to prevent its extinction by overcrowding? +It is certain that she does, in a mysterious way, respond to +our necessities, or rather to her own. But her way is one that we<span class="pagenum" id="Page_91">[Pg 91]</span> +do not understand. The people who say that if we improve the +condition of the world it will be overpopulated are only pretending +to understand it. If the Socialists were to say positively that +Nature will keep the population within bounds under Socialism +without artificial birth control, they would be equally pretending +to understand it. The sensible course is to improve the +condition of the world and see what will happen, or, as some +would say, trust in God that evil will not come out of good. All +that concerns us at present is that as the overpopulation difficulty +has not yet arisen except in the artificial form produced by our +unequal distribution of income, and curable by a better distribution, +it would be ridiculous to refrain from making ourselves +more comfortable on the ground that we may find ourselves getting +uncomfortable again later on. We should never do anything +at all if we listened to the people who tell us that the sun is cooling, +or the end of the world coming next year, or the increase of +population going to eat us off the face of the earth, or, generally, +that all is vanity and vexation of spirit. It would be quite sensible +to say “Let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die” if only we +were certain about tomorrow; but it would be foolish anyhow to +say “It is not worth while to live today; for we shall die tomorrow”. +It is just like saying “It will be all the same a thousand +years hence” as lazy people do when they have neglected their +duties. The fact is that the earth can accommodate its present +population more comfortably than it does or ever did; and whilst +we last we may as well make ourselves as comfortable as we can.</p> + +<p>Note that as long as two persons can produce more than twice +as much as one, and two million very much more than twice as +much as one million, the earth is said by the political economists +to be under the Law of Increasing Return. And if ever we reach +a point when there will be more people than the earth can feed +properly, and the next child born will make the whole world +poorer, then the earth will be under the Law of Diminishing +Return. If any gentleman tries to persuade you that the earth is +now under the Law of Diminishing Return you may safely conclude +that he has been told to say so at a university for the sons +of the rich, who would like you to believe that their riches, and +the poverty of the rest, are brought about by an eternal and unchangeable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_92">[Pg 92]</span> +law of Nature instead of by an artificial and disastrous +misdistribution of the national income which we can remedy.</p> + +<p>All the same, do not overlook the fact that there may be overpopulation +in spots whilst the world as a whole is underpopulated. +A boat in mid ocean, containing ten castaways, a pint of +water, and a pound of biscuits, is terribly overpopulated. The +cottage of a laborer with thirty shillings a week and eight children +is overpopulated. A tenement house with twelve rooms and fifty +people living in them is overpopulated. London is abominably +overpopulated. Therefore, though there is no world population +question, and the world is under the law of increasing return, +there are innumerable spots in the world which are overpopulated +and under the law of diminishing return. Equality of income +would enable the unfortunate denizens of these plague +spots to escape from the slavery of diminishing returns to the +prosperity of increasing returns.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c26">26</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE DIAGNOSTIC OF SOCIALISM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>E have now disposed of the only common objections +to equal division of income not dealt with in our +earlier examination of the various ways in which income +is or might be unequally divided. And we have done the +whole business without bothering over what the Socialists say, +or quoting any of their books. You see how any intelligent +woman, sitting down to decide for herself how the national income +should be distributed, and without having ever heard the +word Socialism or read a line by any Socialist writer, may be +driven by her own common sense and knowledge of the world +to the conclusion that the equal plan is the only permanent and +prosperous one possible in a free community. If you could find +a better way out of our present confusion and misery for us, you +would be hailed as one of the greatest of discoverers.</p> + +<p>“And if I cannot,” you will say, “I suppose you will tell me I +must join the Socialists!”</p> + +<p>Dear lady: have you ever read St Augustine? If you have, you +will remember that he had to admit that the early Christians were<span class="pagenum" id="Page_93">[Pg 93]</span> +a very mixed lot, and that some of them were more addicted to +blackening their wives’ eyes for tempting them, and wrecking +the temples of the pagans, than to carrying out the precepts of the +Sermon on the Mount. Indeed you must have noticed that we +modern Christians are still a very mixed lot, and that it is necessary +to hang a certain number of us every year for our country’s +good. Now I will be as frank as St Augustine, and admit that the +professed Socialists are also a very mixed lot, and that if joining +them meant inviting them indiscriminately to tea I should +strongly advise you not to do it, as they are just like other people, +which means that some of them steal spoons when they get the +chance. The nice ones are very nice; the general run are no worse +than their neighbors; and the undesirable ones include some of +the most thoroughpaced rascals you could meet anywhere. But +what better can you expect from any political party you could +join? You are, I hope, on the side of the angels; but you cannot +join them until you die; and in the meantime you must put up +with mere Conservatives, Liberals, Socialists, Protestants, Catholics, +Dissenters, and other groups of mortal women and men, very +mixed lots all of them, so that when you join them you have to +pick your company just as carefully as if they had no labels and +were entire strangers to you. Carlyle lumped them all as mostly +fools; and who can deny that, on the whole, they deserve it?</p> + +<p>But, after all, you are an Intelligent Woman, and know this as +well as I do. What you may be a little less prepared for is that +there are a great many people who call themselves Socialists who +do not clearly and thoroughly know what Socialism is, and would +be shocked and horrified if you told them that you were in favor +of dividing-up the income of the country equally between everybody, +making no distinction between lords and laborers, babies in +arms and able-bodied adults, drunkards and teetotallers, archbishops +and sextons, sinners and saints. They would assure you +that all this is a mere ignorant delusion of the man in the street, +and that no educated Socialist believes such crazy nonsense. +What they want, they will tell you, is equality of opportunity, by +which I suppose they mean that Capitalism will not matter if +everyone has an equal opportunity of becoming a Capitalist, +though how that equality of opportunity can be established without<span class="pagenum" id="Page_94">[Pg 94]</span> +equality of income they cannot explain. Equality of opportunity +is impossible. Give your son a fountain pen and a ream of +paper, and tell him that he now has an equal opportunity with me +of writing plays, and see what he will say to you! Do not let yourself +be deceived by such phrases, or by protestations that you +need not fear Socialism because it does not really mean Socialism. +It does; and Socialism means equality of income and nothing else. +The other things are only its conditions or its consequences.</p> + +<p>You may, if you have a taste that way, read all the books that +have been written to explain Socialism. You can study the +Utopian Socialism of Sir Thomas More, the Theocratic Socialism +of the Incas, the speculations of Saint Simon, the Communism of +Fourier and Robert Owen, the so-called Scientific Socialism of +Karl Marx, the Christian Socialism of Canon Kingsley and the +Rev. F. D. Maurice, William Morris’s News from Nowhere (a +masterpiece of literary art which you should read anyhow), the +Constitutional Socialism of Sidney and Beatrice Webb and of the +highly respectable Fabian Society, and several fancy Socialisms +preached by young men who have not yet had time to become +celebrated. But clever as they all are, if they do not mean equality +of income they mean nothing that will save civilization. The rule +that subsistence comes first and virtue afterwards is as old as +Aristotle and as new as this book. The Communism of Christ, of +Plato, and of the great religious orders, all take equality in +material subsistence for granted as the first condition of establishing +the Kingdom of Heaven on earth. Whoever has reached +this conclusion, by whatever path, is a Socialist; and whoever has +not reached it is no Socialist, though he or she may profess Socialism +or Communism in passionate harangues from one end of the +country to the other, and even suffer martyrdom for it.</p> + +<p>So now you know, whether you agree with it or not, exactly +what Socialism is, and why it is advocated so widely by thoughtful +and experienced people in all classes. Also, you can distinguish between +the genuine Socialists, and the curious collection of Anarchists, +Syndicalists, Nationalists, Radicals, and malcontents of +all sorts who are ignorantly classed as Socialists or Communists +or Bolshevists because they are all hostile to the existing state of +things, as well as the professional politicians, or Careerists, who<span class="pagenum" id="Page_95">[Pg 95]</span> +are deserting Liberalism for Labor because they think the Liberal +ship is sinking. And you are qualified to take at its proper value +the nonsense that is talked and written every day by anti-Socialist +politicians and journalists who have never given five minutes +serious thought to the subject, and who trot round imaginary +Bolshies as boys trot round Guys on the fifth of November.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c27">27</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">PERSONAL RIGHTEOUSNESS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>ND now that you know what Socialism is, let me give you +a warning, with an apology in advance if the warning is +unnecessary. English people, especially English ladies, +are so individualistically brought up that the moment they +are convinced that anything is right they are apt to announce that +they are going to begin practising it at once, and to order their +children and servants to do the same. I have known women of +exceptional natural intelligence and energy who believed firmly +that the world can be made good by independent displays of +coercive personal righteousness. When they became convinced +of the righteousness of equality, they proceeded to do ridiculous +things like commanding their servants to take their meals with +the family (forgetting that the servants had not bargained for +their intimacy and might strongly object to it), with Heaven +knows what other foolishness, until the servants gave notice, and +their husbands threatened to run away, and sometimes even did.</p> + +<p>It is perhaps natural that ignorant poor women should imagine +that inequality is the fault of the rich women. What is more surprising +is that many rich women, though they ought to know +better than anybody that a woman can no more help being born +rich than born poor, feel guilty and ashamed of their wealth, and +plunge into almsgiving to relieve their sickly consciences. They +often conceive Socialism as a charitable enterprise for the benefit +of the poor. Nothing could be further from the truth. Socialism +abhors poverty, and would abolish the poor. A hearty dislike and +disapproval of poor people as such is the first qualification of +a good Equalizer. Under Socialism people would be prosecuted +for being poor as they are now for being naked. Socialism<span class="pagenum" id="Page_96">[Pg 96]</span> +loathes almsgiving, not only sentimentally because it fills the +paupers with humiliation, the patrons with evil pride, and both +with hatred, but because in a country justly and providently +managed there could be neither excuse for it on the pauper’s part +nor occasion for it on the patron’s. Those who like playing the +good Samaritan should remember that you cannot have good +Samaritans without thieves. Saviors and rescuers may be splendid +figures in hagiography and romance; but as they could not +exist without sinners and victims they are bad symptoms.</p> + +<p>The virtues that feed on suffering are very questionable virtues. +There are people who positively wallow in hospitals and charitable +societies and Relief Funds and the like, yet who, if the need +for their charitable exercises were removed, could spend their +energy to great advantage in improving their own manners and +learning to mind their own business. There will always be plenty +of need in the world for kindness; but it should not be wasted on +preventible starvation and disease. Keeping such horrors in existence +for the sake of exercising our sympathies is like setting our +houses on fire to exercise the vigor and daring of our fire brigades. +It is the people who hate poverty, not those who sympathize with +it, who will put an end to it. Almsgiving, though it cannot be +stopped at present, as without it we should have hunger riots, +and possibly revolution, is an evil. At present we give the unemployed +a dole to support them, not for love of them, but because +if we left them to starve they would begin by breaking our +windows and end by looting our shops and burning our houses.</p> + +<p>It is true that a third of the money has come directly out of their +own pockets; but the way in which it is repaid to them is none the +less demoralizing. They find out that whether they contribute or +not, the rich will pay ransom all the same. In ancient Rome the +unemployed demanded not only bread to feed them but gladiator +shows to keep them amused (<i>panem et circenses</i>); and the result +was that Rome became crowded with playboys who would not +work at all, and were fed and amused with money taken from the +provinces. That was the beginning of the end of ancient Rome. +We may come to bread and football (or prize-fights) yet: indeed +the dole has brought us to the bread already. There is not even +the blessing of kindness on it; for we all grudge the dole (it comes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_97">[Pg 97]</span> +out of all our pockets) and would stop it tomorrow if we dared.</p> + +<p>Equalization of Income will be brought about, not by every +woman making it her private business, but by every woman making +it her public business: that is, by law. And it will not be by a +single law, but a long series of laws. These laws will not be commandments +saying thou shalt or thou shalt not. The Ten Commandments +gave the Israelites a set of precepts which none of +their laws were to violate; but the commandments were politically +useless until an elaborate set of laws and institutions had +been provided to give effect to them. The first and last commandment +of Socialism is “Thou shalt not have a greater or less income +than thy neighbor”; but before such a commandment can +be even approximately obeyed we shall have not only to pass +hundreds of new Acts of Parliament and repeal hundreds of old +ones, but to invent and organize new Government departments; +train and employ no end of women and men as public servants; +educate children to look at their country’s affairs in a new way; +and struggle at every step with the opposition of ignorance, +stupidity, custom, prejudice, and the vested interests of the rich.</p> + +<p>Imagine a Socialist Government elected by an overwhelming +majority of people who have read the preceding chapters of this +book and been convinced by them, but not otherwise prepared +for any change. Imagine it confronted with a starving woman. +The woman says “I want work, not charity”. The Government, +not having any work for her, replies “Read Shaw; and you will +understand all about it”. The woman will say “I am too hungry +to read Shaw, even if I considered him an edifying author. Will +you please give me some food, and a job to enable me to pay for +it honestly?” What could the Government do but confess that it +had no job to give her, and offer her a dole, just as at present.</p> + +<p>Until the Government has acquired all the powers of employment +that the private employers now possess, it can give nothing +to starving women, but outdoor relief with money taken by taxation +from the employers and their landlords and financiers, which +is just what any unsocialist government does. To acquire those +powers it must itself become the national landlord, the national +financier, and the national employer. In other words, it cannot +distribute the national income equally until it, instead of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_98">[Pg 98]</span> +private owners, has the national income to distribute. Until it has +done so you cannot practise Socialism even if you want to: you +may even be severely punished for trying. You may agitate and +vote for all the steps by which equalization of income will be +reached; but in your private life you cannot do otherwise than +you have to do at present: that is, keep your social rank (know +your place, as it is called), paying or receiving the usual wages, +investing your money to the best advantage, and so forth.</p> + +<p>You see, it is one thing to understand the aim of Socialism, and +quite another to carry it into practice, or even to see how it can +or ever could be carried into practice. Jesus tells you to take no +thought for the morrow’s dinner or dress. Matthew Arnold tells +you to choose equality. But these are commandments without +laws. How can you possibly obey them at present? To take no +thought for the morrow as we now are is to become a tramp; and +nobody can persuade a really intelligent woman that the problems +of civilization can be solved by tramps. As to choosing equality, +let us choose it by all means; but how? A woman cannot go into +the streets to rifle the pockets of those who have more money than +she has, and give money away to those who have less: the police +would soon stop that, and pass her on from the prison cell to the +lunatic asylum. She knows that there are things that the Government +may do by law that no private person could be allowed to do. +The Government may say to Mrs Jobson “If you murder Mrs +Dobson (or anyone else) you will be hanged”. But if Mrs Dobson’s +husband said to Mrs Jobson “If you murder my wife I will +strangle you” he would be threatening to commit a crime, and +could be severely punished for it, no matter how odious and +dangerous Mrs Jobson might be. In America, crowds sometimes +take criminals out of the hands of the law and lynch them. If they +attempted to do that in England they would be dispersed by the +police, or shot down by the soldiers, no matter how wicked the +criminal and how natural their indignation at the crime.</p> + +<p>The first thing civilized people have to learn politically is that +they must not take the law into their own hands. Socialism is from +beginning to end a matter of law. It will have to make idlers work; +but it must not allow private persons to take this obligation on +themselves. For instance, an Intelligent Woman, having to deal<span class="pagenum" id="Page_99">[Pg 99]</span> +with a lazy slut, might feel strongly tempted to take up the +nearest broomstick and say “If you dont get on with your work +and do your fair share of it I will lambaste you with this stick +until you are black and blue”. That occasionally happens at +present. But such a threat, and much more its execution, is a +worse crime than idleness, however richly the slattern may deserve +the thrashing. The remedy must be a legal remedy. If the +slattern is to be whacked it must be done by order of a court of +law, by an officer of the law, after a fair trial by law. Otherwise +life would be unbearable; for if we were all allowed to take the +law into our own hands as we pleased, no woman could walk +down the street without risk of having her hat torn off and +stamped on by some æsthete who happened to think it unbecoming, +or her silk stockings tarred by some fanatic who considers +women’s legs indecent, not to mention mobs of such people.</p> + +<p>Besides, the Intelligent Woman might not be stronger than +the lazy one; and in that case the lazy one might take the broomstick +and whack the intelligent one for working too hard and +thereby causing more to be expected from the lazy ones. That, +also, has often been done by too zealous Trade Unionists.</p> + +<p>I need not labor this point any more. Should you become a convert +to Socialism you will not be committed to any change in your +private life, nor indeed will you find yourself able to make any +change that would be of the smallest use in that direction. The +discussions in the papers as to whether a Socialist Prime Minister +should keep a motor car, or a Socialist playwright receive fees +for allowing his plays to be performed, or Socialist landlords and +capitalists charge rent for their land or interest on their capital, +or a Socialist of any sort refrain from selling all that she has and +giving it to the poor (quite the most mischievous thing she could +possibly do with it), are all disgraceful displays of ignorance not +only of Socialism, but of common civilization.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_100">[Pg 100]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c28">28</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">CAPITALISM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">N</span>OBODY who does not understand Capitalism can +change it into Socialism, or have clear notions of how +Socialism will work. Therefore we shall have to study +Capitalism as carefully as Socialism. To begin with, the word +Capitalism is misleading. The proper name of our system is Proletarianism. +When practically every disinterested person who understands +our system wants to put an end to it because it wastes +capital so monstrously that most of us are as poor as church mice, +it darkens counsel to call it Capitalism. It sets people thinking that +Socialists want to destroy capital, and believe that they could do +without it: in short, that they are worse fools than their neighbors.</p> + +<p>Unfortunately that is exactly what the owners of the newspapers +want you to think about Socialists, whilst at the same time +they would persuade you that the British people are a free and +independent race who would scorn to be proletarians (except a +few drunken rascals and Russians and professional agitators): +therefore they carefully avoid the obnoxious word Proletarianism +and stick to the flattering title of Capitalism, which suggests that +the capitalists are defending that necessary thing, Capital.</p> + +<p>However, I must take names as I find them; and so must you. +Let it be understood between us, then, that when we say Capitalism +we mean the system by which the land of the country is in +the hands, not of the nation, but of private persons called landlords, +who can prevent anyone from living on it or using it except +on their own terms. Lawyers tell you that there is no such thing as +private property in land because all the land belongs to the King, +and can legally be “resumed” by him at any moment. But as the +King never resumes it nowadays, and the freeholder can keep you +off it, private property in land is a fact in spite of the law.</p> + +<p>The main advantage claimed for this arrangement is that it +makes the landholders rich enough to accumulate a fund of spare +money called capital. This fund is also private property. Consequently +the entire industry of the country, which could not exist +without land and capital, is private property. But as industry +cannot exist without labor, the owners must for their own sakes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_101">[Pg 101]</span> +give employment to those who are not owners (called proletarians), +and must pay them enough wages to keep them alive and +enable them to marry and reproduce themselves, though not +enough to enable them ever to stop working regularly.</p> + +<p>In this way, provided the owners make it their duty to be selfish, +and always hire labor at the lowest possible wage, the industry of +the country will be kept going, and the people provided with a +continuous livelihood, yet kept under a continuous necessity to +go on working until they are worn out and fit only for the workhouse. +It is fully admitted, by those who understand this system, +that it produces enormous inequality of income, and that the +cheapening of labor which comes from increase of population +must end in an appalling spread of discontent, misery, crime, and +disease, culminating in violent rebellion, unless the population is +checked at the point up to which the owners can find employment +for it; but the argument is that this must be faced because +human nature is so essentially selfish, and so inaccessible to any +motive except pecuniary gain, that no other practicable way of +building up a great modern civilization stands open to us.</p> + +<p>This doctrine used to be called the doctrine of The Manchester +School. But as the name became unpopular, it is now described +generally as Capitalism. Capitalism therefore means that the only +duty of the Government is to maintain private property in land +and capital, and to keep on foot an efficient police force and +magistracy to enforce all private contracts made by individuals in +pursuance of their own interests, besides, of course, keeping civil +order and providing for naval and military defence or adventure.</p> + +<p>In opposition to Capitalism, Socialism insists that the first duty +of the Government is to maintain equality of income, and absolutely +denies any private right of property whatever. It would +treat every contract as one to which the nation is a party, with the +nation’s welfare as the predominant consideration, and would not +for a moment tolerate any contract the effect of which would be +that one woman should work herself to death prematurely in +degrading poverty in order that another should live idly and extravagantly +on her labor. Thus it is quite true that Socialism will +abolish private property and freedom of contract: indeed it has +done so already to a much greater extent than people realize; for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_102">[Pg 102]</span> +the political struggle between Capitalism and Socialism has been +going on for a century past, during which Capitalism has been +yielding bit by bit to the public indignation roused by its worst +results, and accepting instalments of Socialism to palliate them.</p> + +<p>Do not, by the way, let yourself be confused by the common use +of the term private property to denote personal possession. The +law distinguished between Real Property (lordship) and Personal +Property until the effort to make a distinction between property +in land and property in capital produced such a muddle that it was +dropped in 1926. Socialism, far from absurdly objecting to personal +possessions, knows them to be indispensable, and looks forward to +a great increase of them. But it is incompatible with real property.</p> + +<p>To make the distinction clear let me illustrate. You call your +umbrella your private property, and your dinner your private property. +But they are not so: you hold them on public conditions. +You may not do as you please with them. You may not hit me +on the head with your umbrella; and you may not put rat poison +into your dinner and kill me with it, or even kill yourself; for +suicide is a crime in British law. Your right to the use and enjoyment +of your umbrella and dinner is a personal right, rigidly +limited by public considerations. But if you own an English or +Scottish county you may drive the inhabitants off it into the sea if +they have nowhere else to go. You may drag a sick woman with a +newly born baby in her arms out of her house and dump her in +the snow on the public road for no better reason than that you +can make more money out of sheep and deer than out of women +and men. You may prevent a waterside village from building a +steamboat pier for the convenience of its trade because you think +the pier would spoil the view from your bedroom window, even +though you never spend more than a fortnight a year in that bedroom, +and often do not come there for years together. These are +not fancy examples: they are things that have been done again +and again. They are much worse crimes than hitting me over the +head with your umbrella. And if you ask why landowners are +allowed to do with their land what you are not allowed to do with +your umbrella, the reply is that the land is private property, or, as +the lawyers used to say, real property, whilst the umbrella is only +personal property. So you will not be surprised to hear Socialists<span class="pagenum" id="Page_103">[Pg 103]</span> +say that the sooner private property is done away with the better.</p> + +<p>Both Capitalism and Socialism claim that their object is the +attainment of the utmost possible welfare for mankind. It is in +their practical postulates for good government, their commandments +if you like to call them so, that they differ. These are, for +Capitalism, the upholding of private property in land and capital, +the enforcement of private contracts, and no other State interference +with industry or business except to keep civil order; and, +for Socialism, the equalization of income, which involves the +complete substitution of personal for private property and of +publicly regulated contract for private contract, with police interference +whenever equality is threatened, and complete regulation +and control of industry and its products by the State.</p> + +<p>As far as political theory is concerned you could hardly have a +flatter contradiction and opposition than this; and when you look +at our Parliament you do in fact see two opposed parties, the Conservative +and the Labor, representing roughly Capitalism and +Socialism. But as members of Parliament are not required to have +had any political education, or indeed any education at all, only a +very few of them, who happen to have made a special study, such +as you are making, of social and political questions, understand +the principles their parties represent. Many of the Labor members +are not Socialists. Many of the Conservatives are feudal +aristocrats, called Tories, who are as keen on State interference +with everything and everybody as the Socialists. All of them are +muddling along from one difficulty to another, settling as best +they can when they can put it off no longer, rather than on any +principle or system. The most you can say is that, as far as the +Conservative Party has a policy at all, it is a Capitalistic policy, +and as far as the Labor Party has a policy at all it is a Socialist +policy; so that if you wish to vote against Socialism you should +vote Conservative; and if you wish to vote against Capitalism you +should vote Labor. I put it in this way because it is not easy to +induce people to take the trouble to vote. We go to the polling +station mostly to vote against something instead of for anything.</p> + +<p>We can now settle down to our examination of Capitalism as it +comes to our own doors. And, as we proceed, you must excuse the +disadvantage I am at in not knowing your private affairs. You<span class="pagenum" id="Page_104">[Pg 104]</span> +may be a capitalist. You may be a proletarian. You may be betwixt-and-between +in the sense of having an independent income +sufficient to keep you, but not sufficient to enable you to save any +more capital. I shall have to treat you sometimes as if you were so +poor that the difference of a few shillings a ton in the price of coal +is a matter of serious importance in your housekeeping, and +sometimes as if you were so rich that your chief anxiety is how to +invest the thousands you have not been able to spend.</p> + +<p>There is no need for you to remain equally in the dark about +me; and you had better know whom you are dealing with. I am +a landlord and capitalist, rich enough to be supertaxed; and in +addition I have a special sort of property called literary property, +for the use of which I charge people exactly as a landlord charges +rent for his land. I object to inequality of income not as a man +with a small income, but as one with a middling big one. But I +know what it is to be a proletarian, and a poor one at that. I have +worked in an office; and I have pulled through years of professional +unemployment, some of the hardest of them at the expense +of my mother. I have known the extremes of failure and of success. +The class in which I was born was that most unlucky of all +classes: the class that claims gentility and is expected to keep up +its appearances without more than the barest scrap and remnant +of property to do it on. I intrude these confidences on you because +it is as well that you be able to allow for my personal bias. +The rich often write about the poor, and the poor about the rich, +without really knowing what they are writing about. I know the +whole gamut from personal experience, short of actual hunger +and homelessness, which should never be experienced by anybody. +If I cry sour grapes, you need not suspect that they are only +out of my reach: they are all in my hand at their ripest and best.</p> + +<p>So now let us come down to tin tacks.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_105">[Pg 105]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c29">29</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">YOUR SHOPPING</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>SK yourself this question: “Where does unequal distribution +of the national income hit me in my everyday life?”</p> + +<p>The answer is equally plain and practical. When you go +out to do your marketing it hits you in every purchase you +make. For every head of cabbage you buy, every loaf of bread, every +shoulder of mutton, every bottle of beer, every ton of coals, every +bus or tram fare, every theatre ticket, every visit from your doctor +or charwoman, every word of advice from your lawyer, you have +to pay not only what they cost, but an additional charge which is +handed over finally to people who have done nothing whatever +for you.</p> + +<p>Now though every intelligent woman knows that she cannot +expect to have goods or services for less than they cost in education, +materials, labor, management, distribution, and so on, no +intelligent woman will consent, if she knows about it and can help +it, to pay over and above this inevitable cost for the luxuries and +extravagances of idlers, especially if she finds great difficulty in +making both ends meet by working pretty hard herself.</p> + +<p>To rid her of this overcharge, Socialists propose to secure goods +for everyone at cost price by nationalizing the industries which +produce them. This terrifies the idlers and their dependents so +much that they do their best to persuade the Intelligent Woman +in their newspapers and speeches and sermons that nationalization +is an unnatural crime which must utterly ruin the country. +That is all nonsense. We have plenty of nationalization at present; +and nobody is any the worse for it. The army and navy, the +civil service, the posts and telegraphs and telephones, the roads +and bridges, the lighthouses and royal dockyards and arsenals, +are all nationalized services; and anyone declaring that they were +unnatural crimes and were ruining the country would be transferred +to the county lunatic asylum, also a national institution.</p> + +<p>And we have much more nationalization than this in the form +called municipalization, the only difference being that instead of +the central Westminster Parliament owning and conducting the +industry for the nation, as it does the Post Office, the industry is +owned and conducted by City Corporations or County Councils<span class="pagenum" id="Page_106">[Pg 106]</span> +for the local ratepayers. Thus we get publicly owned electric light +works, gas works, water works, trams, baths and washhouses, +public health services, libraries, picture galleries, museums, lavatories, +parks and piers with pavilions and bands and stages, besides +many other public services which concern the maintenance +of the Empire, and of which the public knows nothing.</p> + +<p>Most of these things could be done by private companies and +shops; indeed many of them are done at present partly by private +enterprise and partly by public: for instance, in London private +electric lighting companies supply light in one district whilst the +Borough Councils provide a municipal supply in others. But the +municipal supply is cheaper, and with honest and capable management +always must be cheaper than the private company’s supply.</p> + +<p>You will ask, why must it? Well, shortly, because it pays less +for its capital, less for its management, and nothing at all for +profits, this triple advantage going to the consumer in cheapness. +But to take in the whole scope of public enterprise as compared +with private, let us begin with the nationalized services. Why is +it that the nationalized Post Office is so much cheaper and more +extensive than a private letter-carrying company could make it, +that private letter-carrying is actually forbidden by law?</p> + +<p>The reason is that the cost of carrying letters differs greatly as +between one letter and another. The cost of carrying a letter from +house to house in the same terrace is so small that it cannot be +expressed in money: it is as near nothing as does not matter: to +get a figure at all you would have to take the cost per thousand +letters instead of per letter. But the cost of carrying the same +letter from the Isle of Wight to San Francisco is considerable. It +has to be taken from the train to the ship to cross the Solent; +changed into another ship at Southampton or perhaps at Liverpool +after another train journey; carried across the Atlantic +Ocean; then across the continent of North America; and finally +delivered at the opposite side of the world to the Isle of Wight. +You would naturally expect the Postmaster-General to deliver a +dozen letters for you in the same terrace for a penny, and charge +you a pound or so for sending one letter to San Francisco. What +he actually does for you is to deliver the thirteen letters for three-halfpence +apiece. By the time these lines are in print he may be<span class="pagenum" id="Page_107">[Pg 107]</span> +charging you only a penny apiece, as he used to before the war. +He charges you less than the cost of sending the long-distance +letter, and more than the cost of sending the short-distance letters; +but as he has thousands of short-distance letters to send and only +dozens of long-distance ones he can make up for the undercharge +on the long by an overcharge on the short. This charging the +same for all letters is called by economists averaging. Others call +it gaining on the swings what we lose on the roundabouts.</p> + +<p>Our reason for forbidding private persons or companies to +carry letters is that if they were allowed to meddle, there would +soon be companies selling stamps at threepence a dozen to deliver +letters within a few miles. The Postmaster-General would +get nothing but long-distance letters: that is, the ones with a high +cost of carriage. He would have to put up the price of his stamps; +and when we found that the advantage of sending a letter a mile +or two for a farthing was accompanied by the disadvantage of +paying sixpence or a shilling when we wanted to write to someone +ten miles off, we should feel that we had made a very bad bargain. +The only gainers would be the private companies who had upset +our system. And when they had upset it they would raise their +short-distance prices to the traditional penny, if not higher.</p> + +<p>Now let us turn from this well-established nationalized service +to one that might be nationalized, and that concerns every housekeeper +in the country very intimately. I mean the coal supply. +Coals have become a necessary of life in our climate; and they are +dreadfully dear. As I write these lines it is midsummer, when +coals are cheapest; and a circular dated the 16th June offers me +drawingroom coal for thirty-six and threepence a ton, and anthracite +for seventy shillings. That is much more than the average +cost. Why must I pay it? Why must you pay it? Simply because +the coal industry is not yet nationalized. It is private property.</p> + +<p>The cost price of coal varies from nothing to a pound a ton or +more, without counting what it costs to carry and distribute the +coal throughout the country. Perhaps you do not believe that +coals can be had for nothing; but I assure you that on the Sunderland +coast when the tide is out coals can be picked up on the shore +by all comers as freely as shells or seaweed. I have seen them with +my own eyes doing it. A sack and a back to carry it on is all that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_108">[Pg 108]</span> +anybody needs there to set up as a hawker of coals in a small way, +or to fill the cellar at home. Elsewhere on our coasts coal is so +hard to reach that shafts have been sunk and mines dug for miles +under the sea, the coal not having been reached until after twenty +years work and a heavy expenditure of money. Between these two +extremes there are all sorts of mines, some yielding so little coal +at such high cost that they are worked only when the price of coal +rises to exceptional heights, and others in which coal is so plentiful +and easily got at that it is always profitable to work them even +when coal is unusually cheap. The money they cost to open up +varies from £350 to over a million. But the price you have to pay +never falls below the cost from the very dearest mines.</p> + +<p>The reason is this. What makes prices high is scarcity: what +brings them down is plenty. Coals rise and fall in price just like +strawberries. They are dear when scarce, cheap when plenty.</p> + +<p>Now an article can become scarce in several ways. One is by +reducing the quantity in the market by slackening or ceasing to +manufacture. Another is to increase the number of people who +want to buy the article and have money enough to pay for it. Yet +another is to find out new uses for it. A scarcity of coal can be +produced not only by the increase of the population, but by the +people who formerly wanted only a scuttle of coals for the kitchen +fire wanting thousands of tons for blast furnaces and ocean +steamers. It is the scarcity produced in these ways that has raised +the price of coal to such a point that it is now worth while to +tunnel out mines under the sea. The cost of such mines is heavy; +but it is not incurred until the price of coal has gone up sufficiently +to cover it with a profit. If the price falls enough to cut off +that profit the mine stops working and is abandoned. And what is +the consequence of that? The stopping of the mine cuts off the +supply of coals it used to send to the market; and the scarcity produced +by the stoppage sends the price up again until it is high +enough to restart the mine without losing money by it.</p> + +<p>In this way the Intelligent Woman (and also the unintelligent +one) finds herself condemned always to pay for her coals the full +cost of getting them from the very dearest mines in use, though +she may know that only the fag end of the supply comes from +these mines, the rest coming from mines where the cost is much<span class="pagenum" id="Page_109">[Pg 109]</span> +lower. She will be assured, if she remonstrates, that the price is +barely sufficient to enable some of the collieries to continue working; +and this will be quite true. What she will not be told, though +it also is quite true, is that the better mines are making excessive +profits at her expense, to say nothing of landlord’s royalties.</p> + +<p>And here comes in another complication. The miners who hew +out the coal for wages in the better mines are paid no more than +those in the worse ones which can barely afford to keep going, +because the men, unlike the coal, can go from one mine to another, +and what the poorest miner must accept all must accept. +Thus the wages of all the miners are kept down to the poverty of +the worst mines, just as the coal bills of all the housekeepers are +kept up to their high cost. The dissatisfied miners strike, making +coals scarcer and dearer than ever. The housekeepers grumble, +but cannot bring down prices, and blame “the middleman”. Nobody +is satisfied except the owners of the better mines.</p> + +<p>The remedy here is, of course, the Postmaster-General’s plan of +averaging. If all the coal mines belonged to a Coalmaster-General +he could set off the good mines against the bad, and sell coal for +the average cost of getting the whole supply instead of having to +sell it for the cost of getting it in the very worst mines. To take +fancy figures, if half the supply cost a pound a ton to raise and the +other half cost half a crown a ton, he could sell at eleven and threepence +a ton instead of at a pound. A Commercial Coal Trust, +though it might come to own all the mines, would not do this, +because its object would be to make as much profit as possible for +its shareholders instead of to make coal as cheap for you as possible. +There is only one owner who would work in your interest, +and not want to make any profit at all. That owner would be a +Government Coalmaster-General, acting for the nation: that is, +acting for you and all the other housekeepers and users of coal.</p> + +<p>Now you understand why you have the miners and the intelligent +users and buyers of coal demanding the nationalization of +the coal mines, and all the owners of the mines and the sellers of +coal shrieking that nationalization would mean waste, corruption, +ruinously high prices, the destruction of our commerce and +industry, the end of our empire, and anything else they can think +of in their dismay at the prospect of losing the profits they make<span class="pagenum" id="Page_110">[Pg 110]</span> +by compelling us to pay a great deal more for our coal than it +costs. But however recklessly they shriek, they are careful never +to mention the real point of the whole business: that is, the procuring +of coal for everybody at cost price. To keep the attention +of the public off that, they will declare that nationalization is a +wicked invention of the Bolshevists, and that the British Government +is so corrupt and incompetent that it could not manage a +baked potato stand honestly and capably, much less a coal mine. +You may read ten debates in the House of Commons on coal +nationalization, and a hundred newspaper articles on those debates, +without ever learning what I have just told you about the +difference between the mines, and how by averaging the cost of +working them the price of your coals could be greatly reduced. +Once these facts are known and understood there is no room for +further argument: every purchaser of coal becomes a nationalizer +at once; though every coal proprietor is ready to spend the last +penny he can spare to discredit and prevent nationalization.</p> + +<p>You see then how separate private property in coal mines hits a +woman every time she buys coals. Well, it hits her in precisely the +same way every time she buys a pair of scissors or a set of knives +and forks or a flat-iron, because iron mines and silver mines differ +like coal mines. It hits her every time she buys a loaf of bread, +because wheat farms differ in fertility just like mines: a bushel of +wheat will cost much more to raise on one farm than on another. +It hits her every time she buys anything that is made in a factory, +because factories differ according to their distance from railways +or canals or seaports or big market towns or places where their +raw materials are plentiful, or where there is natural water power +to drive their works. In every case the shop price represents the +cost of the article in the few mines and factories where the cost of +production is greatest. It never represents the average cost taking +one factory and one mine with another, which is the real national +cost. Thus she is kept poor in a rich country because all the difference +between the worst and the best in it is skimmed off for the +private owners of the mines and factories by simply charging her +more for everything she uses than the things cost. And it is to +save her from this monstrous imposition that the Socialists, and +many people who never dream of calling themselves Socialists,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_111">[Pg 111]</span> +propose that the mines and factories shall be made national property +instead of private property. The difference between the +Socialist and non-Socialist nationalizers is that the non-Socialists +aim only at cheap coal, whereas the Socialists have the ulterior +object of bringing the mines into national ownership and control +so as to prevent their remaining an instrument of inequality of income. +On the immediate practical question of nationalization they +are agreed. That is how Socialism can advance without a majority +of professed Socialists in Parliament, or even without any.</p> + +<p>Note that the difference between the highest cost of production +under the worst circumstances and the lower costs under more +favorable circumstances is called by economists rent. Mining +rents and rents of copyrights and patent rights are called royalties; +and most people call nothing rent except what they pay for +house and land. But rent is part of the price of everything that +has a price at all, except things that are communized, and things +that are produced under the most unfavorable conditions.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c30">30</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">YOUR TAXES</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">B</span>ESIDES buying things in the shops you have to pay rates, +taxes, telephone rent (if you have a telephone), and rent +of house and land. Let us examine this part of your expenditure, +and see whether you get hit here again and again.</p> + +<p>People grumble a great deal about the rates, because they get +nothing across the counter for them; and what they do get they +share with everyone else, so that they have no sense of individual +property in it, as they have in their clothes and houses and furniture. +But they would not possess their clothes or their furniture +or their houses very long in peace but for the paved and lighted +and policed streets, the water supply and drainage, and all the +other services the rates pay for. The Intelligent Woman, when +she begins to study these matters, soon realizes that she gets +better value for her rates than for any other part of her expenditure, +and that the municipal candidates who ask for her vote on +the ground that they are going to abolish or reduce the rates +(which they fortunately cannot do) are mostly either fools or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_112">[Pg 112]</span> +humbugs, if not both. And she has the satisfaction of knowing +that she gets these services as nearly as possible at their cost to the +local authority, which not only does not profiteer at her expense, +but does for nothing a great deal of directorial work that in any +private business would have to be paid for, and under present +circumstances ought to be paid for, in public business as well.</p> + +<p>The same advantage can be claimed for taxes. Of all the public +services which you pay for in taxes to the Government it can be +said that there is no direct profiteering in them: you get them for +what they cost the Government: that is, for much less than you +would have to pay if they were private business concerns.</p> + +<p>So far it would seem that when you pay your rates and taxes +you escape the exactions which pursue you whenever you spend +money in any other way. You are perhaps beginning to feel that +the next time the collector calls you will hear his knock with joy, +and welcome him with the beaming face of the willing giver.</p> + +<p>I am sorry to spoil it all; but the truth is that Capitalism plunders +you through the Government and the municipalities and +County Councils as effectually as it does through the shopkeeper. +It is not only that the Government and the local authorities, in +order to carry on their public services, have to buy vast quantities +of goods from private profiteers who charge them more than cost +price, and that this overcharge is passed on to you as a ratepayer +and taxpayer. Nor is it that the Government of the country, acting +for the people of the country, cannot use the land of the +country without paying some private person heavily for leave to +do so. There are ways of getting round these overcharges, as, for +instance, when the Government buys a piece of land for its operations, +but raises the money to pay for it by a tax on rent which +only the landlords pay, or when it raises capital by a tax on unearned +incomes. By this expedient it can, and sometimes does, +give you a complete and genuine cost price service. It can even +give it to you for nothing and make richer people pay for it.</p> + +<p>But you are rated and taxed not only to pay for public services +which are equally useful to all, but for other things as well; and +when you come to these you may, if you are a rich woman, complain +that you are being plundered by Socialists for the benefit of +the poor, or, if you are a poor woman, that you are being plundered<span class="pagenum" id="Page_113">[Pg 113]</span> +by Capitalists who throw on the rents and taxes certain +expenses which they should pay out of their own pockets.</p> + +<p>Let us see what foundation there is for such complaints. Let us +begin with the rich. By taxation rich people have a quarter or a +third of their incomes, and very rich people more than half, taken +from them by the Government, not for any specified public service, +but as pure nationalization (communization) of their income +to that extent without any compensation, and by simple +coercion. This is now taken so completely as a matter of course +that the rich never dream of asking for compensation, or refusing +to pay until their goods are forcibly seized, or even of calling it +Bolshevik confiscation; and so we are apt to talk as if such things +never happened except in the imaginations of wicked Communists; +but they happen in Great Britain regularly every January; +and the Act authorizing them is brought in every April by the +Chancellor of the Exchequer. Though reassuringly called the +Appropriation Act it is really an Expropriation Act.</p> + +<p>There is nothing in the law or the Constitution, or in any custom +or tradition or parliamentary usage or any other part of our +established morality, to prevent this confiscated third or half +being raised to three-quarters, nine-tenths, or the whole. Besides +this, when a very rich person dies, the Government confiscates +the entire income of the property for the next eight years. The +smallest taxable properties have to give up their incomes to the +Government for ten months, and the rest for different periods +between these extremes, in proportion to their amount.</p> + +<p>In addition, there are certain taxes paid by rich and poor alike, +called indirect taxes. Some of them are taxes on certain articles of +food, and on tobacco and spirits, which you pay in the shop when +you buy them, as part of the price. Others are stamp duties: twopence +if you give a receipt for £2 or more, sixpence if you make +a simple written agreement, hundreds of pounds on certain other +documents which propertyless people never use. None of these +taxes are levied for a named service like the police rate or the +water rate: they are simple transfers of income from private +pockets to the national pocket, and, as such, acts of pure Communism. +It may surprise you to learn that even without counting +the taxes on food, which fall on all classes, the private property<span class="pagenum" id="Page_114">[Pg 114]</span> +thus communized already amounts to nearly a million a day.</p> + +<p>The rich may well gasp at the figure, and ask what does the +Government do with it all? What value do they get for this contribution +which appears so prodigious to most of us who have to +count our incomes in hundreds a year and not in millions a day? +Well, the Government provides an army and navy, a civil service, +courts of law and so forth; and, as we have seen, it provides them +either at cost price or more nearly at cost price than any commercial +concern would. But over a hundred million solid pounds +of it are handed over every year in hard cash in pensions and doles +to the unfortunate people who have small incomes or none.</p> + +<p>This is pure redistribution of income: that is, pure Socialism. +The officers of the Government take the money from the rich and +give it to the poor because the poor have not enough and the rich +have too much, without regard to their personal merits. And here +again there is no constitutional limit to the process. I can remember +a time when there was no supertax, and the income tax was +twopence in the pound instead of four-and-sixpence or five shillings, +and when Gladstone hoped to abolish it altogether. Nobody +dreamt then of using taxation as an instrument for effecting a +more equal distribution of income. Nowadays it is one of the +chief uses of taxation; and it could be carried to complete equality +without any change in our annual exchequer routine.</p> + +<p>So far the poor have the better of the bargain. But some of the +rich do very well out of the taxes. By far the heaviest single item +of Government expenditure is the annual payment for the hire +of the money we borrowed for the war. It is all spent and gone; +but we must go on paying for the hire until we replace and repay +it. Most of it was borrowed from the rich, because they alone had +any spare money to lend. Consequently the Government takes a +vast sum of money every year from the whole body of rich, and +immediately hands it back to those who lent it money for the +war. The effect of this transaction is simply to redistribute income +between the rich themselves. Those who lose by it make a fuss +about what they call the burden of the National Debt; but the +nation is not a penny the poorer for taking money from one +bold Briton and giving it to another. Whether the transfer is for +better or worse depends on whether it increases or diminishes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_115">[Pg 115]</span> +the existing inequality. Unfortunately, it is bound, on the whole, +to increase it, because the Government, instead of taking money +from some capitalists and dividing it among them all, is taking +money from all capitalists and dividing it among some of them. +This is the real mischief of the National Debt, which, in so far as +it is owed to our own people, is not a debt at all. To illustrate, one +may say that an elephant does not complain of being burdened +because its legs have to carry its own weight; but if all the weight +were on one side instead of being equally distributed between the +legs, the elephant would hardly be able to carry it, and would +roll over on its back when it met the slightest obstacle, which is +very much what our trade does under our unequal system.</p> + +<p>It is sometimes said that the capitalists who lent the Government +the money for the war deserve the hire of it because they +made sacrifices. As I was one of them myself I can tell you without +malice that this is sentimental nonsense. They were the only +people who were not called on to make any sacrifice: on the contrary, +they were offered a gilt-edged investment at five per cent +when they would have taken four. The people who were blinded, +maimed, or killed by the war were those really sacrificed; and +those who worked and fought were the real saviors of the country; +whilst the people who did nothing but seize the national +loaf that others had made, and take a big bite out of it (they +and their servants) before passing on what they left of it to the +soldiers, did no personal service at all: they only made the food +shortage still shorter. The reason for pampering them in this +absurd fashion was not for any service or merit on their part: it +was the special consideration we have to shew to spare money as +such because we are afraid there would not be any available if we +did not pamper a class by giving it more than it can spend. We +shall have to go further into this when we examine the nature of +capital later on. Meanwhile, if you had the misfortune to lose an +eye during one of the air raids, or if you lost your husband or son, +or if you “did your bit” strenuously throughout the war, and are +now a taxpayer, it must seem to you, to say the least, funny to +have money taken from you by the Government and handed over +to some lady who did nothing but live as indulgently as she could +all the time. You will not easily be convinced that it would have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_116">[Pg 116]</span> +been a more dreadful thing for the Government to commandeer +her money than your husband’s limbs, or your son’s life. The +utmost that can be said is that it may have been more expedient.</p> + +<p>One more example of how your taxes may be used to enrich +profiteers instead of to do you any service. At the beginning of +the war, the influence of the profiteers was so strong that they +persuaded the Government to allow them to make all the shells +instead of having them made in national factories. The result was +that you were paying taxes to keep workmen standing idle in +Woolwich Arsenal at full wages in order that the profiteering +firms should have all the work at a profit. You had to pay their +workmen too, and the profit into the bargain. It soon turned out +that they could not make nearly enough shells. Those they did +make were unnecessarily expensive and not always explosive. +The result was an appalling slaughter of our young men in Flanders, +who were left almost defenceless in the trenches through +the shortage of munitions; and we were on the verge of being +defeated by simple extermination when the Government, taking +the matter in hand itself, opened national factories (you may have +worked in some of them) in which munitions were produced on +such a scale that we have hardly yet got rid of what was left of +them when the war ended, besides controlling the profiteers, +teaching them their business (they did not know even how to +keep proper accounts, and were wasting money like water), and +limiting their profits drastically. And yet, in the face of this +experience (which was of course a tremendous triumph for the +advocates of nationalized industries), the war was no sooner at an +end than the capitalist papers began again with their foolish and +corrupt declarations that Governments are such incompetent +and dishonest and extravagant jobbers, and private firms so +splendidly capable and straightforward, that Governments must +never do anything that private firms can make profits by doing; +and very soon all the national factories were sold for an old song +to the profiteers, and the national workers were in the streets with +the demobilized soldiers, living on the dole, two millions strong.</p> + +<p>This is only a sensational instance of something that is always +going on: namely, the wasting of your money by employing profiteering +contractors to do the work that could be done better by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_117">[Pg 117]</span> +the authorities themselves without charging you any profit.</p> + +<p>You see therefore that when you pay rates and taxes you are +not safe from being charged not only the cost price of public services, +but huge sums which go to private employers as unnecessary +or excessive profits, to the landlords and capitalists whose land and +capital these employers use, and to those property owners who +hold the War Loan and the other stocks which represent the +National Debt. But as you may also get back some of it as a pensioner +or a recipient of public relief in some form or other, or as +you may yourself be a holder of War Loan or Consols, or a shareholder +in one of the commercial concerns which get contracts +from the Government and the municipalities, it is impossible for +me to say whether, on the whole, you gain or lose. I can only say +that the chances are ten to one that you lose on balance; that is, +that the rich get more out of you through the Government than +you get out of them. So much for the taxes. Now for the rates.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c31">31</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">YOUR RATES</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE rates are not paid equally by everybody. The local +authorities, like the Government, have to recognize the +fact that some people are better able to pay than others, +and make them pay accordingly. They do this by calculating the +rates on the value of the house occupied by the ratepayer, and +of his place of business, guessing that a person with a house or +shop worth a hundred a year will be richer than one with a house +or shop worth twenty, and rating him on the valuation.</p> + +<p>Thus every rate is really a graduated income tax as well as a +payment for public services. Then there are the municipal debts +as well as the national debt; and as municipalities are as lazy and +wasteful as central governments in the way of giving public jobs +out to profiteering contractors, everything that happens with the +taxes happens with the rates as well on a smaller scale.</p> + +<p>But there are other anomalies which rating brings out.</p> + +<p>Just consider what happens when even the quite genuine part +of our national and municipal Communism, paying its way honestly +by taxing and rating, is applied, as we apply it, to people of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_118">[Pg 118]</span> +whom some are very poor and some are very rich. If a woman +cannot afford to feed herself well enough to nurse her baby properly +she clearly cannot afford to contribute to the maintenance +of a stud of cream-colored ponies in the stables of Buckingham +Palace. If she lives with her husband and children in a single +room in a back-to-back dwelling in a slum, hopelessly out of +reach of the public parks of the great cities, with their flowers and +bands and rides and lakes and boats, it is rather hard on her to +have to pay a share of the cost of these places of recreation, used +largely by rich people whose horses and motor cars shew that +they could easily pay a charge for admission sufficient to maintain +the place without coming to her for a contribution.</p> + +<p>In short, since communistic expenditure is compulsory expenditure, +enforced on everybody alike, it cannot be kept within +everybody’s means unless everybody has the same income. But +the remedy is, not to abolish the parks and the cream-colored +ponies, and to tell the Prince of Wales that he cannot have more +than one suit of clothes until every poor woman’s son has two, all +of which is not only impossible but envious and curmudgeonish, +but to equalize incomes. In the meantime we must pay our rates +and taxes with the best grace we can, knowing that if we tried to +drag down public expenditure to the level of the worst private +poverty our lives would be unendurable even by savages.</p> + +<p>This, however, does not apply to certain ways in which the ratepayer +is “exploited”. To exploit a person is to make money out of +her without giving her an equivalent return. Now practically all +private employers exploit the ratepayer more or less in a way that +she never notices unless she has studied the subject as we are +studying it at present. And the way they do it is this.</p> + +<p>A woman who employs domestic servants gives regular employment +to most of them; but to some she gives only casual +employment. The housemaid and cook are in regular employment; +the nurse is in temporary employment; and the charwoman +is in casual employment: that is, she is taken on for a few +hours or for a day, and then cast off to shift for herself as best she +can until she gets another equally short job. If she is ill, none of +her occasional employers need concern herself: and when rich +people die and make provision for their servants in their wills,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_119">[Pg 119]</span> +they never think of including a legacy for the charwoman.</p> + +<p>Now no doubt it is very convenient to be able to pick up a +woman like a taxi for an hour or so, and then get rid of her without +any further responsibility by paying her a few shillings and +turning her into the street. But it means that when the charwoman +is ill or out of employment or getting so old that younger +and stronger women are preferred to her, somebody has to provide +for her. And that somebody is the ratepayer, who provides +the outdoor relief and the workhouse, besides, as taxpayer, the +old age pension and part of the dole. If the ratepayer did not do +this the householder would have either to do without the charwoman +or pay her more. Even regular servants could not, as at +present, be discharged without pensions when they are worn out, +if the ratepayers made no provision for them. Thus the householder +is making the other ratepayers, many of whom do not +employ charwomen, pay part of the cost of her domestic service.</p> + +<p>But this is perhaps not the most impressive case, because you, +as an experienced woman, can tell me that charwomen do not do +so badly for themselves; that they are hard to get; and that steady +ones often have their pick of several jobs, and make a compliment +of taking one. But think of the great industrial concerns which +employ huge armies of casuals. Take the dock companies for +example. The men who load and unload the ships are taken on +by the hour in hundreds at a time; and they never know whether +there will be an hour’s work for them or eight hours, or whether +they will get two days in the week or six. I can remember when +they were paid twopence an hour, and how great a victory they +were supposed to have gained when they struck for sixpence an +hour and got it. The dock companies profit; but the men and +their families are nearly always living more or less on the rates.</p> + +<p>Take the extreme case of this. The ratepayers have to maintain +a workhouse. If any man presents himself at that workhouse as a +destitute person, he must be taken in and lodged and fed and +clothed. It is an established practice with some men to live at the +workhouse as ablebodied paupers until they feel disposed for a +night of drinking and debauchery. Then they demand their discharge, +and must be let out to go about their business. They unload +a ship; spend all the money they earn in a reckless spree; and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_120">[Pg 120]</span> +return to the workhouse next morning as destitute persons to resume +their residence there at the ratepayers’ expense. A woman +can do the same when there are casual jobs within her reach. This, +I repeat, is the extreme case only: the decent respectable laborers +do not do it; but casual labor does not tend to make people decent +and respectable. If they were not careless, and did not keep up their +spirits and keep down their prudence by drinking more than is +good for them, they could not endure such worrying uncertainty.</p> + +<p>Now, as it happens, dock labor is dangerous labor. In busy +times in big docks an accident happens about every twenty minutes. +But the dock company does not keep a hospital to mend its +broken casuals. Why should it? There is the Poor Law Infirmary, +supported by the ratepayers, near at hand, or a hospital supported +by their charitable subscriptions; and nothing is simpler than to +carry the victim of the accident there to be cured at the public +expense without troubling the dock company. No wonder the +dock company chairmen and directors are often among our most +ardent advocates of public charity. With them it begins at home.</p> + +<p>Another public institution kept by the ratepayers and taxpayers +is the prison, with its police force, its courts of law, its judges, +and all the rest of its very expensive retinue. An enormous proportion +of the offences they deal with are caused by drink. Now the +trade in drink is extremely profitable: so much so that in England +it is called <i>The</i> Trade, which is short for The Trade of Trades. +But why is it profitable? Because the trader in drink takes all the +money the drunkard pays for his liquor, and when he is drunk +throws him into the street, leaving the ratepayer to pay for all the +mischief he may do, all the crimes he may commit, all the illness +he may bring on himself and his family, and all the poverty to +which he may be reduced. If the cost of these were charged +against the drink trade instead of against the police rates and +poor rates, the profits of the trade would vanish at once.</p> + +<p>As it is, the trader gets all the takings; and the ratepayer stands +all the losses. That is why they made the trade unlawful in America. +They shut up the saloons (public houses), and found immediately +that they could shut up a good many of the prisons as well. But +if they had municipalized the drink traffic: that is, if the ratepayer +had kept the public house as well as the prison, the greatest<span class="pagenum" id="Page_121">[Pg 121]</span> +care would have been taken to discourage drunkenness, because +drunkenness would have produced a loss in the municipal accounts +instead of a profit. As it is, the ratepayer is being exploited +outrageously by the drink trade, and the whole nation weakened +and demoralized in order that a handful of people may become +unnaturally rich. It is true that they rebuild our tumble-down +cathedrals for us occasionally; but then they expect to be made +peers for it. The bargain is an insanely bad one anyhow.</p> + +<p>There is one more trick that can be played on you both by the +municipality and the Government. In spite of their obligation +not to profiteer, but to give you every service at cost price, they +often do profiteer quite openly, and actually boast of their profits +as a proof of their business efficiency. This takes place when you +pay for the service, not by a tax or a rate, but by the ordinary process +of paying for what you consume. Thus when you want a +letter sent, you pay the Government three halfpence across the +counter for the job. When you live where electric light is made +and supplied by the municipality, you do not pay for it in your +rates: you pay so much for every unit you consume.</p> + +<p>I am sorry to have to add that the Postmaster-General takes advantage +of this to charge you more for carrying your letter than +the average cost of it to the Post Office. In this way he makes a +profit which he hands over to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, +who uses it to keep down the income tax and supertax. You pay +more that the income tax payers may pay less. A fraction of your +three halfpence goes into the pockets of the millionaires. True, if +you are an income tax payer you get a scrap of it back yourself; +but as most people do not pay income tax and everybody buys at +least a few postage stamps, the income tax payers in effect exploit +the purchasers of stamps. The principle is wrong, and the practice +a dangerous abuse, which is nevertheless applauded and +carried to greater and greater lengths as the Government adds +telegraphs to posts, telephones to telegraphs, and wireless to both.</p> + +<p>In the case of a municipal electric lighting supply, I must tell +you that in spite of the fact that the municipality, unlike a private +company, has to begin paying off the cost of setting up its works +from the moment it borrows it, and must clear it all off within a +certain period, yet even when it does this and yet supplies electricity<span class="pagenum" id="Page_122">[Pg 122]</span> +at a lower price than the private companies, it makes a +profit in spite of itself. It applies the profit to a reduction of the +rates; and the ratepayers are so pleased by this, and so accustomed +to think that a business which makes profits must be a +sound one, that the municipality is tempted to make a profit on +purpose, and even a big one, by charging the consumer more +than the supply costs. When this happens, it is clear that the overcharged +people who use electric light are paying part of the rates +of those who do not. Even if everybody used electric light there +would still be inequalities in the consumption of current. A struggling +shopkeeper, who must make his shop blaze with light to attract +custom, must have a heavier bill for electric light than much +richer people who have only their private houses to illuminate.</p> + +<p>We must not spend any more time on your rates and taxes. If +they were entirely abolished (how popular that would be!) and +their places taken by profiteering charges for State and municipal +services, the result would be, not State and municipal +Socialism but State and municipal Capitalism. As it is, you can +see how even in your rates, which ought to be quite free from the +idler’s toll, you can be and to some extent are “exploited” just +as you are in your ordinary shopping.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c32">32</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">YOUR RENT</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>HEN we come from your rates and taxes to your rent, +your grievance is far clearer, because when you pay +your rent you have to hand your money directly to +your exploiter to do what she or he likes with instead of to +a public treasurer who gives you value for part of it in public service +to yourself, and tells you nothing about the remainder which +goes to septuagenarians, paupers, ground landlords, profiteering +contractors, and so forth, some of whom are poorer than you, +which makes for equality of income and is therefore a move in +the right direction, and others richer, which aggravates inequality +and is therefore a move in the wrong direction.</p> + +<p>Rent paying is simpler. If you rent a piece of land and work on +it, it is quite clear that the landlord is living on your earnings; and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_123">[Pg 123]</span> +you cannot prevent him, because the law gives him the power to +turn you off the land unless you pay him for leave to use it. You are +so used to this that it may never have struck you as extraordinary +that any private person should have the power to treat the earth +as if it belonged to him, though you would certainly think him +mad if he claimed to own the air or the sunlight or the sea. Besides, +you may be paying rent for a house; and it seems reasonable +that the man who built the house should be paid for it. But +you can easily find out how much of what you are paying is the +value of the house. If you have insured the house against fire +(very likely the landlord makes you do this), you know what it +would cost to build the house, as that is the sum you have insured +it for. If you have not insured it, ask a builder what it would cost +to build a similar house. The interest you would have to pay every +year if you borrowed that sum on the security of the house is the +value of the house apart from the value of the land.</p> + +<p>You will find that what you are paying exceeds this house value, +unless you are in the landlord’s employment or the house has +become useless for its original purpose: for instance, a medieval +castle. In big cities like London, it exceeds it so enormously that +the value of the building is hardly worth mentioning in comparison. +In out-of-the-way places the excess may be so small that it +hardly goes beyond a reasonable profit on the speculation of +building the house. But in the lump over the whole country it +amounts to hundreds of millions of pounds a year; and this is the +price, not of the houses, but of the landlords’ permission to live +on the native earth on which the houses have been built.</p> + +<p>That any person should have the power to give or refuse an +Englishwoman permission to live in England, or indeed—for +this is what it comes to—to live at all, is so absurdly opposed to +every possible conception of natural justice that any lawyer will +tell you that there is no such thing as absolute private property in +land, and that the King, in whom the land is vested, may take it +all back from its present holders if he thinks fit. But as the landlords +were for many centuries also both the lawmakers and the +kingmakers, they took care that, king or no king, land should +become in practice as much private property as anything else, +except that it cannot be bought and sold without paying fees to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_124">[Pg 124]</span> +lawyers and signing conveyances and other special legal documents. +And this private power over land has been bought and +sold so often that you never know whether your landlord will be +a bold baron whose ancestors have lived as petty kings on their +tenants since the days of William the Conqueror, or a poor widow +who has invested all her hardearned savings in a freehold.</p> + +<p>Howbeit the fact remains that the case of landlord and tenant +is one in which an idle and possibly infamous person can with the +police at his back come quite openly to an industrious and respectable +woman, and say, “Hand me over a quarter of your earnings +or get off the earth”. The landlord can even refuse to accept a +rent, and order her off the earth unconditionally; and he sometimes +does so; for you may remember that in Scotland whole +populations of fishermen and husbandmen with their families +have been driven from their country to the backwoods of America +because their landlords wanted the land on which they lived for +deer forests. In England people have been driven from the countryside +in multitudes to make room for sheep, because the sheep +brought more money to the landlord than the people. When the +great London railway stations, with their many acres of sidings, +were first made, the houses of great numbers of people were +knocked down, and the inhabitants driven into the streets; with +the result that the whole neighbourhood became so overcrowded +that it was for many years a centre of disease infecting all London. +These things are still happening, and may happen to you at any +moment, in spite of a few laws which have been made to protect +tenants in towns in times of great scarcity of houses such as that +which followed the war, or in Ireland, where the Government +bought the agricultural land and resold it to the farmers, which +eased matters for a time, but in the long run can come to nothing +but exchanging one set of landlords for another.</p> + +<p>It is in large towns and their neighbourhood that the Intelligent +Woman will find not only how much the landlord can make her +give up to him, but, oddly enough, how devoutly he believes in +equality of income for his tenants, if not for himself. In the middle +of the town she will find rents very high. If she or her husband +has work to do there it will occur to her that if she were to take +a house in the suburbs, where rents are lower, and use the tram<span class="pagenum" id="Page_125">[Pg 125]</span> +to come to and fro, she might save a little. But she will find that +the landlord knows all about that, and that though the further +she moves out into the country the lower the rents, yet the railway +fare or tram fare will bring up the yearly cost to what she +would have to pay if she lived close enough in to walk to her +market or for her husband to walk to his work. Whatever advantage +she may try to gain, the landlord will snatch its full money +value from her sooner or later in rent, provided it is an advantage +open to everyone. It ought to be plain even to a fairly stupid +woman that if the land belongs to a few people they can make +their own terms with the rest, who must have land to live and +work on or else starve on the highway or be drowned in the sea. +They can strip them of everything except what is barely enough +to keep them alive to earn money for the landowner, and bring up +families to do the same in the next generation.</p> + +<p>It is easy to see how this foolish state of things comes about. +As long as there is plenty of land for everybody private property +in land works very well. The landholders are not preventing anyone +else from owning land like themselves; and they are quite +justified in making the strongest laws to protect themselves +against having their lands intruded on and their crops taken by +rascals who want to reap where they have not sown. But this state +of things never lasts long with a growing population, because at +last all the land gets taken up, and there is none left for the later +comers. Even long before this happens the best land is all taken +up, and later comers find that they can do as well by paying rent +for the use of the best land as by owning poorer land themselves, +the amount of the rent being the difference between the yield of +the poorer land and the better. At this point the owners of the +best land can let their land; stop working; and live on the rent: +that is, on the labor of others, or, as they call it, by owning.</p> + +<p>When big towns and great industries arise, the value of the land +goes up to enormous heights: in London bits of land with frontages +on the important streets sell at the rate of a million pounds +an acre; and men of business will pay the huge rents that make +the land worth such a figure, although there is land forty miles +away to be had for next to nothing. The land that was first let gets +sublet, and yet again and again sublet until there may be half a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_126">[Pg 126]</span> +dozen leaseholders and subleaseholders drawing more rent from +it than the original ground landlord; and the tenant who is in +working occupation of it has to make the money for all of them. +Within the last hundred and fifty years villages in Europe and +pioneer encampments in the other continents have grown into +towns and cities making money by hundreds of millions; yet +most of the inhabitants whose work makes all this wealth are no +better off, and many of them decidedly worse off, than the villagers +or pioneer campers-out who occupied the place when it was not +worth a pound an acre. Meanwhile the landlords have become +fabulously rich, some of them taking every day, for doing nothing, +more than many a woman for sixty years drudgery.</p> + +<p>And all this could have been avoided if we had only had the +sense and foresight to insist that the land should remain national +property in fact as well as in legal theory, and that all rents should +be paid into a common stock and used for public purposes. +If that had been done there need have been no slums, no ugly +mean streets and buildings, nor indeed any rates or taxes: everybody +would benefit by the rent; everybody would have to contribute +to it by work; and no idler would be able to live on the +labor of others. The prosperity of our great towns would be a real +prosperity, shared by everyone, and not what it is now, the enslavement +and impoverishment of nine persons out of every ten in +order that the tenth should be idle and rich and extravagant and +useless. This evil is so glaring, so inexcusable by any sophistry +that the cleverest landlord can devise, that, long before Socialism +was heard of, a demand arose for the abolition of all taxation +except the taxation of landowners; and we still have among us +people called Single Taxers, who preach the same doctrine.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_127">[Pg 127]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c33">33</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">CAPITAL</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">N</span>OW the Single Taxers are not wrong in principle; but +they are behind the times. Out of landowning there has +grown a lazier way of living on other people’s labor without +doing anything for them in return. Land is not the only +property that returns a rent to the owner. Spare money will do the +same if it is properly used. Spare money is called Capital; its +owner is called a capitalist; and our system of leaving all the +spare money in the country in private hands like the land is called +Capitalism. Until you understand Capitalism you do not understand +human society as it exists at present. You do not know the +world, as the saying is. You are living in a fool’s paradise; and +Capitalism is doing its best to keep you there. You may be +happier in a fool’s paradise; and as I must now proceed to explain +Capitalism, you will read the rest of this book at the risk of being +made unhappy and rebellious, and even of rushing into the +streets with a red flag and making a greater fool of yourself than +Capitalism has ever made of you. On the other hand, if you do not +understand Capitalism you may easily be cheated out of all your +money, if you have any, or, if you have none, duped into sacrificing +yourself in all sorts of ways for the profit of mercenary +adventurers and philanthropic humbugs under the impression +that you are exercising the noblest virtues. Therefore I will risk +letting you know where you are and what is happening to you.</p> + +<p>Nothing but a very narrow mind can save you from despair if +you look at all the poverty and misery around you and can see no +way out of it all. And if you had a narrow mind you would never +have dreamt of buying this book and reading it. Fortunately, you +need not be afraid to face the truth about our Capitalism. Once +you understand it, you will see that it is neither eternal nor even +very old-established, neither incurable nor even very hard to cure +when you have diagnosed it scientifically. I use the word cure because +the civilization produced by Capitalism is a disease due to +shortsightedness and bad morals: and we should all have died of +it long ago if it were not that happily our society has been built up +on the ten commandments and the gospels and the reasonings of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_128">[Pg 128]</span> +jurists and philosophers, all of which are flatly opposed to the +principles of Capitalism. Capitalism, though it has destroyed +many ancient civilizations, and may destroy ours if we are not +careful, is with us quite a recent heresy, hardly two hundred +years old at its worst, though the sins it has let loose and glorified +are the seven deadly ones, which are as old as human nature.</p> + +<p>And now I hear you say “My gracious goodness me, what on +the face of the earth has all this to do with the possession of spare +money by ordinary ladies and gentlemen, which you say is all +that Capitalism is?” And I reply, farfetched as it may seem, that +it is out of that innocent looking beginning that our huge burden +of poverty and misery and drink and crime and vice and premature +death has grown. When we have examined the possibilities +of this apparently simple matter of spare money, <i>alias</i> Capital, +you will find that spare money is the root of all evil, though it +ought to be, and can be made, the means of all betterment.</p> + +<p>What is spare money? It is the money you have left when you +have bought everything you need to keep you becomingly in +your station in life. If you can live on ten pounds a week in the +way you are accustomed and content to live, and your income is +fifteen pounds a week, you have five pounds spare money at the +end of the week, and are a capitalist to that amount. To be a +capitalist, therefore, you must have more than enough to live on.</p> + +<p>Consequently a poor person cannot become a capitalist. A poor +person is one who has less than enough to live on. I can remember +a bishop, who ought to have known better, exhorting the poor in +the east end of London, at a time when poverty there was even +more dreadful than it is at present, to become capitalists by saving. +He really should have had his apron publicly and officially torn off +him, and his shovel hat publicly and officially jumped on, for +such a monstrously wicked precept. Imagine a woman, without +enough money to feed her children properly and clothe them decently +and healthily, letting them starve still more, and go still +more ragged and naked, to buy Savings Certificates, or to put her +money in the Post Office Savings Bank and keep it there until +there is enough of it to buy stocks and shares! She would be +prosecuted for neglecting her children: and serve her right! If +she pleaded that the bishop incited her to commit this unnatural<span class="pagenum" id="Page_129">[Pg 129]</span> +crime, she would be told that the bishop could not possibly have +meant that she should save out of her children’s necessary food +and clothing, or even out of her own. And if she asked why the +bishop did not say so, she would be told to hold her tongue; and +the gaoler would be ordered to remove her to the cells.</p> + +<p>Poor people cannot save, and ought not to try. Spending is not +only a first necessity but a first duty. Nine people out of ten have +not enough money to spend on themselves and their families; and +to preach saving to them is not only foolish but wicked. Schoolmistresses +are already complaining that the encouragement held +out by Building Societies to poor parents to buy their own houses +has led to the underfeeding of their children. Fortunately most of +the poor neither save nor try to. All the spare money invested in +the Savings Banks and Building Societies and Co-operative Societies +and Savings Certificates, though it sounds very imposing +when it is totalled up into hundreds of millions, and all credited to +the working classes, is such a mere fleabite compared to the total +sums invested that its poor owners would gain greatly by throwing +it into the common stock if the capital owned by the rich +were thrown in at the same time. The great bulk of British +capital, the capital that matters, is the spare money of those who +have more than enough to live on. It saves itself without any +privation to the owner. The only question is, what is to be done +with it? The answer is, keep it for a rainy day: you may want it +yet. This is simple; but suppose it will not keep! Of course +Treasury notes will keep; and Bank notes will keep; and metal +coins will keep: and cheque books will keep; and entries of sums +of money in the ledgers in the bank will keep safely enough. But +these things are only legal claims to the goods we need, chiefly +food. Food, we know, will not keep. And what good will spare +money be to us when the food it represents has gone rotten?</p> + +<p>The Intelligent Woman, when she realizes that money really +means the things that money can buy, and that the most important +of these things are perishable, will see that spare money cannot +be saved: it must be spent at once. It is only the Very Simple +Woman who puts her spare money into an old stocking and hides +it under a loose board in the floor. She thinks that money is always +money. But she is quite wrong in this. It is true that gold coins<span class="pagenum" id="Page_130">[Pg 130]</span> +will always be worth the metal they are made of; but in Europe +at present gold coins are not to be had: there is nothing but paper +money; and within the last few years we have seen English paper +money fall in value until a shilling would buy no more than could +be bought for sixpence before the war, whilst on the Continent +a thousand pounds would not buy a postage stamp, and notes for +fifty thousand pounds would hardly pay a tram fare. People who +thought themselves and their children provided for for life were +reduced to destitution all over Europe; and even in England +women left comfortably-off by insurances made by their fathers +found themselves barely able to get along by the hardest pinching. +That was what came of putting their trust in money.</p> + +<p>Whilst people were being cheated in this fashion out of their +savings by Governments printing heaps of Treasury notes and +Bank notes with no goods at their back, several rich men of business +became enormously richer because, having obtained goods +on credit, they were able to pay for them in money that had become +worthless. Naturally these rich men of business used all +their power and influence to make their Governments go from +bad to worse with their printing of bogus notes, whilst other rich +men of business who, instead of owing money were owed it, used +their influence in the opposite direction; so that the Governments +never knew where they were: one set of business men telling +them to print more notes, and another set to print less, and none +of them seeming to realize that they were playing with the food of +the people. The bad advice always won, because the Governments +themselves owed money, and were glad enough to pay it in +cheap paper, following the example of Henry VIII, who cheated +his creditors by giving short weight in his silver coins.</p> + +<p>The Intelligent Woman will conclude, and conclude rightly, +that hoarding money is not a safe way of saving. If her money is +not spent at once she can never be sure what it will be worth ten +years hence, or ten weeks or even ten days or minutes in war time.</p> + +<p>But you, prudent lady, will remind me that you do not want to +spend your spare money: you want to keep it. If you wanted +anything that it could buy it would not be spare money. If a +woman has just finished a good dinner it is no use advising her to +order another and eat it immediately so as to make sure of getting<span class="pagenum" id="Page_131">[Pg 131]</span> +something for her money: she had better throw it out of the window. +What she wants to know is how she can spend it and save +it too. That is impossible; but she can spend it and increase her +income by spending it. If you would like to know how, read the +next chapter.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c34">34</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">INVESTMENT AND ENTERPRISE</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>F, having finished your dinner, you can find a hungry person +who can be depended on to give you a dinner, say after a year’s +time, for nothing, you can spend your spare money in giving +him a dinner for nothing; and in this way you will in a sense +both spend your money on the spot and save it for next year, or, +to put it the other way, you will have your spare food eaten while +it is fresh and yet have fresh food to eat a year hence.</p> + +<p>You will at once reply that you can find a million hungry persons +only too easily, but that none of them can be depended on to provide +a dinner for themselves, much less for you, next year: if they +could, they would not be hungry. You are quite right; but there +is a way round the difficulty. You will not be able to find dependable +men who are hungry; but your banker or stockbroker or +solicitor will find you plenty of more or less dependable persons, +some of them enormously rich, who, though overfed, are nevertheless +always in want of huge quantities of spare food.</p> + +<p>What do they want it for? Why, to feed the hungry men who +cannot be depended on, not on the chance of their returning the +compliment next year, but for doing some work immediately that +will bring in money later on. There is nothing to prevent any +Intelligent Woman with spare money enough from doing this +herself if she has enough invention and business ability.</p> + +<p>Suppose, for instance, she has a big country house in a big park. +Suppose her park blocks up the shortest way from one important +town to another, and that the public roads that go round her park +are hilly and twisty and dangerous for motor cars. She can then +use her spare food to feed the hungry men while they make a road +for motors through her park. When this is done she can send the +hungry men away to find another job as best they can, leaving +herself with a new road for the use of which she can charge a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_132">[Pg 132]</span> +shilling to every motorist who uses it, as they all will to save time +and risk and difficulty. She can keep one of the hungry men to +collect the shillings for her. In this way she will have changed her +spare food into a steady income. In city language, she will have +gone into business as a roadmaker with her own capital.</p> + +<p>Now if the traffic on the road be so great that the shillings, and +the spare food they represent, pile themselves up on her hands +faster than she can spend them (or eat them), she will have to find +some new means of spending them to prevent the new spare food +going bad. She will have to call the hungry men back and find +something new for them to do. She might set them to build +houses all along the road. Then she could present the road to the +local authorities to be maintained by the ratepayers as a public +street, and yet greatly increase her income by letting the houses. +Having in this way obtained more spare money than ever, she +could establish a service of motor buses to the nearest town to +enable her tenants to work there and her workmen to live there. +She could set up an electric lighting plant and gasworks to supply +their houses. She could turn her big house into a hotel, or knock +it down and cover its site and the park with new houses and +streets. The hungry would do all the executive work for her: +what she would have to do would be to give them the necessary +orders and allow them to live on her spare food meanwhile.</p> + +<p>But, you will say, only an exceptionally able and hardworking +woman of business could plan all this and superintend its carrying-out. +Suppose she were too stupid or too lazy to think of these +things, or a genius occupied with art or science or religion or +politics! Well, if only she had the spare money, hungry women +and men with the requisite ability would come to her and offer to +develop her estate and to pay her so much a year for the use of +her land and of her spare money, arranging it all with her solicitor +so that she would not have to lift her little finger in the matter +except to sign her name sometimes. In business language, she +could invest her capital in the development of her estate.</p> + +<p>Now consider how much further these operations can be carried +than the mere investment of one lady’s savings, and the development +of one lady’s estate in the country. Big companies, by collecting +millions of spare subsistence in small or large sums from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_133">[Pg 133]</span> +people all over the country who are willing to take shares according +to their means, can set the hungry to dig those mines that run +out under the sea and need twenty years work before the coal is +reached. They can make railways and monster steamships; they +can build factories employing thousands of men, and equip them +with machinery; they can lay cables across the ocean: there is no +end or limit to what they can do as long as they can borrow spare +food enough for the hungry men until the preparations are finished +and the businesses begin to pay their own way.</p> + +<p>Sometimes the schemes fail, and the owners of the spare food +lose it; but they have to risk this because, as the food will not +keep, they would lose it all the same if they did not invest it. So +there is always spare money being offered to the big men of business +and their companies; and thus our queer civilization, with +its many poor and its few rich, grows as we see it with all its +shops, factories, railways, mines, ocean liners, aeroplanes, telephones, +palaces, mansions, flats, and cottages, on top of the fundamental +sowing and reaping of the food that it all depends on.</p> + +<p>Such is the magic of spare subsistence, called capital. That is +how idle people who have land and spare subsistence become +enormously rich without knowing how, and make their babies +enormously rich in their cradles, whilst the landless penniless +persons who do it all by slaving from dawn to dusk are left as poor +at the end of the job as they were at the beginning.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c35">35</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">LIMITATIONS OF CAPITALISM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">M</span>ANY people are so impressed with the achievements of +Capitalism that they believe that if you overthrow it you +overthrow civilization. It seems to them indispensable. +We must therefore consider, first, what are the disadvantages +of this way of doing it? and, second, is there any other way?</p> + +<p>Now in one sense there is no other way. All the businesses that +need to have many weeks or months or years of work done on +them by large bodies of men before they can pay their way, require +great quantities of spare subsistence. If it takes ten years to +make a harbor or twenty years to make a coal mine, the men who<span class="pagenum" id="Page_134">[Pg 134]</span> +are making it will be eating their heads off all that time. Other +people must be providing them with food, clothes, lodging, and +so forth without immediate return, just as parents have to provide +for growing children. In this respect it makes no difference +whether we vote for Capitalism or Socialism. The process is one of +natural necessity which cannot be changed by any political revolution +nor evaded by any possible method of social organization.</p> + +<p>But it does not follow that the collection and employment of +spare subsistence for these purposes must be done by private +companies touting for the money that very rich people are too +gorged with luxuries to be able to spend, and that people of more +moderate means are prudent enough to put by for a rainy day.</p> + +<p>To begin with, there are many most necessary things that the +private companies and employers will not do because they cannot +make people pay for them when they are done. Take for instance +a lighthouse. Without lighthouses we should hardly dare to go +to sea; and the trading ships would have to go so slowly and +cautiously, and so many of them would be wrecked, that the cost +of the goods they carry would be much higher than it is. Therefore +we all benefit greatly by lighthouses, even those of us who +have never seen the sea and never expect to. But the capitalists +will not build lighthouses. If the lighthouse keeper could collect +a payment from every ship that passed, they would build them +fast enough until the cost was lighted all round like the sea front +in Brighton; but as this is impossible, and the lighthouses must +shine on every ship impartially without making the captain put +his hand in his pocket for it, the capitalists leave the coast in the +dark. Therefore the Government steps in and collects spare subsistence +in the shape of taxes from everybody (which is quite fair, +as everybody shares the benefit), and builds the lighthouses. +Here we see Capitalism failing completely to supply what to +a seafaring nation like ours is one of the first necessaries of life +(for we should starve without our shipping) and thereby forcing +us to resort to Communism.</p> + +<p>But Capitalism often refuses necessary work even when some +money can be made out of it directly.</p> + +<p>For example, a lighthouse reminds us of a harbor, which is +equally necessary. Every ship coming into a harbor has to pay<span class="pagenum" id="Page_135">[Pg 135]</span> +harbor dues; therefore anyone making a harbor can make money +by it. But great harbors, with their breakwaters and piers built +up in the sea, take so many years to construct, and the work is +so liable to damage and even destruction in storms, and the impossibility +of raising harbor dues beyond a certain point without +sending the ships round to cheaper harbors so certain, that +private capital turns away from it to enterprises in which there +is more certainty as to what the cost will be, less delay, and more +money to be made. For instance, distilleries make large profits. +There is no uncertainty about the cost of building them and fitting +them up; and a ready sale for whiskey can always be depended +on. You can tell to within a few hundred pounds what a big distillery +will cost, whereas you cannot tell to within a million what a +big harbor will cost. All this would not influence the Government, +which has to consider only whether another distillery or another +harbor is more wanted for the good of the nation. But the private +capitalists have not the good of the nation in their charge: all they +have to consider is their duty to themselves and their families, +which is to choose the safest and most profitable way of investing +their spare money. Accordingly they choose the distillery; and if +we depended on private capitalists alone the country would have +as many distilleries as the whiskey market could support, and no +harbors. And when they have established their distillery they will +spend enormous sums of money in advertisements to persuade +the public that their whiskey is better and healthier and older and +more famous than the whiskey made in other distilleries, and +that everybody ought to drink whiskey every day as a matter of +course. As none of these statements is true, the printing of them +is, from the point of view of the nation, a waste of wealth, a perversion +of labor, and a propaganda of pernicious humbug.</p> + +<p>The private capitalists not only choose what will make most +money for them, but what will make it with least trouble: that +is, they will do as little for it as possible. If they sell an article or +a service, they will make it as dear as possible instead of as cheap +as possible. This would not matter if, as thoughtless people +imagine, the lower the price the bigger the sale, and the bigger the +sale the greater the profit. It is true in many cases that the lower +the price the bigger the sale; but it is not true that the bigger the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_136">[Pg 136]</span> +sale the greater the profit. There may be half a dozen prices (and +consequently sales) at which the profit will be exactly the same.</p> + +<p>Take the case of a cable laid across the ocean to send messages +to foreign countries. How much a word is the company to charge +for the messages? If the charge is a pound a word very few people +can afford to send them. If the charge is a penny a word the cable +will be crowded with messages all day and all night. Yet the profit +may be the same; and, if it is, it will be far less trouble to send one +word at a pound than two hundred and forty words at a penny.</p> + +<p>The same is true of the ordinary telegraph service. When it +was in the hands of private companies, the service was restricted +and expensive. When the Government took it over, it not only +extended lines of all sorts to out-of-the-way places; cheapened +the service; and did without a profit: it actually ran it at what the +private capitalist calls a loss. It did this because the cheap service +was such a benefit to the whole community, including the people +who never send telegrams as well as those who send a dozen every +day, that it paid the nation and was much fairer as well to reduce +the price charged to the actual senders below the cost of the service, +the difference being made up by everybody in taxes.</p> + +<p>This very desirable arrangement is quite beyond the power of +private Capitalism, which not only keeps the price as high as possible +above the cost of production and service for the sake of +making the utmost profit, but has no power to distribute that cost +over all the people who benefit, and must levy it entirely on those +who actually buy the goods or pay for the service. It is true that +business people can pass the cost of their telegrams and telephone +messages on to their customers in the price of the things they +sell; but a great deal of our telegraphing and telephoning is not +business telegraphing and telephoning; and its cost cannot be +passed on by the senders to anyone. The only objection to throwing +the cost entirely on public taxation is that if we could all send +telegrams of unlimited length without having to pay across the +counter enough ready money to prevent us using the telegraph +service when the post would do as well, or sticking in “kind regards +from all to dear Aunt Jane and a kiss from Baby” at the end +of every message, the lines would be so choked that we should +not be able to send telegrams at all. As to the telephone, some<span class="pagenum" id="Page_137">[Pg 137]</span> +women would hang on to it all day if it made no difference to their +pockets. Even as it is, a good deal of unnecessary work is put +upon the telegraph service by people spinning out their messages +to twelve words because they are not allowed to pay for less, and +they think they are not getting full value for their money if they +say what they have to say in six. It does not occur to them that +they are wasting their own time and that of the officials, besides +increasing their taxes. It seems a trifle; but public affairs consist +of trifles multiplied by as many millions as there are people in the +country; and trifles cease to be trifles when they are multiplied on +that scale. Snowball letters, which seem a kindly joke to the idiots +who start them, would wreck our postal system if sensible people +did not conscientiously throw them into the waste paper basket.</p> + +<p>It is necessary to understand these things very clearly, because +most people are so simple and ignorant of big business matters +that the private capitalists are actually able to persuade them that +Capitalism is a success because it makes profits, and public service +(or Communism) a failure because it makes none. The simpletons +forget that the profits come out of their own pockets, and +that what is the better for the private capitalists in this respect is +the worse for their customers, the disappearance of profit being +simply the disappearance of overcharge.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c36">36</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU now see how it is that the nation cannot depend on +private capital because there are so many vitally necessary +things, from town drainage to lighthouses, which it will +not provide at all, and how what it does provide it provides in +the wrong order, refusing to make a harbor until it has made as +many distilleries as the trade will hold, and building five luxurious +houses for one rich person whilst a shocking proportion of +the nation’s children is dying of overcrowding in slums.</p> + +<p>In short, the private capitalists, instead of doing the most desirable +work first, begin at the wrong end. All that can be said +for this policy is that if you begin at the wrong end you may be +driven towards the right end when you have done your worst and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_138">[Pg 138]</span> +can get no further in the wrong direction; and this is in fact the +position into which our most respectable capitalists have been +forced by circumstances. When the poor have bought all the +strong drink they can afford to pay for, and the rich their racing +stables and all the pearls they can find room for on their wives’ +necks, the capitalists are forced to apply their next year’s accumulations +of capital to the production of more necessary things.</p> + +<p>Before the hungry can be set to work building mills and making +machinery to equip them, somebody, possibly a woman, must +invent the machinery. The capitalists buy her invention. If she is +good at business, which very few inventors are, she makes them +pay her enough to become a capitalist herself; but in most cases +she makes a very poor bargain, because she has to sell the lion’s +share in her invention for a few pounds to enable her to pay for +the necessary models and trials. It is only in modern Big Business +that inventiveness in method and organization superadded to +mechanical ingenuity has a chance against capital. If you have +that talent the Big Business people will not trouble to buy your +patents: they will buy you at a handsome price, and take you into +the concern. But the simpleminded mechanical inventor has no +such luck. In any case, the capitalists have made a communist law +nationalizing all inventions after fourteen years, when the capitalists +can use them without paying the inventor anything. They +soon persuade themselves, or at least try to persuade others, that +they invented the machines themselves, and deserve their riches +for their ingenuity. Quite a number of people believe them.</p> + +<p>Thus equipped with mechanical devices which are quite beyond +the means of small producers, the big capitalists begin to +wipe the small producers off the face of the earth. They seize on +the work done by the handloom weaver in his cottage, and do +it much more cheaply in great mills full of expensive machine +looms driven by steam. They take the work of the oldtime miller +with his windmill or waterwheel, and do it in vast buildings with +steel rollers and powerful engines. They set up against the blacksmith +a Nasmyth hammer that a thousand Vulcans could not +handle, and scissors that snip sheet steel and bite off heavy bars +more easily than he could open a tin of condensed milk. They +launch huge steel ships, driven by machinery which the shipwrights<span class="pagenum" id="Page_139">[Pg 139]</span> +who built for Columbus would have called devil’s work. +They raise houses in skyscraping piles of a hundred dwellings +one on top of another, in steel and concrete, so that in place of +one horizontal street you have bunches of perpendicular ones. +They make lace by machinery, more of it in a day than ten thousand +women could make by hand. They make boots by machinery, +clocks by machinery, pins and needles by machinery. They +sell you machines to use yourself in your own house, such as +vacuum cleaners, to replace your old sweeping brush and tea +leaves. They lay on the electric power and hydraulic power that +they use in their factories to your house like water or gas; so that +you can light and heat your house with it, and have yourself carried +in a lift from the basement to the attic and back again without +the trouble of climbing the stairs. You can boil your kettle and +cook your dinner with it. You could even make toast with it (they +sell you a little oven for the purpose) if it were not that you always +forget to take the toast out before it is burnt to a cinder.</p> + +<p>Bad as the machine-made goods are at first compared to hand-made +goods, they end by being sometimes better, sometimes as +good, sometimes as well worth buying at the lower price, and +always in the long run the only goods you can get. For at last we +forget how to make things by hand, and become dependent on +the bigger machine industries in spite of the little groups of +artists who try to keep the old handicrafts alive. When William +Morris, a great artist and craftsman, invented a story about the +handle coming off a rake in a village, and nobody knowing how +to put it on again, so that they had to get a big machine and eight +engineers down from London to do it, his tale was not at all so +improbable as it would have been in the days of Queen Anne. +Our consolation is that if machinery makes rakes so cheap that it +is not worth while mending them instead of throwing them away +and going on with new ones, the loss is greater than the gain. +And if the people who work the machines have a better life of it +than the old handy people, then the change is for the better.</p> + +<p>Mind: I do not say that these advantages are always gained at +present. Most of us are using cheap and nasty articles, and living +a cheap and nasty life; but this is not the fault of the machines and +the great factories, nor of the application of spare money to construct<span class="pagenum" id="Page_140">[Pg 140]</span> +them: it is the fault of the unequal distribution of the product +and of the leisure gained by their saving of labor.</p> + +<p>Now this misdistribution need not have occurred if the spare +money had not been in private hands. If it had been in the hands +of national and municipal banks controlling its use in the interest +of all of us the capitalization of industry on a large scale would +have been an unmixed blessing, instead of being, as it is at present, +a blessing so mixed with curses of one kind or another that in +Samuel Butler’s famous Utopia, called Erewhon, the making +and even the possession of machinery is punished as a crime.</p> + +<p>Some of our cleverest anti-Socialists advocate a return to the +life of the early eighteenth century, before the machines and factories +came in. But that would mean going back to the small +population of that time, as the old methods would not produce +enough for our fortytwo millions. High capitalization of industry, +in which a million of spare money is spent to provide us with +fourpenny reels of cotton, has come to stay; but if Socialism prevails, +the million will be public and not private property, and the +reels will cost considerably less than twopence. To put it shortly, +capitalization is one thing, and Capitalism quite another. Capitalization +does not hurt us as long as capital is our servant and +not our master. Capitalism inevitably makes it our master instead +of our servant. Instead of public servants we are private slaves.</p> + +<p>Note that the great change from cottage handicraft to factories +and machine industries in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries +is called by economists and historians The Industrial +Revolution.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c37">37</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SENDING CAPITAL OUT OF THE COUNTRY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">S</span>O far we have considered the growth of Capitalism as it +occurs at home. But capital has no home, or rather it is at +home everywhere. It is a quaint fact that though professed +Socialists and Communists call themselves Internationalists, +and carry a red flag which is the flag of the workers of all +nations, and though most capitalists are boastfully national, and +wave the Union Jack on every possible occasion, yet when you +come down from the cries and catchwords to the facts, you find<span class="pagenum" id="Page_141">[Pg 141]</span> +that every practical measure advocated by British Socialists would +have the effect of keeping British capital in Britain to be spent on +improving the condition of their native country, whilst the British +Capitalists are sending British capital out of Britain to the ends +of the earth by hundreds of millions every year. If, with all our +British spare money in their hands, they were compelled to spend +it in the British Isles, or were patriotic or public spirited or insular +enough to do so without being compelled, they could at least call +themselves patriots with some show of plausibility. Unfortunately +we allow them to spend it where they please; and their only +preference, as we have seen, is for the country in which it will +yield them the largest income. Consequently, when they have begun +at the wrong end at home, and have exhausted its possibilities, +they do not move towards the right end until they have +exhausted the possibilities of the wrong end abroad as well.</p> + +<p>Take the drink trade again as the most obvious example of the +wrong end being the most profitable end commercially.</p> + +<p>It soon became so certain that free Capitalism in drink in England +would destroy England, that the Government was forced to +interfere. Spirits can be distilled so cheaply that it is quite possible +to make a woman “drunk for a penny: dead drunk for twopence”, +and make a handsome profit by doing it. When the capitalists +were allowed to do this they did it without remorse, having nothing +to consider commercially but their profits. The Government +found that masses of people were poisoning, ruining, maddening +themselves with cheap gin. Accordingly a law was made by which +every distiller had to pay the Government so much money for +every gallon of strong drink he manufactured that he could make +no profit unless he added this tax to the price of the drink; and +this made the drink so dear that though there was still a great +deal too much drunkenness, and working women suffered because +much more had to come out of the housekeeping money +for the men’s beer and spirits, yet the working people could not +afford to drink as recklessly and ruinously as they did in the days +when Hogarth’s picture of Gin Lane was painted.</p> + +<p>In the United States of America the resistance of the Government +to the demoralization of the people by private traffic in +drink has gone much further. These States, after trying the plan<span class="pagenum" id="Page_142">[Pg 142]</span> +of taxing strong drink, and finding it impossible to stop excessive +drinking in this way, were driven one by one to a resolution to +exterminate the trade altogether, until at last it was prohibited in +so many States that it became possible to make a Federal law +(that is, a law for all the States) prohibiting the sale or even the +possession of intoxicating liquor anywhere within the United +States. The benefits of this step were so immediate and so enormous +that even the Americans who buy drink from smugglers +(bootleggers) whenever they can, vote steadily for Prohibition; +and so, of course, do the bootleggers, whose profits are prodigious. +Prohibition will sooner or later be forced on every Capitalist +country as a necessary defence against the ruinous effect of private +profiteering in drink. The only practicable alternative is the +municipalization of the drink trade: that is, socialism.</p> + +<p>When our drink profiteers and their customers fill the newspapers +with stories about Prohibition being a failure in America, +about all Americans taking to drugs because they cannot get +whiskey, about their drinking more whiskey than ever, and when +they quote a foolish saying of a former bishop of Peterborough, +that he would rather see England free than England sober (as if a +drunken man could be free in any sense, even if he escaped arrest +by the police), you must bear in mind the fact, never mentioned +by them, that millions of Americans who have never been drunk +in their lives, and who do not believe that their moderate use of +the intoxicants they have found pleasant has ever done them the +slightest harm, have yet voted away this indulgence for the general +good of their country and in the interests of human dignity +and civilization. Remember also that our profiteers have engaged +in the smuggling trade, and actually tried to represent the measures +taken against it by the American Government as attacks on British +liberties. If America were as weak militarily as China was in 1840 +they would drive us into a war to force whiskey on America.</p> + +<p>Do not, however, rush to the conclusion that Prohibition, because +it is a violently effective method of combating unscrupulous +profiteering in drink, is an ideal method of dealing with the drink +question. It is not certain that there would be any drink question +if we got rid of capitalism. We shall consider that later on: our +present point is simply that capital has no conscience and no<span class="pagenum" id="Page_143">[Pg 143]</span> +country. Capitalism, beaten in a civilized country by Prohibition, +can send its capital abroad to an uncivilized one where it can do +what it likes. Our capitalists wiped multitudes of black men out +of existence with gin when they were forcibly prevented by law +from doing the same to their own countrymen. They would have +made Africa a desert white with the bones of drunkards had they +not discovered that more profit could be made by selling men and +women than by poisoning them. The drink trade was rich; but +the slave trade was richer. Huge profits were made by kidnapping +shiploads of negroes and selling them as slaves. Cities like Bristol +have been built upon that black foundation. White queens put +money into it. The slave trade would still be a British trade if it +had not been forbidden by law through the efforts of British philanthropists +who, with their eyes in the ends of the earth, did not +know that British children were being overworked and beaten in +British factories as cruelly as the negro children in the plantations.</p> + +<p>If you are a softhearted person, be careful not to lose your head +as you read of these horrors. Virtuous indignation is a powerful +stimulant, but a dangerous diet. Keep in mind the old proverb: +anger is a bad counsellor. Our capitalists did not begin in this +way as perversely wicked people. They did not soil their own +hands with the work. Their hands were often the white hands of +refined, benevolent, cultivated ladies of the highest rank. All they +did or could do was to invest their spare money in the way that +brought them the largest income. If milk had paid better than +gin, or converting negroes to Christianity better than converting +them into slaves, they would have traded in milk and Bibles just +as willingly, or rather just as helplessly, as in gin and slaves.</p> + +<p>When the gin trade was overdone and exhausted, and the slave +trade suppressed, they went on into ordinary industrial work, +and found that profits could be made by employing slaves as well +as by kidnapping and selling them. They used their political +power to induce the British Government to annex great tracts of +Africa, and to impose on the natives taxes which they could not +possibly pay except by working for the capitalists like English +working men, only at lower wages and without the protection +of English Factory Acts and English public opinion. Great fortunes +were made in this way. The Empire was enlarged: “trade<span class="pagenum" id="Page_144">[Pg 144]</span> +followed the flag” they said, meaning that the flag followed trade +and then more trade followed the flag; British capital developed +the world everywhere (except at home); the newspapers declared +that it was all very splendid; and generals like Lord Roberts expressed +their belief that God meant that three-quarters of the +earth should be ruled by young gentlemen from our public schools, +in which schools, by the way, nothing whatever was done to explain +to them what this outrageous pillage of their own country +for the development of the rest of the earth really meant over and +above the temporary enrichment of their own small class.</p> + +<p>Nothing in our political history is more appalling than the improvidence +with which we have allowed British spare money, +desperately needed at home for the full realization of our own +powers of production, and for the clearing away of our disgraceful +slum centres of social corruption, to be driven abroad at the +rate of two hundred millions every year, loading us with unemployed, +draining us by emigration, imposing huge military and +naval forces upon us, strengthening the foreign armies of which +we are afraid, and providing all sorts of facilities for the foreign +industries which destroy our powers of self-support by doing for +us what we could and should do just as well for ourselves. If a +fraction of the British spare money our capitalists have spent in +providing South America with railways and mines and factories +had been spent in making roads to our natural harbors and turning +to account the gigantic wasted water power of the tideways +and torrents of barren savage coasts in Scotland and Ireland, or +even in putting an end to such capitalistic absurdities as the sending +of farm produce from one English county to another by way +of America, we should not now be complaining that the countries +our spare money has developed can undersell our merchants and +throw our workers on public charity for want of employment.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_145">[Pg 145]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c38">38</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">DOLES, DEPOPULATION, AND PARASITIC PARADISES</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap1">I</span> BECAME a little rhetorical at the end of the last chapter, as +Socialists will when they have, like myself, acquired the habit +of public speaking. I hope I have not carried you away so far +as to make you overlook in your indignation the fact that, whilst +all these dreadful things have been going on, the profits of the +capital which has gone abroad are coming into the country gratuitously +(imports without equivalent exports) and being spent here +by the capitalists, and that their expenditure gives employment. +The capital went out; but the income comes in; and the question +arises, are we any the worse for being pampered paupers, living +on the labor of other nations? If the money that is coming in +in income is more than went out as capital, are we not better off?</p> + +<p>One’s impulse is to say certainly not, because the same money +spent as capital at home would have brought us in just as large an +income, and perhaps larger, than it fetches from abroad, though +the capitalists might not have got so much of it. Indeed they +might have got none of it if it had been spent in great public works +like clearing slums, embanking rivers, roadmaking, smoke abatement, +free schools and universities, and other good things that +cannot be charged for except communistically through rates and +taxes. But the question is more complicated than that.</p> + +<p>Suppose yourself a mill hand in a factory, accustomed to tend +a machine there, and to live with your people in a poor quarter +of a manufacturing town. Suddenly you find yourself discharged, +and the factory shut up, because the trade has mysteriously gone +abroad. You find that mill hands are not wanted, but that there is +a scarcity of lady’s maids, of assistants in fashionable shops, of +waitresses in week-end motoring hotels, of stewardesses in palatial +steamships, of dressmakers, of laundresses, of fine cooks +(hidden in the kitchen and spoken of as “<i>the chef</i>”), of all sorts of +women whose services are required by idle rich people. But you +cannot get one of these jobs because you do not know the work, +and are not the sort of person, and have not the speech, dress, and +manners which are considered indispensable. After a spell of +starvation and despair you find a job in a chocolate cream factory<span class="pagenum" id="Page_146">[Pg 146]</span> +or a jam and pickles works, or you become a charwoman. And if +you have a daughter you bring her up to the chocolate cream or +lady’s maid business, and not to weaving and spinning.</p> + +<p>It is possible that in the end your daughter may be better paid, +better dressed, more gently spoken, more ladylike than you were +in the old mill. You may come to thank God that some Indian, or +Chinaman, or negro, or simply some foreigner is doing the work +you used to do, and setting your daughter free to do something +that is considered much more genteel and is better paid and more +respected. Your son may be doing better as a trainer of racehorses +than his father did as a steel smelter, and be ever so much more +the gentleman. You might, if you lived long enough, see the ugly +factory towns of the Manchester and Sheffield and Birmingham +districts, and of the Potteries, disappear and be replaced by nice +residential towns and pleasure resorts like Bournemouth, Cheltenham, +and the Malverns. You might see the valleys of Wales +recover the beauty they had before the mines spoiled them. And +it would be quite natural for you to call these changes prosperity, +and vote for them, and sincerely loathe anyone who warned you +that all it meant was that the nation, having become a parasite on +foreign labor, was going to the devil as fast as it could.</p> + +<p>Yet the warning would be much needed. If a nation turns its +rough mill hands into well-educated, well-dressed, well-spoken, +ladylike mill officials, properly respected, and given a fair share +of the wealth they help to produce, the nation is the stronger, the +richer, the happier, and the holier for the change. If it turns them +into lady’s maids and sellers of twenty-guinea hats, it breaks its +own backbone and exchanges its page in honorable history for a +chapter in The Ruins of Empires. It becomes too idle and luxurious +to be able to compel the foreign countries to pay the tribute +on which it lives; and when they cease to feed it, it has lost the art +of feeding itself and collapses in the midst of its genteel splendor.</p> + +<p>But this dismal sketch of the future of countries that let themselves +become dependent on the labor of other countries and +settle down into a comfortable and ladylike parasitism is really +much too favorable. If all our factory foremen could be turned +into headwaiters with a touch of Cinderella’s godmother’s wand, +neither they nor their wives might object. But this is not what<span class="pagenum" id="Page_147">[Pg 147]</span> +happens. The factory foreman may bring up his son to be a +waiter; but he himself becomes an unemployed man. If he is not +fit for any of the new jobs, and too old to learn, and his trade is not +merely going through one of the usual periods of depression but +has left the country for good, he becomes a permanently unemployed +man, and consequently a starving man. Now a starving +man is a dangerous man, no matter how respectable his political +opinions may be. A man who has had his dinner is never a revolutionist: +his politics are all talk. But hungry men, rather than +die of starvation, will, when there are enough of them to overpower +the police, begin by rioting, and end by plundering and +burning rich men’s houses, upsetting the government, and destroying +civilization. And the women, sooner than see their children +starve, will make the men do it, small blame to them.</p> + +<p>Consequently the capitalists, when they have sent their capital +abroad instead of giving continuous employment with it at home, +and are confronted at home with masses of desperate men for +whom they can find no suitable jobs, must either feed them for +nothing or face a revolution. And so you get what we call the dole. +Now small as the dole may be it must be sufficient to live on; and +if two or three in one household put their doles together, they +grow less keen on finding employment, and develop a taste for +living like ladies and gentlemen: that is, amusing themselves at +the expense of others instead of earning anything. We used to +moralize over this sort of thing as part of the decline and fall of +ancient Rome; but we have been heading straight for it ourselves +for a long while past, and the war has plunged us into it head over +ears. For it was after the war that the capitalists failed to find employment +for no less than two million demobilized soldiers who +had for four years been not only well fed and clothed, but trained +in the handling of weapons whilst occupied in slaughtering, +burning, destroying, and facing terrible risks of being themselves +destroyed. If these men had not been given money to live on they +would have taken it by violence. Accordingly the Government +had to take millions of spare money from the capitalists and give +it to the demobilized men; and they are still doing so, with the +grudged consent of the capitalists themselves, who complain bitterly, +but fear that if they refuse they will lose everything.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_148">[Pg 148]</span></p> + +<p>At this point Capitalism becomes desperate, and quite openly +engages in attempts to get rid of the unemployed: that is, to +empty the country of part of its population, which it calls overpopulation. +How is it to be done? As the unemployed will not +let themselves be starved, still less will they let themselves be +gassed or poisoned or shot, which would be the logical Capitalist +way out of the mess. But they can perhaps be induced to leave +the country and try their luck elsewhere if the Government will +pay the fare, or as much of it as they cannot scrape up themselves. +As I write these lines the Government announces that if any +Englishwoman or Englishman will be so kind as to clear out of +England to the other side of the world it will cost them only three +pounds apiece instead of five times that sum, as the Government +will provide the odd twelve pounds. And if sufficient numbers do +not jump at this offer before these lines are printed, the Government +may be driven to offer to send them away for nothing and +give them ten pounds apiece to start with in their new country. +That would be cheaper than keeping them at home on the dole.</p> + +<p>Thus we see Capitalism producing the amazing and fantastic +result that the people of the country become a drawback to it, +and have to be got rid of like vermin (polite people call the process +Assisted Emigration), leaving nobody in it but capitalists +and landlords and their attendants, living on imported food and +manufactures in an elegant manner, and realizing the lady’s and +gentleman’s dream of a country in which there is lavish consumption +and no production, stately parks and palatial residences without +factories or mines or smoke or slums or any unpleasantness +that heaps of gratuitous money can prevent, and contraception in +full swing to avoid any further increase in the population.</p> + +<p>Surely, you will say, if Capitalism leads to this, it leads to an +earthly paradise. Leaving out of account the question whether +the paradise, if realized, would not be a fool’s paradise (for, I am +sorry to say, we have all been brought up to regard such a state +of things as the perfection of human society), and admitting that +something like it has been half realized in spots in many places +from Monte Carlo to Gleneagles, and from Gleneagles to Palm +Beach, it is never realized for a whole country. It has often been +carried far enough to reduce powerful empires like Rome and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_149">[Pg 149]</span> +Spain to a state of demoralized impotence in which they were +broken up and plundered by the foreigners on whom they had +allowed themselves to become dependent; but it never has, and +never can, build up a stable Parasitic State in which all the workers +are happy and contented because they share the riches of +the capitalists, and are kept healthy and pleasant and nice because +the capitalists are cultivated enough to dislike seeing slums and +shabby ugly people and running the risk of catching infectious +diseases from them. When capitalists are intelligent enough to +care whether the whole community is healthy and pleasant and +happy or not, even when the unpleasantnesses do not come under +their own noses, they become Socialists, for the excellent reason +that there is no fun in being a capitalist if you have to take care of +your servants and tradesmen (which means sharing your income +with them) as affectionately as if they were your own family. If +your taste and conscience were cultivated to that extent you +would find such a responsibility unbearable, because you would +have to be continually thinking of others, not only to the necessary +and possible extent of taking care that your own activities +and conveniences did not clash unreasonably and unkindly with +theirs, but to the unnecessary and impossible extent of doing all +the thinking for them that they ought to do, and in freedom +could do, for themselves. It is easy to say that servants should be +treated well not only because humanity requires it but because +they will otherwise be unpleasant and dishonest and inefficient +servants. But if you treat your servants as well as you treat yourself, +which really amounts to spending as much money on them +as on yourself, what is the use of having servants? They become +a positive burden, expecting you to be a sort of Earthly Providence +to them, which means that you spend half your time thinking +for them and the other half talking about them. Being able +to call your servants your own is a very poor compensation for +not being able to call your soul your own. That is why, even as it +is, you run away from your comfortable house to live in hotels (if +you can afford it), because, when you have paid your bill and +tipped the waiter and the chambermaid, you are finished with +them, and have not to be a sort of matriarch to them as well.</p> + +<p>Anyhow, most of those who are ministering to your wants are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_150">[Pg 150]</span> +not in personal contact with you. They are the employees of your +tradesmen; and as your tradesmen trade capitalistically, you have +inequality of income, unemployment, sweating, division of society +into classes, with the resultant dysgenic restrictions on marriage, +and all the other evils which prevent a capitalist society +from achieving peace or permanence. A self-contained, self-supporting +Capitalism would at least be safe from being starved out +as Germany was in the war in spite of her military successes; but +a completely parasitic Capitalism, however fashionable, would +be simply Capitalism with that peril intensified to the utmost.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c39">39</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">FOREIGN TRADE AND THE FLAG</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">N</span>OW let us turn back to inquire whether sending our capital +abroad, and consenting to be taxed to pay emigration +fares to get rid of the women and men who are left without +employment in consequence, is all that Capitalism can do when +our employers, who act for our capitalists in industrial affairs, and +are more or less capitalists themselves in the earlier stages of capitalistic +development, find that they can sell no more of their goods +at a profit, or indeed at all, in their own country.</p> + +<p>Clearly they cannot send abroad the capital they have already +invested, because it has all been eaten up by the workers, leaving +in its place factories and railways and mines and the like; and +these cannot be packed into a ship’s hold and sent to Africa. It is +only the freshly saved capital that can be sent out of the country. +This, as we have seen, does go abroad in heaps. But the British +employer who is working with capital in the shape of works fixed +to British land held by him on long lease, must, when once he has +sold all the goods at home that his British customers can afford +to buy, either shut up his works until the customers have worn +out their stock of what they have bought, which would bankrupt +him (for the landlord will not wait), or else sell his superfluous +goods somewhere else: that is, he must send them abroad.</p> + +<p>Now it is not so easy to send them to civilized countries, because +they practise Protection, which means that they impose +heavy taxes (customs duties) on foreign goods. Uncivilized countries,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_151">[Pg 151]</span> +without Protection, and inhabited by natives to whom +gaudy calicoes and cheap showy brass ware are dazzling and +delightful novelties, are the best places to make for at first.</p> + +<p>But trade requires a settled government to put down the habit +of plundering strangers. This is not a habit of simple tribes, who +are often friendly and honest. It is what civilized men do where +there is no law to restrain them. Until quite recent times it was +extremely dangerous to be wrecked on our own coasts, as wrecking, +which meant plundering wrecked ships and refraining from +any officious efforts to save the lives of their crews, was a well-established +business in many places on our shores. The Chinese +still remember some astonishing outbursts of looting perpetrated +by English ladies of high position, at moments when law was suspended +and priceless works of art were to be had for the grabbing. +When trading with aborigines begins with the visit of a +single ship, the cannons and cutlasses it carries may be quite +sufficient to overawe the natives if they are troublesome. The real +difficulty begins when so many ships come that a little trading +station of white men grows up and attracts the white ne’er-do-wells +and violent roughs who are always being squeezed out of +civilization by the pressure of law and order. It is these riffraff +who turn the place into a sort of hell in which sooner or later +missionaries are murdered and traders plundered. Their home +Governments are appealed to to put a stop to this. A gunboat is +sent out and an inquiry made. The report after the inquiry is that +there is nothing to be done but set up a civilized government, +with a post office, police, troops, and a navy in the offing. In +short, the place is added to some civilized Empire. And the civilized +taxpayer pays the bill without getting a farthing of the profits.</p> + +<p>Of course the business does not stop there. The riffraff who +have created the emergency move out just beyond the boundary +of the annexed territory, and are as great a nuisance as ever to the +traders when they have exhausted the purchasing power of the +included natives and push on after fresh customers. Again they +call on their home Government to civilize a further area; and so +bit by bit the civilized Empire grows at the expense of the home +taxpayers, without any intention or approval on their part, until at +last, though all their real patriotism is centred on their own people<span class="pagenum" id="Page_152">[Pg 152]</span> +and confined to their own country, their own rulers, and their +own religious faith, they find that the centre of their beloved +realm has shifted to the other hemisphere. That is how we in the +British Islands have found our centre moved from London to the +Suez Canal, and are now in the position that out of every hundred +of our fellow-subjects, in whose defence we are expected to shed +the last drop of our blood, only eleven are whites or even Christians. +In our bewilderment some of us declare that the Empire is +a burden and a blunder, whilst others glory in it as a triumph. You +and I need not argue with them just now, our point for the moment +being that, whether blunder or glory, the British Empire +was quite unintentional. What should have been undertaken only +as a most carefully considered political development has been a +series of commercial adventures thrust on us by capitalists forced +by their own system to cater for foreign customers before their +own country’s needs were one-tenth satisfied.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c40">40</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">EMPIRES IN COLLISION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>F the British Empire were the only State on earth, the process +might go on peacefully (except for ordinary police coercion) +until the whole earth was civilized under the British flag. This +is the dream of British Imperialism. But it is not what the world +is like. There are all the other States, large and small, with their +Imperialist dreamers and their very practical traders pushing for +foreign markets, and their navies and armies to back the traders +and annex these markets. Sooner or later, as they push their +boundaries into Africa and Asia, they come up against oneanother. +A collision of that kind (called the Fashoda incident) very +nearly involved us in a war with France. Fortunately France gave +way, not being prepared to fight us just then; but France and +Britain were left with the whole Sudan divided between them. +France had before this pushed into and annexed Algeria and +(virtually) Tunisia; and Spain was pushing into Morocco. Italy, +alarmed lest there should be nothing left for her, made a dash at +Tripoli and annexed it. England was in Egypt as well as in India.</p> + +<p>Now imagine yourself for a moment a German trader, with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_153">[Pg 153]</span> +more goods than you can sell in Germany, having either to +shut up your factory and be ruined, or find a foreign market in +Africa. Imagine yourself looking at the map of Africa. The entire +Mediterranean coast, the pick of the basket, is English, Italian, +French, and Spanish. The Hinterland, as you call it, is English +and French. You cannot get in anywhere without going through +the English Suez Canal or round the Cape to some remote place +down south. Do you now understand what the German Kaiser +meant when he complained that Germany had not been left “a +place in the sun”? That hideous war of 1914-18 was at bottom a +fight between the capitalists of England, France, and Italy on the +one side, and those of Germany on the other, for command of the +African markets. On top, of course, it was about other things: +about Austria making the murder of the Archduke a pretext for +subjugating Serbia; about Russia mobilizing against Austria to +prevent this; about Germany being dragged into the Austro-Russian +quarrel by her alliance with Austria; about France being +dragged in on the other side by her alliance with Russia; about +the German army having to make a desperate attempt to conquer +the French army before the Russian troops could reach her; +about England having to attack Germany because she was allied +to France and Russia; and about the German army having taken +the shortest cut through Belgium, not knowing that Belgium had +a secret arrangement with England to have a British expedition +sent to defend her if Germany invaded her. Of course the moment +the first shot was fired all the Britons and Belgians and Germans +and French and Austrians and Russians became enraged sheep, +and imagined all sorts of romantic reasons for fighting, in addition +to the solid reason that if Tommy and the Poilu and Ivan did +not kill Hans and Fritz, Hans and Fritz would kill Tommy and +the Poilu and Ivan. Before the killing had gone on very long, the +Turks, the Bulgarians, the Japanese, the Americans, and other +States that had no more to do with the first quarrel than you had, +were in it and at it hammer and tongs. The whole world went +mad, and never alluded to markets except when they ridiculed +the Kaiser for his demand for a place in the sun.</p> + +<p>Yet there would have been no war without the alliances; and +the alliances could not have fought if they had not set up great<span class="pagenum" id="Page_154">[Pg 154]</span> +armaments, especially the new German navy, to protect their foreign +markets and frontiers. These armaments, created to produce +a sense of security, had produced a sense of terror in which no +nation dared go unarmed unless it was too small to have any +chance against the great Powers, and could depend on their +jealousy of oneanother to stave off a conquest by any one of them. +Soon the nations that dared not go unarmed became more terrified +still, and dared not go alone: they had to form alliances and +go in twos and threes, like policemen in thieves’ quarters, Germany +and Austria in one group and England, France, and Russia +in another, both trying to induce Italy and Turkey and America +to join them. Their differences were not about their own countries: +the German navy was not built to bombard Portsmouth nor +the British navy to bombard Bremerhaven. But when the German +navy interfered in the north of Africa, which was just what it was +built for, and the French and British navies frightened it off from +that market in the sun, the capitalist diplomatists of these nations +saw that the first thing to concentrate on was not the markets but +the sinking of the German navy by the combined French and +British navies (or vice versa) on any available pretext. And as you +cannot have fleets fighting on the sea without armies fighting on +the land to help them, the armies grew like the fleets; the Race of +Armaments became as familiar as the Derby; all the natural and +kindly sentiments of white civilized nations towards oneanother +were changed into blustering terror, the parent of hatred, malice, +and all uncharitableness; and after all, when the explosive mixture +blew up at last, and blew millions of us with it, it was not +about the African markets, but about a comparatively trumpery +quarrel between Austria and Serbia which the other Powers +could have settled with the greatest ease, without the shedding of +one drop of blood, if they had been on decent human terms with +oneanother instead of on competitive capitalistic terms.</p> + +<p>And please do not fail to note that whereas in the early days of +Capitalism our capitalists did not compel us to fight for their +markets with our own hands, but hired German serfs and British +voluntary professional soldiers for the job, their wars have now +become so colossal that every woman’s husband, father, son, +brother, or sweetheart, if young and strong enough to carry a rifle,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_155">[Pg 155]</span> +must go to the trenches as helplessly as cattle go to the slaughterhouse, +abandoning wife and children, home and business, and +renouncing normal morality and humanity, pretending all the +time that such conduct is splendid and heroic and that his name +will live for ever, though he may have the greatest horror of war, +and be perfectly aware that the enemy’s soldiers, against whom +he is defending his hearth, are in exactly the same predicament as +himself, and would never dream of injuring him or his if the +pressure of the drive for markets were removed from both.</p> + +<p>I have purposely brought you to the question of war because +your conscience must be sorely troubled about it. You have seen +the men of Europe rise up and slaughter oneanother in the most +horrible manner in millions. Your son, perhaps, has received a +military cross for venturing into the air in a flying machine and +dropping a bomb on a sleeping village, blowing several children +into fragments, and mutilating or killing their parents. From a +militarist, nationalist, or selfishly patriotic point of view such +deeds may appear glorious exploits; but from the point of view +of any universally valid morality: say from the point of view of a +God who is the father of Englishmen and Germans, Frenchmen +and Turks alike, they must seem outbursts of the most infernal +wickedness. As such they have caused many of us to despair of +human nature. A bitter cynicism has succeeded to transports of +pugnacious hatred of which all but the incorrigibly thoughtless, +and a few incurables who have been mentally disabled for life by +the war fever, are now heartily ashamed. I can hardly believe that +you have escaped your share of this crushing disillusion. If you +are human as well as intelligent you must feel about your species +very much as the King of Brobdingnag did when he took Gulliver +in his hand as a child takes a tin soldier, and heard his boastful +patriotic discourse about the glories of military history.</p> + +<p>Perhaps I can console you a little. If you will look at the business +in the light of what we have just been studying I think you will see +that the fault lay not so much in our characters as in the capitalist +system which we had allowed to dominate our lives until it became +a sort of blind monster which neither we nor the capitalists +could control. It is absurd to pretend that the young men of +Europe ever wanted to hunt each other into holes in the ground<span class="pagenum" id="Page_156">[Pg 156]</span> +and throw bombs into the holes to disembowel oneanother, or +to have to hide in those holes themselves, eaten with lice and +sickened by the decay of the unburied, in unutterable discomfort, +boredom, and occasionally acute terror, or that any woman ever +wanted to put on her best Sunday clothes and be gratified at the +honor done to her son for killing some other woman’s babies. +The capitalists and their papers try to persuade themselves and +us that we are like that and always will be, in spite of all the +Christmas cards and Leagues of Nations. It is not a bit true. The +staggering fact about all these horrors was that we found ourselves +compelled to do them in spite of the fact that they were +so unintended by us, and so repugnant and dreadful to us that, +when at last the war suddenly stopped, our heroic pretences +dropped from us like blown-off hats, and we danced in the streets +for weeks, mad with joy, until the police had to stop us to restore +the necessary traffic. We still celebrate, by two minutes’ national +silence, not the day on which the glorious war broke out, but the +day on which the horrible thing came to an end. Not the victory, +which we have thrown away by abusing it as helplessly as we +fought for it, but the Armistice, the Cessation, the stoppage of +the Red Cross vans from the terminuses of the Channel railways +with their heartbreaking loads of mutilated men, was what we +danced for so wildly and pitifully. If ever there was anything +made clear in the world it was that we were no more directly +guilty of the war than we were guilty of the earthquake of Tokio. +We and the French and the Germans and the Turks and the rest +found ourselves conscripted for an appalling slaughtering match, +ruinous to ourselves, ruinous to civilization, and so dreaded by +the capitalists themselves that it was only by an extraordinary +legal suspension of all financial obligations (called the Moratorium) +that the City was induced to face it. The attempt to fight +out the war with volunteers failed: there were not enough. The +rest went because they were forced to go, and fought because +they were forced to fight. The women let them go partly because +they could not help themselves, partly because they were just as +pugnacious as the men, partly because they read the papers +(which were not allowed to tell them the truth), and partly because +most of them were so poor that they grasped at the allowances<span class="pagenum" id="Page_157">[Pg 157]</span> +which left most of them better off with their husbands in +the trenches than they had ever been with their husbands at home.</p> + +<p>How had they got into this position? Simply by the original sin +of allowing their countries to be moved and governed and fed and +clothed by the pursuit of profit for capitalists instead of by the +pursuit of righteous prosperity for “all people that on earth do +dwell”. The first ship that went to Africa to sell things to the +natives at more than cost price because there was no sale for them +at home began not only this war, but the other and worse wars +that will follow it if we persist in depending on Capitalism for our +livelihood and our morals. All these monstrous evils begin in a +small and apparently harmless way. It is not too much to say that +when a nation, having five shillings to divide-up, gives four to +Fanny and one to Sarah instead of giving half a crown to each and +seeing that she earns it, it sows the seed of all the evils that now +make thoughtful and farseeing men speak of our capitalistic civilization +as a disease instead of a blessing.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c41">41</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">D</span>O not, however, disparage foreign trade. There is nothing +wrong with foreign trade as such. We could have no gold +without foreign trade; and gold has all sorts of uses and +all sorts of beauties. I will not add that we could have no tea, +because I happen to think that we should be better without this +insidious Chinese stimulant. It is safer and probably healthier for +a nation to live on the food and drink it can itself produce, as the +Esquimaux manage to do under much harder conditions. But +there are many necessaries of a high civilization that nations cannot +find within their own boundaries, and must buy from oneanother. +We must trade and travel and come to know oneanother +all over the habitable globe. We have to make international +institutions as well as national ones, beginning with Trading +Treaties and Postal Conventions and Copyright Conventions, +and going on to the Leagues of Nations. The necessities of travelling +and trade, and the common interest of all nations in the +works and discoveries of art, literature, and science, have forced<span class="pagenum" id="Page_158">[Pg 158]</span> +them to make international agreements and treaties with oneanother +which are making an end of “keeping ourselves to ourselves”, +and throwing half bricks at foreigners and strangers. +Honest foreign trade would never have got us into trouble.</p> + +<p>Neither is the combination of little States in great Federations +and Commonwealths undesirable: on the contrary, the fewer +frontiers the better. The establishment of law and order in uncivilized +places should not have made us hated there: it should +have made us popular; and it often did—at first. The annexation +of other countries under our flag, when it was really needed, +should have been a welcome privilege and a strengthening partnership +for the inhabitants of the annexed regions. Indeed we +have always pretended that this was actually the case, and that we +were in foreign countries for the good of the inhabitants and not +for our own sake. Unfortunately we never could make these pretensions +good in the long run. However noble the aspirations +of our Imperialist idealists might be, our capitalist traders were +there to make as much profit out of the inhabitants as they could, +and for no other purpose. They had abandoned their own country +because there was no more profit to be made there, or not so +much; and it is not to be expected that they would become idealistically +disinterested the moment they landed on foreign shores. +They stigmatized the Stay-at-homes, the anti-Expansionists, the +Little-Englanders, as friends of every country but their own; but +they themselves were the enemies of every country, including +their own, where there was a sweatable laborer to make dividends +for them. They pretended that the civilization of the annexed +country was “the white man’s burden”, and posed as weary +Titans reluctantly shouldering the public work of other nations +as a duty imposed on them by Providence; but when the natives, +having been duly civilized, declared that they were now quite +ready to govern themselves, the capitalists held on to their markets +as an eagle holds on to its prey, and, throwing off their apostolic +mask, defended their annexations with fire and sword. They +said they would fight to the last drop of their blood for “the integrity +of the Empire”; and they did in fact pay many thousands +of hungry men to fight to that extremity. In spite of them half of +North America broke loose, after a war which left a volcano of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_159">[Pg 159]</span> +hatred that is still smouldering and winning Chicago elections +after a century of American independence. Roman Catholic +Ireland, South Africa, and Egypt have extorted self-government +from us. India is doing the same. But they do not thank us for it, +knowing how loth our Capitalism was to let them go.</p> + +<p>On the other hand look at Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. +We did not dare coerce them after our failure in North America. +We provide a costly fleet gratuitously to protect their shores from +invasion. We give them preferences in trade whilst allowing them +to set up heavy protective duties against us. We allow them to +be represented at international congresses as if they were independent +nations. We even allow them access to the King independently +of the London Cabinet. The result is that they hang +on to us with tyrannical devotion, waving the Union Jack as enthusiastically +as the Americans wave the Stars and Stripes. And +this is not because they are of our own race. The Americans were +that; yet they broke away; so were the Irish and their leaders. The +French Canadians, who are of the same race with us only in the +sense that we all belong to the human race, cling to us just as hard. +They all follow us to war so boldly that we begin to have misgivings +as to whether someday they may not make us follow them to +war. The last land to strike for independence of the British Empire +may be Protestant England herself, with Ulster and Scotland for +allies, and the Irish Free State heading her Imperialist opponents.</p> + +<p>But Capitalism can be depended on to spoil all these reconciliations +and loyalties. True, we no longer exploit colonies capitalistically: +we allow them to do it for themselves, and to call the +process self-government. Whilst we persisted in governing them +they blamed us for all the evils Capitalism brought upon them; +and they finally refused to endure our government. When we left +them to govern themselves they became less and less hostile to us. +But the change always impoverishes them, and leaves them in +comparative disorder. The capitalistic evils for which they blamed +us still oppress them. Their self-government is more tyrannical +than our alien government ever dared to be. Their new relation to +the Imperial State becomes more dangerously strained than the +old relation, precisely as the relation of England to Germany was +more dangerously strained in 1913 than the relation of England<span class="pagenum" id="Page_160">[Pg 160]</span> +to Ireland. The most liberal allowance of self-government cannot +reconcile people as long as their capitalists are competing for +markets. Nationalism may make Frenchmen and Englishmen, +Englishmen and Irishmen, savage enemies when it is infringed. +Frenchmen and Irishmen laid their own countries waste to get +rid of English rule. But Capitalism makes all men enemies all the +time without distinction of race, color, or creed. When all the +nations have freed themselves Capitalism will make them fight +more furiously than ever, if we are fools enough to let it.</p> + +<p>Have you ever seen the curiosity called a Prince Rupert’s Drop? +It is a bead of glass in such a state of internal strain that if you +break off the tiniest corner the whole bead flies violently to bits. +Europe was like that in 1914. A handful of people in Serbia committed +a murder, and the next moment half Europe was murdering +the other half. This frightful condition of internal strain and +instability was not set up by human nature: it was, I repeat, intensely +repugnant to human nature, being a condition of chronic +terror that at last became unbearable, like that of a woman who +commits suicide because she can no longer endure the dread of +death. It was set up by Capitalism. Capitalism, you will say, is at +bottom nothing but covetousness; and covetousness is human +nature. That is true; but covetousness is not the whole of human +nature; it is only a part, and one that vanishes when it is satisfied, +like hunger after a meal, up to which point it is wholesome and +necessary. Under Capitalism it becomes a dread of poverty and +slavery, which are neither wholesome nor necessary. And, as we +have just seen, capital is carried by its own nature beyond the control +of both human covetousness and human conscience, marching +on blindly and automatically, until we find on the one hand +the masses of mankind condemned to poverty relieved only by +horrible paroxysms of bloodshed, and on the other a handful of +hypertrophied capitalists gasping under the load of their growing +millions, and giving it away in heaps in a desperate attempt, +partly to get rid of it without being locked up as madmen for +throwing it into the sea, and partly to undo, by founding Rockefeller +institutes and Carnegie libraries, and hospitals and universities +and schools and churches, the effects of the welter of ignorance +and poverty produced by the system under which it has<span class="pagenum" id="Page_161">[Pg 161]</span> +accumulated on their hands. To call these unfortunate billionaires +monsters of covetousness in the face of their wild disgorgings +(to say nothing of their very ordinary portraits) is silly. They +are rather to be compared to the sorcerer’s apprentice who called +up a demon to fetch a drink for him, and, not knowing the spell +for stopping him when he had brought enough, was drowned in +an ocean of wine.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c42">42</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW WEALTH ACCUMULATES AND MEN DECAY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap1">I</span> WANT to stress this personal helplessness we are all stricken +with in the face of a system that has passed beyond our knowledge +and control. To bring it nearer home, I propose that we +switch off from the big things like empires and their wars to +little familiar things. Take pins for example! I do not know why +it is that I so seldom use a pin when my wife cannot get on without +boxes of them at hand; but it is so; and I will therefore take pins +as being for some reason specially important to women.</p> + +<p>There was a time when pinmakers could buy the material; shape +it; make the head and the point; ornament it; and take it to market +or to your door and sell it to you. They had to know three +trades: buying, making, and selling; and the making required +skill in several operations. They not only knew how the thing was +done from beginning to end, but could do it. But they could not +afford to sell you a paper of pins for a farthing. Pins cost so much +that a woman’s dress allowance was called pin money.</p> + +<p>By the end of the eighteenth century Adam Smith boasted that +it took eighteen men to make a pin, each man doing a little bit of +the job and passing the pin on to the next, and none of them being +able to make a whole pin or to buy the materials or to sell it when +it was made. The most you could say for them was that at least +they had some idea of how it was made, though they could not +make it. Now as this meant that they were clearly less capable and +knowledgeable men than the old pinmakers, you may ask why +Adam Smith boasted of it as a triumph of civilization when its +effect was so clearly a degrading effect. The reason was that by +setting each man to do just one little bit of the work and nothing +but that, over and over again, he became very quick at it. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_162">[Pg 162]</span> +men, it is said, could turn out nearly five thousand pins a day each; +and thus pins became plentiful and cheap. The country was supposed +to be richer because it had more pins, though it had turned +capable men into mere machines doing their work without intelligence, +and being fed by the spare food of the capitalist as an +engine is fed with coals and oil. That was why the poet Goldsmith, +who was a farsighted economist as well as a poet, complained +that “wealth accumulates, and men decay”.</p> + +<p>Nowadays Adam Smith’s eighteen men are as extinct as the +diplodocus. The eighteen flesh-and-blood machines are replaced +by machines of steel which spout out pins by the hundred million. +Even sticking them into pink papers is done by machinery. The +result is that with the exception of a few people who design the +machines, nobody knows how to make a pin or how a pin is made: +that is to say, the modern worker in pin manufacture need not be +one-tenth so intelligent and skilful and accomplished as the old +pinmaker; and the only compensation we have for this deterioration +is that pins are so cheap that a single pin has no expressible +value at all. Even with a big profit stuck on to the cost-price you +can buy dozens for a farthing; and pins are so recklessly thrown +away and wasted that verses have to be written to persuade children +(without success) that it is a sin to steal a pin.</p> + +<p>Many serious thinkers, like John Ruskin and William Morris, +have been greatly troubled by this, just as Goldsmith was, and +have asked whether we really believe that it is an advance in +wealth to lose our skill and degrade our workers for the sake of +being able to waste pins by the ton. We shall see later on, when +we come to consider the Distribution of Leisure, that the cure for +this is not to go back to the old ways; for if the saving of time +by modern machinery were equally divided among us, it would +set us all free for higher work than pinmaking or the like. But in +the meantime the fact remains that pins are now made by men +and women who cannot make anything by themselves, and could +not arrange between themselves to make anything even in little +bits. They are ignorant and helpless, and cannot lift their finger +to begin their day’s work until it has all been arranged for them +by their employers, who themselves do not understand the machines +they buy, and simply pay other people to set them going<span class="pagenum" id="Page_163">[Pg 163]</span> +by carrying out the machine maker’s directions.</p> + +<p>The same is true of clothes. Formerly the whole work of making +clothes, from the shearing of the sheep to the turning out of the +finished and washed garment ready to put on, had to be done in +the country by the men and women of the household, especially +the women; so that to this day an unmarried woman is called a +spinster. Nowadays nothing is left of all this but the sheep-shearing; +and even that, like the milking of cows, is being done by +machinery, as the sewing is. Give a woman a sheep today and ask +her to produce a woollen dress for you; and not only will she be +quite unable to do it, but you are as likely as not to find that she +is not even aware of any connection between sheep and clothes. +When she gets her clothes, which she does by buying them at +a shop, she knows that there is a difference between wool and +cotton and silk, between flannel and merino, perhaps even between +stockinet and other wefts; but as to how they are made, or +what they are made of, or how they came to be in the shop ready +for her to buy, she knows hardly anything. And the shop assistant +from whom she buys is no wiser. The people engaged in the making +of them know even less; for many of them are too poor to have +much choice of materials when they buy their own clothes.</p> + +<p>Thus the capitalist system has produced an almost universal +ignorance of how things are made and done, whilst at the same +time it has caused them to be made and done on a gigantic scale. +We have to buy books and encyclopedias to find out what it is we +are doing all day; and as the books are written by people who are +not doing it, and who get their information from other books, +what they tell us is from twenty to fifty years out of date, and unpractical +at that. And of course most of us are too tired of our +work when we come home to want to read about it: what we need +is a cinema to take our minds off it and feed our imagination.</p> + +<p>It is a funny place, this world of Capitalism, with its astonishing +spread of ignorance and helplessness, boasting all the time of its +spread of education and enlightenment. There stand the thousands +of property owners and the millions of wage workers, none +of them able to make anything, none of them knowing what to +do until somebody tells them, none of them having the least notion +of how it is that they find people paying them money, and things<span class="pagenum" id="Page_164">[Pg 164]</span> +in the shops to buy with it. And when they travel they are surprised +to find that savages and Esquimaux and villagers who +have to make everything for themselves are more intelligent and +resourceful! The wonder would be if they were anything else. +We should die of idiocy through disuse of our mental faculties +if we did not fill our heads with romantic nonsense out of illustrated +newspapers and novels and plays and films. Such stuff +keeps us alive; but it falsifies everything for us so absurdly that +it leaves us more or less dangerous lunatics in the real world.</p> + +<p>Excuse my going on like this; but as I am a writer of books and +plays myself, I know the folly and peril of it better than you do. +And when I see that this moment of our utmost ignorance and +helplessness, delusion and folly, has been stumbled on by the +blind forces of Capitalism as the moment for giving votes to +everybody, so that the few wise women are hopelessly overruled +by the thousands whose political minds, as far as they can be said +to have any political minds at all, have been formed in the cinema, +I realize that I had better stop writing plays for a while to discuss +political and social realities in this book with those who are intelligent +enough to listen to me.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c43">43</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">DISABLEMENT ABOVE AND BELOW</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU must not conclude from what I have just said that I +grudge the people their amusements. I have made most +of my money by amusing them. I recognize more clearly +than most people that not only does all work and no play +make Jill a dull girl, but that she works so that she may be able +to enjoy life as well as to keep herself from dying of hunger and +exposure. She wants, and needs, leisure as well as wages. But +breadwinning must come before charabancs and cinemas. I have +the strongest sympathy, as I daresay you have, with the French +gentleman who said that if he could have the luxuries of life he +could do without the necessities; but unfortunately Nature does +not share our sympathy, and ruthlessly puts breadwinning first +on pain of death. The French gentleman is less important than +the women who are asking for an eight-hour working day, because,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_165">[Pg 165]</span> +though what they are really asking for is for a few hours +more leisure when they have rested and slept, cooked and fed and +washed up, yet they know that leisure must be worked for, and +that no woman can shirk her share of the work except by putting +it on some other woman and cutting short <i>her</i> leisure.</p> + +<p>Therefore when I say that Capitalism has reduced our people +to a condition of abject helplessness and ignorance in their productive +capacity as workers, you cannot reassure me by pointing +out that factory girls are no fools when it comes to gossiping and +amusing themselves; that they are resourceful enough to learn +lip reading in the weaving-sheds, where the banging of the looms +makes it impossible to hear each other speak; that their dances +and charabanc excursions and whist drives and dressing and wireless +concerts stimulate and cultivate them to an extent unknown +to their grandmothers; that they consume frightful quantities of +confectionery; and that they limit their families to avoid too +much mothering. But all this is consumption, not production. +When they are engaged in producing these amusements: when +they take the money for the tickets at the pay-boxes, or do some +scrap of the work of making a charabanc, or wind the wire on a +coil for broadcasting, they are mere machines, taking part in a +routine without knowing what came before or what is to follow.</p> + +<p>In giving all the work to one class and all the leisure to another +as far as the law will let it, the Capitalist system disables the rich +as completely as the poor. By letting their land and hiring out +their spare money (capital) to others, they can have plenty of food +and fun without lifting their little fingers. Their agents collect +the rent for the land, and lodge it in the bank for them. The companies +which have hired their spare money lodge the half-yearly +hire (dividends) in the same way. Bismarck said of them that they +had only to take a pair of scissors and cut off a coupon; but he +was wrong: the bank does even that for them; so that all they +have to do is to sign the cheques with which they pay for everything. +They need do nothing but amuse themselves; and they +would get their incomes just the same if they did not do even +that. They can only plead that their ancestors worked productively, +as if everybody’s ancestors had not worked productively, +or as if this were any excuse for their not following their ancestors’<span class="pagenum" id="Page_166">[Pg 166]</span> +excellent example. We cannot live on the virtues of our +grandmothers. They may have farmed their own land, and invented +the ways in which their spare money was applied to the +land to make them richer; but when their successors found that +all this trouble would be taken for them by others, they simply let +the land and put out their spare money for hire (invested it).</p> + +<p>Some of our great landholders inherit their land from feudal +times, when there were no factories nor railways, and when towns +were so small that they were walled in as gardens are now. In +those days the landholders, with the king at their head, had to +raise armies and defend the country at their own cost. They had +to make the laws and administer them, doing military work, +police work, and government work of all sorts. Henry IV, who +died of overwork, found to his cost how true it was in those days +that the greatest among us must be servant to all the rest. Nowadays +it is the other way about: the greatest is she to whom all the +rest are servants. All the chores and duties of the feudal barons +are done by paid officials. In country places they may still sit on +the Bench as unpaid magistrates; and there remains the tradition +that military service as officers is proper for their sons. A few of +them, with the help of solicitors and agents, manage the estates +on which they actually live, or allow their wives to do it. But these +are only vestiges of a bygone order, maintained mostly by rich +purchasers of estates who are willing to take a little trouble to be +ranked as country gentlemen and county ladies. There are always +newly enriched folk who have this vanity for a while, and +will buy the estate of a real country gentleman to take on his +position in the country. But at any moment our landed gentry, +whether they are so by descent or purchase, can sell their country +houses and parks, and live anywhere they please in the civilized +world without any public duties or responsibilities. Sooner or +later they all do so, thus breaking the only link that binds them to +the old feudal aristocracy save their names and titles. For all the +purposes of the real world of today there is no longer a feudal +aristocracy: it is merged in the industrial capitalist class, with +which it associates and intermarries without distinction, money +making up for everything. If it be still necessary to call the rich an +ocracy of any kind, they must be called a plutocracy, in which the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_167">[Pg 167]</span> +oldest ducal estate and the newest fortune made in business are +only forms of capital, imposing no public duties on the owner.</p> + +<p>Now this state of things may seem extremely jolly for the plutocracy +from the point of view of those who are so overworked and +underamused that they can imagine nothing better than a life +that is one long holiday; but it has the disadvantage of making +the plutocrats as helpless as babies when they are left to earn their +own living. You know that there is nothing more pitiable on +earth within the limits of good health than born ladies and gentlemen +suddenly losing their property. But have you considered +that they would be equally pitiable if their property were thrown +on their own hands to make what they could of it? They would +not know how to farm their lands or to work their mines and railways +or to sail their ships. They would perish surrounded by +what Dr Johnson called “the potentiality of growing rich beyond +the dreams of avarice”. Without the hungry they would +have to say “I cannot dig: to beg (even if I knew how) I am +ashamed”. The hungry could do without them, and be very much +the better for it; but they could not do without the hungry.</p> + +<p>Yet most of the hungry, left to themselves, would be quite as +helpless as the plutocrats. Take the case of a housemaid, familiar +to the intelligent lady who can afford to keep one. A woman may +be a very good housemaid; but you have to provide the house for +her and manage the house before she can set to work. Many +excellent housemaids, when they marry, make a poor enough job +of their own housekeeping. Ask them to manage a big hotel, +which employs dozens of housemaids, and they will think you +are laughing at them: you might as well ask the porter at the +Bank of England to manage the bank. A bricklayer may be a very +good bricklayer; but he cannot build a house nor even make the +bricks he lays. Any laborer can lay a plank across a stream, or +place a row of stepping-stones in it; but just ask him to build a +bridge, whether it be the simplest sort of canal bridge or a gigantic +construction like the Forth Bridge! You might as well ask +your baby to make its cot and knit its jumper, or your cook to design +and construct a kitchen range and water supply.</p> + +<p>This helplessness gets more and more complete as civilization +advances. In villages you may still find carpenters and blacksmiths<span class="pagenum" id="Page_168">[Pg 168]</span> +who can make things. They can even choose and buy their +materials, and then sell the finished article. But in the cities on +which our existence now depends you find multitudes of workers +and plutocrats who cannot make anything; do not know how anything +is made; and are so inept at buying and selling that without +fixed-price-shops they would perish.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c44">44</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE MIDDLE STATION IN LIFE</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>ND now, if the landlords and capitalists can neither make +anything nor even tell others how to make it; and if the +workers can do nothing until they are told what to do, +how does the world get on? There must be some third class +standing between the propertied class on the one hand and the +propertyless class on the other, to lease the land and hire the +capital and tell the workers what to do with them.</p> + +<p>There is. You can see for yourself that there is a middle class +which does all the managing and directing and deciding work of +the nation, besides carrying on the learned and literary and artistic +professions. Let us consider how this class arose, and how it +is continually recruited from the capitalist families.</p> + +<p>The capitalists do something more than merely own. They +marry and have children. Now an income which is comfortable +for two people may not be enough for three or four children in +addition, to say nothing of possibly twice or thrice that number. +And when the three or four children grow up and marry and have +three or four children each, what meant riches for the grandparents +may mean poverty for the grandchildren.</p> + +<p>To avoid this, propertied families may arrange that only the eldest +son shall inherit the property, leaving the younger sons to shift +for themselves, and the daughters to marry men of property if +they can. This is called primogeniture. Until 1926 it was the law of +the land in England when the owner of a landed estate died without +leaving a will to the contrary. Where there is no such law, and all +the children inherit equal shares of the parents’ property, as they +do among the peasant proprietors in France, the family must come +to an arrangement of the same kind between themselves, or else<span class="pagenum" id="Page_169">[Pg 169]</span> +sell the property and leave its owners with a few pounds each that +will not last them very long. Therefore they almost always do +agree that the younger children shall live by working like the +hungry, whilst the eldest keeps the farm and cultivates it. This +cannot be done when the property is not land but capital, and all +the members of the family are living on the interest of hired out +spare money. Parents may make wills leaving all of it or most of it +to one son; but they do not do this as a rule; and sooner or later +the property gets divided and divided among children and other +next-of-kin until the inheritors cannot live on their shares.</p> + +<p>But please remark that the younger sons who are thus thrown +on the world to earn their living have the tastes and habits and +speech and appearance and education of rich men. They are well +connected, as we say. Their near relations may be peers. Some of +them have been schooled at Eton and Harrow, and have taken +degrees at Oxford and Cambridge. Others have less distinguished +connections. Their parents or grandparents may have +made money in business; and they may have gone to the big city +schools, or to day schools, instead of to Eton, and either to one of +the new democratic universities or to no university at all. Their +most important relative may be a mayor or alderman. But they +are educated at secondary as distinguished from elementary +schools; and though not what they themselves call great swells, +they have the manners and appearance and speech and habits of +the capitalist class, are described as gentlemen, and politely addressed +by letter as Esquires instead of plain Misters.</p> + +<p>All these propertyless people who have the ways and the culture +of propertied ones have to live by their wits. They go into the +army and navy as officers, or into the upper grades of the civil +service. They become clergymen, doctors, lawyers, authors, +actors, painters, sculptors, architects, schoolmasters, university +professors, astronomers and the like, forming what we call the +professional class. They are treated with special respect socially; +but they see successful men of business, inferior to themselves in +knowledge, talent, character, and public spirit, making much +larger incomes. The highest sorts of mental work are often so +unremunerative that it is impossible to make a living by practising +them commercially. Spinoza lived by grinding lenses, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_170">[Pg 170]</span> +Rousseau by copying music. Einstein lives by professorships. +Newton lived, not by discovering gravitation and measuring +fluxions, but by acting as Master of the Mint, which other men +could have done as well. Even when a profession is comparatively +lucrative and popular, its gains are restricted by the fact +that the work must all be done by the practitioner’s own hand; for +a surgeon cannot employ a thousand subordinates to deal with a +million patients as a soap king deals with a million customers, +nor the President of the Royal Academy hand over a two thousand +guinea portrait sitter to his secretary. The years of professional +success are usually preceded by a long struggle with scanty +means. I myself am held to be a conspicuous example of success +in the most lucrative branch of the literary profession; but until +I was thirty I could not make even a bare living by my pen. At +thirty-eight I thought myself passing rich on six or seven pounds +a week; and even now, when I am seventy, and have achieved all +that can be achieved commercially at my job, I see in the paper +every day, under the heading Wills and Bequests, that the widow +of some successful man of business, wholly unknown to fame, has +died leaving a fortune which reduces my gains to insignificance.</p> + +<p>The consequence is that professional men and civil servants, +when they are not incurable old-fashioned snobs who regard trade +as beneath the dignity of their family, and when their sons have +no overwhelming aptitude for one or other of the professions, +advise them strongly to go in for business. The man of business +may not have much chance of a public statue unless he pays for +it and presents it to his native town with a spacious public park +attached; and his occupation may be a dry one in itself, however +exciting the prospect of pocketing more and more money may +make it. But he can make profits not only out of his work, like the +surgeon or painter, but out of the work of thousands of others as +well. And his work is not necessarily dry: modern businesses +tend to become more interesting and important, and even more +scientific, than average professional work. Their activities are +much more varied: in fact modern commercial magnates, when +they control a dozen different businesses, become better informed +and better developed mentally than the rank and file of +the professions. What is more, they are learning to snap up the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_171">[Pg 171]</span> +ablest university scholars and civil servants, and take them into +partnership not as office managers but as thinkers, diplomatists, +and commercial scientists. It is in industrially undeveloped countries +that professional men rank as an aristocracy of learning and +intellect: in European centres today commercial society is a more +effective reserve of culture than professional society. When the +professional man or the public servant tells his son that a berth in +the civil service is a blind alley, or doctoring at the call of the night +bell a dog’s life, contrasting them with the unlimited prospects +and the infinite scope for personal initiative in business, he is +recommending the young man to improve on his father’s condition +instead of starting him on the downward path socially.</p> + +<p>And what is business in the lump? It is hiring land from landlords +and spare money from capitalists, and employing the hungry +to make enough money out of them day by day to pay the +wages for their keep and bring in a profit as well. Astonishing +fortunes can be made in this way by men and women with the +necessary ability and decision who have the particular sort of pecuniary +keenness and pertinacity that business requires. Even more +staggering profits are made sometimes by accident, the business +man hitting by chance on something new that the public happens +to fancy. Millions are made by medicines which injure people’s +health instead of improving it (read Tono-Bungay), and hair restorers +that leave the buyer as bald as before. Articles that nobody +needs, and sham pleasures that give only fatigue and boredom at +extravagant prices, are advertized and advertized until people +are beglamored into thinking they cannot do without them.</p> + +<p>But the main scope in business is for honorable and useful +activity, from growing food and building houses and making +clothes, or manufacturing spades and sewing-machines, to laying +cables round the world, and building giant ships to turn the +ocean or the air into a highway. The planning and management +and ordering of this gives employment to able and energetic men +who have no property, but have the education and social address of +the propertied class. The educated who are neither able nor energetic, +and who have no professions, find employment as agents +or clerks carrying out the routine and keeping the accounts of +businesses which the able ones have established and are directing.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_172">[Pg 172]</span> +And the women of their class are forced to live by marrying them.</p> + +<p>In this way we get, between the propertied class and the hungry +mass, a middle class which acts as a sort of Providence to both of +them. It cultivates the land and employs the capital of the property +holders, paying them the rent of their lands and the hire of +their spare money without asking them to lift a finger, and giving +the hungry wages to live on without asking them to think or decide +or know or do anything except their own little bit of the job +in hand. The hungry have neither to buy the material nor to sell +the product, neither to organize the service nor find the customer. +Like children they are told what to do, and fed and lodged and +clothed whilst they are doing it, not always very handsomely perhaps; +but at worst they are kept alive long enough to produce a +fresh set of hungry ones to replace them when they are worn out.</p> + +<p>There are always a few cases in which this management is done, +not by descendants of propertied folk, but by men and women +sprung from the hungriest of the hungry. These are the geniuses +who know most of the things that other people have to be taught, +and who educate themselves as far as they need any education. +But there are so few of them that they need not be taken into +account. In great social questions we are dealing with the abilities +of ordinary citizens: that is, the abilities we can depend on everyone +except invalids and idiots possessing, and not with what one +man or woman in ten thousand can do. In spite of several cases in +which persons born in poverty and ignorance have risen to make +vast fortunes, to become famous as philosophers, discoverers, +authors, and even rulers of kingdoms, to say nothing of saints +and martyrs, we may take it that business and the professions are +closed to those who cannot read and write, travel and keep accounts, +besides dressing, speaking, behaving, and handling and +spending money more or less in the manner of the propertied classes.</p> + +<p>This is another way of saying that until about fifty years ago +the great mass of our people working for weekly wages were as +completely shut out from the professions and from business as if +there had been a law forbidding them on pain of death to attempt +to enter them. I remember wondering when I was a lad at a man +who was in my father’s employment as a miller. He could neither +read nor write nor cipher (that is, do sums on paper); but his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_173">[Pg 173]</span> +natural faculty for calculation was so great that he could solve +instantly all the arithmetical problems that arose in the course of +his work: for instance, if it were a question of so many sacks of +flour at so much a sack, he could tell you the answer straight off +without thinking, which was more than my father or his clerks +could do. But because he did not know his alphabet, and could +not put pen to paper, and had not the speech and manners and +habits and dress without which he would not have been admitted +into the company of merchants and manufacturers, or of lawyers, +doctors, and clergymen, he lived and died a poor employee, without +the slightest chance of rising into the middle class, or the +faintest pretension to social equality with my father. And my +father, though he was propertyless, and worked as a middle class +civil servant and subsequently as a merchant, was not at all proud +of being a member of the middle class: on the contrary, he resented +that description, holding on to his connexion with the +propertied class as a younger son of many former younger sons, +and therefore, though unfortunately reduced to living not very +successfully by his wits, a man of family and a gentleman.</p> + +<p>But this was sixty years ago. Since then we have established +Communism in education. If my father’s miller were a boy now, +he would go to school for nine years, whether his parents liked it +or not, at the expense of the whole community; and his mathematical +gift would enable him to win a scholarship that would +take him on to a secondary school, and another scholarship there +that would take him to the university and qualify him for a profession. +At the very least he would become an accountant, even +were it only as a bookkeeper or clerk. In any case he would be +qualified for middle class employment and pass into that class.</p> + +<p>Now the social significance of this is that the middle class, +which the younger sons and their descendants formerly had all +to themselves as far as the most desirable positions in it were concerned, +is now recruited from the working class as well. These +recruits, with no gentlemanly nonsense about them, are not only +better taught than the boys who go to cheapish middle class +schools, but better trained to face the realities of life. Also the old +differences in speech and dress and manners are much less than +they were, partly because the working class is picking up middle<span class="pagenum" id="Page_174">[Pg 174]</span> +class manners, but much more because they are forcing their own +manners and speech on the middle class as standards. A man like +my father, half a merchant, but ashamed of it and unable to make +up his mind to it, and half a gentleman without any property +to uphold his pretension, would, if he were a boy nowadays, be +beaten hollow in the competition for land, for capital, and for +position in the civil service by the sons of men whose grandfathers +would never have dreamed of presuming to sit down in +his presence. The futile propertyless gentlemen, the unserviceable +and grossly insolent civil servants whom Dickens described, +have to be content nowadays with the refuse of middle class +employment. They are discontented, unhappy, impecunious, +struggling with a false position, borrowing (really begging) from +their relatives, and unable to realize, or unwilling to admit, that +they have fallen out of the propertied class, not into an intermediate +position where they have a monopoly of all the occupations +and employments that require a little education and +manners, but right down into the ranks of the hungry, without +the hardening that makes the hungry life bearable.</p> + +<p>And what of the daughters? Their business is to get married; +and I can remember the time when there was no other hopeful +opening in life for them. When they failed to find husbands, and +no special provision had been made for them, they became governesses +or school teachers or “companions” or genteel beggars +under the general heading of poor relations. They had been carefully +trained to feel that it was unladylike to work, and still more +unladylike to propose marriage to men. The professions were +closed to them. The universities were closed to them. The business +offices were closed to them. Their poverty cut them off from +propertied society. Their ladylikeness cut them off from the +society of working people as poor as themselves, and from inter-marriage +with them. Life was a ghastly business for them.</p> + +<p>Nowadays, there are far more careers open to women. We have +women barristers and women doctors in practice. True, the +Church is closed against them, to its own great detriment, as it +could easily find picked women, eloquent in the pulpit and +capable in parish management, to replace the male refuse it has +too often to fall back on; but women can do without ecclesiastical<span class="pagenum" id="Page_175">[Pg 175]</span> +careers now that the secular and civil services are open. +The closing of the fighting services is socially necessary, as women +are far too valuable to have their lives risked in battle as well as in +child-bearing. If ninety out of every hundred young men were +killed we could recover from the loss, but if ninety out of every +hundred young women were killed there would be an end of the +nation. That is why modern war, which is not confined to battle +fields, and rains high explosives and poison gas on male and +female civilians indiscriminately in their peaceful homes, is so +much more dangerous than war has ever been before.</p> + +<p>Besides, women are now educated as men are: they go to the +universities and to the technical colleges if they can afford it; and, +as Domestic Service is now an educational subject with special +colleges, a woman can get trained for such an occupation as that +of manageress of a hotel as well as for the practice of law or +medicine, or for accountancy and actuarial work. In short, nothing +now blocks a woman’s way into business or professional life +except prejudice, superstition, old-fashioned parents, shyness, +snobbery, ignorance of the contemporary world, and all the other +imbecilities for which there is no remedy but modern ideas and +force of character. Therefore it is no use facing the world today +with the ideas of a hundred years ago, when it was practically +against the law for a lady who was not a genius to be self-supporting; +for if she kept a shop, or even visited at the house of a +woman who kept a shop, she was no lady. I know better than you +(because I am probably much older) that the tradition of those +bad old times still wastes the lives of single gentlewomen to a +deplorable extent; but, for all that, every year sees an increase in +the activities of gentlewomen outside the home in business and +the professions, and even in perilous professional exploration and +adventure with a cinematographic camera in attendance.</p> + +<p>This increase is hastened by the gigantic scale of capitalist production, +which, as we have seen, reduces the old household labor +of baking and brewing, spinning and weaving, first to shopping +at separate shops, and then to telephoning the day’s orders to one +big multiple shop. We have seen also how it leads prematurely to +Birth Control, which has reduced the number of children in the +middle class households very notably. Many middle-class women<span class="pagenum" id="Page_176">[Pg 176]</span> +who could formerly say with truth that there was no end to a +woman’s work in the house are now underworked, in spite of the +difficulty of finding servants. It is conceivable that women may +drive men out of many middle class occupations as they have already +driven them out of many city offices. We are losing the habit +of regarding business and the professions as male employments.</p> + +<p>Nevertheless males are in a vast majority in these departments, +and must remain so as long as our family arrangements last, because +the bearing and rearing of children, including domestic +housekeeping, is woman’s natural monopoly. As such, being as it +is the most vital of all the functions of mankind, it gives women a +power and importance that they can attain to in no other profession, +and that man cannot attain to at all. In so far as it is a slavery, +it is a slavery to Nature and not to Man: indeed it is the +means by which women enslave men, and thus create a Man Question +which is called, very inappropriately, the Woman Question. +Woman as Wife and Mother stands apart from the development +we are dealing with in this chapter, which is, the rise of a business +and professional middle class out of the propertied class. This is +a sexless development, because when the unmarried daughters, +like the younger sons, become doctors, barristers, ministers in +the Free Churches, managers, accountants, shopkeepers, and +clerks under the term typist (in America stenographer), they +virtually leave their sex behind them, as men do. In business and +the professions there are neither men nor women: economically +they are all neuters, as far as that is humanly possible. The only +disadvantage the woman is at in competition with the man is that +the man must either succeed in his business or fail completely in +life, whilst the woman has a second string to her bow in the possibility +of getting married. A young woman who regards business +employment as only a temporary support until she can find an +eligible husband will never master her work as a man must.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_177">[Pg 177]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c45">45</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">DECLINE OF THE EMPLOYER</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>T first sight it would seem that the employers must be the +most powerful class in the community, because the others +can do nothing without them. So they were, a hundred +years ago. The dominant man then was not the capitalist nor the +landlord nor the laborer, but the employer who could set capital +and land and labor to work. These employers began as office +employees; for business in those days was mostly on so small a +scale that any middle class employee who had learnt the routine +of business as a clerk or apprentice, in his father’s office or elsewhere, +and who could scrape together a few hundred pounds, +could enter into partnership with another thrifty employee, and +set up in almost any sort of business as an employer.</p> + +<p>But as spare money accumulated in larger and larger quantity, +and enterprise expanded accordingly, business came to be done +on a larger and larger scale until these old-fashioned little firms +found their customers being taken away from them by big concerns +and joint stock companies who could, with their huge +capitals and costly machinery, not only undersell them, but make +a greater profit out of their lower prices. Women see this in their +shopping. They used to buy their umbrellas at an umbrella shop, +their boots at a boot shop, their books at a book shop, and their +lunches-out at a restaurant. Nowadays they buy them all at the +same shop, lunch and all. Huge bazaars like Selfridge’s and +Whiteley’s in London, and the great multiple shops in the provincial +cities, are becoming the only shops where you can buy +anything, because they are taking away the trade of the small +separate shops and ruining the shopkeepers who kept them. +These ruined shopkeepers may think themselves lucky if they get +jobs in the multiple shops as shop assistants, managers of departments, +and the like, when they are not too old for the change.</p> + +<p>Sometimes the change is invisible. Certain retail trades have to +be carried on in small shops scattered all over the place. For example, +oil shops, public houses, and tobacconists. These look like +separate small businesses. But they are not. The public houses +are tied houses practically owned in dozens by the brewers. A<span class="pagenum" id="Page_178">[Pg 178]</span> +hundred oil shops or tobacco shops may belong to a single big +company, called a Trust. Just as the little businesses conducted +by a couple of gentlemen partners, starting with a capital which +they counted in hundreds, had to give way to companies counting +their capital in thousands, so these companies are being forced +to combine into Trusts which count their capital in millions.</p> + +<p>These changes involve another which is politically very important. +When the employers had it all their own way, and were +in business for themselves separately and independently, they +worked with what we should call small capitals, and had no difficulty +in getting them. Capital was positively thrown down their +throats by the bankers, who, as we shall see later, have most of +the spare money to keep. Those were the days of arrogant cotton +lords and merchant princes. The man who could manage a +business took every penny that was left in the till when the landlord +had had his rent, the capitalist (who was often himself) his +interest, and the employees their wages. If he were a capable man, +what remained for him as profit was enough to make him rich +enough to go into Parliament if he cared to. Sometimes it was +enough to enable him to buy his way into the peerage. Capital +being useless and Labor helpless without him, he was, as an +American economist put it, master of the situation.</p> + +<p>When joint stock companies, which were formerly supposed to +be suitable for banking and insurance only, came into business +generally, the situation of the employers began to change. In a +joint stock concern you have, instead of one or two capitalists, +hundreds of capitalists, called shareholders, each contributing +what spare money she or he can afford. It began with £100 +shares, and has gone on to £10 and £1 shares; so that a single +business today may belong to a host of capitalist proprietors, +many of them much poorer people than could ever have acquired +property in pre-company days. This had two results. One was +that a woman with a £5 note to spare could allow a company to +spend it, and thereby become entitled to, say, five shillings a year +out of the gains of that company as long as it lasted. In this way +Capitalism was strengthened by the extension of property in industry +from rich people with large sums of spare money to poor +people with small ones. But the employers were weakened, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_179">[Pg 179]</span> +finally lost their supremacy and became employees.</p> + +<p>It happened in this way. The joint stock company system made +it possible to collect much larger capitals to start business with +than the old separate firms could command. It was already known +that the employer with a thousand pounds worth of machinery +and other aids to production (called plant) could be undersold +and driven out of the market by the employer with twenty thousand +pounds worth. Still, employers could get twenty thousand +pounds lent to them easily enough if it was believed that they +could handle it profitably. But when companies came into the +field equipped with hundreds of thousands of pounds, and these +companies began to combine into Trusts equipped with millions, +the employers were outdone. They could not raise such sums +among their acquaintances. No bank would allow them to overdraw +their accounts on such a gigantic scale. To get more capital, +they had to turn their businesses into joint stock companies.</p> + +<p>This sounds simple; but the employers did not find it so. You, +I hope, would not buy shares in a new company unless you saw +what are called good names on the prospectus, shewing that half +a dozen persons whom you believe to be wealthy, trustworthy, +good judges of business, and in responsible social stations were +setting you the example. If ever you do you will regret it, possibly +in the workhouse. Now the art of getting at the people with the +good names, and interesting them, is one at which practical employers +are for the most part incurably unskilled. Therefore when +they want to raise capital on the modern scale they are forced to +go to persons who, having made a special profession of it, know +where to go and how to proceed. These persons are called Promoters, +though they usually call themselves financiers. They +naturally charge a very high commission for their services; and +the accountants and solicitors whose reputations inspire confidence +put a high price on their names also. They all find that they +can make so much by raising large capitals that it is not worth +their while to trouble themselves with small ones; and the quaint +result of this is that an employer finds it easier to raise large sums +than small ones. If he wants only £20,000, the promoters and +financiers shew him the door contemptuously: the pickings on +so small a sum are beneath their notice. If, however, he wants<span class="pagenum" id="Page_180">[Pg 180]</span> +£100,000, they will listen superciliously, and perhaps get it +for him. Only, though he has to pay interest on £100,000, and +stand indebted in that amount, he is very lucky if he receives +£70,000 in cash. The promoters and financiers divide the odd +£30,000 among themselves for their names and their trouble in +raising the money. The employers are helpless in their hands: +it is a case of take it or leave it: if they refuse the terms they get +no capital. Thus the financiers and their go-betweens are now +masters of the situation; and the men who actually conduct and +order the industry of the country, who would have been great +commercial magnates in Queen Victoria’s reign, are now under +the thumbs of men who never employed an industrial workman +nor entered a factory or mine in their lives, and never intend to.</p> + +<p>And that is not all. When an employer turns his business into +a joint stock company he becomes an employee. He may be the +head employee who orders all the other employees about, engaging +and dismissing them as he thinks fit; but still he is an employee, +and can be dismissed by the shareholders and replaced +by another manager if they think he is taking too much for his +services. Against this possibility he usually protects himself by +selling his establishment to the company at first for a number of +shares sufficient to enable him to outvote all the discontented +shareholders (each share carries a vote); and in any case his position +as the established head who has made a success of the business, +or at least persuaded the shareholders that he has, is a +strong one. But he does not live for ever. When he dies or retires, +a new manager must be found; and this successor is not his heir, +but a stranger entering as a removable employee, managing the +concern for a salary and perhaps a percentage of the profits.</p> + +<p>Now an able employee-manager can command a high salary, +and have a good deal of power, because he is felt to be indispensable +until he is worn out. But he can never be as indispensable as +the old employers who invented their own methods, and clung to +their “trade secrets” jealously. Their methods necessarily resolved +themselves into an office routine which could be picked +up, however unintelligently, by those employed in it. The only +trade secret that really counted was the new machinery, which +was not secret at all; for all the great mechanical inventions are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_181">[Pg 181]</span> +soon communized by law: that is, instead of the inventor of a +machine being allowed to keep it as his private property for ever +and make all the employers who use it pay him a royalty, he is +allowed to monopolize it in this way under a patent for fourteen +years only, after which it is at everybody’s disposal.</p> + +<p>You can guess the inevitable result. It may take a genius to +invent, say a steam-engine, but once it is invented a couple of +ordinary workmen can keep it going; and when it is worn out +any ordinary engineering firm can replace it by copying it. Also, +though it may need exceptional talent, initiative, energy, and +concentration to set up a new business, yet when it is once set up, +and the routine of working it established, it can be kept going by +ordinary persons who have learnt the routine, and whose rule is +“When in doubt as to what to do, see what was done the last time, +and do it over again”. Thus a very clever man may build up a +great business, and leave it to his quite ordinary son to carry on +when he is dead; and the son may get on very well without ever +really understanding the business as his father did. Or the father +may leave it to his daughter with the certainty that if she cannot +or will not do the directing work herself, she can easily hire +employee-employers who can and will, for a salary plus a percentage. +The famous Krupp factory in Germany belongs to a lady. I +will not go so far as to say that managerial ability has become a +drug in the market, though, in the little businesses which are +still conducted in the old way in the poorer middle class, the +employer often has to pay his more highly skilled employees more +than he gets out of the business for himself. But the monopoly +of business technique which made the capitalist-employer +supreme in the nineteenth century has gone for ever. Employers +today are neither capitalists nor monopolists of managerial ability. +The political and social power which their predecessors enjoyed +has passed to the financiers and bankers, who monopolize the art +of collecting millions of spare money. That monopoly will be +broken in its turn by the communization of banking, to which we +shall come presently.</p> + +<p>Meanwhile you, putting all these developments together in +your mind, can now contemplate the Middle Class understandingly. +You know now how it sprang from the propertied class as<span class="pagenum" id="Page_182">[Pg 182]</span> +an educated younger-son class without property, and supported +itself by practising the professions, and by doing the business of +the propertied class. You know how it rose to supreme power and +riches when the development of modern machinery (called the +Industrial Revolution) made business so big and complicated +that neither the propertied class nor the working class could +understand it, and the middle class men who did (called generally +employers), became masters of the situation. You know how, +when the first generations of employers had found out how to do +this work, and established a routine of doing it which any literate +man could learn and practise, and when all that remained was to +find more and more capital to feed it as its concerns grew bigger +and bigger, the supremacy passed from the employers to the +financiers who hold it at present. You know also that this last +change has been accompanied by a change in the status of the +employer, who instead of hiring the land and capital of the propertied +classes for a fixed payment of rent and interest, and +taking as his profit all that remains, is now simply employed to +manage for companies and trusts, the shareholders taking everything +that is left after they have paid rent and wages (including +his salary). You see that in applying for such posts he has to meet +the competition not only of other middle class men as of old, but +of clever sons of the working class, raised into the middle class by +education at the public expense by our system of scholarships, +which act as ladders from the elementary school to the University +or the Polytechnic. You see that this applies not only to employers, +but much more to their clerks. Clerking was formerly a +monopoly of the less energetic sons of the middle class. Now that +everybody has to go to school the middle class monopoly of reading, +writing, and ciphering is gone; and skilled manual workers +are better paid than clerks, being scarcer. As to parlormaids, what +ordinary typist does not envy their creature comforts?</p> + +<p>The Middle Station in Life no longer justifies the pæan in its +praise which Daniel Defoe raised in Robinson Crusoe. For those +who possess no special talent of a lucrative kind, it is now the +least eligible class in the community.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_183">[Pg 183]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c46">46</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE PROLETARIAT</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>E have disposed of the Middle Classes: let us turn +to the Lower Classes, the Hungry Ones, the Working +Classes, the Masses, the Mob, or whatever else +you call them. Classical culture has invented a general name for +all people, of whatever nation, color, sex, sect, or social pretension, +who, having no land nor capital (no property), have to hire +themselves out for a living. It calls them proletarians, or, in the +lump, The Proletariat. Karl Marx, who was born in Rhenish +Germany in 1818, and died in London in 1883, after spending +the last thirty-four years of his life in England making a special +study of the development of Capitalism among us, was, and still +is, the most famous champion of the Proletariat as the really +organic part of civilized society to which all the old governing and +propertied classes must finally succumb. When Marx raised his +famous slogan, “Proletarians of all lands: unite”, he meant that +all who live by the sale or hire of their labor should combine to +do away with private property in land and capital, and to make +everyone do her or his bit of the labor of the world, and share the +product without paying toll to any idler.</p> + +<p>The difficulty at that time was that the employers, without +whom the proletarians could do nothing, were, as we have seen, +strong, rich, independent, and masterful. They not only owned +a good deal of land and capital themselves, but fully intended to +become propertied country gentlemen when they retired. It was +not until they began to slip down into a salaried, or proletarian +class, that they also began to listen to Karl Marx. You see, they +were losing their personal interest in private property with its +rents and dividends, and were becoming interested solely in the +price that could be got out of the landlords and capitalists for +active services: that is, for labor of hand and brain. Instead of +wanting to give Labor as little as possible and get as much out of +it as possible, they wanted property to get as little as possible, and +the sort of labor they themselves did to get as much as possible. +They found that skilled manual work, and even unskilled manual +strength, was coming more and more to be better paid than bookkeeping<span class="pagenum" id="Page_184">[Pg 184]</span> +work and routine managing and professional work.</p> + +<p>Now it is no use pretending to be better than other people when +you are poorer. It only leads to keeping up more expensive +appearances on less money, and forbidding your children to +associate with most people’s children whilst they forbid their +children to speak to yours. If the parents do not realize the vanity +of such pretension the children do. I remember thinking when +I was a boy how silly it was that my father, whose business was +wholesale business, should consider himself socially superior to +his tailor, who had the best means of knowing how much poorer +than himself my father was, and who had a handsome residence, +with ornamental grounds and sailing-boats, at the seaside place +where we spent the summer in a six-roomed cottage-villa with a +small garden. The great Grafton Street shopkeepers of Dublin +outshone the tailor with their palaces and yachts; and their children +had luxuries that I never dreamt of as possible for me, +besides being far more expensively educated. My father’s conviction +that they were too lowly to associate with me, when it was +so clear that I was too poor to associate with them, may have had +some sort of imaginary validity for him; but for me it was snobbish +nonsense. I lived to see those children entertaining the Irish +peerage and the Viceroy without a thought of the old social barriers; +and very glad the Irish peers were to be entertained by them. +I lived to see those shops become multiple shops managed by +salaried employees who have less chance of entertaining the peerage +than a baked-potato man of entertaining the King.</p> + +<p>My father was an employer whose whole capital added to that +of his partner would not have kept a big modern company in +postage stamps for a fortnight. But at my start in life I found it +impossible to become an employer like him: I had to become a +clerk at fifteen. I was a proletarian undisguised. Therefore, when +I began to take an interest in politics, I did not join the Conservative +Party. It was the party of the landlords; and I was not a landlord. +I did not join the Liberal Party. It was the party of the +employers; and I was an employee. My father voted Conservative +or Liberal just as the humor took him, and never imagined +that any other party could exist. But I wanted a proletarian party; +and when the Karl Marx slogan began to take effect in all the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_185">[Pg 185]</span> +countries in Europe by producing proletarian political societies, +which came to be called Socialist societies because they aimed at +the welfare of society as a whole as against class prejudices and +property interests, I naturally joined one of these societies, and so +came to be called, and was proud to call myself, a Socialist.</p> + +<p>Now the significant thing about the particular Socialist society +which I joined was that the members all belonged to the middle +class. Indeed its leaders and directors belonged to what is sometimes +called the upper middle class: that is, they were either +professional men like myself (I had escaped from clerkdom into +literature) or members of the upper division of the civil service. +Several of them have since had distinguished careers without +changing their opinions or leaving the Society. To their Conservative +and Liberal parents and aunts and uncles fifty years ago +it seemed an amazing, shocking, unheard-of thing that they +should become Socialists, and also a step bound to make an end +of all their chances of success in life. Really it was quite natural +and inevitable. Karl Marx was not a poor laborer: he was the +highly educated son of a rich Jewish lawyer. His almost equally +famous colleague, Friedrich Engels, was a well-to-do employer. +It was precisely because they were liberally educated, and +brought up to think about how things are done instead of merely +drudging at the manual labor of doing them, that these two men, +like my colleagues in The Fabian Society (note, please, that we +gave our society a name that could have occurred only to classically +educated men), were the first to see that Capitalism was +reducing their own class to the condition of a proletariat, and +that the only chance of securing anything more than a slave’s +share in the national income for anyone but the biggest capitalists +or the cleverest professional or business men lay in a combination +of all the proletarians without distinction of class or +country to put an end to Capitalism by developing the communistic +side of our civilization until Communism became the +dominant principle in society, and mere owning, profiteering, and +genteel idling were disabled and discredited. Or, as our numerous +clergymen members put it, to worship God instead of Mammon. +Communism, being the lay form of Catholicism, and indeed +meaning the same thing, has never had any lack of chaplains.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_186">[Pg 186]</span></p> + +<p>I may mention, as illustrating the same point, that The Fabian +Society, when I joined it immediately after its foundation in +1884, had only two rival Socialist Societies in London, both +professing, unlike the Fabian, to be working-class societies. But +one of them was dominated by the son of a very rich man who +bequeathed large sums to religious institutions in addition to +providing for his sons, to whom he had given a first-rate education. +The other was entirely dependent on one of the most +famous men of the nineteenth century, who was not only a successful +employer and manufacturer in the business of furnishing +and decorating palaces and churches, but an eminent artistic +designer, a rediscoverer of lost arts, and one of the greatest of +English poets and writers. These two men, Henry Mayers +Hyndman and William Morris, left their mark on the working-class +proletariat as preachers of Socialism, but failed in their +attempts to organize a new working-class Socialist Party in their +own upper middle class way under their own leadership and in +their own dialect (for the language of ladies and gentlemen is +only a dialect), because the working classes had already organized +themselves in their own way, under their own leaders, and +in their own dialect. The Fabian Society succeeded because it +addressed itself to its own class in order that it might set about +doing the necessary brain work of planning Socialist organization +for all classes, meanwhile accepting, instead of trying to +supersede, the existing political organizations which it intended +to permeate with the Socialist conception of human society.</p> + +<p>The existing form of working-class organization was Trade +Unionism. Trade Unionism is not Socialism: it is the Capitalism +of the Proletariat. This requires another chapter of explanation, +and a very important one; for Trade Unionism is now very +powerful, and occasionally leaves the Intelligent Woman without +coals or regular trains for weeks together. Before we can +understand it, however, we must study the Labor Market out of +which it grew; and this will take several preliminary chapters, +including a somewhat grim one on the special position of women +as sellers in that market.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_187">[Pg 187]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c47">47</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE LABOR MARKET AND THE FACTORY ACTS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE workwoman working for weekly wages is like her +employer in one respect. She has something to sell; and +she has to live on the price of it. That something is her +labor. The more she gets for it the better-off she is: the less she +gets for it the worse-off she is: if she can get nothing for it she +starves or becomes a pauper. When she marries, she finds her +husband in the same position; and he has to pay for the upkeep +of her domestic labor out of the price of his industrial labor. +Under these circumstances they are both naturally keen on getting +as much for his industrial labor as possible, and giving as +little for its price as the purchaser (the employer) will put up with. +This means that they want the highest wages and the shortest +hours of work they can get. Unless they are exceptionally thoughtful +and public spirited persons, their ideas are limited to that.</p> + +<p>The employer is in the same predicament. He does not sell +labor: he has to buy it: what he sells are the goods or services produced +under his direction; and if he, as mostly happens, is neither +thoughtful nor public spirited, his ideas are limited to getting as +much for what he sells as possible and giving as little for the +money as the purchaser will put up with. In buying labor his interest +and policy are to pay as little and get as much as he can, being +thus precisely the opposites of the workers’ interest and policy.</p> + +<p>This not only produces that unhappy and dangerous conflict +of feeling and interest between employers and employed called +Class War, but leads to extremities of social wickedness that are +hardly credible of civilized people. The Government has been +forced again and again to interfere between the buyers and sellers +of labor to compel them to keep their bargains within the barest +limits of common humanity. To begin with, all the employers +want is labor, and whether the labor is done by a child or a woman +or a man is nothing to them: they buy whatever labor is cheapest. +Also the effect of the work on the health and morals of the employed +is nothing to the employer except in so far as they may +make a difference in his profit; and when he takes them into consideration +with this in view he may conclude that an inhuman<span class="pagenum" id="Page_188">[Pg 188]</span> +disregard of all natural kindness will pay him better than any attempt +to reconcile his interest with the welfare of his employees.</p> + +<p>To illustrate this I may cite the case of the London tramways +when the cars were drawn by horses, and of certain plantations in +America before negro slavery was abolished there. The question +to be decided by the tramway managers was, what is the most +moneymaking way of treating tramway horses? A well-cared-for +horse, if not overworked, may live twenty years, or even, like the +Duke of Wellington’s horse, forty. On the other hand, reckless +ill-usage will kill a horse in less than a year, as it will kill anyone +else. If horses cost nothing, and a new horse could be picked up in +the street when the old one died, it would be more profitable commercially +to work horses to death in six months, say, than to treat +them humanely and let them retire to the salt marshes of Norfolk +at the age of eighteen or so. But horses cost money; and the tramway +managers knew that if they wore out a horse too quickly he +would not pay for his cost. After figuring it out they decided that +the most profitable way of treating tram horses was to wear them +out in four years. The same calculation was made on the plantations. +The slave, like the horse, cost a substantial sum of money; +and if he were worked to death too soon his death would result in +a loss. The most businesslike planters settled that the most paying +plan was to wear out their slaves in seven years; and this was +the result they instructed their overseers to aim at.</p> + +<p>The Intelligent Woman will naturally exclaim “What a dreadful +thing to be a company’s horse or a slave!” But wait a moment. +Horses and slaves are worth something: if you kill them you have +to pay for new ones. But if instead of employing horses and slave +you employ “free” children and women and men, you may work +them to death as hard and as soon as you like: there are plenty +more to be had for nothing where they came from. What is more, +you need not support them, as you have to support slaves, during +the weeks when you have no work for them. You take them on by +the week; and when trade is slack, and you have no work for +them, you just discharge them, leaving them to starve or shift for +themselves as best they can. In the heyday of Capitalism, when +this system was in full swing, and no laws had been made to limit +its abuse, small children were worked to death under the whip<span class="pagenum" id="Page_189">[Pg 189]</span> +until it was commonly said that the northern factory employers +were using up nine generations in one generation. Women were +employed at the mines under conditions of degradation which +would have horrified any negress in South Carolina. Men were +reduced to lives which savages would have despised. The places +these unhappy people lived in were beyond description. Epidemics +of cholera and smallpox swept the country from time to +time; typhus was commoner than measles today; drunkenness +and brutal violence were considered as natural to the working +classes as fustian coats and horny hands. The respectability and +prosperity of the propertied and middle classes who grew rich +on sweated labor covered an abyss of horror; and it was by raising +the lid from that abyss that Karl Marx, in his terrible and epoch-making +book called Capital, became the prophet of that great +revolt of outraged humanity against Capitalism which is the +emotional force of the Socialist movement. However, your subject +and mine just now is not Emotional Socialism but Intelligent +Socialism; so let us keep calm. Anger is a bad counsellor.</p> + +<p>Long before Marx published his book the Government had +been forced to interfere. A succession of laws called the Factory +Acts, which include regulation of mines and other industries, +were passed to forbid the employment of children below a certain +age; to regulate the employment of women and young persons; +to limit the hours during which a factory employing such persons +could be kept open; to force employers to fence in machines which +crushed and tore to pieces the employees who brushed against +them in moments of haste or carelessness; to pay wages in money +instead of in credit at employers’ shops where bad food and bad +clothes were sold at exorbitant prices; to provide sanitary conveniences; +to limewash factory walls at frequent intervals; to forbid +the practice of taking meals at work in the factory instead of +during an interval and in another place; to frustrate the dodges +by which these laws were at first evaded by the employers; and to +appoint factory inspectors to see that the laws were carried out. +These laws were the fruit of an agitation headed, not by Socialists, +but by a pious Conservative nobleman, Lord Shaftesbury, who +did not find in his Bible any authority for the Capitalist theory +that you could and should produce universal well-being by breaking<span class="pagenum" id="Page_190">[Pg 190]</span> +all the laws of God and Man whenever you could make a commercial +profit by doing so. This amazing theory was not only put +into practice by greedy people, but openly laid down and explicitly +advocated in books by quite sincere and serious professors +of political economy and jurisprudence (calling themselves The +Manchester School) and in speeches made in opposition to the +Factory Acts by moral and highminded orator-manufacturers +like John Bright. It is still taught as authentic political science at +our universities. It has broken the moral authority of university +bred Churchmen, and reduced university bred Statesmen to intellectually +self-satisfied impotence. It is perhaps the worst of +the many rationalist dogmas that have in the course of human history +led naturally amiable logicians to countenance and commit +villainies that would revolt professed criminals.</p> + +<p>Now one would suppose on first thoughts that the Factory Acts +would have been opposed by all the employers and supported by +all their employees. But there are good employers as well as bad +ones; and there are ignorant and shortsighted laborers as well as +wise ones. The employers who had tender consciences, or who, +like some of the Quakers, had a form of religion which compelled +them to think sometimes of what they were doing by throwing all +the responsibility for it on themselves and not on any outside +authority like the professors of Capitalist political economy, were +greatly troubled by the condition of their employees. You may +ask why, in that case, they did not treat them better. The answer +is that if they had done so they would have been driven out of +business and ruined by the bad employers.</p> + +<p>It would have occurred in this way. Cheap sweated labor meant +not only bigger profits: it also meant cheaper goods. If the good +employer paid a decent living wage to his workpeople, and +worked them for eight hours a day instead of from twelve to sixteen, +he had to charge high enough prices for his goods to enable +him to pay such wages. But in that case the bad employer could +and would at once offer the same goods at a lower price and +thus take all the good employer’s customers away from him. The +good employer was therefore obliged to join Lord Shaftesbury +in telling the Government that unless laws were passed to force +all employers, good and bad alike, to behave better, there could<span class="pagenum" id="Page_191">[Pg 191]</span> +never be any improvement, because the good employers would +have either to sweat the workers like the bad ones, or else be +driven out of business, leaving matters worse than ever. They +found that social problems cannot be solved by personal righteousness, +and that under Capitalism not only must men be made +moral by Act of Parliament, but cannot be made moral in any +other way, no matter how benevolent their dispositions may be.</p> + +<p>The opposition to the Factory Acts by the workers themselves +was actually harder to overcome in some ways than that of the +employers, because the employers, when they were forced by law +to try the experiment, found that extreme sweating, like killing +the goose that laid the golden eggs, was not the best way to make +business pay, and that they could more than make up for the cost +of complying with the very moderate requirements of the Acts by +putting a little more brains into their work. Even the stupid ones +found that by speeding up their machinery, and thus making their +employees pull themselves together and work harder, they could +get more out of them in ten hours than in twelve. The Intelligent +Woman, if she has travelled, may have noticed that in countries +where there is no Shop Hours Act, and shops remain open until +everyone has gone to bed, the shopkeepers and their assistants +are far less tired and strained at nine in the evening than the +assistants in a big shop in a big English city are at five in the +afternoon, though the shop closes at six. Impossible as it may +sound, in the ginning mills of Bombay, before any factory legislation +was introduced, the children employed went into the +factory, not for so many hours a day, but for months at a time; +and there are such things in the world as Italian cafés that are +open day and night without regular night and day waiters, the +employees taking a nap when and where they can. And this lazy +happy-go-lucky way of doing business may do no great harm, +whilst an eight hour day at high wages under modern scientific +management may mean work so intense that it takes the last inch +out of the workers, and cannot be done except by persons in the +prime of life, nor even by them for many consecutive months.</p> + +<p>The employers had another resource in the introduction of +machinery. When employers can get plenty of cheap labor they +will not introduce machinery: it is too much trouble, and though<span class="pagenum" id="Page_192">[Pg 192]</span> +the machine may do the work of several persons it may cost more. +At this moment (1925) in Lisbon the very rough and dirty business +of coaling steamships can be done by machinery. The machinery +is actually there ready for use. But the work is done by +women, because they are cheaper and there is no law against it. +If a Portuguese Factory Act were passed, forbidding the employment +of women, or imposing restrictions and regulations on it +(possibly not really for the sake of the women, but only to keep +them out of the job and thus reserve it for men), the machinery +would be turned on at once; and it would soon be improved and +added to until it became indispensable. But as the women would +lose their employment, they would object to any such Factory +Act much more vociferously than the employers.</p> + +<p>All the protestations of the employers that they would be ruined +by the Factory Acts were contradicted by experience. By better +management, more and better machinery, and speeding up the +work, they made bigger profits than ever. If they had been half as +clever as they claimed to be, they would have imposed on themselves +all the regulations the Factory Acts imposed on them, without +waiting to be forced by law. But profiteering does not cultivate +men’s minds as public service does. The greatest advances +in industrial organization have been forced on employers in spite +of their piteous protests that they would be unable to carry on +under them, and that British industry must consequently perish. +It may shock you to learn that the employees themselves resisted +the Factory Acts at first because the Acts began by putting +a stop to the ill treatment and overworking of children too young +to be decently put to commercial work at all. At first these victims +of unregulated Capitalism were little Oliver Twists, sold into +slavery by the Guardians of the Poor to get rid of them. But the +later generations were the children of the employees; and the +wage on which the employee kept his family in squalid poverty +was added to by the children’s earnings. When people are very +poor the loss of a shilling a week is much worse than the loss of +£500 a week to a millionaire: it means, for the woman who has a +desperate struggle to keep the house and make both ends meet +every Saturday, that her task becomes impossible. It is easy for +comparatively rich people to say “You should not send your<span class="pagenum" id="Page_193">[Pg 193]</span> +young children out to work under such inhuman conditions”, or, +“You should rejoice in a new Factory Act which makes such infamies +impossible”. But if the immediate result of listening to +them is that the children who were only half starved before are +now to be three-quarters starved, such pious remonstrances produce +nothing but exasperation. The melancholy truth is that, as +the Factory Acts were passed one after another, gradually raising +the age at which children might be employed in factories from infancy +to fourteen and sixteen, and half the children’s time below +a certain age had to be spent in school, the parents were the +fiercest opponents of the Acts; and when they got the vote, and +became able to influence Parliament directly, they made it impossible +for anybody to get elected as a member for a factory +town where children’s labor was employed unless he pledged +himself to oppose any extension of the laws restricting child labor. +The common saying that the parents are the best people to take +care of the interests of the children depends not only on the sort +of people the parents are, but on whether they are well enough +off to be able to afford to indulge their natural parental instinct. +Only a small proportion of parents, and these not the poorest, +will deliberately bring up their children to be thieves and prostitutes; +but practically all parents will, and indeed must, sweat their +children if they are themselves sweated so mercilessly that they +cannot get on without the few pence their children can earn.</p> + +<p>Now that I have explained the seeming heartlessness of the +parents, you have still to ask me why these parents accepted +wages so low that they were forced to sacrifice their children to +the employers’ greed for profits. The answer is that the increase +of population which produced the younger son class in the propertied +class, and finally built up the middle class, went on also +among the employees who lived from hand to mouth on the +wages of manual labor. Now manual labor is like fish or asparagus, +dear when it is scarce, cheap when it is plentiful. As the +numbers of propertyless manual workers grew from thousands +to millions the price of their labor fell and fell. In the nineteenth +century everybody knew that wages were higher in America and +Australia than in Great Britain and Ireland, because labor was +scarcer there; and those who could afford it emigrated to these<span class="pagenum" id="Page_194">[Pg 194]</span> +countries. Half the population of Ireland went to America, +where labor was so scarce that immigrants were welcomed from +all countries. But today the labor market in America is so choked +with them that immigration is sternly restricted to a fixed number +from each European country every year. Australia restricts +its births artificially, and refuses to admit Chinamen or Japanese +on any terms. America also excludes Japanese. But in the days +when the Factory Acts were made really effective (the first ones +were evaded by all sorts of employers’ tricks) emigration from +our islands was unrestricted, and went on at a great rate among +those who could afford the passage money.</p> + +<p>This shewed that our labor market was overstocked. When the +fish market is overstocked the fish are thrown back into the sea. +Emigration was, in effect, throwing men and women into the sea +with a ship to cling to and a chance of reaching another country +in it. The value of men and women in England, unless they could +do some sort of work that was still scarce, had fallen to nothing. +Doctors and dentists and lawyers and parsons were still worth +something (parsons shamefully little: £70 a year for a curate with +a family); and exceptionally skilled or physically powerful workmen +could earn more than the poorer clergy; but the mass of +manual employees, those who could do nothing except under +direction, and even under direction could do nothing that any +ablebodied person could not learn to do in a very short time, were +literally worth nothing: you could get them for what it cost to +keep them alive, and to enable them to bring up children enough +to replace them when they were worn out. It was just as if steam-engines +had been made in such excessive quantities that the manufacturers +would give them for nothing to anyone who would +take them away. Whoever took them away would still have to feed +them with coal and oil before they could work; but this would not +mean that they had any value, or that they would be taken proper +care of, or that the coal and oil would be of decent quality.</p> + +<p>You see, people without property have no other way of living +than selling themselves for their market value, or, when their +value falls to nothing, offering to work for anyone who will feed +them. They have no land, and cannot afford to buy any: and even +if land were given to them few of them would know how to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_195">[Pg 195]</span> +cultivate it. They cannot become capitalists, because capital is +spare money, and they have no money to spare. They cannot set +up in business for themselves with borrowed money, because +nobody will lend them money: if anyone did, they would lose +it all and become bankrupt for want of the requisite education +and training. They must find an employer or starve; and if they +attempt to bargain for anything more than a bare subsistence +wage they are told curtly but only too truthfully that if they do +not choose to take it there are plenty of others who will.</p> + +<p>Even at this they cannot all get employment. Although the plea +made for Capitalism by the professors of The Manchester School +was that at least it would always provide the workers with employment +at a living wage, it has never either kept that promise +or justified that plea. The employers have had to confess that +they need what is called “a reserve army of unemployed”, so that +they can always pick up “hands” when trade is good and throw +them back into the street when it is bad. Throwing them back +into the street means forcing them to spend the few shillings they +may have been able to put by while employed, selling or pawning +their clothes and furniture, and finally going on the rates +as paupers. The ratepayers naturally object very strongly to having +to support the employer’s workmen whenever he does not +happen to want them; consequently, when the Capitalist system +developed on a large scale, the ratepayers made Poor Law relief +such a disgraceful, cruel, and degrading business that decent +working class families would suffer any extremity rather than +resort to it. We said to the unemployed father of a starving +family, “We must feed you and your children if you are destitute, +because the Statute of Elizabeth obliges us to; but you must +bring your daughters and sons into the workhouse with you to +live with drunkards, prostitutes, tramps, idiots, epileptics, old +criminals, the very dregs and refuse of human society at its worst, +and having done that you will never be able to hold up your head +again among your fellows”. The man naturally said “Thank you: +I had rather see my children dead”, and starved it out as best he +could until trade revived, and the employers had another job for +him. And to get that job he would accept the barest wages the +family could support life on. If his children could earn a little in a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_196">[Pg 196]</span> +factory he would snatch at wages that were just enough, when the +children’s earnings were thrown in, to support them all; and in +this way he did not benefit in the long run by letting his children +go out to work, as it ended in their earnings being used to beat +down his own wages; so that, though he at first sent his children +into the factories to get a little extra money, he was at last forced +to do it to make up his own wages to subsistence point; and when +the law stepped in to rescue the children from their slavery, he +opposed the law because he did not see how he could live unless +his children earned something instead of going to school.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c48">48</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">WOMEN IN THE LABOR MARKET</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE effect of the system on women was worse in some respects +than on men. As no industrial employer would employ +a woman if he could get a man for the same money, +women who wished to get any industrial employment could do +so only by offering to do it for less than men. This was possible, +because even when the man’s wage was a starvation wage it was +the starvation wage of a family, not of a single person. Out of it +the man had to pay for the subsistence of his wife and children, +without whom the Capitalist system would soon have come to +an end for want of any young workers to replace the old ones. +Therefore even when the men’s wages were down to the lowest +point at which their wives and children could be kept alive, a +single woman could take less without being any worse off than +her married neighbors and their children. In this way it became +a matter of course that women should be paid less than men; and +when any female rebel claimed to be paid as much as a man for +the same work (“Equal wages for equal work”), the employer +shut her up with two arguments: first, “If you dont take the lower +wage there are plenty of others who will”, and, second, “If I have +to pay a man’s wages I will get a man to do the work”.</p> + +<p>The most important and indispensable work of women, that of +bearing and rearing children, and keeping house for them, was +never paid for directly to the woman but always through the +man; and so many foolish people came to forget that it was work<span class="pagenum" id="Page_197">[Pg 197]</span> +at all, and spoke of Man as The Breadwinner. This was nonsense. +From first to last the woman’s work in the home was vitally +necessary to the existence of society, whilst millions of men were +engaged in wasteful or positively michievous work, the only excuse +for which was that it enabled them to support their useful +and necessary wives. But the men, partly through conceit, partly +through thoughtlessness, and very largely because they were +afraid that their wives might, if their value were recognized, +become unruly and claim to be the heads of the household, set up +a convention that women earned nothing and men everything, +and refused to give their wives any legal claim on the housekeeping +money. By law everything a woman possessed became the +property of her husband when she married: a state of things that +led to such monstrous abuses that the propertied class set up +an elaborate legal system of marriage settlements, the effect of +which was to hand over the woman’s property to some person +or persons yet unborn before her marriage; so that though she +could have an income from the property during her life, it was no +longer her property, and therefore her husband could not make +ducks and drakes of it. Later on the middle classes made Parliament +protect their women by The Married Women’s Property +Acts under which we still live; and these Acts, owing to the confusion +of people’s minds on the subject, overshot the mark and +produced a good deal of injustice to men. That, however, is another +part of the story: the point to be grasped here is that +under the Capitalist system women found themselves worse off +than men because, as Capitalism made a slave of the man, and +then, by paying the woman through him, made her his slave, she +became the slave of a slave, which is the worst sort of slavery.</p> + +<p>This suits certain employers very well, because it enables them +to sweat other employers without being found out. And this +is how it is done. A laborer finds himself bringing up a family +of daughters on a wage of twenty-nine shillings a week in the +country (it was thirteen in the nineteenth century) or, in or near +a city, of from thirty (formerly eighteen) to seventy, subject to +deductions for spells of unemployment. Now in a household +scraping along on thirty shillings a week another five shillings +a week makes an enormous difference: far more, I repeat, than<span class="pagenum" id="Page_198">[Pg 198]</span> +another five hundred pounds makes to a millionaire. An addition +of fifteen shillings or a pound a week raises the family of a +laborer to the money level of that of a skilled workman. How +were such tempting additions possible? Simply by the big girls +going out to work at five shillings a week each, and continuing +to live at home with their fathers. One girl meant another five +shillings, two meant another ten shillings, three another fifteen +shillings. Under such circumstances huge factories sprang up +employing hundreds of girls at wages of from four-and-sixpence +to seven-and-sixpence a week, the great majority getting five. +These were called starvation wages; but the girls were much +better fed and jollier and healthier than women who had to support +themselves altogether. Some of the largest fortunes made in +business: for example in the match industry, were made out of +the five shilling girl living with, and of course partly on, her +father, or as a lodger on somebody else’s father, a girl lodger being +as good as a daughter in this respect. Thus the match manufacturer +was getting three-quarters of his labor at the father’s expense. +If the father worked in, say, a brewery, the match manufacturer +was getting three-quarters of his labor at the expense +of the brewer. In this way one trade lives by sweating another +trade; and factory girls getting wages that would hardly support +a prize cat are plump and jolly and willing and vigorous and +rowdy, whilst older women, many of them widows with young +children, are told that if they are not satisfied with the same wages +there are plenty of strong girls who will be glad to get them.</p> + +<p>It was not merely the daughters but the wives of working men +who brought down women’s wages in this way. In the cities +young women, married to young men, and not yet burdened with +many children or with more than a room or two to keep tidy at +home (and they were often not too particular about tidiness), or +having no children, used to be quite willing to go out as charwomen +for an hour a day for five shillings a week, plus such little +perquisites and jobs of washing as might be incidental to this +employment. As such a charwoman had nothing to do at home, +and was not at all disposed to go on to a second job when she +had secured the five shillings that made all the difference between +pinching and prodigality to her and her husband, the hour<span class="pagenum" id="Page_199">[Pg 199]</span> +easily stretched to half a day. The five shillings have now become +ten or so; but as they buy no more, the situation is not altered.</p> + +<p>In this way the labor market is infested with subsidized wives +and daughters willing to work for pocket money on which no +independent solitary woman or widow can possibly subsist. The +effect is to make marriage compulsory as a woman’s profession: +she has to take anything she can get in the way of a husband +rather than face penury as a single woman. Some women get +married easily; but others, less attractive or amiable, are driven +to every possible trick and stratagem to entrap some man into +marriage; and that sort of trickery is not good for a woman’s +self-respect, and does not lead to happy marriages when the men +realize that they have been “made a convenience of”.</p> + +<p>This is bad enough; but there are lower depths still. It may not +be respectable to live on a man’s wages without marrying him; +but it is possible. If a man says to a destitute woman “I will not +take you until death do us part, for better for worse, in sickness +and in health and so forth; nor will I give you my name and the +status of my legal wife; but if you would like to be my wife +illegally until tomorrow morning, here is sixpence and a drink for +you, or, as the case may be, a shilling, or a pound, or ten pounds, +or a hundred pounds, or a villa with a pearl necklace and a sable +mantle and a motor car”, he will not always meet with a refusal. +It is easy to ask a woman to be virtuous; but it is not reasonable +if the penalty of virtue be starvation, and the reward of +vice immediate relief. If you offer a pretty girl twopence halfpenny +an hour in a match factory, with a chance of contracting +necrosis of the jawbone from phosphorus poisoning on the one +hand, and on the other a jolly and pampered time under the +protection of a wealthy bachelor, which was what the Victorian +employers did and what employers still do all over the world +when they are not stopped by resolutely socialistic laws, you are +loading the dice in favor of the devil so monstrously as not only to +make it certain that he will win, but raising the question whether +the girl does not owe it to her own self-respect and desire for +wider knowledge and experience, more cultivated society, and +greater grace and elegance of life, to sell herself to a gentleman +for pleasure rather than to an employer for profit. To warn her<span class="pagenum" id="Page_200">[Pg 200]</span> +that her beauty will not last for ever only reminds her that if she +takes reasonable care of her beauty it will last long past the age at +which women, “too old at twenty-four”, find the factory closed to +them, and their places filled by younger girls. She has actually +less security of respectable employment than of illicit employment; +for the women who sell labor are often out of work through +periods of bad trade and consequent unemployment; but the +women who sell pleasure, if they are in other respects well conducted +and not positively repulsive, are seldom at a loss for a +customer. The cases which are held up as terrible warnings of +how a woman may fall to the lowest depths of degradation by +listening to such arguments are pious inventions, supported by +examples of women who through drink, drugs, and general depravity +or weakness of character would have fallen equally if they +had been respectably married or had lived in the strictest celibacy. +The incidental risks of venereal diseases are unfortunately +not avoidable by respectable matrimony: more women are infected +by their husbands than by their lovers. If a woman accepts +Capitalist morality, and does what pays her best, she will take +what district visitors call (when poor women are concerned) the +wages of sin rather than the wages of sweated labor.</p> + +<p>There are cases, too, where the wedding ring may be a drawback +instead of a makeweight. Illicit unions are so common +under the Capitalist system that the Government has had to deal +with them; and the law at present is that if an unmarried woman +bears a child she can compel its father to pay her seven-and-sixpence +a week for its support until it is sixteen, at which age it can +begin to help to support her. Meanwhile the child belongs to her +instead of to the father (it would belong to him if they were +married); and she is free from any obligation to keep his house or +do any ordinary drudgery for him. Rather than be brought into +court he will pay without demur; and when he is goodnatured +and not too poor he will often pay her more than he is legally +obliged to. The effect of this is that a careful, discreet, sensible, +pleasant sort of woman who has not scrupled to bear five illegitimate +children may find herself with a legally guaranteed steady +income of thirty-seven-and-sixpence a week in addition to what +she can earn by respectable work. Compared to a widow with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_201">[Pg 201]</span> +five legitimate children she was on velvet until the Government, +after centuries of blind neglect, began to pension widows.</p> + +<p>In short, Capitalism acts on women as a continual bribe to enter +into sex relations for money, whether in or out of marriage; and +against this bribe there stands nothing beyond the traditional +respectability which Capitalism ruthlessly destroys by poverty, except +religion and the inborn sense of honor which has its citadel in +the soul and can hold out (sometimes) against all circumstances.</p> + +<p>It is useless to pretend that religion and tradition and honor +always win the day. It is now a century and a half since the poet +Oliver Goldsmith warned us that “Honor sinks where commerce +long prevails”; and the economic pressure by which Capitalism +tempts women grew fiercer after his time. We have just seen +how in the case of the parents sending their children out to work +in their infancy to add a little to the family income, they found +that their wages fell until what they and the children between +them could earn was no more than they had been able to earn by +themselves before, so that in order to live they now had to send +their children to work whether they liked it or not. In the same +way the women who occasionally picked up a little extra money +illicitly, presently found themselves driven to snatch at employment +by offering to take lower wages and depending on the other +resource to make them up to subsistence point. Then the women +who stood on their honor were offered those reduced wages, and, +when they said they could not live on them, were told as usual +that others could, and that they could do what the others did.</p> + +<p>In certain occupations prostitution thus became practically +compulsory, the alternative being starvation. Hood’s woman clad +in unwomanly rags, who sang the Song of the Shirt, represents +either the woman who would starve rather than sell her person +or the woman neither young enough nor agreeable enough to +earn even the few pence she could hope for from the men within +her reach. The occupations in which prostitution is almost a +matter of course are by no means the sensationally abject and +miserable ones. It is rather in the employments in which well-dressed +and goodlooking but unskilled women are employed +to attract the public, that wages are paid on which they cannot +possibly keep up the appearance expected from them. Girls with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_202">[Pg 202]</span> +thirty shillings a week come to their work in expensive motor +cars, and wear strings of pearls which, if not genuine, are at least +the best imitations. If one of them asks how she can dress as she +is expected to on thirty shillings a week she is either met with the +old retort, “If you wont take it there are plenty who will”, or else +told quite frankly that she is very lucky to get thirty shillings in +addition to such a splendid advertisement and show-case for her +attractions as the stage or the restaurant, the counter or the showroom, +afford her. You must not, however, infer from this that all +theatres, restaurants, showrooms and so forth exploit prostitution +in this way. Most of them have permanent staffs of efficient +respectable women, and could not be conducted in any other +way. Neither must it be inferred that the young gentlemen who +provide the motor cars and furs and jewels are always allowed to +succeed in their expensive courtship. Sir Arthur Pinero’s play +Mind the Paint is instructively true to life on this point. But +such relations are not made edifying by the plea that the gentlemen +are bilked. It is safe to assume that when women are employed, +not to do any specially skilled work, but to attract custom +to the place by their sex, their youth, their good looks and their +smart dressing, employers of a certain type will underpay them, +and by their competition finally compel more scrupulous employers +to do the same or be undersold and driven out of the business. +Now these are extremities to which men cannot be reduced. It +is true that smart ladies can and do hire dancing partners at fifty +francs an evening on the Riviera; but this quite innocent transaction +does not mean that Capitalism can as yet say to a man, “If +your wages are not enough to live on, go out into the streets and +sell pleasures as others do”. When the man deals in that commodity +he does so as a buyer, not as a seller. Thus it is the woman, +not the man, who suffers the last extremity of the Capitalist system; +and this is why so many conscientious women are devoting +their lives to the replacement of Capitalism by Socialism.</p> + +<p>But let not anyone imagine that men escape prostitution under +Capitalism. If they do not sell their bodies they sell their souls. +The barrister who in court strives “to make the worse appear the +better cause” has been held up as a stock example of the dishonesty +of misrepresenting for money. Nothing could be more<span class="pagenum" id="Page_203">[Pg 203]</span> +unjust. It is agreed, and necessarily agreed, that the best way of +learning the truth about anything is not to listen to a vain attempt +at an impartial and disinterested statement, but to hear everything +that can possibly be said for it, and then everything that can +possibly be said against it, by skilled pleaders on behalf of the +interested parties on both sides. A barrister is bound to do his +utmost to obtain a verdict for a client whom he privately believes +to be in the wrong, just as a doctor is bound to do his utmost to +save the life of a patient whose death would, in his private opinion, +be a good riddance. The barrister is an innocent figure who is +used to distract our attention from the writer and publisher of +lying advertisements which pretend to prove the worse the better +article, the shopman who sells it by assuring the customer that it +is the best, the agents of drugging and drink, the clerk making +out dishonest accounts, the adulterator and giver of short weight, +the journalist writing for Socialist papers when he is a convinced +Liberal, or for Tory papers when he is an Anarchist, the professional +politician working for his party right or wrong, the doctor +paying useless visits and prescribing bogus medicines to hypochondriacs +who need only Abernethy’s advice, “Live on sixpence +a day, and earn it”, the solicitor using the law as an instrument +for the oppression of the poor by the rich, the mercenary soldier +fighting for a country which he regards as the worst enemy of his +own, and the citizens of all classes who have to be obsequious to +the rich and insolent to the poor. These are only a few examples +of the male prostitutions, so repeatedly and vehemently denounced +by the prophets in the Bible as whoredoms and idolatries, +which are daily imposed on men by Capitalism.</p> + +<p>We see, then, that when the reproach of prostitution is raised +neither woman nor man dares cast the first stone; for both have +been equally stained with it under Capitalism. It may even be +urged by special pleaders on behalf of women that the prostitution +of the mind is more mischievous, and is a deeper betrayal of +the divine purpose of our powers, than the prostitution of the +body, the sale of which does not necessarily involve its misuse. +As a matter of fact nobody has ever blamed Nell Gwynne for selling +her body as Judas Iscariot for selling his soul. But whatever +satisfaction the pot may have in calling the kettle blacker than itself<span class="pagenum" id="Page_204">[Pg 204]</span> +the two blacks do not make a white. And the abstract identity +of male and female prostitution only brings out more strongly +the physical difference, which no abstract argument can balance. +The violation of one’s person is a quite peculiar sort of outrage. +Anyone who does not draw a line between it and offences to the +mind ignores the plain facts of human sensitiveness. For instance, +landlords have had the power to force Dissenters to send their +children to Church schools, and have used it. They have also had +a special power over women to anticipate a husband’s privilege, +and have either used it or forced the woman to buy them off. Can +a woman feel about the one case as about the other? A man cannot. +The quality of the two wrongs is quite different. The remedy for +the one could wait until after the next general election. The other +does not bear thinking of for a moment. Yet there it is.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c49">49</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">TRADE UNION CAPITALISM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">N</span>OW we must go into the history of the resistance offered +by the proletariat to the capitalists. It was evident, to +begin with, that no woman or man could do anything +against the employers single-handed. The stock retort, “If you +will not take the wage offered, and do the work put upon you, +there are plenty who will”, checkmated the destitute solitary +bargainer for a decent living wage and a reasonable day’s work. +The first necessity for effective resistance was that the employees +should form some sort of union and stand together. In many +cases this was impossible, because the employees did not know +oneanother, and had no opportunities of coming together and +agreeing on a joint course of action. For instance, domestic servants +could not form unions. They were in private kitchens all +over the country, more or less imprisoned in them, and working +singly, or at most in groups of two or three, except in the +houses of the very rich, where the groups might be as large as +thirty or forty. Or take agricultural laborers. It is very difficult +to organize them into unions, and still more difficult to keep +their unions together for any length of time. They live too far +apart. The same thing is true more or less of almost every kind<span class="pagenum" id="Page_205">[Pg 205]</span> +of labor except labor in factories and mines or on railways.</p> + +<p>In some callings there are such differences of pay and social +position that even if all their members could be brought together +they would not mix. Thus on the stage an actor may be a highly +accomplished gentleman with a title, who plays Hamlet, or a +lady who is an aristocrat and a Dame of the British Empire, +and plays Portia: both of them receiving weekly salaries counted +in hundreds of pounds. With them are working every night +actors and actresses who never utter a word, because, if they did, +their speech would betray the fact that, far from being the court +lords and ladies they are dressed up to look like, they are not +earning as much as the carpenters who shift the scenes. It is even +possible for an acrobat or clown to be more highly paid than +Hamlet, and yet in private life be so illiterate, and have such +shocking table manners, that the titled Hamlet could endure +neither his conversation nor his company at dinner. For this +reason a union of actors is difficult: a class split is inevitable. +Union is possible only in trades where the members work together +in large bodies; live in the same neighborhoods; belong +all to the same social class; and earn about the same money. The +miners in the coalfields, the cotton spinners in the factory towns +of Lancashire, the metal smelters and fitters in the Midlands, +were the first to form enduring and powerful unions. The bricklayers, +masons, carpenters, and joiners who come together in +the building trades were also early in the field with attempts at +unionism. Under the stress of some intolerable oppression they +would combine to make the employers see their situation in some +particular point; and when they had carried that point, or were +defeated, the union would dissolve until another emergency +arose. Then they began to subscribe to form little insurance funds +against unemployment, which obliged them to keep the union +together; and in this way the unions grew from momentary +rebellions into permanent Trade Unions of the kind we know.</p> + +<p>We now have to consider what a union of proletarians can do +to defend their livelihood from the continual encroachments of +Capitalism. First, when the union is sufficiently complete, it enables +them to face the employer without any risk of being told that +if they will not submit to his terms others will. If nearly all the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_206">[Pg 206]</span> +bricklayers in a town form a union, and each pays into it week by +week a small contribution until they have a little fund to fall back +on, then, if their employers attempt to reduce their wages, they +can, by refusing to work and living on their fund, bring the employers’ +business to a dead stop for weeks or months, according +to the size of the fund. This is called a strike. They can strike not +only against a reduction of wages but for an increase, or for a +reduction of their working hours, or for anything that may be in +dispute between them and the employers. Their success will depend +on the state of the employers’ business. The employers can +practically always wait if they choose until the strike fund is exhausted, +and thus starve the strikers into submission. But if trade +is so flourishing at the moment, and the employers consequently +in such a hurry to get on with their profit making, that they would +lose more by an interruption to their business than by giving the +strikers what they demand, then the employers will give in.</p> + +<p>But the employers will bide their time for a counterstrike. +When trade gets slack again, and they have little or nothing to +lose by shutting up their works for a while, they reduce the wage, +and lock out all the workers who will not submit to the reduction. +This is why an employers’ strike is called a lock-out. The newspapers +use the word strike for strikes and lock-outs indiscriminately, +because their readers blame the workers instead of the +employers for a strike; but some of the greatest so-called strikes +should have been called lock-outs. A boom in trade always produces +a series of strikes which are generally successful. A falling-off +in trade produces a series of lock-outs; and they, too, are +generally successful, the one series undoing the work of the other +in a dreary see-saw. After the war we went through a gigantic +boom followed by a disastrous slump, with strikes and lock-outs +all complete. Your own experience of these civil wars of strike +and lock-out must have left you convinced that they are public +disasters which would have no sort of sense in a well ordered +community. But let that pass for the moment. We have not yet +finished our study of primitive Trade Unionism, nor seen what it +led to besides saving up for a strike and then “downing tools”.</p> + +<p>The first necessity of the situation was that everybody in the +trade should join the union, as outsiders could be used by employers<span class="pagenum" id="Page_207">[Pg 207]</span> +to break the strike by taking on the work that the +strikers refused. Consequently a fierce hatred of the men who +would not join the unions grew up. They were called scabs and +blacklegs, and boycotted in every possible way by the unionists. +But vituperation and boycotting were not sufficient to deter the +scabs. The unions, when they declared a strike, stationed bodies +of strikers at the gates of the works to persuade the scabs not +to enter. No Intelligent Woman will need to be told that unless +there was a strong force of police on the spot the persuasion was +so vigorous that the scabs felt lucky when they survived it without +broken bones. At last there came a time in Sheffield and +Manchester when scabs working at furnaces found bombs there +that blew them to pieces; when machinery and tools were tampered +with so as to make them dangerous to those who used them +(this was called rattening); and when factory chimneys were +shattered by explosives like fulminate of mercury, so risky to +handle that only very ignorant and desperate men would venture +on their use. This was stopped less by punishing the perpetrators +than by forcing the employers to relax the provocation. For instance, +the Sheffield sawgrinders died prematurely, and suffered +miserably during their lifetimes, because the air they breathed +was half steel dust. It was quite easy to prevent this by using +vacuum cleaners (as we call them) to suck away the deadly dust; +but the employers would not fit them, because, as they cost extra +capital on which there was no extra profit, an employer who fitted +them could be undersold by those who did not. At that time a +Sheffield steel worker of fifty (when he was lucky enough to reach +that age) looked like a weedy and very unhealthy lad of seventeen. +In the face of such murderous conditions, persisted in for +a hundred years, the burst of outrage on the part of the victims +seems trifling enough. At last the Government had to come to the +rescue and force all the employers to fit suction fans. Sheffielders’ +lungs are now no worse than most people’s, and better than those +of many who are not so carefully protected by the law.</p> + +<p>But accepting a lower wage than that demanded by the union +was not the only way in which an employee could drag down his +fellows. In many trades it was not much use fixing the wage the +worker was to receive unless the quantity of work he gave for it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_208">[Pg 208]</span> +was also fixed. You must be tired by this time of the silly joking of +the Capitalist newspapers about bricklayers who are not allowed +by their unions to lay more than three bricks a day. A bricklayer +has clearly as much right to charge a day’s wages for laying three +bricks as his employer has to sell the house when it is built for the +biggest price he can get for it. Those who condemn either of +them are condemning the Capitalist system, like good Bolshevists. +The three-brick joke is only a comic exaggeration of what +actually occurs. The employers, to find out how much work can +be got out of a man, pick out an exceptionally quick and indefatigable +man called a slogger, and try to impose what he can do +in a day on all the rest. The unions naturally retort by forbidding +any of their members to lay a brick more than he must do if he is +to be worth employing at all. This practice of deliberately doing +the least they dare instead of the most they can is the ca’canny of +which the employers complain so much, though they all do the +same thing themselves under the more respectable name of “restricting +output” and selling in the dearest market. It is the principle +on which the Capitalist system is avowedly founded.</p> + +<p>Thus Capitalism drives the employers to do their worst to the +employed, and the employed to do the least for them. And it +boasts all the time of the incentive it provides to both to do their +best! You may ask why this does not end in a deadlock. The +answer is it is producing deadlocks twice a day or thereabouts. +The King’s speeches in opening Parliament now contain regularly +an appeal to the workers and employers to be good boys +and not paralyze the industry of the nation by the clash of their +quite irreconcilable interests. The reason the Capitalist system +has worked so far without jamming for more than a few months +at a time, and then only in places, is that it has not yet succeeded +in making a conquest of human nature so complete that +everybody acts on strictly business principles. The mass of the +nation has been humbly and ignorantly taking what the employers +offer and working as well as it can, either believing that it +is doing its duty in that station of life to which it has pleased God +to call it, or not thinking about the matter at all, but suffering its +lot as something that cannot be helped, like the weather. Even +late in the nineteenth century, when there were fourteen million<span class="pagenum" id="Page_209">[Pg 209]</span> +wage workers, only a million and a half of them were in trade +unions, which meant that only a million and a half of them were +selling their labor on systematic Capitalist business principles. +Today nearly four and a half millions of them are converts to +Capitalism, and duly enrolled in militant unions. Between six and +seven hundred battles a year, called trade disputes, are fought; +and the number of days of work lost to the nation by them sometimes +totals up to ten millions and more. If the matter were not +so serious for all of us one could laugh at the silly way in which +people talk of the spread of Socialism when what is really threatening +them is the spread of Capitalism. The moment the propertyless +workers refuse to see the finger of God in their poverty, +and begin organizing themselves in unions to make the most +money they can out of their labor exactly as they find the landlord +doing with his land, the capitalist with his capital, the employer +with his knowledge of business, and the financier with his art of +promotion, the industry of the country, on which we all depend +for our existence, begins rolling faster and faster down two opposite +slopes, at the bottom of which there will be a disastrous +collision which will bring it to a standstill until either Property +drives Labor by main force into undisguised and unwilling +slavery, or Labor gains the upper hand, and the long series of +changes by which the mastery of the situation has already passed +from the landlord-capitalist to the individual employer, from the +individual employer to the joint stock company, from the joint +stock company to the Trust, and finally from the industrialists in +general to the financiers, will culminate in its passing to capitalized +Labor. The battle for this supremacy is joined; and here we +are in the thick of it, our country ravaged by strikes and lock-outs, +a huge army of unemployed billeted upon us, the ladies +and gentlemen declaring that it is all the fault of the workers, and +the workers either declaring that it is all the fault of the ladies +and gentlemen, or else, more sensibly, concluding that it is the +fault of the Capitalist system, and taking to Socialism not so +much because they understand it as because it promises a way out.</p> + +<p>When this open war was first declared, the employers used +their command of Parliament to have it punished as a crime. The +unions were classed as conspiracies; and anybody who joined<span class="pagenum" id="Page_210">[Pg 210]</span> +one was held to be a conspirator and punished accordingly. +This did not prevent the unions: it only “drove them underground”: +that is, made secret societies of them, and thereby put +them into the hands of more determined and less law-abiding +leaders. The Government at last found it impossible to go on with +such coercion; for the few cases in which the law could be carried +out had the effect of martyrdoms, producing noisy popular agitations, +and stimulating Trade Unionism instead of suppressing it.</p> + +<p>Then the employers tried what they could do for themselves. +They refused to employ unionists. This was no use: they could +not get enough non-unionist labor to go on with: and the unionists +whom they had to employ refused to work with non-unionists. +Then the employers refused to “recognize” the unions, +which meant that they refused to negotiate questions of wages +with the secretaries of the unions, and insisted on dealing with +their employees directly and individually, one at a time. This also +failed. Making a separate bargain with each employee is easy +enough in the case of a woman engaging a domestic servant or an +oldfashioned merchant engaging a clerk or warehouseman; but +when men have to be taken on by the hundred, and sometimes +by the thousand, separate bargaining is impossible. The big employers +who talked about it at first really meant that there was to +be no bargaining at all. The men were to come in and just take +what they were told were the wages of the firm, and not presume +to argue. The moment the formation of the unions enabled the +men to bargain, the big employers, to save their own time, had to +insist on its being done with a single representative of the men +who was experienced in bargaining and qualified to discuss business: +that is, with the secretary of the Trade Union; so that all +the fuss ended in the unions being not only recognized by the big +employers, but looked on as a necessary part of their industry. +Finally the unions were legalized; and here, as in the case of the +Married Women’s Property Acts, the change from outlawry to +legal protection went a little beyond the mark, in its reaction +against previous injustice, and gave the Trade Unions privileges +and immunities which are not enjoyed by ordinary societies. The +employers then found that they also must act together in dealing +with the Trade Unions. Accordingly, they formed unions<span class="pagenum" id="Page_211">[Pg 211]</span> +of their own, called Employers’ Federations. The war of Capital +with Labor is now a war of Trade Unions with Employers’ Federations. +Their battles, or rather blockades, are lock-outs and +strikes, lasting, like modern military battles, for months.</p> + +<p>Though some of the battles are about victimization (that is, +discharging an employee for actively advocating Trade Unionism, +or refusing to reinstate a prominent striker when the strike +is over), all the disputes in which ground is won or lost are +about wages or hours of work. You must understand that there +are two sorts of wages: time wages and piecework wages. Time +wages are paid for the employee’s time by the month, week, day, +or hour, no matter how much or how little work may be done +during those periods. Piecework wages are paid according to the +work done: so much for each piece of work turned out.</p> + +<p>Now you would suppose that the employees would be unanimously +in favor of time wages, and the employers of piecework +wages: indeed this was roughly so in early days. But the introduction +of machinery altered the case. Piecework wages are +really only time wages paid in such a way as to prevent the employee +from slacking. He has to keep hard at it to earn the wage; +but the amount of the wage is arrived at by considering whether +what he can make in an hour or a day or a week at piecework will +enable him to live in the way he is accustomed to live, or, as it is +called, to maintain his standard of subsistence. Now suppose a +machine is invented by which he can turn out twice as many +pieces in a day as before. He will then find that he has earned as +much in the week by Wednesday evening as he had previously +earned by Saturday. What will he do? You may think, if you are +a very energetic lady, that he will put in the whole week as usual, +and rejoice his wife by bringing home twice as much money. But +that is not what a man is like. He prefers a shillingsworth of +leisure to another shillingsworth of bread and cheese or a new hat +for his wife. What he actually does is to bring her just what he +brought her before, and have a holiday on Thursday, Friday, and +Saturday, leaving his employer with no labor to go on with, and +perhaps with the most pressing contracts to be finished by a certain +date. To force him to remain at work the whole week the +employer has to “cut the rate”: that is, to reduce the piecework<span class="pagenum" id="Page_212">[Pg 212]</span> +wage by half. Then the fat is in the fire: the Trade Union resists +the reduction fiercely, and threatens that if the employees are to +have no benefit from the new machine they will refuse to work it. +There was a time when the introduction of machines led to riots +and the wrecking of newly equipped factories by furious mobs +of handworkers. When the mobs were replaced by Trade Unions +the introduction of new machines was often followed by strikes +and lock-outs. But when the heated personal disputes of hot-headed +employers with resentful employees gave way to cool +negotiations between experienced secretaries of Employers’ Federations +and equally experienced secretaries of Trade Unions, +who had settled similar difficulties many times before, it became +an established practice to readjust the piecework wage so as to +allow the employee to share the benefit of the machine with the +employer. The only question was how much each could claim.</p> + +<p>On time wages the employee gets no benefit from the introduction +of a machine. The product of his labor may be multiplied +a hundred times; but he remains as poor as before. That is why in +many industries the employees insist on piecework wages, and +the employers would be only too glad to pay time wages: all the +more because, when machinery comes into play, the machine +works the man instead of the man working the machine, and +slacking becomes either impossible or easy to detect.</p> + +<p>But it often happens that neither the time wage worker nor the +piece wage worker has any say in the matter at all, for the very +simple reason that the introduction of the machine enables the +employer to “slack the lot” and replace them by girls who are +only machine minders. And we have already seen what the effect +of women’s and girls’ labor has on wages. Besides, Trade Unionism +is weaker among women than among men, because, as most +women regard industrial employment as merely a temporary expedient +to keep them going until they get married, they will not +take the duty of combination as seriously as the men, who know that +they will be industrial employees all their lives. In the Lancashire +weaving industry, where women do not retire from the factory +when they marry, the women’s unions are as strong as the men’s.</p> + +<p>In the long run the reserves of the employer are so much greater +than those of the employees that though John Stuart Mill’s statement<span class="pagenum" id="Page_213">[Pg 213]</span> +in the middle of last century that the wage workers had +not benefited by the introduction of machinery is no longer quite +true, yet they have gained so little in comparison with the prodigiously +greater national output from the machines, that it is +putting it very mildly to say that they have not only not gained +but lost ground heavily relatively to the capitalists.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c50">50</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">DIVIDE AND GOVERN</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE weakness of Trade Unionism was that the concessions +wrung from the employers when trade was good were +taken back again when trade was bad, because, as the employers +commanded the main national store of spare money, they +could always stop working without starving for longer than their +employees. The Trade Unions soon had to face the fact that unless +they could get the concessions fixed and enforced by law, +they were certain to lose by the lock-outs all they gained by the +strikes. At the same time they saw that Parliament had put a +permanent stop to the sweating of very young children in factories; +and though, as I have explained, their members had been +driven by poverty to object to this reform, nevertheless it convinced +them that Parliament, if it liked, could fix any reform so +firmly that the employers could not go back on it. They wanted a +permanent reduction in the then monstrous length of the factory +working day. The cry for a reduction to eight hours was set up. +At first it seemed an unattainable ideal; and it is still very far +from being completely attained. But a ten hours day for women +and children and young persons seemed reasonable and possible. +As to the men, they were told they were grown-up independent +Britons, and that it would be an outrage on British liberty to +prevent an Englishman from working as long as he liked. But +when the women and young children go home the factory engine +is stopped, because its work cannot go on without them. When +the engine stops the men may as well go home too, as their work +cannot go on without the engine. So the men got the factory +hours shortened by law “behind the petticoats of the women”.</p> + +<p>And how did the employees, who had no votes at that time,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_214">[Pg 214]</span> +induce Parliament, in which there were only landlords, capitalists, +and employers, to pass these benevolent Acts of Parliament +for the protection of the employees against the employers?</p> + +<p>If I were to reply that they were acts of pure conscience, nobody +nowadays would believe me, because Capitalism has destroyed +our belief in any effective power but that of self-interest backed +by force. But even Capitalist cynicism will admit that however +unconscionable we may be when our own interests are affected, +we can be most indignantly virtuous at the expense of others. +The Intelligent Woman must guard herself against imagining +that the property owners and employers in Parliament a hundred +years ago had read this book, and therefore understood that their +interests were the same, though their occupations and habits and +social positions were so very different. The country gentlemen +despised the employers as vulgar tradesmen, and made them feel +it. The employers, knowing that any fool might be a peer or a +country gentleman if he had the luck to be born in a country +house, whilst success in business needed business ability, were +determined to destroy the privileges of the landed aristocracy. +This had been done in France in 1789 by a revolution; and it was +by threatening a similar revolution that the English employers, +in 1832, forced the King and the peerage, after a long popular +agitation, to pass into law the famous Reform Bill which practically +transferred the command of Parliament in England from +the hereditary landed aristocracy to the industrial employers.</p> + +<p>You know what a popular agitation means. It means a little +reasoning and a great deal of abuse of the other side. Before 1832 +the employers did not confine themselves to pointing out the +absurdity of allowing a couple of cottages owned by a county +aristocrat to send a member to Parliament when the city of Birmingham +was not represented there. Most people thought it quite +natural that great folk should have great privileges, and cared +nothing about Birmingham, which they had heard of only as a +dirty place where most of the bad pennies (Brummagem buttons) +came from. The employers therefore stirred up public feeling +against the landed gentry by exposing all their misdeeds: their +driving of whole populations out of the country to make room +for sheep or deer; their ruthless enforcement of the Game Laws,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_215">[Pg 215]</span> +under which men were transported with the worst felons for +poaching a few hares or pheasants; the horrible condition of +the laborers’ cottages on their estates; the miserable wages they +paid: their bigoted persecution of Nonconformists not only by +refusing to allow any places of worship except those of the Church +of England to be built on their estates, but by nominating to +the Church livings such clergymen as could be depended on to +teach the children in the village schools that all Dissenters were +disgraced in this world and damned in the next; their equally +bigoted boycotting of any shopkeeper who dared to vote against +their candidates at elections; with all the other tyrannies which in +those days made it a common saying, even among men of business, +that “the displeasure of a lord is a sentence of death”. By +harping on these grievances the employers at last embittered +public opinion against the squires to such a pitch that the fear of a +repetition in England of the French Revolution broke down the +opposition to the Reform Bill. The employers, after propitiating +King William IV by paying his debts, were able to force Parliament +to pass the Bill; and that event inaugurated the purseproud +reign of the English middle class under Queen Victoria.</p> + +<p>Naturally the squires were not disposed to take this defeat lying +down. They revenged themselves by taking up Lord Shaftesbury’s +agitation for the Factory Acts, and shewing that the employer’s +little finger was thicker than the country gentleman’s +loins; that the condition of the factory employees was worse than +that of the slaves on the American and West Indian plantations; +that the worst cottages of the worst landlords had at least fresher +air than the overcrowded slums of the manufacturing towns; +that if the employers did not care whether their “hands” were +Church of England or Methodist, neither did they care whether +they were Methodists or Atheists, because they had no God but +Mammon; that if they did not persecute politically it was only +because the hands had no votes; that they persecuted industrially +as hard as they could by imprisoning Trade Unionists; and that +the personal and often kindly relations between the peasantry and +the landlords, the training in good manners and decent housekeeping +traditions learnt by the women in domestic service in +the country houses, the kindnesses shewn to the old and sick on<span class="pagenum" id="Page_216">[Pg 216]</span> +the great estates, were all lost in the squalor and misery, the +brutality and blasphemy, the incestuous overcrowding, and the +terrible dirt epidemics in the mining and factory populations +where English life was what the employer’s greed had made it.</p> + +<p>All this, though quite true, was merely the pot again calling the +kettle black; for the country gentlemen did not refuse the dividends +made for them by the employers in the mines and factories, +nor refuse to let factories and slums be built all over their estates +in Lancashire; nor did the employers, when they had made fortunes, +hesitate to buy country estates and “found families” to be +brought up in the strictest county traditions, nor to disparage +trade as vulgar when the generation that remembered what their +grandfathers were had died out. But the quarrel between them +explains how it was that when Parliament consisted exclusively +of landlords and capitalist employers or their nominees, and the +proletariat had no votes, yet the Factory Acts got passed. The +Acts were the revenge of the squires for the Reform Act.</p> + +<p>Also, the poor were not wholly voteless. The owner of a freehold +worth forty shillings a year had a vote; and a number of odd +old franchises existed which gave quite poor people a certain +weight at elections. They could not return a Labor member +(such a thing was then unheard of); but they could sometimes +turn the scale as between the Conservative landlord and the +Liberal employer. If the Conservatives and Liberals had understood +that their political interests were the same, and that they +must present a united front to Labor, the employees would have +had no hope except in revolution. But the Conservatives and +Liberals did not understand their commercial interests. The Conservative +clung blindly to his old privileges: the Liberal followed +the slot of his new profits as thoughtlessly as a hound follows the +slot of a fox. Both of them wanted to be in Parliament because +it gave them personal importance, opening the way to the front +bench, where the Cabinet Ministers sit, and to knighthoods, baronetcies, +and peerages. The Liberals considered themselves the +party of reform because they had carried the Reform Bill, and, as +the employees wanted all sorts of reform very badly, took it for +granted that they would always vote gratefully for the Liberals.</p> + +<p>Under this delusion a Liberal Government made a bid for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_217">[Pg 217]</span> +popular support by offering votes to the working class. The Conservatives +at first opposed this so fiercely that they turned the +Liberals out at the next election; but a very clever Conservative +leader named Benjamin Disraeli, afterwards Earl of Beaconsfield, +a Jew who had begun his political career, like Karl Marx, as +a champion of the proletariat, persuaded the Conservatives that +they were really more popular in the country than the Liberals, +and induced them to make the very extension of the franchise +they had just been opposing. Naturally the employees, when they +got some votes in this way, used them to get more votes; and the +end of it was that everybody got a vote, including at long last the +women, though the women had to make a special and furious +fight for their inclusion, and did not win it until the national work +they did when they took the place of the absent men during the +war of 1914-18 shamed the country into enfranchising them.</p> + +<p>The proletarian voters who could formerly only turn the scale +between Conservative and Liberal can now turn out both Conservative +and Liberal, and elect candidates of their own. They +did not at first realize this, and have not fully realized it yet. +They began by timidly sending into Parliament about a dozen +men who were not called Labor members, but working class +members of the Liberal Party. It became the custom for Liberal +Governments to give a minor ministerial post to some mild +middle class professor who was vaguely supposed to be interested +in factory legislation and popular education, and who was openly +treated as a negligible nobody by the rest of the Cabinet.</p> + +<p>Meanwhile Socialist societies were growing up among students +of Karl Marx’s famous exposure of the sins of Capitalism, and of +a very widely circulated book called Progress and Poverty, written +by an American named Henry George, who had seen within his +own lifetime American villages, where people were neither poor +enough to be degraded and miserable nor rich enough to be idle +and extravagant, changed by the simple operation of private +property in land and capital into cities of fabulous wealth, so badly +divided that the mass of the people were weltering in shocking +poverty whilst a handful of owners wallowed in millions. These +Societies broke the tradition of proletarian attachment to the +Liberal Party by making the workers what Marx called class-conscious,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_218">[Pg 218]</span> +a phrase which the Intelligent Woman has probably +met several times in the papers without knowing any more clearly +than the newspaper writers exactly what it means. The voters who +had believed that there were only two parties in politics, the Conservatives +and the Liberals (or Tories and Whigs), representing +the two great religious parties of the Churchmen and the Dissenters, +and the two great economic interests of the country +farmers with their landlords and the town men of business with +their capitalists, were now taught that from the point of view of +the employee there is not a penny to choose between Conservatives +and Liberals, as the gain of either means the employee’s +loss, and that the only two parties who really have opposed interests +are the party of the propertied class on the one hand and +the party of the propertyless proletariat on the other: in other +words, the party of Capital and the party of Labor. What mattered +was not the Parliamentary struggle between the Liberal Mr +Gladstone and the Conservative Mr Disraeli as to which should +be Prime Minister, or between their successors Mr Balfour, Mr +Bonar Law, and Mr Baldwin of the one party, and Sir Henry +Campbell-Bannerman, Mr Asquith, and Mr Lloyd George of the +other. To the class-conscious proletarian all that is mere Tweedledum +and Tweedledee: what is really moving the world is the +Class Struggle, the Class War (both terms are in use) between +the proprietors and the proletariat for the possession of the land +and capital of the country (the Means of Production). When a +man realized that, he was said to be class-conscious. These terms +are misleading because they imply that all the proletarians are in +one camp and all the bourgeoisie in the other, which is untrue; +but as the Intelligent Woman who has read thus far now knows +what they mean, let them pass for the moment.</p> + +<p>The Socialist Societies had begun badly by treating Parliament +as the enemy’s camp; boycotting the Churches as mere contrivances +for doping the workers into submission to Capitalism; and +denouncing Trade Unionism and Co-operation as mistaken remedies. +Under Marx and Engels, Morris and Hyndman, Socialism +was a middle class movement caused by the revolt of the +consciences of educated and humane men and women against the +injustice and cruelty of Capitalism, and also (this was a very important<span class="pagenum" id="Page_219">[Pg 219]</span> +factor with Morris) against its brutal disregard of beauty +and the daily human happiness of doing fine work for its own +sake. Now the strongest and noblest feelings of this kind were +quite compatible with the most complete detachment from and +ignorance of proletarian life and history in the class that worked +for weekly wages. The most devoted middle class champions of +the wage workers knew what housemaids and gardeners and railway +porters and errand boys and postmen were like; but factory +hands, miners, and dockers might as well have been fairies for all +their lady and gentleman sympathizers knew about them.</p> + +<p>Whenever your sympathies are strongly stirred on behalf of +some cruelly ill used person or persons of whom you know nothing +except that they are ill used, your generous indignation +attributes all sorts of virtues to them, and all sorts of vices to those +who oppress them. But the blunt truth is that ill used people are +worse than well used people: indeed this is at bottom the only +good reason why we should not allow anyone to be ill used. If I +thought you would be made a better woman by ill treatment I +should do my best to have you ill treated. We should refuse to +tolerate poverty as a social institution not because the poor are the +salt of the earth, but because “the poor in a lump are bad”. And +the poor know this better than anyone else. When the Socialist +movement in London took its tone from lovers of art and literature +who had read George Borrow until they had come to regard +tramps as saints, and passionate High Church clergymen (Anglo-Catholics) +who adored supertramps like St Francis, it was apt to +assume that all that was needed was to teach Socialism to the +masses (vaguely imagined as a huge crowd of tramplike saints) +and leave the rest to the natural effect of sowing the good seed in +kindly virgin soil. But the proletarian soil was neither virgin nor +exceptionally kindly. The masses are not in the least like tramps; +and they have no romantic illusions about oneanother, whatever +illusions each of them may cherish about herself. When John +Stuart Mill was a Parliamentary candidate in Westminster, his +opponents tried to defeat him by recalling an occasion on which +he had said flatly that the British workman was neither entirely +truthful, entirely sober, entirely honest, nor imbued with a proper +sense of the wickedness of gambling: in short, that he was by no<span class="pagenum" id="Page_220">[Pg 220]</span> +means the paragon he was always assumed to be by parliamentary +candidates when they addressed his class as “Gentlemen”, and +begged for his vote. Mill probably owed his success on that occasion +to the fact that instead of denying his opinion he uncompromisingly +reaffirmed it. The wage workers are as fond of flattery +as other people, and will swallow any quantity of it from candidates +provided it be thoroughly understood that it is only flattery, +and that the candidates know better; but they have no use for +gushingly idealistic ladies and gentlemen who are fools enough +to think that the poor are cruelly misunderstood angels.</p> + +<p>In the eighteen-eighties the Socialists found out their mistake. +The Fabian Society got rid of its Anarchists and Borrovians, +and presented Socialism in the form of a series of parliamentary +measures, thus making it possible for an ordinary respectable +religious citizen to profess Socialism and belong to a Socialist +Society without any suspicion of lawlessness, exactly as he might +profess himself a Conservative and belong to an ordinary constitutional +club. A leader of the society, Mr Sidney Webb, +married Miss Beatrice Potter, who had made a study at first hand +of working-class life and organization, and had published a book +on Co-operation. They wrote the first really scientific history of +Trade Unionism, and thereby not only made the wage-workers +conscious of the dignity of their own political history (a very important +step in the Marxian class-consciousness) but shewed the +middle-class Socialists what the public work of the wage-working +world was really like, and convinced them of the absurdity of +supposing that Socialists could loftily ignore the organization the +people had already accomplished spontaneously in their own +way. Only by grafting Socialism on this existing organization +could it be made a really powerful proletarian movement.</p> + +<p>The Liberals, still believing themselves to be the party of progress, +assumed that all progressive movements would be grafted +on the Liberal Party as a matter of course, to be patronized and +adopted by the Liberal leaders in Parliament as far as they approved. +They were disagreeably surprised when the first effect +of the adoption of constitutional parliamentarism by the Fabian +Society was an attack on the Liberal Government of that day, +published in one of the leading reviews, for being more reactionary<span class="pagenum" id="Page_221">[Pg 221]</span> +and hostile to the wage-workers than the Conservatives. The +Liberals were so astonished and scandalized that they could only +suggest that the Fabian Society had been bribed by the Conservatives +to commit what seemed to all Liberals to be an act of +barefaced political treachery. They soon had their eyes opened +much more widely. The Fabian Society followed up its attack by +a proposal for the establishment of a Labor Party in Parliament +to oppose both Conservatives and Liberals impartially. A working-class +leader, Keir Hardie, formerly a miner, founded a +Society called the Independent Labor Party to put this proposal +into practice. Among the members of the Fabian Society who became +a leader in this new Society was Mr Ramsay MacDonald, +who, by his education and knowledge of the world outside the +wage-working class, was better qualified than Keir Hardie for successful +leadership in Parliament. From the Independent Labor +Party sprang The Labor Party, a political federation, much more +powerful, of Trade Unions and of Socialist Societies, whose delegates +sat on its executive committee. As all the persons who were +members of Trade Unions at that time could, by subscribing +a penny a week each, have provided a political fund of over +£325,000 (there are three times as many now), this combination +with the Trade Unionists was decisive. At the election of 1906 +enough Labor members were elected to form an independent +party in Parliament. By 1923 they had encroached so much that +neither the Liberals nor the Conservatives had a majority in the +House; and Mr Ramsay MacDonald was challenged to form a +Government and shew whether Labor could govern or not. He +accepted the challenge, and became British Prime Minister with +a Cabinet of Socialists and Trade Unionists. It was a more competent +government than the Conservative Government that preceded +it, partly because its members, having risen from poverty +or obscurity to eminence by their personal ability, were unhampered +by nonentities, and partly because it knew what the world is +like today, and was not dreaming, as even the cleverest of the Conservative +leaders still were, of the Victorian mixture of growing +cotton lordship and decaying feudal lordship in the capitalist class, +with starved helpless ignorance and submissive servitude in the +proletariat, which had not even lasted out Queen Victoria’s lifetime.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_222">[Pg 222]</span> +In fact, the Labor leaders were to an extraordinary degree +better educated and more experienced than their opponents, who +infatuatedly took it for granted that rich men must be superior in +education because they graduate in the two aristocratic universities +instead of in the school of economically organic life.</p> + +<p>The Liberals and Conservatives, disgusted with this result, and +ruefully sorry that by derisively giving Labor a chance to prove +its relative incompetence it had proved the opposite, combined to +throw Mr MacDonald out of office in 1924. Although he had as +yet no real chance of a majority in the country, he had so scared +the plutocrats in Parliament by his comparative success as Secretary +of State for Foreign Affairs, which they had regarded as the +department in which Labor was certain to break down ridiculously, +that they overdid their attack by persuading the country +that he was connected with the Communist Government of +Russia. The panic which followed, lasting until the election was +over, wiped out at the polls, not the Labor Party, which just +managed to hold its own, but the innocent Liberal Party.</p> + +<p>The danger of stampeding a general election is that all sorts of +political lunatics, whom no one would dream of taking seriously +in quiet times, get elected by screaming that the country is in +danger, whilst sober candidates are defeated ignominiously. In +1906, when a general election was stampeded by an alarm of +Chinese labor, third rate Liberal candidates ousted first rate Conservative +ones by the score. In 1924 the Red Russian scare enabled +third rate Conservatives to oust first rate Liberals. In both +cases the result was a grave falling-off in the quality of the victorious +party. When the Sirdar, our representative in Egypt, was unluckily +assassinated just after the election, the Conservatives, +drunk with their victory, could not be restrained by the Prime +Minister, Mr Baldwin, from hurling at the assassins an insane +threat to cut off the water supply of Egypt. This extravagance, +which startled all Europe, was felt to be just the sort of thing that +Mr MacDonald would not have done. The Government had to +climb down rather abjectly when it discovered that it could neither +carry out its threat nor expect anything but reprobation from all +sides, both at home and abroad, for having been so absurd as to +make it; for though a forceful wickedness is, I am sorry to say,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_223">[Pg 223]</span> +rather popular than otherwise when our Governments indulge in +it at the expense of foreigners, we expect it to be successful. A +climb-down is unpopular in proportion to the arrogance of the +climb-up. Consequently the Government lost on the Egyptian +fiasco the support won by the Russian scare; but it lost its head +again at a crazy threat of a general strike by the Trade Unions. +The Russians sent us a very handsome subscription to the strike +funds; and the Government, frightened and infuriated, and quite +incapable of measuring the danger (which need not have alarmed +a mouse) brought in a futile but provocative Bill to make Trade +Unionism illegal, and broke off diplomatic relations with Russia +after raiding the offices of the Russian Government in London. +Meanwhile, Labor in Parliament, having recovered from the shock +of the election, settled into its place as the official Opposition.</p> + +<p>To sum up the story to the point it has now reached (1927), the +Proletariat, having begun its defensive operations in the Class +War by organizing its battalions into Trade Unions, only to +discover that it could not retain its winnings without passing +them into law, organized itself politically as a Labor Party, and +returned enough members to Parliament to change the House of +Commons from a chamber in which two capitalist parties, calling +themselves Conservative and Liberal, contended for the spoils of +office and the honor and glory of governing, to an arena in which +the Proletariat and the Proprietariat face each other on a series of +questions which are all parts of two main questions: first, whether +the national land and capital and industry shall be held and controlled +by the nation for the nation, or left in the hands of a small +body of private men to do as they please with; second, whilst the +capitalist system lasts, which shall be top dog, the provider of +capital or the provider of labor. The first is a Socialist question, +because until land and capital and the control of industry are in +the hands of the Government it cannot equalize the distribution +either of the product or of the labor of producing it.</p> + +<p>The second is a Trade Unionist question. The Labor Party consists +not only of Socialists aiming at equality of income, but of +Trade Unionists who have no objection to the continuance of the +capitalist method in industry provided that Labor gets the lion’s +share. It should be easier to maintain the capitalist system with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_224">[Pg 224]</span> +the proletarians taking the lion’s share, and the landlords, capitalists, +and employers reduced to comparative penury, than to +maintain it as at present; for the laborers and mechanics and their +wives and daughters form about nine-tenths of the nation; and +on all accounts it should be safer and steadier to have only one +discontented person to every nine contented ones than nine discontented +persons to every one contented one. To put it another +way, it should be easier for a government supported by nine-tenths +of the voters to collect income tax and supertax from landlords +and capitalists until they had to sell their country houses +and motor cars to their tenants and employees, and live in the +gardener’s cottage themselves, than it is for a landlord to collect +his rents or a capitalist to find investments on which he can live in +luxury. An engineer designing a Forth Bridge, or an architect a +cathedral or a palace, can quite easily be reduced to accept less +money for his work than the riveters and fitters and masons and +bricklayers and painters who carry out the designs. It is true that +labor could no more do without them than they could do without +labor; but labor would have the advantage in bargaining, because +the talented worker, sooner than waste his talent, would rather +exercise it for a low wage than fix rivets or pile bricks for a high +one. At his own job he will work on any terms for the pleasure +of working, and loathe any other job; whilst the reluctant laborer +will do nothing for nothing and very little for a halfpenny.</p> + +<p>Thus a Trade Unionist Government, with the mass of the +people at its back, could, by ruthless taxation of unearned incomes, +by Factory Acts, by Wages Boards fixing wages, by Commissions +fixing prices, by using the income tax to subsidize +trades in which wages were low (all of these devices are already +established in parliamentary practice) could redistribute the +national income in such a way that the present rich would become +the poor, and the laborer would be cock of the walk. What is +more, that arrangement would be much more stable than the +present state of affairs in which the many are poor and the few +rich. The only threat to its permanence would come from the +owners of property refusing to go on collecting rent and interest +merely to have it nearly all seized by the tax collector. If you have +a thousand a year and a turn for business, you must sometimes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_225">[Pg 225]</span> +feel that you are really only collecting money for the Government +at a commission of seventy per cent or thereabouts. Suppose the +commission were reduced to twenty-five per cent, what could you +do but pay £750 out of your thousand as helplessly as you now +pay £250? Just as the owners of property, when they controlled +Parliament, used their power to extort the utmost farthing from +Labor, Labor can and probably will use its power to extort the +utmost farthing from Property unless equal distribution for all is +made a fundamental constitutional dogma. At present the propertied +classes are looking to capitalist Trade Unions to save +them from Socialism. The time is coming when they will clamor +for Socialism to save them from capitalist Trade Unionism: that +is, from Capitalized Labor. Already in America Trade Unionism +is combining with Big Business to squeeze the sleeping partner. +More of that later on.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c51">51</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">DOMESTIC CAPITAL</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>FTER talking so long about Capitalism in the lump, let us +take a few chapters off to examine it as it affects you personally +if you happen to be a lady with a little capital of +your own: one who, after living in the style customary in her +class, still has some money to spare to use as capital so as to increase +her income. I will begin by the simple case of a woman +earning money, not as an employer, but by her own work.</p> + +<p>Let us assume that her work involves doing sums (she is an +accountant), or writing (she is an author or scrivener), or visiting +clients instead of waiting in an office to receive them (she +is a doctor). It is evident that if she can spare money enough to +buy an adding-machine which will enable her to do the work +of three ordinary bookkeepers, or a sewing-machine, or a typewriter, +or a bicycle, or a motor car, as the case may be, the machine +will enable her to get through so much more work every +day that she will be able to earn more money with them than without +them. The machine will be carelessly called her capital +(most people muddle themselves with that mistake when they +discuss economics); but the capital was the money saved to pay +for the machine, and as it was eaten up by the workers who made<span class="pagenum" id="Page_226">[Pg 226]</span> +the machine, it no longer exists. What does exist is the machine, +which is continually wearing out, and can never be sold secondhand +for its price when new. Its value falls from year to year until +it falls to nothing but the value of the old iron of which it is made.</p> + +<p>Now suppose she marries, thus changing her profession for +that of wife, mother, housekeeper, and so forth! Or suppose that +the introduction of an electric tram service, and the appearance of +plenty of taxis in the streets, enable her to do all the travelling she +wants as well and more cheaply than her private car! What is she +to do with her adding-machine or sewing-machine, her typewriter +or her car? She cannot eat them or wear them on her back. The +adding-machine will not iron shirt fronts: the sewing-machine +will not fry eggs: the typewriter will not dust the furniture: the +motor car, for all its marvels, will not wash the baby.</p> + +<p>If you shew what I have just written to the sort of male who +calls himself a practical business man, he will at once say that I am +childishly wrong: that you <i>can</i> eat an adding-or sewing-machine; +dust the furniture with a typewriter; and wash a hundred babies +with a motor car. All you have to do is to sell the sewing-machine +and buy food with the price you get for it; sell the typewriter and +buy a vacuum cleaner; sell the motor car and hire a few nurses +after buying a bath and soap and towels. And he will be so far +right that you certainly can do all these things <i>provided too many +other people are not trying to do them at the same time</i>. It is because +the practical business man always forgets this proviso that +he is such a hopeless idiot politically. When you have sold the sewing-machine +and bought food with the price, you have not really +turned the sewing-machine into food. The sewing-machine remains +as uneatable as ever: not even an ostrich could get a tooth +into it or digest it afterwards. What has happened is that you, +finding yourself with a sewing-machine which you no longer +want, and being in want of food, find some other woman who has +some spare food which she does not want, but who wants a sewing-machine. +You have a sewing-machine for which you have no +use, and an unsatisfied appetite. She has food for which she has +no appetite, and wants a sewing-machine. So you two make an +exchange: and there you are! Nothing could be simpler.</p> + +<p>But please remark that it takes two to make the bargain, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_227">[Pg 227]</span> +that the two must want opposite things. If they both want the +same thing, or want to get rid of the same thing, there will be no +deal. Now suppose the Chancellor of the Exchequer took it into +his head as a practical business man to raise money by a tax on +capital instead of on income. Suppose he were to say that as +thousands of women have capital in the form of sewing-machines +which they can sell for, say, £5 apiece, they can each afford to pay +a tax of £3. Suppose he actually induced the House of Commons +to impose such a tax under the title of a Capital Levy or some +such practical business nonsense, and that every woman had to sell +her sewing-machine to pay the tax! What would be the result? +Each woman trying to sell her machine would find all the other +women trying to sell their machines too, and nobody wanting to +buy them. She could sell it as old iron for a shilling perhaps, but +that would not enable her to pay the tax. The tax collector, not +being paid, would distrain on her goods: that is, he would seize +the sewing-machine. But as he also could not sell it, he would +have to hand it over unsold to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, +who would find himself heaped up with thousands of unsellable +sewing-machines instead of the thousands of pounds he was looking +forward to. He would have no money; and the women would +have no sewing-machines: all because the practical business men +told him that sewing-machines could be turned into bread.</p> + +<p>If you consider this a little you will see that the difference between +private affairs and State affairs is that private affairs are +what people can do by themselves, one at a time and once in a +way, whereas State affairs are what we are all made to do by law +at the same moment. At home you are a private woman dealing +with your own private affairs; but if you go into Parliament and +perhaps into the Cabinet, you become a stateswoman. As a private +woman all you have to consider is, “Suppose I were to do this or +that”. But as a stateswoman you must consider “Suppose everybody +had to do this or that”. This is called the Kantian test.</p> + +<p>For instance, if you become Chancellor of the Exchequer, your +common sense as a private woman will save you from such a +folly as supposing that a sewing-machine in the house is the same +as £5 in the house. But that very same private common sense of +yours may persuade you that an income of £5 a year is the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_228">[Pg 228]</span> +same as £100 ready money, because you know that if you want +£100 your stockbroker can get it for you in exchange for £5 a +year of your income. You might therefore be tempted to lay a tax +of £30 on everyone with £5 a year, and imagine that you would +not only get the £30, but that the taxpayer would have £70 left to +go on with. Let me therefore explain the nature of this business of +£5 a year being worth £100 cash to you privately, and worth just +£5 a year to the Chancellor publicly and not a rap more.</p> + +<p>When we were dealing with the impossibility of saving I pointed +out that there are certain everyday transactions that are like saving +and that are called saving, very much as selling a sewing-machine +and buying food with the price may be called eating the +sewing-machine. Do not bother to try to remember this now: +it is easier to go over it again. Suppose you have £100 and +you wish to save it: that is, to consume it at some future time +instead of immediately! The objection is that as the things the +money represents will rot unless they are used at once, what you +want to do is impossible. But suppose there is in the next street a +woman who has been left by the death of her parents with nothing +but an income of £5 a year. Evidently she cannot live on that. But +if she had £100 in ready money she could emigrate, or set up a +typewriting office, or stock a little shop, or take lessons in some +moneymaking art, or buy some smart clothes to improve her +chances of getting respectable employment, or any of the things +that poor women imagine they could do if only they had a little +ready money. Now nothing is easier than for you to make an +exchange with this woman. She gives you her right to take £5 +every year fresh-and-fresh out of each year’s harvest as it comes; +and you give her your hundred pounds to spend at once. Your +stockbroker or banker will bring you together. You go to him +and say that you want him to invest your £100 for you at five per +cent; and she goes to him and says that she wants to sell her £5 a +year for ready money. He effects the change for a small commission. +But the transaction is disguised under such fantastic names +(like the water and breadcrumb in doctors’ prescriptions) that +neither you nor the other woman understands what has really +happened. You are said to have invested £100, and to be “worth” +£100, and to have added £100 to the capital of the country: and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_229">[Pg 229]</span> +she is said to have “realized her capital”. But all that has actually +occurred is that your £100 has been handed over to be spent +and done for by the other woman, and that you are left with the +right to take £5 out of the income of the country without working +for it year after year for ever, or until you in your turn sell that +right for £100 down if you should unhappily find yourself in the +same predicament as the other lady was in when you bought it.</p> + +<p>Now suppose you brought in your tax of £30 on every £5 a year +in the country! Or suppose a Conservative Government, led by +the nose by practical business men who know by experience that +people who have £5 a year can sell it for £100 whenever they +want to, were to do it! Or suppose a Labor Government, misled +by the desire to take capital out of private hands and vest it in the +State, were to do it! They would call it a levy of thirty per cent on +capital; and most of them would vote for it without understanding +what it really meant. Its opponents would vote against it in +equal ignorance of its nature; so that their arguments would convince +nobody. What would happen? Evidently no woman could +pay £30 out of £5 a year. She would have to sell the £5 a year for +£100, and then reinvest the odd £70. But she would not get the +£100 because, as the tax would not fall on her alone, but on all +the other capitalists as well, her stockbroker would find everybody +asking him to sell future incomes for ready money and nobody +offering ready money for future incomes. It would be the +story of the sewing-machines over again. She would have to tell +the tax collector that she could not pay the tax, and that he might +sell her furniture and be damned (intelligent women use recklessly +strong language under such circumstances). But the tax +collector would reply that her furniture was no good to him; for +as he was selling up all the other capitalists’ furniture at the same +time, and as only those who were too poor to have any capital to +be taxed were buying it, Chippendale chairs were down to a +shilling a dozen and dining room tables to five shillings; so that +it would cost him more to take her furniture away and sell it or +store it than it would fetch. He would have to go away empty +handed; and all the Government could do would be to take her +£5 a year from her for six years and four months, the odd months +being for the interest to pay for waiting. In other words it would<span class="pagenum" id="Page_230">[Pg 230]</span> +find that her income was real, and her capital imaginary.</p> + +<p>But even this would not work if the tax were imposed every +year, like the income tax, because at the end of the six years she +would owe £180, incurring a debt of £30 every year and getting +only £5 to pay it with; so that it would be much better for her to +give up her £5 a year for ever and support herself entirely by +work. And the Government would have to admit that a tax on +capital is an impossibility, for the unanswerable reason that the +capital has no existence, having been eaten up long ago.</p> + +<p>There is a tax on capital actually in existence which is often +referred to as proving that such taxes are possible. When we die, +taxes called Death Duties (officially Estate Duties) are levied on +the fictitious capital value of our estates, if we leave any. The +reason people manage to pay them is that we do not all die simultaneously +every year on the 5th April and thus incur death duties +payable on the following 31st December. We die seldom and +slowly, less than twenty out of every thousand of us in one year, +and out of that twenty not more than two at the outside have any +capital. Their heirs, one would think, would find it easy to sell +part of their income for enough ready money to pay the duties, the +purchasers being capitalists whose fathers or uncles have not died +lately. And yet the Government has to wait for its money often +and long. The tax is a stupid one, not because it confiscates property +by making the State inherit part of it (why not?) but because +it operates cruelly and unfairly. One estate, passing by death +from heir to heir three times in a century, will hardly feel the +duties. Another, passing three times in one year (as happens easily +during a war), is wiped out by them, and the heirs reduced from +affluence to destitution. When you make your will, be careful +how you leave valuable objects to poor people. If they keep them +they may have to pay more for them in death duties than they can +afford. Probably they will have to sell them to pay the duty.</p> + +<p>This is so little understood, that men not otherwise mad are +found estimating the capital of the country at sums varying from +ten thousand millions before the war to thirty thousand millions +after it (as if the war had made the country richer instead of +poorer), and actually proposing in the House of Commons to tax +that thirty thousand millions as available existing wealth and to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_231">[Pg 231]</span> +pay off the cost of the war with it. They all know that you cannot +eat your cake and have it too; yet, because we have spent seven +thousand millions on a frightful war, and, as they calculate, +twenty thousand millions more on mines and railways and factory +plant and so on, and because these sums are written down in the +books of the Bank of England and the balance sheets of the +Companies and Trusts, they think they still exist, and that we are +an enormously rich nation instead of being, as anyone can see by +the condition of nine-tenths of the population, a disgracefully +poor one.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c52">52</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE MONEY MARKET</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>ND now, still assuming that you are a lady of some means, +perhaps I can be a little useful to you in your private affairs +if I explain that mysterious institution where your investments +are made for you, called the Money Market, with +its chronic ailment of Fluctuations that may at any moment increase +your income pleasantly without any trouble to you, or +swallow it up and ruin you in ways that a man can never make a +woman understand because he does not understand them himself.</p> + +<p>A market for the purchase and sale of money is nonsense on the +face of it. You can say reasonably “I want five shillingsworth of +salmon”; but it is ridiculous to say “I want five shillingsworth of +money”. Five shillingsworth of money is just five shillings; and +who wants to exchange five shillings for five shillings? Nobody +buys money for money except money changers, who buy foreign +coins and notes to sell to you when you are going abroad.</p> + +<p>But though nobody in England wants to buy English money, +we often want to hire it, or, as we say, to borrow it. Borrow and +hire, however, do not always mean the same thing. You may +borrow your neighbor’s frying-pan, and return it to her later on +with a thank you kindly. But in the money market there is no +kindness: you pay for what you get, and charge for what you +give, as a matter of business. And it is quite understood that what +you hire you do not give back: you consume it at once. If you ask +your neighbor to lend you, not a frying-pan, but a loaf of bread +and a candle, it is understood that you eat the bread and burn the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_232">[Pg 232]</span> +candle, and repay her later on by giving her a fresh loaf and a new +candle. Now when you borrow money you are really borrowing +what it will buy: that is, bread and candles and material things of +all sorts for immediate consumption. If you borrow a shilling you +borrow it because you want to buy a shillingsworth of something +to use at once. You cannot pay that something back: all +you can do is to make something new or do some service that you +can get paid a shilling for, and pay with that shilling. (You can, +of course, borrow another shilling from someone else, or beg it or +steal it; but that would not be a ladylike transaction.) At all +events, not until you pay can the lender consume the things that +the shilling represents. If you pay her anything additional for +waiting you are really hiring the use of the money from her.</p> + +<p>In that case you are under no obligation to her whatever, because +you are doing her as great a service as she is doing you. You +may not see this at first; but just consider. All money that is lent +is necessarily spare money, because people cannot afford to lend +money until they have spent enough of it to support themselves. +Now this spare money is only a sort of handy title deed to spare +things, mostly food, which will rot and perish unless they are +consumed immediately. If your neighbor has a loaf left over from +her week’s household supply you are doing her a service in eating +it for her and promising to give her a fresh loaf next week. In fact +a woman who found herself with a tenpenny loaf on her hands +over and above what her family needed to eat, might, sooner than +throw the loaf into the dustbin, say to her neighbor, “You can +have this loaf if you will give me half a fresh loaf for it next +week”: that is to say, she might offer half the loaf for the service +of saving her from the total loss of it by natural decay.</p> + +<p>The economists call this paying negative interest. What it +means is that you pay people to keep your spare money for you +until you want it instead of making them pay you for allowing +them to keep it, which the economists call paying positive interest. +One is just as natural as the other; and the sole reason why +nobody at present will pay you to borrow from them, whereas +everyone will pay you to lend to them, is that under our system +of unequal division of income there are so very few of us +with spare money to lend, and so very many with less than they<span class="pagenum" id="Page_233">[Pg 233]</span> +need for immediate consumption, that there are always plenty of +people offering not only to spend the spare money at once, but to +replace it later on in full with fresh goods and pay the lenders for +waiting into the bargain. The economists used to call this payment +the reward of abstinence, which was silly, as people do not +need to be rewarded for abstaining from eating a second dinner, +or from wearing six suits of clothes at a time, or living in a dozen +houses: on the contrary, they ought to be extremely obliged to +anyone who will use these superfluities for them and pay them +something as well. If instead of having a few rich amid a great +many poor, we had a great many rich, the bankers would charge +you a high price for keeping your money; and the epitaph of the +dead knight in Watts’s picture, “What I saved I lost”, would be +true materially as well as spiritually. If you then had £100 to +spare, and wanted to save it until next year, and took it to the +manager of your bank to keep it for you, he would say “I am +sorry, madam; but your hundred pounds will not keep. The best +I can do for you is to promise you seventy pounds next year (or +fifty, or twenty, or five, as the case might be); and you are very +fortunate to be able to get that with so much spare money lying +about. You had really much better not save. Increase your expenditure; +and enjoy your money before what it represents goes +rotten. Banking is not what it was.”</p> + +<p>This cannot happen under Capitalism, because Capitalism distributes +the national income in such a way that the many are poor +and the few enormously rich. Therefore for the present you may +count on being able to lend (invest) all your spare money, and on +being paid so much a year for waiting until the borrower replaces +what you have lent. The payment for waiting is called interest, +or, in the Bible, usury. Interest is the polite word. The borrower, +in short, hires the use of your spare money from you; and there is +nothing dishonest nor dishonorable in the transaction. You hand +over your spare ready money (your capital) to the borrower; and +the borrower binds herself to pay you a certain yearly or monthly +or weekly income until she repays it to you in full.</p> + +<p>The money market is the place in the city where yearly incomes +are bought for lump sums of spare ready money. The income you +can buy for £100 (which is the measuring figure) varies from day<span class="pagenum" id="Page_234">[Pg 234]</span> +to day, according to the plenty or scarcity of spare money offered +for hire and of incomes offered for sale. It varies also according to +the security of the income and the chances of its fluctuating from +year to year. When you take your spare £100 to your stockbroker +to invest for you (that is, to hire out for an income in the money +market) he can, at the moment when I write these lines (1926) +get you £4: 10s. a year certain, £6 a year with the chance of its +rising or falling, or £10 a year and upwards if you will take a +sporting chance of never receiving anything at all.</p> + +<p>The poor do not meddle with this official money market, because +the only security they can give when borrowing ready +money from anyone but the pawnbroker is their promise to pay +so much a week out of their earnings. This being much more +uncertain than a share certificate or a lease of land, they have to +pay comparatively prodigious prices. For instance, a poor working +woman can hire a shilling for a penny a week. This is the +usual rate; and it seems quite reasonable to very poor people; but +it is more than eighty-six times as much as the Government pays +for the hire of money. It means paying at the rate of £433: 10s. a +year for the use of £100, or, as we say, interest at 433½ per cent: +a rate no rich man would dream of paying. The poorer you are +the more you pay, because the risk of your failing to pay is greater. +Therefore when you see in the paper that the price of hiring +money has been fixed by the Bank of England (that is why it is +called the Bank Rate) at five per cent, or reduced to four-and-a-half +per cent, or raised to six per cent, or what not, you must not +suppose that you or anyone else can hire money at that rate: it +means only that those who are practically certain to be able to +pay, like the Government or the great financiers and business +houses, can borrow from the banks at that rate. In their case the +rate changes not according to any risk of their being unable to +pay, but according to the quantity of spare money available for +lending. And no matter how low the rate falls, the charwoman still +has to pay 433½ per cent, partly because the risk of her being +unable to pay is great, partly because the expense of lending +money by shillings and collecting the interest every week is much +greater than the expense of lending it by millions and collecting +the interest every six months, and partly because the charwoman<span class="pagenum" id="Page_235">[Pg 235]</span> +is ignorant and helpless and does not know that the slum usurer, +whom she regards as her best friend in need, is charging her +anything more than a millionaire is charged.</p> + +<p>The price of money varies also according to the purpose for +which it is borrowed. You are, I hope, concerned with the money +market as a lender rather than as a borrower. Do not be startled at +the notion of being a moneylender (not, I repeat, that there is +anything dishonorable in it): nobody will call your investments +loans. But they are loans for all that. Only, they are loans made, +not to individuals, but to joint stock companies on special conditions. +The business people in the city are always forming these +companies and asking you to lend them money to start some big +business undertaking, which may be a shop in the next street, or +a motor bus service along it, or a tunnel through the Andes, +or a harbor in the Pacific, or a gold mine in Peru, or a rubber +plantation in Malaya, or any mortal enterprise out of which +they think they can make money. But they do not borrow on the +simple condition that they pay you for the hire of the money until +they pay it back. Their offer is that when the business is set up it +shall belong to you and to all your fellow lenders (called shareholders); +so that when it begins to make money the profits will be +distributed among you all in proportion to the amount each of +you has lent. On the other hand, if it makes no profits you lose +your money. Your only consolation is that you can lose no more. +You cannot be called on to pay the Company’s debts if it has spent +more than you lent it. Your liability is limited, as they say.</p> + +<p>This is a chancy business; and to encourage you if you are +timid (or shall we say cautious?) these companies may ask you to +lend your spare money to them at the fixed rate of, say, six or +seven per cent, on the understanding that this is to be paid before +any of the ordinary lenders get anything, but that you will get +nothing more no matter how big the profits may be. If you accept +this offer you are said to have debentures or preference shares in +the company; and the others are said to have ordinary shares. +There are a few varieties both of preference and ordinary shares; +but they are all ways of hiring spare money: the only difference is +in the conditions on which you are invited to provide it.</p> + +<p>When you have taken a share, and it is bringing you in an income,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_236">[Pg 236]</span> +you can at any time, if you are pressed for ready money, +sell your share for what it may be worth in the money market to +somebody who has spare money and wants to “save” it by exchanging +it for an income. The department of the money market +in which shares are bought and sold in this way is called the Stock +Exchange. To sell a share you have to employ an agent (called +a stockbroker), who takes your share to the Exchange and asks +another agent (called a stockjobber) to “make him a price”: It is +the jobber’s business to know what the share is worth, according +to the prospects of the company, the quantity of spare money +being offered for incomes, and the number of income producing +shares being offered for sale. Never speak disrespectfully of stockjobbers: +they are very important people, and consider themselves +greater masters of the money business than the stockbrokers.</p> + +<p>The legitimate business of the Stock Exchange is this selling +and buying of shares in companies already established. It is +largely occupied also with a curious game called speculation, in +which phantom prices are offered for imaginary shares; but for +the moment let us keep to the point that the shares dealt in are +practically all in established companies, because what is nationally +important is the application of spare money, not to the purchase +of shares in old companies, but to the foundation of new +ones, or at least to the extension of the plant and operations of the +old ones. Now the business done on the Stock Exchange is no +index to this, and indeed may have nothing to do with it. Suppose, +for example, that you have £50,000 to spare, and you invest +it all in railway shares! You will not by doing so create a single +yard of railway, nor cause a single additional train to be run, nor +even supply an existing train with an extra footwarmer. Your +money will have no effect whatever on the railways. All that will +happen is that your name will be substituted for some other name +or names in the list of shareholders, and that for the future you +will get the income the owners of those names would get if they +had not sold their shares to you. Also, of course, that they will get +your £50,000 to do what they like with. They may spend it on the +gambling tables at Monte Carlo, or on the British turf; or they +may present it to the funds of the Labor Party. You may disapprove +strongly of gambling; and you may have a horror of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_237">[Pg 237]</span> +Labor Party. You may say “If I had thought this was going to +happen to my money, I would have bought shares privately from +some persons whose principles were well known to me and whom +I could trust not to spend it foolishly instead of from that wicked +stockjobber who has no more conscience than a cash register, and +does not care what becomes of my money”. But your protest will +be vain. In practice you will find that you must buy your shares in +established companies on the Stock Exchange; that your money +will never go into the company whose shares you buy; and that its +real destination will be entirely beyond your control. A day’s +work on the Stock Exchange, nominally a most gratifying addition +of hundreds of thousands of pounds of spare money to the +industrial capital of the country, may be really a waste of them in +extravagant luxury, or ruinous vice, to say nothing of the possibility +of their being sent abroad to establish some foreign business +which will capture the business of the company whose shares +you have bought, and thus reduce you to indigence.</p> + +<p>And now you will say that if this is so, you will take particular +care to buy nothing but new shares in new companies, sending +the money directly to their bankers according to the form enclosed +with the prospectus, without allowing any stockbroker or +stockjobber to know anything about it, thus making sure that +your money will be used to create a new business and add it to the +productive resources of your country’s industry. My dear lady, +you will lose it all unless you are very careful, very well informed +as to the risks involved, and very intelligent in money matters. +Company promotion, I am sorry to say, is a most rascally business +in its shadier corners. Act after Act of Parliament has been passed, +without much effect, to prevent swindlers from forming companies +for some excellent object, and, when they have collected +as much money as they can by selling shares in it, making no +serious attempt to carry out that object, but simply taking offices, +ordering goods, appointing themselves directors and managers +and secretaries and anything else that carries a salary, taking +commissions on all their orders, and, when they have divided all +the plunder in this way (which is perfectly legal), winding up the +company as a failure. All you can do in that case is to go to the +shareholders’ meeting and make a row, being very careful not to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_238">[Pg 238]</span> +tell the swindlers that they are swindlers, because if you do they +will immediately take an action against you for slander and get +damages out of you. But making a row will not save your money. +The amount that is stolen from innocent women every year in +this way is appalling; and it has been done as much by sham +motor bus companies, which if genuine would have been very +sensible and publicly useful investments, as by companies to +work bogus gold mines, which are suspect on the face of them.</p> + +<p>Even if you escape this swindling by blackguards who know +what they are doing, and would be as much disconcerted by the +success of their companies as a burglar if he found himself +politely received and invited to dinner in a house he had broken +into, you may be tempted by the companies founded by genuine +enthusiasts who believe in their scheme, who are quite right in +believing in it, who are finally justified by its success, and who +put all their own spare money and a great deal of hard work +into it. But they almost always underestimate its cost. Because it +is new, they have no experience to guide them; and they have +their own enthusiasm to mislead them. When they are half way +to success the share money is all used up; and they are forced to +sell out all they have done for an old song to a new company +formed expressly to take advantage of them. Sometimes this +second company shares the fate of the first, and is bought out by a +third. The company which finally succeeds may be built on the +money and work of three or four successive sets of pioneers who +have run short of the cash needed for completion of the plant. +The experienced men of the city know this, and lie in wait until +the moment has come for the final success. As one of them has +put it “the money is made by coming in on the third reconstruction”. +For them it may be a splendid investment; but the original +shareholders, who had the intelligence to foresee the successful +future of the business, and the enterprise to start it, are cleaned +out. They see their hopes fulfilled and their judgment justified; +but as they have to look through the workhouse windows, they +are a warning rather than an example to later investors.</p> + +<p>You can avoid these risks by never meddling with a new company, +but calling in your stockbroker to buy shares in a well +established old one. You will not do it any good; but at all events<span class="pagenum" id="Page_239">[Pg 239]</span> +you will know that it is neither a bogus company nor one which +has started with too little capital and will presently have to sell out +at a heavy or total loss. Beware of enterprise: beware of public +spirit: beware of conscience and visions of the future. Play for +safety. Lend to the Government or the Municipalities if you can, +though the income may be less; for there is no investment so safe +and useful as a communal investment. And when you find journalists +glorifying the Capitalist system as a splendid stimulus to +all these qualities against which I have just warned you, restrain +the unladylike impulse to imitate the sacristan in the Ingoldsby +Legends, who said no word to indicate a doubt, but put his thumb +unto his nose, and spread his fingers out.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c53">53</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SPECULATION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>N the preceding chapter I have been assuming that you are a +capitalist. I am now going to assume that you are perhaps a bit +of a gambler. Even if you abhor gambling it is a necessary part +of your education in modern social conditions to know how most +of it is done. Without such knowledge you might, for instance, +marry a gambler after having taken the greatest pains to assure +yourself that he had never touched a playing card, sat at a +roulette table, or backed a horse in his life, and was engaged +solely in financial operations on the Stock Exchange. You might +find him encouraging you to spend money like water in one week, +and in the next protesting that he could not possibly afford you a +new hat. In short, you might find yourself that tragic figure, the +gambler’s wife who is not by temperament a gambler.</p> + +<p>A page or two ago I dropped a remark about a game played on +the Stock Exchange and called Speculation, at which phantom +prices are offered for imaginary shares. I will explain this game +to you, leaving it to your taste and conscience to decide whether +you will shun it or plunge into it. It is by far the most widely practised +and exciting form of gambling produced by Capitalism.</p> + +<p>To understand it you must know that on the London Stock +Exchange you can buy a share and not have to pay for it, or sell a +share and not have to hand over the share certificate, until next<span class="pagenum" id="Page_240">[Pg 240]</span> +settling day, which may be a fortnight off. You may not see at first +what difference that makes. But a great deal may happen in a +fortnight. Just recollect what you have learnt about the continual +fluctuations in the prices of incomes and of spare subsistence in +the Money Market! Think of the hopes and fears raised by the +flourishing and decaying of the joint stock companies as their business +and prospects grow or shrink according as the harvests are +good or bad: rubber harvests, oil harvests, coal harvests, copper +harvests, as well as the agricultural harvests: all meaning that +there will be more or less money to divide among the shareholders +as yearly income, and more or less spare money available +to buy shares with. The prices of shares change not only from +year to year but from day to day, from hour to hour, and, in +moments of excitement on the Stock Exchange, from minute to +minute. The share that was obtained years ago or centuries ago +by giving £100 spare money to start a new company may bring +its owner £5000 a year, or it may bring her thirty shillings, or +it may bring her nothing, or it may bring her all three in succession. +Consequently that share, which cost somebody £100 spare +money when it was new, she may be able to sell for £100,000 at +one moment, for £30 at another, whilst at yet another she may be +unable to sell it at all, for love or money. As she opens her newspaper +in the morning she looks at the city page, with its list of +yesterday’s prices of stocks and shares, to see how rich she is today; +and she seldom finds that her shares are worth the same +price for a week at a time unless she has been prudent enough to +lend it to the Government or to a municipality (in which case she +has communal security) instead of to private companies.</p> + +<p>Now put these two things together: the continual change in the +prices of shares, and the London Stock Exchange rule that they +need not be paid for nor delivered until next settling day. Suppose +you have not a penny of spare cash in your possession, nor a +share (carrying an income) to sell! Suppose you believe for some +reason or other that the price of shares in a certain company (call +it company A) is going to rise in value within the next few days! +And suppose you believe that the price of shares in a certain other +company (company B) is going to fall. If you are right, all you +have to do to make some money by your good guessing is to buy<span class="pagenum" id="Page_241">[Pg 241]</span> +shares in company A and sell shares in company B. You may say +“How am I to buy shares without money or sell them without the +share certificates?” It is very simple: you need not produce either +the money or the certificates until settling day. Before settling +day you sell the A shares for more than you bought them for +on credit; and you buy the B certificates for less than you pretended +to sell them for. On settling day you will get the money +from the people you sold to, and the certificates from the people +you bought from; and when you have paid for the A shares and +handed over the B certificates, you will be in pocket by the difference +between their values on the day you bought and sold them +and their values on settling day. Simple enough, is it not?</p> + +<p>This is the game of speculation. Nobody will blame you for +engaging in it; but on the Stock Exchange they will call you a +bull for pretending to buy the A shares, and a bear for pretending +to sell the B shares. If you pay a small sum to get shares allotted to +you in a new company on the chance of selling them at a profit +before you have to pay up, they will call you a stag. If you ask why +not a cow or a hind, the reply is that as the Stock Exchange was +founded by men for men its slang is exclusively masculine.</p> + +<p>But, you may say, suppose my guess was wrong! Suppose the +price of the A shares goes down instead of up, and the price of the +B shares up instead of down! Well, that often happens, either +through some unforeseen event affecting the companies, or +simply because you guessed badly. But do not be too terrified by +this possibility; for all you can lose is the difference between the +prices; and as this may be only a matter of five or ten pounds +for every hundred you have been dealing in you can pawn your +clothes and furniture and try again. You can even have your +account “carried over” to next settling day by paying “contango” +if you are a bull, or “backwardation” if you are a bear, on +the chance of your luck changing in the extra fortnight.</p> + +<p>I must warn you, however, that if a great many other bears have +guessed just as you have, and sold imaginary shares in great numbers, +you may be “cornered”. This means that the bears have +sold either more shares than actually exist, or more than the +holders will sell except at a great advance in price. Bulls who are +cunning enough to foresee this and to buy up the shares which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_242">[Pg 242]</span> +are being beared may make all the money the bears lose. Cornering +the bears is a recognized part of the game of speculation.</p> + +<p>As the game is one of knowledge and skill and character (or +no character) as well as of chance, a good guesser, or one with private +(inside) information as to facts likely to affect share prices, +can make a living at it; and some speculators have made and lost +princely fortunes. Some women play at it just as others back +horses. Sometimes they do it intelligently through regular stockbrokers, +with a clear understanding of the game. Sometimes they +are blindly tempted by circulars sent out from Bucket Shops; so I +had better enlighten you as to what a bucket shop is.</p> + +<p>You will remember that a speculator does not stand to lose the +whole price she offers for a share, or the whole value of the share +she pretends to buy. If she loses she loses only the difference between +the prices she expected and the prices she has to pay. If she +has a sufficient sum in hand to meet this she escapes bankruptcy. +This sufficient sum is called “cover”. A bucket shop keeper is +one who undertakes to speculate for anyone who will send him +cover. His circulars say, in effect, “Send me ten pounds, and the +worst that can happen to you is to lose it; but I may be able to +double it for you or even double it many times over. I can refer +you to clients who have sent me £10 and got back £50 or £100.” +A lady, not understanding the business in the least, is tempted to +send him £10, and very likely loses it, in which case she usually +tries to get it back by risking another £10 note if she has one left. +But she may be lucky and pocket some winnings; for bucket shops +must let their clients win sometimes or they could hardly exist. +But they can generally prevent your winning, if they choose, by +taking advantage of some specially low price of shares to shew +that your cover has disappeared, or even by selling two or three +shares themselves at a low price and quoting it against you. Besides, +if you sue them for your winnings they can escape by pleading +the Gaming Act. They cannot be mulcted or expelled by the +Stock Exchange Committee; for they are not members of the +Stock Exchange, and have given no securities. A bucket shop +keeper is not necessarily a swindler any more than a bookmaker is +necessarily a welsher; but if he fleeces you you have no remedy, +whereas if a stockbroker cheats you it may cost him his livelihood.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_243">[Pg 243]</span></p> + +<p>If you speculate through a regular stockbroker you must bear +in mind that he is supposed to deal in genuine investments only: +that is, in the buying of shares by clients who have the money to +pay for them, and the sale of shares by those who really possess +them and wish to exchange them for a lump sum of spare money. +The difference is that if you go into a bucket shop and say frankly +“Here is a five pound note, which is all I have in the world. Will +you take it as cover, and speculate with it for me in stocks of ten +times its value”, the bucket shop will oblige you; but if you say +this to a stockbroker he must have you shewn out. You must +allow him to believe, or pretend to believe, that you really have +the spare money or the shares in which you want to deal.</p> + +<p>You will now understand what gambling on the London Stock +Exchange means. The game can be played with certain variations, +called options and double options and so on, which are as +easily picked up as the different hazards of the roulette table; and +the foreign stock exchanges have rules which are not so convenient +for the bears as our rules; but these differences do not +change the nature of the game. Every day speculative business is +done in Capel Court in London, on Wall Street in New York, in +the Bourses on the Continent, to the tune of millions of pounds; +and it is literally only a tune: the buyers have no money and the +sellers no goods; and their countries are no richer for it all than +they are for the gaming tables at Monte Carlo or the bookmakers’ +settlements at the end of a horse race. Yet the human +energy, audacity, and cunning wasted on it would, if rightly +directed, make an end of our slums and epidemics and most of +our prisons in fewer hours than it has taken days of Capitalism to +produce them.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c54">54</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">BANKING</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE Stock Exchange is only a department of the money +market. The commonest way of hiring money for business +purposes is to keep an account at a bank, and hire spare +money there when you want it. The bank manager will lend it +to you if he feels reasonably sure that you will be able to repay +him: in fact that is his real business, as we shall see presently. He<span class="pagenum" id="Page_244">[Pg 244]</span> +may do it by letting you overdraw your account. Or if somebody +with whom you are doing business has given you a written promise +to pay you a sum of money at some future time (this written +promise is called a bill of exchange) and the bank manager thinks +the promise will be kept, he will give you the money at once, only +deducting enough to pay him for its hire until your customer +pays it. This is called discounting the bill. All such transactions +are forms of hiring spare money; and when you read in the city +articles in the papers that money is cheap or money is dear, it +means that the price you have to pay your banker for the hire of +spare money is low or high as the case may be.</p> + +<p>Sometimes you will see a fuss made because the Bank of England +has raised or lowered the Bank Rate. This means that the +Bank of England is going to charge more or less, as the case may +be, for discounting bills of exchange, because spare money has +become dearer or cheaper: that is to say, because spare subsistence +has become scarcer or more plentiful. If you are overdrawn +at your bank, the announcement that the Bank Rate is raised may +bring you a letter from the manager to say that you must not overdraw +any more, and that he will be obliged to you if you will pay +off your overdraft as soon as possible. What he means is that as +spare subsistence has become scarce and dear he cannot go on +supplying you with it, and would like you to replace what he has +already supplied. This may be very inconvenient to you, and may +prevent you from extending your business. That is why there +is great consternation and lamentation among business people +when the Bank Rate goes up, and jubilation when it goes down. +For when the terms on which spare money can be hired at the +Bank of England go up, they go up everywhere; so that the Bank +Rate is an index to the cost of hiring spare money generally.</p> + +<p>And now comes the question, where on earth do the banks get +all the spare money they deal in? To the Intelligent Woman who +is not engaged in business, or who, if she has a bank account, +never overdraws it or brings a bill to be discounted, a bank seems +only a place where they very kindly pay her cheques and keep her +money safe for her for nothing, as if she were paying them a compliment +by allowing them to do it. They will even hire money +from her when she has more than enough to go on with, provided<span class="pagenum" id="Page_245">[Pg 245]</span> +she will agree not to draw it out without giving them some days’ +notice (they call this placing it on deposit). She must ask herself +sometimes how they can possibly afford to keep up a big handsomely +fitted building and a staff of respectably dressed clerks +with a most polite and sympathetic manager to do a lot of her +private business for her and charge her nothing for it.</p> + +<p>The explanation is that people hardly ever draw as much money +from the bank as they put in; and even when they do, it remains +in the bank for some time. Suppose you lodge a hundred pounds +in the bank on Monday to keep it safe because you will have to +draw a cheque for it on Saturday! That cheque will not be presented +for payment until the following Monday. Consequently +the bank has your hundred pounds in its hands for a week, and +can therefore hire it out for a week for a couple of shillings.</p> + +<p>But very few bank transactions are as unprofitable as this. Most +people keep their bank accounts open all the year round; and +instead of paying in every week exactly what they want to spend +and drawing it out again by their cheques as they spend it, they +keep a round sum always at their call so as to be ready when they +may happen to want it. The poorest woman who ever dreams of +keeping a bank account at all is not often driven to draw the last +half crown out: when her balance falls as low as that, she knows it +is time to put in another pound or two. Indeed it is not every bank +that will do business on so small a scale as this: the Governor +of the Bank of England would turn blue and order the porters +to remove you if you offered him an account of that sort. Bank +customers are people some of whom keep £20 continually at call, +some £100, some £1000, and some many thousands, according +to the extent of their business or the rate at which they are living. +This means that no matter how much money they may put into +the bank or take out, there always remains in the bank a balance +that they never draw out; and when all these balances are added +up they come to a huge amount of spare money in the hands of +the bank. It is by hiring out this money that the banks make their +enormous profits. They can well afford to be polite to you.</p> + +<p>And now the Intelligent Woman who keeps a bank account, +and most conscientiously never lets her balance fall below a certain +figure, may ask in some alarm whether her bank, instead of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_246">[Pg 246]</span> +keeping her balance always in the bank ready for her to draw out +if she should need it, actually lends it to other people. The reply +is, Yes: that is not only what the bank does, but what it was +founded to do. But, the Intelligent Woman will exclaim, that +means that if I were to draw a cheque for my balance there would +be no money in the bank to pay it with. And certainly that would +happen if all the other customers of the bank drew cheques for +their balances on the same day. But they never do. “Still”, you +urge, “they might.” Never mind: the bank does not trouble +about what might happen. It is concerned only with what does +happen; and what does happen is that if out of every pound +lodged with them the bankers keep about three shillings in the +till to pay their customers’ cheques it will be quite sufficient.</p> + +<p>Only, please remember that the woman who has a bank account +should never frighten the others by letting them know this. They +would all rush to the bank and draw out their balances; and when +the bankers had paid to the first comers all the three shillingses +they had kept, they would stop payment and put up the shutters. +This sometimes actually happens when a report is spread that +some particular bank is not to be trusted. Something or somebody +starts a panic; there is “a run on the bank”; the bank is broken; +and its customers are very angry with the directors, clamoring to +have them prosecuted and sent to prison, which is unreasonable; +for they ought to have known that banks, with all the services they +give for nothing, can exist only on condition that their customers +do not draw out their balances all on the same day.</p> + +<p>Perhaps, by the way, you know some woman who not only +always draws her full balance, but overdraws it; so that she is +always in debt to the bank. Her case is very simple. The bank +lends her the other customers’ money to go on with, and charges +her for the hire of it. That sort of business pays them very well.</p> + +<p>And now that you know what banking is from the inside, and +how the bankers get all the spare money they let on hire, may I +remind you again, if I am not too tiresome, that this spare money +is really spare subsistence, mainly perishable stuff that must be +used at once. One of the greatest public dangers of our day is that +the bankers do not know this, because they never handle or store +the stuff themselves; and the right to take it away and use it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_247">[Pg 247]</span> +which they sell on the hire system is disguised under the name of +Credit. Consequently they come to think that credit is something +that can be eaten and drunk and worn and made into houses and +railways and factories and so on, whereas real credit is only the +lender’s opinion that the borrower will be able to pay him.</p> + +<p>Now you cannot feed workmen or build houses or butter parsnips +with opinions. When you hear of a woman living on credit or +building a house on credit or having a car on credit you may rest +assured that she is not doing anything of the kind: she is living +on real victuals; having her house built of bricks and mortar by +men who are eating substantial meals; and driving about in a steel +car full of highly explosive petrol. If she has not made them nor +paid for them somebody else has; and all that her having them +on credit means is that the bank manager believes that at some +future time she will replace them with equally substantial equivalent +goods of the same value after paying the bank for waiting +meanwhile. But when she goes to the bank manager she does not +ask for food and bricks and cars: she says she wants credit. And +when the bank manager allows her to draw the money that is +really an order for so much food and so many bricks and a car, he +says nothing about these things. He says, and thinks, that he is +giving her credit. And so at last all the bankers and the practical +business men come to believe that credit is something eatable, +drinkable, and substantial, and that bank managers can increase +or diminish the harvest by becoming more credulous or more +sceptical as to whether the people to whom they lend money will +pay them or not (issuing or restricting credit, as they call it). The +city articles in the papers, the addresses of bank chairmen at the +annual shareholders’ meetings, the financial debates in Parliament, +are full of nonsensical phrases about issuing credit, destroying +credit, restricting credit, as if somebody were shovelling +credit about with a spade. Clever men put forward wonderful +schemes based on the calculation that when a banker lends five +thousand pounds worth of spare subsistence he also gives the +borrower credit for five thousand pounds, the five thousand credit +added to the five thousand spare subsistence making ten thousand +altogether! Instead of being immediately rushed into the +nearest lunatic asylum, these clever ones find disciples both in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_248">[Pg 248]</span> +Parliament and in the city. They propose to extend our industries +(that is, build ships and factories and railway engines and the like) +with credit. They believe that you can double the quantity of +goods in the country by changing the cipher 2 into the cipher 4. +Whenever a scarcity of spare subsistence forces the Bank of England +to raise the Bank Rate they accuse the directors of playing +them a dirty trick and preventing them from extending their +business, as if the Governor and Company of the Bank of England +could keep the rate down any more than the barometer can +keep the mercury down in fair weather. They think they know, +because they are “practical business men”. But for national purposes +they are maniacs with dangerous delusions; and the Governments +who take their advice soon find themselves on the rocks.</p> + +<p>What is it, then, that really fixes the price you have to pay if you +hire ready money from your bank, or that you receive for lending +it to the bank (on deposit), or to trading companies by buying +shares, or to the Government or the Municipalities? In other +words, what fixes the so-called price of money, meaning the cost +of hiring it? And what fixes the price of incomes when their +owners sell them for ready money in the Stock Exchange?</p> + +<p>Well, it depends on the proportion between the quantity of +spare subsistence (“saved” money) there may be in the market to +be hired, and how much the people who want to use it up are able +and willing to pay for the hire of it. On the one hand you have the +property owners who are living on less than their incomes and +therefore want to dispose of their spare stuff before it goes rotten. +On the other are the business men who want what the property +owners have not consumed to feed the proletarians whose labor +they need to start new businesses or extend old ones. Beside these, +you have the spendthrift property owners who have lived beyond +their incomes, and must therefore sell the incomes (or part of +them) for ready money to pay their debts. Between them all, +you get a Supply and Demand according to which spare money +and incomes are cheap or dear. The price runs up when the supply +runs short or the demand becomes more pressing. It runs +down when the supply increases or the demand slackens.</p> + +<p>By the way, now that we are picking up the terms Supply and +Demand, remember that Demand in the money market sense<span class="pagenum" id="Page_249">[Pg 249]</span> +does not mean want alone: it means only the want that the wanter +can afford to satisfy. The demand of a hungry child for food is +very strong and very loud; but it does not count in business unless +the mother has money to buy food for the child. But with +this rather inhuman qualification supply and demand (called +“effective demand”) settle the price of everything that has a price.</p> + +<p>Banks are safe when they lend their money (or rather yours) +judiciously. If they make bad investments, or trust the wrong +people, or speculate, they may ruin themselves and their customers. +This happened occasionally when there were many banks. +But now that the big ones have swallowed up the little ones they +are so few and so big that they could not afford to let one another +break, nor indeed could the Government. So you are fairly safe in +keeping your money at a big bank, and need have no scruple +about availing yourself of its readiness to oblige you in many +ways, including acting as your stockbroker, borrowing from you +at interest (on deposit account), and lending you, though at a +considerably higher rate, any ready money for the repayment of +which you can offer reasonably satisfactory security.</p> + +<p>As we now see why the hiring terms for money vary from time +to time, sometimes from hour to hour, let us amuse ourselves by +working out what would happen at the banks if the Government, +misled by the practical business men, or by the millennial amateurs, +were to attempt to raise say £30,000 millions by a tax on +capital, and another £30,000 millions by a tax on credit.</p> + +<p>The announcement of the tax on credit would make an end of +that part of the business at once by destroying all credit. The +financial magnate who the day before could raise a million at six +or seven per cent by raising his finger would not be able to borrow +five shillings from his butler unless the butler let him have it for +the sake of old times without the least hope of ever seeing it again.</p> + +<p>To pay the tax the capitalists would have to draw out every +farthing they had in the bank, and instruct their stockbrokers +to sell out all their shares and debentures and Government and +municipal stock. There would be such a prodigious demand for +ready money that the Governor and Company of the Bank of +England would meet at eleven o’clock and resolve, after some +hesitation, to raise the Bank Rate boldly to ten per cent. After<span class="pagenum" id="Page_250">[Pg 250]</span> +lunch they would be summoned hurriedly to raise it to a hundred +per cent; and before they could send out this staggering announcement +they would learn that they might save themselves +the trouble, as all the banks, after paying out three shillings in the +pound, had stopped payment and stuck up a notice on their +closed doors that they hoped to be able to pay their customers the +rest when they had realized their investments: that is, called in +their loans and sold their stocks and shares. But the stockbrokers +would report only one price for all stocks, that price being no +pounds, no shillings, and no pence, not even farthings. For that +is the price in a market where there are all sellers and no buyers.</p> + +<p>When the tax collector called for his money, the taxpayer would +have to say “I can get no money for you; so instead of paying the +tax on my capital, here is the capital itself for you. Here is a +bundle of share certificates which you can sell to the waste paper +dealer for a halfpenny. Here is a bundle of bonds payable to +bearer which you can try your luck with, and a sheet of coupons +which in a few years’ time will be as valuable as rare and obsolete +postage stamps. Here is a transfer which will authorize the Bank +of England to run its pen through my name in the War Loan +register and substitute your own. And much good may they all +do you! I must shew you out myself, as my servants are in the +streets starving because I have no money to pay their wages: in +fact, I should not have had anything to eat myself today if I had +not pawned my evening clothes; and precious little the pawnbroker +would give me on them, as he is short of money and piled +up to the ceiling with evening suits. Good morning.”</p> + +<p>You may ask what, after all, would that matter? As nine out of +every ten people have no capital and no credit in the financial +sense (that is to say, though a shopkeeper might trust them until +the end of the week, no banker would dream of lending them a +sixpence), they could look on and laugh, crying “Let the rich take +their turn at being penniless, as we so often are”. But what about +the great numbers of poor who live on the rich, the servants, the +employers and employed in the luxury trades, the fashionable +doctors and solicitors? Even in the productive trades what would +happen with the banks all shut up and bankrupt, the money for +wages all taken by the Government, no cheque payable and no<span class="pagenum" id="Page_251">[Pg 251]</span> +bill of exchange discountable? Unless the Government were +ready instantly to take over and manage every business in the +country: that is, to establish complete nationalization of industry +in a thunderclap without ever having foreseen or intended such a +thing, ruin and starvation would be followed by riot and looting: +riot and looting would only make bad worse; and finally the +survivors, if there were any, would be only too glad to fall on +their knees before any Napoleon or Mussolini who would organize +the violence of the mob and re-establish the old state of things, +or as much of it as could be rescued from the chaos, by main +force applied by a ruthless dictator.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c55">55</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">MONEY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU now know more than most people about the money +market. But it is not enough to know what settles the value +of stocks and shares in spare money from day to day. +All money is not spare money. Few of us spend as much on +shares as on food and clothes and lodging. Most of us, having no +spare money, would as soon dream of buying shooting lodges in +Scotland as of investing or speculating on the Stock Exchange; +yet we use money. Suppose there were no spare money on earth, +what would fix the value of money? What is money?</p> + +<p>Take a gold coin for instance. You are probably old enough to +remember such things before the war swept them away and substituted +bits of paper called Treasury notes; and you may be +young enough to live until they come back again. What is a gold +coin? It is a tool for buying things in exactly the same sense as a +silver spoon is a tool for eating an egg. Buying and selling would +be impossible without such tools. Suppose they did not exist, and +you wanted to go somewhere in a bus! Suppose the only movable +property you had was twenty ducks and a donkey! When the bus +conductor came round for the fare you would offer him the +donkey and ask for the change in potatoes, or offer him a duck and +ask for the change in eggs. This would be so troublesome, and the +bargaining so prolonged, that next time you would find it cheaper +to ride the donkey instead of taking the bus: indeed there would<span class="pagenum" id="Page_252">[Pg 252]</span> +be no buses because there would be nobody willing to take them, +unless buses were communized and fares abolished.</p> + +<p>Now it is troublesome to take a donkey about, even when it +takes you, but quite easy to carry as much gold as a donkey is +worth. Accordingly, the Government cuts up gold into conveniently +shaped bits weighing a little over 123 grains of standard +gold (22 carat) apiece, to be used for buying and selling. For +transactions that are too small to be settled by a metal so costly as +gold it provides bronze and silver coins, and makes a law that so +many of these coins shall pass as worth one of the gold coins. +Then buying and selling become quite easy. Instead of offering +your donkey to the bus conductor you exchange it for its worth in +coins; and with these in your pocket you can pay your bus fare +in two seconds without having any words about it.</p> + +<p>Thus you see that money is not only a necessary tool for buying +and selling, but also a measure of value; for when it is introduced +we stop saying that a donkey is worth so many ducks or half a +horse, and say instead that it is worth so many pounds or shillings. +This enables accounts to be kept, and makes commerce possible.</p> + +<p>All this is as easy as A B C. What is not so easy is the question +why the donkey should be worth, say, three-quarters of a sovereign +(fifteen bob, it would be called at this price), or, to put it +the other way, why fifteen bob should be worth a donkey. All you +can say is that a buyer at this price is a person with fifteen shillings +who wants a donkey more than she wants the fifteen shillings, +and a seller at this price a person with a donkey who would rather +have fifteen shillings than keep the donkey. The buyer, though +she wants a donkey, does not want it badly enough to give more +than fifteen shillings for it; and the seller, though she wants +money, will not let the donkey go for less than fifteen; and so they +exchange. Their respective needs just balance at that figure.</p> + +<p>Now a donkey represents just a donkey and nothing else; but +fifteen shillings represents fifteen shillingsworth of anything you +like, from food and drink to a cheap umbrella. Any fund of money +represents subsistence; but do not forget that though you can eat +and drink and wear subsistence, you cannot eat or drink or wear +Treasury notes and metal coins. Granted that if you have two +shillings the dairyman will give you a pound of butter for it; still,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_253">[Pg 253]</span> +a pound of butter is no more a round piece of metal than a cat is +a flat iron; and if there were no butter you would have to eat dry +bread, even if you had millions and millions of shillings.</p> + +<p>Besides, butter is not always two shillings: it is sometimes two +and twopence or even two and sixpence. There are people now +living who have bought good fresh butter for fourpence a pound, +and complained of its being dear at that. It is easy to say that +butter is cheap when it is plentiful, and dear when it is scarce; but +this is only one side of the bargain. If ten pounds of butter cost a +sovereign on Monday and a sovereign and a quarter on Saturday, +is that because there is less butter or more gold?</p> + +<p>Well, it may be one or the other or both combined. If the Government +were to strike off enough new sovereigns at the Mint +to double the number in circulation we should have to pay two +sovereigns for ten pounds of butter, not because butter would be +scarcer but because gold would be more plentiful. But there is no +danger of this happening, because gold is so scarce and hard to +get that if the Government turned more of it into sovereigns than +were needed to conduct our buying and selling, the superfluous +ones would be melted down, and the gold used for other purposes, +in spite of the law against it; and this would go on until sovereigns +were so scarce that you could get more for gold in the +form of sovereigns than in the form of watch chains or bracelets. +For this reason people feel safe with gold money: the gold in the +sovereign keeps its value for other purposes than buying and selling; +and if the worst came to the worst, and the British Empire +were annexed by the planet Mars, and only Martian money were +current, the sovereigns would still be taken in exchange for as +much butter or anything else as before, not as money, but as so +much gold; so that the British sovereign would buy as much as a +Martian gold sovereign of equal weight.</p> + +<p>Suppose, however, you had a dishonest Government! Suppose +the country and its Mint were ruled by a king who was a thief. +Suppose he owed large sums of money, and wished to cheat his +creditors. He could do it by paying in sovereigns which were +made of lead, with just gold enough in them to make them +look genuine. Henry the Eighth did it less crudely by giving +short weight in silver coins; and he was not the only ruler who<span class="pagenum" id="Page_254">[Pg 254]</span> +played the same trick when pressed for money. When such +frauds are discovered prices go up and wages follow them. The +only gainers were those who, like the king, had borrowed heavy +money and were paying it in light; and what they gained the +creditors lost. But it was a low trick, damaging English as well +as royal credit, as all English debtors were inextricably and +involuntarily engaged in the swindle as deeply as the king.</p> + +<p>The moral is that a dishonest ruler is one of the greatest dangers +a nation has to dread. People who do not understand these things +make a great fuss because Henry married six wives and had very +bad luck with most of them, and because he allowed the nobles to +plunder the Church. But we are far more concerned today with +his debasement of the coinage; for that is a danger that is hanging +over our own heads. Henry’s trick is now played not only by +kings, but by republican governments with Socialist majorities +and by the Soviets of proletarian States, with the result that innocent +women, provided comfortably for by years of self-denial +on the part of their parents in paying insurance premiums, find +themselves starving; pensions earned by lifetimes of honorable +and arduous service lose their value, leaving the pensioners to +survive their privations as castaways survive in a boat at sea; and +enormous fortunes are made without the least merit by A, B, and +C, whilst X, Y, and Z, without the least fault, go bankrupt. The +matter is so serious and so menacing that you must summon all +your patience while I explain it more particularly.</p> + +<p>At present (1927) we do not use sovereigns. We use bits of +paper, mostly dirty and smelly, with the words <i>One Pound</i> printed +in large letters on them, and a picture of the Houses of Parliament +on the back. There is also a printed notice that the bit of +paper is a currency note, and that by Act of Parliament IV and V +Geo. V, ch. XIV, if you owe anyone a pound you can pay him by +handing him the bit of paper, which he must accept as a full +discharge of your debt to him whether he likes or not.</p> + +<p>Now there is no use pretending that this bit of paper which you +can pass as a pound is worth anything at all as paper. It is too +small and too crowded with print and pictures to be usable for +any of the uses to which paper can be put, except that of a short +title deed to a poundsworth of goods. Yet there is no law to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_255">[Pg 255]</span> +prevent the Government, which owes 7700 million pounds to its +creditors, from printing off 7700 millions of these one pound +Treasury notes, and paying off all its home creditors with them, +even though a thousand of them would not buy a cigarette.</p> + +<p>You may say that this is too monstrous to be possible. But it has +been done, and that quite recently, as I know to my cost. The +German Government did it after the war when the conquerors, +with insane spite, persisted in demanding sums of money that +the Germans had not got. The Austrian Government did it. The +Russian Government did it. I was owed by these countries sums +sufficient to support me for the rest of my days; and they paid me +in paper money, four thousand million pounds of which was +worth exactly twopence halfpenny in English money. The British +Government thought it was making Germany pay for the war; +but it was really making me and all the other creditors of Germany +pay for it. Now as I was a foreigner and an alien enemy, the +Germans probably do not feel very sorry for me. But the same +occurred to the Germans who were owed German money, +whether by foreigners or by other Germans. Merchants who had +obtained goods for bills payable in six months paid those bills +with paper Marks and thus got the goods for nothing. Mortgages +on land and houses, and debentures and loan stocks of +every redeemable sort, were cleared off in the same way. And one +very unexpected result of this was that German employers, relieved +of the burden of mortgages and loans such as the English +employers were bearing, were able to undersell the English +even in the English market. All sorts of extraordinary things +happened. Nobody saved money, because its value fell from hour +to hour: people went into a restaurant for a five million lunch, +and when they came to pay found that the price had gone up to +seven millions whilst they were eating. The moment a woman +got a scrap of money she rushed to the shops to buy something +with it; for the thing she bought would keep its usefulness, but +the money that bought it, if she kept it until tomorrow, might not +purchase half so much, or a tenth so much, or indeed anything at +all. It was better to pay ten million marks for a frying-pan, even if +you had two frying-pans already, than to buy nothing; for the +frying-pan would remain a frying-pan and fry things (if you had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_256">[Pg 256]</span> +anything to fry) whatever happened; but the ten million marks +might not pay a tram fare by five o’clock the same evening.</p> + +<p>A still better plan in Germany then was to buy shares if you +could get them; for factories and railways will keep as well as +frying-pans. Thus, though people were in a frantic hurry to spend +their money, they were also in a frantic hurry to invest it: that is, +use it as capital; so that there was not only a delusive appearance +of an increase in the national capital produced by the simple expedient +of calling a spare loaf of bread fifty thousand pounds, but a +real increase in the proportion of their subsistence which people +were willing to invest instead of spending. But however the +money was spent, the object of everyone was to get rid of it instantly +by exchanging it for something that would not change +in value. They soon began to use foreign money (American +dollars mostly); and this expedient, eked out with every possible +device for doing without money altogether by bartering, tided +them over until the Government was forced to introduce a new +gold currency and leave the old notes to be thrown into the waste +paper basket or kept to be sold fifty years hence as curiosities, like +the famous assignats of the French Revolution.</p> + +<p>This process of debasement of the currency by a Government in +order that it may cheat its creditors is called by the polite name, +which few understand, of Inflation; and the reversal of the process +by going back to a currency of precious metal is called Deflation. +The worst of it is that the remedy is as painful as the disease, +because if Inflation, by raising prices, enables the debtor to cheat +the creditor, Deflation, by lowering them, enables the creditor to +cheat the debtor. Therefore the most sacred economic duty of a +Government is to keep the value of money steady; and it is because +Governments can play tricks with the value of money that +it is of such vital importance that they should consist of men who +are honest, and who understand money thoroughly.</p> + +<p>At present there is not a Government in the world that answers +fully to this description. Between our own Government, which +took advantage of the war to substitute Treasury notes for our +gold currency, and the German and Russian Governments, which +issued so many notes that a vanload of them would hardly buy a +postage stamp, the difference is only one of degree. And this degree<span class="pagenum" id="Page_257">[Pg 257]</span> +was not in the relative honesty of Englishmen, Russians, and +Germans, but in the pressure of circumstances on them, and consequently +of temptation. Had we been defeated and forced to pay +impossible sums to our conquerors, or momentarily wrecked as +Russia was by the collapse of the Tsardom, we should not have +been any honester; for though the doubling of prices that occurred +here seems to have been caused by scarcity of goods and +labor rather than by an excessive issue of paper money, we still +treat with great respect as high financial authorities gentlemen +who recommend Inflation as a means of providing industry with +additional capital. Whether these gentlemen really believe that +we could double our wealth by simply printing twice as many +Treasury notes, or whether they owe so much money that they +would be greatly relieved if only they could be let pay it in paper +pounds worth only ten shillings, is not always easy to guess. But +if you catch your Parliamentary representative advocating Inflation, +and ask him, at the risk of being told that you are no lady, +whether he is a fool or a rogue, you will give him a salutary shock, +and force him to think for a moment instead of merely grabbing +at the illusion of enriching the nation by calling a penny twopence.</p> + +<p>And now, if you agree with me that it is the duty of a Government +to keep the value of its money always as nearly as possible +at the same level, we are both up against the question, “What +level?” Well, you may take it as a rule of thumb that the answer +always is the existing level, unless it has been tampered with and +has wobbled badly, in which case the easiest answer is “Whatever +level it had before it began to wobble”. But if you want a +real explanation and not a mere rule of thumb, you must think +of coins and notes as useful articles which you carry about because +without them you cannot take a bus or a taxi or a train, or buy a +bun. There must be enough of them to supply you and all the +other people who have purchases to make. In short, coins and +notes are like needles or shovels; and their value is settled in the +same way. If the manufacturers make ten times as many needles +as anyone wants, then their needles will fetch nothing as needles, +because no woman will pay anything for the one needle she wants +if there are nine lying about to be had for nothing. So all that can +be done is to take the nine worthless needles and use the steel in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_258">[Pg 258]</span> +them to make something else (say steel pens), after which there +will be no longer any useless needles, and the remaining useful +ones will be worth at least what it cost to make them, because +sempstresses will want them badly enough to be willing to pay +that price. An intelligent community will try to regulate the supply +of needles so as to keep their value at that level as nearly as +possible. A Capitalist community, on the contrary, will regulate +it so as to make needles yield the utmost profit to the capitalist. +But anyhow the value will depend on the quantity available.</p> + +<p>Now just as a needle is for sewing, and is of no legitimate use +for anything else, so coins and notes are for enabling people to buy +and sell, and no use for anything else. And one coin will do for +many sales as it passes from hand to hand, just as one needle will +do to hem many handkerchiefs. This makes it very difficult to +find out how many needles and coins are wanted. You cannot say +“There are so many handkerchiefs in the country which must be +hemmed; so we will make a needle for every one of them”, or +“There are so many loaves of bread to be sold every morning; so +we will make coins or issue notes for the price of every one of +them”. No person or Government on earth can say beforehand +how many needles or coins will be enough. You can count the +mouths you have to feed, and say how many loaves will be required +to fill them, because a slice of bread can be eaten only +once, and is destroyed by being eaten; but a needle or a sovereign +or a Treasury note can be used over and over again. One pound +may be lying in an old stocking until the landlord calls for it, +whilst another may be changing hands fifty times a day and effecting +a sale every time. How then is a Government to settle how +many coins and notes it shall issue? And how is a needle manufacturer +to decide how many needles he shall make?</p> + +<p>There is only one way of doing it. The needle makers just keep +on making needles at a fancy price until they find they cannot sell +them all without charging less for them; and then they go on +charging less and less, but selling more and more (because of the +cheapness), until the price is so low that they would make less +profit if it went any lower, after which they make no more needles +than are necessary to keep the supply, and consequently the price, +just at that point. The Government has to do the same with gold<span class="pagenum" id="Page_259">[Pg 259]</span> +coins. At first, because gold is more useful for coins than for anything +else, an ounce of gold coined into sovereigns will be worth +more than an ounce of uncoined gold (called bar or bullion). But +if the Government issues more sovereigns than are needed for our +buying and selling there will be more sovereigns than are wanted; +and their value per ounce of gold will fall below that of gold +bullion. This will be shewn by all prices going up, including that +of gold in bars and ingots. The result will be that gold merchants +will find it profitable to melt down sovereigns into bars of gold to +be made into watches and bracelets and other things than coins. +But this melting down reduces the number of sovereigns, which +immediately begin to rise in value as they become scarcer until +gold in the form of sovereigns is worth as much as gold in any +other form. In this way, as long as money consists of gold, and +melting down cannot be prevented as soon as it becomes profitable, +the value of the coinage fixes and maintains itself automatically. +It is against the British law to melt down a British sovereign +in the British Empire; but as this silly law cannot restrain, say, a +Dutch goldsmith in Amsterdam from melting down as many +British sovereigns as he pleases, it does not count.</p> + +<p>Though this settles the value of gold money, and all prices can +be fixed in terms of gold, a penny being the two hundred and +fortieth part of a sovereign, half a crown the eighth part of a +sovereign, and so on, yet you cannot have gold pennies or even +sixpences: they would be too small to handle. Also, if you want to +make or receive a payment of five thousand pounds, you would +find five thousand sovereigns more than you would care to carry. +We get out of the penny and sixpenny difficulty by using coins of +bronze and silver, making a law that bronze pennies shall be +accepted, provided not more than twelve are offered at a time, as +worth the two hundred and fortieth part of a sovereign, and that +silver coins shall pass up to £2. We get over the five thousand +pound difficulty by allowing the Bank of England to issue promissory +notes, payable at sight in gold at the Bank, for sums of five +pounds, ten pounds, a hundred pounds, and so on. People hand +these notes from one to another in buying and selling, knowing +them to be “as good as gold”. Certain Scottish and Irish banks +have the same privilege on condition that they hold sufficient<span class="pagenum" id="Page_260">[Pg 260]</span> +gold in their cellars to redeem the notes when presented, and, of +course, that they do not pay their debts in their own notes.</p> + +<p>In this way we all get used to paper money as well as to bronze +and silver coins: that is, we get used to pretending that a scrap of +paper with a water mark is worth 615 grains of gold or thereabouts; +that a bit of metal that is only half silver is worth a much +larger piece of pure silver; that 240 bits of bronze are worth a +sovereign, and so on. We find these cheap substitutes do just as +well as gold coins; and we naturally begin to ask what is the use of +having any gold money at all, seeing that we get on quite well +without it. Paper is just as effective as an instrument of exchange, +and much less heavy to handle. We measure prices in quantities +of gold; but imaginary gold does for that as well as real gold, just +as you can measure fluids by pints and quarts without having a +drop of beer in the house. If only the honesty of Governments +could be depended on, the use of gold for money would be a +pure luxury, like using gold safety pins and diamond shirt studs +instead of common ones, which fasten quite as well.</p> + +<p>But that is a very large If. When there is a genuine gold currency, +the purchasing power of the coins does not depend on the +honesty of the Government: they are valuable as precious metal, +and can be turned to other purposes if the Government issues +more of them than are needed for buying and selling. But the +Government can go on printing and issuing paper money until it +is worthless. Where should it stop when the check of gold is removed? +As we have seen, it should stop the moment there is any +sign of a general rise of prices, because the only thing that can +cause a general rise of prices is a fall in the value of money. This +or that article may become cheaper by the discovery of new ways +of making it, or dearer by a failure in the crops, or worthless by a +change of fashion; but all the articles do not move together from +these causes: some rise and others fall. When they all rise or fall +simultaneously, then it is not the articles that are changing in value +but the money. In a paper money country the Government should +watch carefully for such movements; and when prices all rise +together they should withdraw notes from circulation until prices +all fall again. When all prices fall simultaneously the Government +should issue fresh notes until they rise again. What is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_261">[Pg 261]</span> +needed is just enough money to do all the ready money selling +and buying in the country. When less is issued money gets a +scarcity value; so that when you go into a grocer’s shop he will +give you more for your money (falling prices); and when more is +issued there is a glut of it and the grocer will give less for it (rising +prices). The business of an honest and understanding Government +is to keep it steady by adjusting the supply to the demand. +When Governments are either dishonest or ignorant, or both, +there is no safety save in a currency of precious metal.</p> + +<p>Remember, by the way, that modern banking makes it possible +to do an enormous quantity of business without coinage or notes +or money of any sort. Suppose Mrs John Doe and Mrs Richard +Roe are both in business. Suppose Mrs Doe sells Mrs Roe five +hundred pounds’ worth of goods, and at the same time buys goods +from her to the value of five hundred pounds and one penny. +They do business to the amount of a thousand pounds and one +penny; yet all the money they need to settle their accounts is the +odd penny. If they keep their accounts at the same bank even +the penny is not necessary. The banker transfers a penny from +Mrs Doe’s account to Mrs Roe’s; and the thing is done. When +you have to pay a business debt you do not give your creditor the +money: you give him an order on your banker for it (a cheque); +and he does not go to your bank and cash the cheque: he gives it +to his own banker to collect. Thus every bank finds every day that +it has to pay a heap of money to other banks which hold cheques +on it for collection, and at the same time to receive a heap of +money for the cheques it has received for collection from the +other banks. These cheques taken together may amount to hundreds +of thousands of pounds, yet the difference between the +ones to be paid and the ones to be collected may be only a few +pounds or less. So the banks began by setting up a Clearing +House, as they call it, to add up all the cheques and find out what +each bank ought to pay or receive on balance. This saved a great +deal of money handling, as the transfer of a single pound from +one bank to another would settle transactions involving huge +sums. But it presently occurred to the banks that even this pound +might be saved if they all kept an account at the same bank. So +the banks themselves opened accounts at the Bank of England;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_262">[Pg 262]</span> +and now their accounts with oneanother are settled by a couple +of entries in the Bank of England’s books; and trade to the +amount of millions and millions is done by pure figures without +the use of coinage or notes. If we were all well enough off to have +banking accounts money might disappear altogether, except for +small transactions between strangers whose names and addresses +were unknown to oneanother: for instance, you give an order and +pay by a cheque in a shop because you can count on finding the +shopkeeper in the same place if there is anything wrong with the +goods; and he can count on finding you similarly if there is anything +wrong with your cheque; but if you take a taxi on the way +home, you can hardly expect the driver to open an account for +you; so you settle with him by handing him his fare in coin.</p> + +<p>This need for pocket money (change) is greatly reduced by +Communism. In the days of turnpike roads and toll bridges every +traveller had to keep a supply of money to pay tolls at every turnpike +gate and bridge head. Now that the roads and bridges are +communized he can travel by road from London to Aberdeen in +his car without having to put his hand in his pocket once to pay +for the roads, because he has already paid when taking out the +communal license for his car. If he pays his hotel bills by cheque +he needs no money for his journey except for tips; and when +these fall into disuse, as the old custom of making presents to +judges has done, it is easy to conceive motoring trips, in the +Communist future, being carried out in the greatest luxury by +highly prosperous but literally penniless persons.</p> + +<p>In this way actual money is coming to be replaced more and +more by money of account: that is, we still count our earnings and +our debts in terms of money, and value our position in the same +way, earning hundreds of pounds, paying hundreds of pounds, +owning hundreds of poundsworth of furniture and clothes and +motor cars, and yet never having more than a few pounds and +a handful of silver in our pockets from one end of our lives to the +other. The cost of providing coins and notes for the nation to buy +and sell with is dwindling continuously to a smaller and smaller +percentage of the value of the goods bought and sold.</p> + +<p>It may amuse you to realize that when coinage disappears altogether +it does not matter whether we call our debts sovereigns<span class="pagenum" id="Page_263">[Pg 263]</span> +and pennies and shillings or millions and billions and trillions. +When the Germans were paying millions for tram fares and postage +stamps, no harm was done by the apparent magnitude of the +price: poor men could still ride in trams and send letters. If only +those prices could have been depended on to stay put, so that the +poor man (or the rich one for that matter) could have felt sure +that his million mark note would buy as much tomorrow as today, +and as much next year as this year, it would not have inconvenienced +him in the least that the million mark note used to be a +bronze coin. Germany has now stabilized her currency at the old +rate of twenty marks to the English pound. Austria stabilized hers +at first at the startling rate of 300,000 tenpences to the English +pound but had to alter this to 34½ sevenpenny schillings later on. +Except for the look of the thing the change made no great difference +to the marketing housekeeper. When prices are in millions +she soon gets into the habit of dropping the six noughts in conversation +across the counter. Such prices seem silly to us because +we are not accustomed to millionaire scavengers and beef at billions +a pound. We are accustomed to pounds worth 160 ounces +of butter; but pounds worth half a grain of butter or ten tons of +butter will do as long as they are stabilized at that, and as long as +the money is either money of account, existing only as ink marks +in ledgers, or paper notes of no intrinsic value. If a tram ticket +costs a million pounds it can be paid more cheaply than by a +penny, provided the million pounds be only a scrap of paper costing +less than a disk of bronze.</p> + +<p>To sum up, the most important thing about money is to maintain +its stability, so that a pound will buy as much a year hence or +ten years hence or fifty years hence as today, and no more. With +paper money this stability has to be maintained by the Government. +With a gold currency it tends to maintain itself even when +the natural supply of gold is increased by discoveries of new deposits, +because of the curious fact that the demand for gold in the +world is practically infinite. You have to choose (as a voter) between +trusting to the natural stability of gold and the natural +stability of the honesty and intelligence of the members of the +Government. And, with due respect for these gentlemen, I advise +you, as long as the Capitalist system lasts, to vote for gold.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_264">[Pg 264]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c56">56</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">NATIONALIZATION OF BANKING</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU now know enough about banking and the manufacture +of money to understand that they are necessities of +civilization. They are in some respects quite peculiar businesses. +Banking heaps up huge masses of capital in the banker’s +hands for absolutely nothing but the provision of a till to put +it in, and clerks to keep an account of it. Coinage is useless +without a Government guarantee of the genuineness of the coins, +and a code of laws making it a serious crime for any private person +to make counterfeit coins, besides settling the limits within +which coins that are stamped with more than their value as metal +(called token coinage) can be used for paying debts.</p> + +<p>As it is impossible for any private person or company to fulfil +these coinage conditions satisfactorily, the manufacture of money +is a nationalized business, unlike the manufacture of boots. You +do not see a mint in every street as you see a bootmaker’s. All the +money is made in <span class="allsmcap">THE</span> Mint, which is a Government factory of +coins. If, in your disgust at the disagreeable white metal shillings +which have been substituted since the war for the old silver ones, +you were to set up a private mint of your own, you would be sent +to prison for coining, even though you could prove that your nice +shillings were worth more than the nasty ones of the Government. +Formerly, if you had a quantity of gold, you could take it to +the Mint, and have it made into sovereigns for you at a small +charge for the King’s image and guarantee called seignorage; +but you were not allowed to make the coins for yourself out of +your own gold. Today the Mint will not do that for you because +it is easier for you to give your gold to your banker, who will give +you credit for its worth in money. Thus the whole business is as +strictly nationalized as that of the Post Office. Perhaps you do +not know that you can be prosecuted for carrying a letter for hire +instead of giving it to the Postmaster-General to carry. But you +can, just as you can be prosecuted for making a coin, or for melting +one down. And nobody objects. The people who, when it is +proposed to nationalize the coal mines and the railways, shriek +into your ears that nationalization is robbery and ruin, are so<span class="pagenum" id="Page_265">[Pg 265]</span> +perfectly satisfied with the nationalization of the Mint that they +never even notice that it is nationalized, poor dears!</p> + +<p>However, private persons can issue a currency of their own, +provided it is not an imitation of the Government currency. You +may write a cheque, or a bill of exchange, and use it as paper +money as often as you please; and no policeman can lay a finger +on you for it provided (<i>a</i>) that you have enough Government +money at your bank to meet the cheque when it is presented for +payment, and (<i>b</i>) that the piece of paper on which your cheque is +printed, or your bill of exchange drawn, bears no resemblance to +a Treasury note or a bank note. An enormous volume of business +is done today by these private currencies of cheques and bills of +exchange. But they are not money: they are only title deeds to +money, just as money itself is only a title deed to goods. If you +owe money to your grocer he may refuse to take a cheque in payment; +but if you offer him Treasury notes or sovereigns, he must +take them whether he likes them or not. If you are trading with a +manufacturer, and offer him a bill of exchange pledging you to +pay for his goods in six months, he may refuse it and insist on +Government money down on the nail. But he may not refuse +Government money. Your offer of it is “legal tender”.</p> + +<p>Besides, money, as we have seen, is a measure of value; and +cheques and bills are not. The cheques and bills would have no +meaning and no use unless they were expressed in terms of +money. They are all for so many pounds, shillings, and pence; +and if there were no pounds, shillings, and pence in the background, +a cheque would have to run “Pay to Emma Wilkins or +Order two pairs of secondhand stockings, slightly laddered, my +share of the family Pekingese dog, and half an egg”. No banker +would undertake to pay cheques of that sort. Both cheques and +banking depend on the existence of nationalized money.</p> + +<p>Banking is not yet nationalized; but it will be, because the public +gain from nationalization will lead people to vote for it when +they understand it just as they will vote for nationalization of the +coal mines. Business people need capital to start and extend their +businesses just as they need coal to warm themselves. As we have +seen, when they want hundreds of thousands they get them by +paying enormous commissions to financiers, who are so spoiled<span class="pagenum" id="Page_266">[Pg 266]</span> +by huge profits that they will not deign to look at what they regard +as small business. Those who want tens of thousands are not +catered for: and those who want modest hundreds are often +driven to borrow from money lenders at high rates of interest because +the bank manager does not think it worth the bank’s while +to let them overdraw. If you could shew these traders a bank +working not to make profits at the expense of its customers but to +distribute capital as cheaply as possible for the good of the country +to all the businesses, large or small, which needed it, they +would rush to it and snap their fingers at the profiteering financiers. +A national or municipal bank would be just that. It would +bring down the price of capital just as nationalization of the coal +mines would bring down the price of coal, by eliminating the +profiteer; and all the profiteers except the money profiteers (financiers +and bankers) will be finally converted to it by this prospect, +because, though they aim at making as much profit as possible +out of you when you go shopping, they are determined that other +people shall make as little profit as possible out of them.</p> + +<p>Nationalization of Banking therefore needs no Socialist advocacy +to recommend it to the middle class. It is just as likely to be +finally achieved by a Conservative Government as by a Labor +one. The proof is that the first municipal bank has been established +in Birmingham, which returns twelve members to Parliament +of whom eleven are Conservatives, and strong ones at that. +Only one is Labor. The Birmingham municipal bank has been +so easily and brilliantly successful that unless it be deliberately +sabotaged in the interests of the financiers by a press campaign +against it, which is practically impossible in a city of manufacturers, +it will lead to a development of municipal banking all over +the manufacturing districts. Already there are several others.</p> + +<p>Meanwhile the bankers and financiers continue to assure us +that their business is such a mysteriously difficult one that no +Government or municipal department could deal with it successfully. +They are right about the mystery, which is due to the fact +that they only half understand their own business, and their +customers do not understand it at all. By this time I hope you +understand it much better than an average banker. But the difficulty +is all nonsense. Let us see again what a bank has to do.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_267">[Pg 267]</span></p> + +<p>By simply offering to keep people’s money safe for them, and to +make payments out of it for them to anyone they choose to name +(by cheque), and to keep a simple cash account of these payments +for them, it gets into its hands a mass of spare money which it +professes to keep at its customers’ call, but which it finds by experience +it can hire out to the extent of about sixteen shillings in +the pound because each customer keeps a balance to his credit all +the time. There is no mystery or difficulty about this. It can be +done by government or municipal banks as easily as petty banking, +with its currency of postal notes and stamps, is done by our +national post offices and savings banks. The only part of it that is +not automatically successful is the hiring out of the money when it +is paid in. A bank manager whose judgment was bad would very +soon get his bank into difficulties by hiring out the spare money +to traders who are in a bad way, either because their businesses +were being superseded by new businesses, or because they were +too honest, or not honest enough, or extravagant, or drunken, or +lazy, or not good men of business, or poetically unfitted to succeed. +But a manager who was too cautious to lend any money +at all would be still more disastrous; for we must continually +remember that the things represented by the spare money in the +bank will not keep, and that if fifty billions’ worth of food were +saved out of the year’s harvest and lodged in a State bank (or any +other bank) it would be a dead loss and waste if it were not eaten +pretty promptly by workers building up facilities for producing +future harvests. The bank manager can choose the person to +whom he lends the bank’s spare money; but he cannot choose +not to lend it at all; just as a baker, when he has sold all the bread +he can for ready money, must either give credit for the rest to +somebody or else throw the loaves into the dustbin.</p> + +<p>Only, there is this difference between the baker and the banker. +The baker can refrain from baking more loaves than he can +reasonably expect to sell; but the banker may find himself heaped +up with far more spare money than he can find safe hirers for; and +then he has not only to take chances himself, but to tempt tradesmen +by low rates of hire to take them (“the banks are granting +credit freely” the city articles in the papers will say), whereas at +other times his spare money will be so short that he will pick and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_268">[Pg 268]</span> +choose and charge high interest (“the bankers are restricting +credit”); and this is why it takes more knowledge and critical +judgment to manage a bank than to run a baker’s shop.</p> + +<p>No wonder the bankers, who make enormous profits, and consequently +have the greatest dread of having these cut off by the +nationalization of banking, declare that no Government could +possibly do this difficult work of hiring out money, and that it +must be left to them, as they alone understand it! Now, to begin +with, they neither understand it nor do it themselves. Their bad +advice produced widespread ruin in Europe after the war, simply +because they did not understand the rudiments of their business, +and persisted in reasoning on the assumption that spent capital +still exists, and that credit is something solid that can be eaten +and drunk and worn and lived in. The people who do the really +successful work of hiring out the heaps of spare money in the +bank for use in business are not the bankers but the bank managers, +who are only employees. Their position as such is not more +eligible either in money or social standing than that of an upper +division civil servant, and is in many respects much less eligible. +They would be only too glad to be civil servants instead of private +employees. As to the superior direction which deals with what +may be called the wholesale investment of the banked spare +money as distinguished from its retail hirings to ordinary tradesmen +and men of business, the pretence that this could not be +done by the Treasury or any modern public finance department +is a tale for the marines. The Bank of England is as glad to have a +former Treasury official on its staff as the London Midland and +Scottish Railway to have a former civil servant for its Chairman.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c57">57</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">COMPENSATION FOR NATIONALIZATION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">B</span>Y the way, when demonstrating the need for the nationalization +of banking to you I did not forget that you may be +a bank shareholder, and that your attention may have been +distracted by your wonder as to what will become of your shares +when the banks are nationalized. I have had to consider this +question rather closely myself, because, as it happens, my wife<span class="pagenum" id="Page_269">[Pg 269]</span> +is a bank shareholder. We might have to cut down our household +expenses if everyone went to a national or municipal bank +instead of to her bank. In fact, when banking is nationalized, +private banking will probably be made a crime, like private +coining or letter carrying. So we shall certainly insist on the +Government buying her shares when it nationalizes banking.</p> + +<p>The Government will buy them willingly enough, for the excellent +reason that it will get the money by taxing all capitalists’ +incomes; so that if my wife were the only capitalist in the country +the transaction would be as broad as it was long: the Government +would take from her with one hand what it gave her with the other. +Fortunately for her there are plenty of other capitalists to be taxed +along with her; so that instead of having to provide all the money +to buy herself out, she will have to provide only a little bit of it; +and all the little bits that the other capitalists will have to provide +will go into her pocket. This transaction is called Compensation.</p> + +<p>It is very important that you should grasp this quaint process +which seems so perfectly fair and ordinary. It explains how Governments +compensate without really compensating, and how +such compensation costs the nation nothing, being really a +method of expropriation. Just consider. If the Government purchases +a piece of land or a railway or a bank or a coal mine, and +pays for it out of the taxes, it is evident that the Government gets +it for nothing: it is the taxpayers who pay. And if the tax is a tax +like the income tax, from which the bulk of the nation is wholly or +partially exempt, or the supertax and estate duties, which fall on +the capitalist classes only, then the Government has compelled +the capitalist class to buy out one of themselves and present her +property to the nation without any compensation whatever. The +so-called compensation is only an adjustment by which the loss is +shared by the whole capitalist class instead of being borne wholly +by the particular member of it whose piece of land or bank shares +or other property the Government happens to want. Even that +member pays her share of the tax without compensation.</p> + +<p>Some ladies may find this clearer if an imaginary case is put +before them in figures. Suppose the Government wants a piece of +land of the market value of £1000! Suppose it raises that sum, +not by taxing the nation, but by taxing the incomes of a hundred<span class="pagenum" id="Page_270">[Pg 270]</span> +rich landlords, including the owner of the piece of land, making +each of them contribute £10! The Government then takes the +piece of land, and solemnly hands £1000 to its former owner, +telling him that he has nothing to complain of, as he has been +paid the full market value of his land instead of having had it +wrested from him violently in a revolutionary manner, as the +Bolshevists took the land from the Russian landlords in 1917. +Nothing can be more reasonable and constitutional and customary; +the most Conservative Government might do it; in fact +(except for the substitution of all the landlords for a hundred +selected ones) Conservative Governments have done it over and +over again. None the less, at the end of the transaction a piece of +land has passed from private property into national property; +and a hundred landlords have had their incomes reduced by ten +shillings a year each (the interest on £10 at 5 per cent). It is quite +clear that if such a transaction is repeated often enough the +nation will have all the land, and the incomes of the landlords will +be reduced to nothing, although every acre has been bought from +its owner at full market price. The process can be applied to bank +shares or any other shares as easily as to acres.</p> + +<p>Let me repeat that this is not something that may be done: it is +something that has been done and is being done. It has gone so +far already that a huge quantity of property formerly owned by +private persons is now owned by the Government and the municipalities: +that is, by the nation; whilst taxation has risen to such +a point that the rich have to remind themselves continually that +their pounds are only thirteen-and-fourpences or less, because the +Government will take the other six and eightpence or more as +income tax and supertax, and that even out of the thirteen and +fourpence the municipalities of the places where their houses are +(rich men keep from two to five houses) will take a considerable +dollop in rates for pure Communism. At present they are selling +their houses in all directions to speculators and contractors who +have made large fortunes out of inflation and War; but these +New Rich will in their turn be forced to buy oneanother out just +as the Old Rich, now called the New Poor, were.</p> + +<p>In this way you get the constitutional rule for nationalization of +private property, which is, always to pay the full market price or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_271">[Pg 271]</span> +more to the proprietors for every scrap of property nationalized. +Pay for it by taxing incomes derived from property (there is, of +course, no compensation for taxation). Your own rule as a voter +should be never to vote for a candidate who advocates expropriation +without compensation, whether he calls himself a Socialist +or Communist, in which case he does not understand his own +political business, or a Liberal. The Liberal impulse is almost +always to give a dog a bad name and hang him: that is, to denounce +the menaced proprietors as enemies of mankind, and ruin +them in a transport of virtuous indignation. But Liberals are not, +as such, hostile to capitalists, nor indeed to anybody but publicans +and imaginary feudal landlords. Conservatives are practically +always for compensation to property owners; and they are +right; but they do not see through the trick of it as you now do.</p> + +<p>Anyhow, always vote against the no-compensation candidate +unless you are opposed to nationalization, and are subtle enough +to see that the surest way to defeat it is to advocate its being +carried out vindictively without a farthing of compensation.</p> + +<p>There is, however, an alternative to compensated nationalization +of private industries. Why should not the Government set up +for itself in the industry it desires to nationalize, and extinguish +its private competitors just as the big multiple shops extinguish +the small shops, by underselling them, and by all the other +methods of competitive trade? The Birmingham municipality +has begun the nationalization of banking without troubling itself +about the private banks: it has simply opened its bank in the +street and gone ahead. The parcel post was established without +any compensation to private carriers; and the Cash on Delivery +development of it was effected without any consideration for the +middlemen whom it superseded. Private employers have always +proceeded in this manner on competitive principles; why should +not the State, as public employer, do just the same?</p> + +<p>The reason is that the competitive method is an extremely +wasteful one. When two bakeries are set up in a district that +could be quite well served by one, or two milk carts ply in the +same street, each trying to snatch the other’s custom, it means +that the difference between the cost of running two and one is +sheer waste. When a woman wears out her hat, or rather when<span class="pagenum" id="Page_272">[Pg 272]</span> +the hatmakers change the fashion so as to compel her to buy a +new hat before the one she is wearing is half worn out, and fifty +shops make new hats on the chance of selling that one to her, +there is overproduction, with its sequel of unemployment.</p> + +<p>Now apply this to, for example, the nationalization of railways. +The Government could, no doubt, construct a network of State +railways parallel with the existing railways; so that you could go +from London to Penzance either by the Great Western or by a +new State line running side by side with it. The State could then, +by introducing the system of Penny Transport proposed by Mr +Whately Arnold on the lines of Penny Postage, undersell the +separate private companies and take all their traffic from them. +That would be the competitive method. Then there would be +two railways to Penzance and Thurso and Bristol and Cromer +and everywhere else, one of them carrying nearly all the traffic, +and the other carrying only its leavings and holiday overflows +until it fell into hopeless and dangerous decay and ruin.</p> + +<p>But can you imagine anything more idiotically wasteful? The +cost of making the competing State railway would be enormous, +and quite unnecessary. The ruin of the private railway would be +sheer destruction of a useful and sufficient means of communication +which had itself cost a huge sum. The land occupied by one +of the railways would be wasted. What Government in its senses +would propose such a thing when it could take over the existing +railways by compensating the shareholders in the manner I have +described: that is, distributing their loss over the propertied +class without a farthing of expense to the nation as a whole?</p> + +<p>The same considerations must lead the State to take over the +existing banks. Municipal banks on the Birmingham model may +be competing banks; but when a national banking service comes, +it will come by way of nationalizing the existing private banks.</p> + +<p>There is another objection to the competitive method. If the +State is to compete with private enterprise, it must allow private +enterprise to compete with it. Now this is not practicable if the +full advantage of nationalization is to be obtained. The Post +Office is able to establish a letter service and C.O.D. parcel post +in every village in the country, and a telephone and telegraph +service in most of them, with charges reckoned in pence and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_273">[Pg 273]</span> +halfpence, on condition that profiteers are not allowed to come in +and pick out the easy bits of the business to exploit for themselves. +The Postmaster-General does things for the nation that no +profiteer would or could do; but his rule is All or Nothing.</p> + +<p>A Banker-General would have to insist on the same rule. He +would establish banks, if not literally everywhere, at least in hundreds +of places where the private banks would no more dream of +opening a branch, even on the open-once-a-week scale, than of +building a Grand Opera House. But he, too, would say “All or +Nothing: I will not have any intelligent Jewish gentleman, or +rapacious Christian person trained in the intelligent Jewish gentleman’s +office, picking the plums out of my pudding”.</p> + +<p>Yet do not conclude that all State activities will be State monopolies. +Indeed the nationalization of banking will certainly enlarge +the possibilities of private activity in all sorts of ways. +But as the big public services will have to be made practically +ubiquitous, charging more than they cost in one place and less in +another, they must be protected against sectional private competition. +Otherwise we should have what prevails at present in +municipal building, where all the lucrative contracts for the +houses of the rich and the offices of the capitalists and the +churches and institutions and so forth go to the private employer, +whilst the municipality may build only dwellings for the poor at a +loss, which they conceal from the ratepayers by fictitious figures +as to the value of the land. Municipal building is always insolvent. +If it had a monopoly it could afford to make every town +in the land a ratepayers’ and tenants’ paradise.</p> + +<p>This reminds me to remind you that every nationalization of an +industry or service involves the occupation of land by the State. +This land should always be nationalized by purchase and compensation. +For if it is merely rented, as I am sorry to say it sometimes +is, the charges made to the public must be raised by the +amount of the rent, thus giving the ground landlord the money +value of all the advantages of the nationalization.</p> + +<p>I have said nothing about one of the cruelest effects of superseding +an industry by competition instead of buying it up. The +process consists fundamentally of the gradual impoverishment +and ruin of those who are carrying on the superseded business.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_274">[Pg 274]</span> +Capitalism is ruthless on this point: its principle is “Each for +himself; and devil take the hindmost!” But the State has to +consider the loser as well as the winner. It must not impoverish +anybody. It must let the loser down easily; and there is no other +way of doing this except the way of purchase and compensation.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c58">58</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">PRELIMINARIES TO NATIONALIZATION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU now see that nationalization and municipalization are +so desirable as a means of cheapening the things we all +need that the most violently anti-Socialist Parliaments and +municipal corporations have established nationalized and municipalized +industries in the past, and are quite likely to do so +in future under electoral pressure from Conservative voters. You +see also that the alleged enormous expense of buying out private +owners, which has been alleged by a Coal Commission as an +insuperable objection to the nationalization of our coal mines, is +a bogey, because, though the coalowners (of whom, by the way, +I am one) will be fully compensated, the proprietary class as a +whole will pay the bill out of their unearned incomes, leaving the +nation richer instead of poorer by the transaction. So far so good. +Theoretically, nationalization is perfectly sound.</p> + +<p>Practically, it takes, as the people very accurately put it, a lot +of doing. A mere proclamation that such and such an industry is +nationalized can do nothing but just put a stop to it. Before any +industry or service can be effectively nationalized a new department +of the Civil Service must be created to carry it on. Unless +we had a War Office we could not have an army, because no +soldier could get his pay, or his uniform, or his weapons. Without +an Admiralty, no navy. Without a General Post Office and a +Postmaster-General, no letters in the morning. Without a Royal +Mint and a Master of the Mint, no money. Without Scotland +Yard in London, and Watch Committees in the country, no +police. And as in the present so in the future. Without a great +extension of the Treasury, banking cannot be nationalized, nor +coal without the creation of a Department of Mines much bigger +than our existing Department of Woods and Forests, nor railways<span class="pagenum" id="Page_275">[Pg 275]</span> +without a Railway Board and a Railroadmaster-General as +important as the Post Office and the Postmaster-General.</p> + +<p>Such institutions can be set up by stable and highly organized +States only, which means—and here is the political moral of +it—that they cannot be done by revolutions, or by improvised +dictatorships, or even by permanent States in which, as in America, +where in some cases the civil services are still regarded as the +spoils of office, a new set of officials oust the old ones whenever +the Opposition ousts the Government. What a revolution can do +towards nationalization is to destroy the political power of the +class which opposes nationalization. But such a revolution by +itself cannot nationalize; and the new Government it sets up may +be unable even to carry on the nationalized services it finds in +existence, and be obliged to abandon them to private enterprise.</p> + +<p>A nationalizing Government must also be financially honest, +and determined to make the nationalization a success, and +neither plunder it to eke out the general revenue, nor discredit +and wreck it so to have an excuse for giving the nationalized +service back to the private profiteers. State railways have sometimes +been standing examples of what State management can be +at its worst. The Governments, instead of keeping the railways +in proper repair, grabbed all the money paid by the public in +fares and freightage; applied it to the relief of general taxation; +and let the stations and rolling stock decay until their railways +were the worst in the world, and there was a general clamor for +their denationalization. Private profiteering enterprises have +gone to pieces in the same way and worse; but, as they have been +responsible to themselves only, their failures and frauds have +passed unnoted, whilst the failures and frauds of Governments +have raised great popular agitations and even provoked revolutions. +The misdeeds of Governments are public and conspicuous: +the misdeeds of private traders are practically invisible; and +thus an illusion is created that Governments are less honest and +efficient than private traders. It is only an illusion; but all the +same, honesty and good faith are as necessary in nationalized +businesses as in private ones. Our British nationalized services +are held up as models of integrity; yet the Postmaster-General +overcharges us a little for our letters, and puts the profit into the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_276">[Pg 276]</span> +pockets of the propertied class in the form of reduced income +tax; and the Admiralty is continually fighting against the tendency +to keep down taxation by starving the navy. These depredations +do not amount to much; but they illustrate what may be +done when voters are not vigilant and well instructed.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c59">59</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">CONFISCATION WITHOUT COMPENSATION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">O</span>UR study of nationalization by compensated or distributed +confiscation has no doubt relieved you from all +anxiety as to the need for nationalization without compensation. +But there is always a loud-mouthed, virtuously +indignant political group, still saturated with the revolutionary +traditions of Liberalism, which opposes compensation. If the +property owner is, in effect, a thief, they say, why should he be +compensated for being compelled to cease to do evil and learn to +do well? If by taxation we can make the whole capitalist class find +the money to buy out the coalowners, and thus transfer their property +to the nation to that extent, why not take the rest of their +property simply for the sake of transferring it also to the nation? +Our joint stock companies work as well with one set of shareholders +as with another: in fact their shares change hands so continually +in the Money Market that they never have the same set +of shareholders from one working day to the next. If all the railway +shares in the country were held on Monday by the inhabitants +of Park Lane, and on Tuesday by the British Government, +the railways would go on just the same. In like case so would any +other of the great industrial services now in joint stock ownership. +If a landlord had to hand over the title-deeds of half a dozen +farms and an urban street to the Exchequer, the farmers would +go on farming, and the tenants go on living in the street, unaffected +by the obligation to pay their rents in future to an agent of the +Government instead of to the agent of a duke or any other plutocrat. +The business of a bank would proceed just as smoothly after +as before the owners had handed over their claims on its profits to +the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Then why not at once push +taxation of capital to the point at which the capitalist taxpayer,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_277">[Pg 277]</span> +unable to find the money, will be forced to surrender to the +Government his share certificates, his War Loan interest, and +his title-deeds? The share certificates would not be worth a farthing +on the Stock Exchange, because there would be all sellers +and no buyers there; but none the less each certificate would, +like the title-deeds to the land, carry the right to an income out +of the future harvests of the country; and if the Government +could immediately use that income for the benefit of the nation, +it would be extremely well worth its while to get hold of it by +accepting the certificates at their face value.</p> + +<p>It could even do so with a show of generosity; for it could say +to the capitalist, “You owe the tax collector a thousand pounds +(say); but instead of selling you up we are authorizing him to +give you a clean receipt, not for the money, but for ten paper +certificates marked a hundred pounds each, for which the cleverest +stockbroker in London could not get you twopence”. “But”, +exclaims the cornered capitalist, “what becomes of my income? +What am I to do for a living?” “Work for it, as others have to +do”, is the reply. In short, from the point of view of its Socialist +advocates, taxation of capital, though absurd as a means of raising +ready money for the expenses of Government, is a way of confiscating +without compensation the title-deeds of, and thereby nationalizing, +the land and the mines and the railways and all the other +industries which the capitalists now hold as their private property.</p> + +<p>The scheme is plausible enough.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c60">60</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">REVOLT OF THE PARASITIC PROLETARIAT</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">B</span>UT there is an objection to it; and that objection may be +learnt from the stupidest woman you ask in the street. She +will tell you that you must not take away the property of +the rich, because “they give employment”. Now, as we have seen, +it is quite true that fundamentally it is nonsense to say that an +unproductive rich person can give employment in any other sense +than as a lunatic gives employment to her keeper. An idle rich +woman can give no productive employment: the employment +she gives is wasteful. But wasteful or not, she gives it and pays for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_278">[Pg 278]</span> +it. She may not have earned the money she pays with; but it will +buy as good bread and clothes for her employee as the most +honestly earned money in the kingdom. The idler is a parasite: +and the idler’s employee, however industrious, is therefore a +parasite on a parasite; but if you leave the parasite destitute you +leave the parasite’s parasites destitute; and unless you have productive +employment ready for them they will have to starve or +steal or rebel; and as they will certainly not choose to starve, their +choice of the remaining two alternatives (which they will probably +combine) may upset the Government if they are numerous +enough. And they are, as a matter of fact, very numerous, as you +may see by counting the Conservative votes that are given at +every General Election by people who work for weekly wages in +wholly or partly parasitic occupations. The plunder of the proletariat +is shared handsomely by the plunderers with the proletarians. +If our capitalists could not plunder our proletarians, our +proletarians and their middle class organizers, from the Bond +Street art dealers and jewellers to the errand boys of Bournemouth, +could not live on the custom of our capitalists. That is +why neither Bond Street nor Bournemouth can be persuaded to +vote for uncompensated expropriation, and why, if it came to +fighting instead of voting, they would fight against it.</p> + +<p>The trouble would begin, not with the nationalized industries, +but with the others. As we have seen, the mines and banks and +railways, being already organized as going concerns, and managed +by directors elected by the votes of the shareholders, could +be confiscated by taxing the shareholders heavily enough to +oblige them to transfer their shares to the Government in payment +of the tax. But the income derived from these shares would +therefore go into the pocket of the Government instead of into +the pockets of the shareholders. Thus the purchasing power of the +shareholders would pass to the Government; and every shop or +factory that depended on their custom would have to shut up and +discharge all its employees. The saving power of the shareholders, +which means, as we now understand, the power of supplying the +spare money needed for starting new industrial enterprises or +extending old ones to keep pace with civilization, would also pass +to the Government. These powers, which must be kept in action<span class="pagenum" id="Page_279">[Pg 279]</span> +without a moment’s interruption, operate by continual expenditure +(mainly household expenditure) and continual investment of +the enormous total of all our private incomes.</p> + +<p>What could the Government do with that total? If it simply +dropped it into the national till, and sat on it, most of it would +perish by natural decay; and meanwhile a great many of the +people would perish too. There would be a monster epidemic +of bankruptcy and unemployment. The tide of calamity would +sweep away any Government unless it proclaimed itself a Dictatorship, +and employed, say, a third of the population to shoot +down another third, whilst the remaining third footed the bill +with its labor. What could the Government do to avert this, short +of handing back the confiscated property to the owners with +apologies for having made a fool of itself?</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c61">61</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SAFETY VALVES</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>T could distribute the money in doles; but that would only +spread the very evil the confiscation was intended to destroy: +that is to say, the evil of unearned income. A much sounder +plan (and do not forget this when next you are tempted to give +a spare £5 note to a beggar instead of putting it on deposit at your +bank) would be to throw all the money into the confiscated banks, +and lend it to employers at unprecedentedly cheap rates. Another +expedient would be to raise wages handsomely in the confiscated +industries. Another, the most desperate of all, but by no means the +least probable, would be to go to war, and waste on the soldier the +incomes formerly wasted on the plutocrat.</p> + +<p>These expedients do not exclude oneanother. Doles, cheap +capital available in Government-owned banks, and high wages, +could be resorted to simultaneously to redistribute purchasing +power and employing power. The doles and pensions would tide +over the remaining years of those discharged servants of the +ruined rich who were incapable of changing their occupations, +and of the ruined rich themselves. The cheap capital at the banks +would enable employers to start new businesses, or modify old +ones, and to cater for the increased purchasing power of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_280">[Pg 280]</span> +workers whose wages had been raised, thereby giving employment +to the workers who had lost their jobs in Bournemouth or +Bond Street. The art dealers could sell pictures to the National +Gallery and the provincial municipal galleries. There would be a +crisis: but what of that? Capitalism has often enough produced +displacements of purchasing power and loss of livelihood to large +bodies of citizens, and fallen back on doles in the shape of Mansion +House Funds and the like as safety valves to ease the +pressure when the unemployed began to riot and break windows. +Why should we not muddle through as we have always done?</p> + +<p>Well, we might. But serious as the biggest crises of Capitalism +have been, they have never been as big as the crash that would +follow confiscation by the Government of the entire property of +the whole propertied class without any preparation for the immediate +productive employment not only of the expropriated +owners (who are too few to give much trouble) but of the vast +parasitic proletariat who produce their luxuries. Would the +safety valves act quickly enough and open widely enough? We +must examine them more closely before we can judge.</p> + +<p>A civilized country depends on the circulation of its money as +much as a living animal depends on the circulation of its blood. +A general confiscation of private property and its incomes would +produce an unprecedented congestion in London, where the +national Treasury is, of money from all over the kingdom; and it +would become a matter of life or death for the Government to +pump that congested money promptly back again to the extremities +of the land. Remember that the total sum congested +would be much larger than under the capitalist system, because, +as the capitalists spend much more of their incomes than they +save, the huge amount of this expenditure would be saved and +added to the Government revenue from the confiscated property.</p> + +<p>Now for the safety valves. A prodigious quantity of the congested +money would come from the confiscated ground rents of +our cities and towns. The present proprietors spend these rents +where they please; and they seldom please to spend them in the +places where they were produced by the work of the inhabitants. +A plutocrat does not decide to live in Bootle when he is free to live +in Biarritz. The inhabitants of Bootle do not get the benefit of his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_281">[Pg 281]</span> +expenditure, which goes to the west end of London and to the +pleasure resorts and sporting grounds of all the world, though +perhaps a little of it may come back if the town manufactures first +class boots and riding breeches and polo mallets. The dwellers in +the town enjoy a good deal of municipal communism; but they +have to pay for it in rates which are now oppressively heavy +everywhere. And they would be heavier still if the Government +did not make what are called Grants-in-Aid to the municipalities.</p> + +<p>An obvious safety valve, and a popular one with the ratepayers, +would be the payment of the rates by the Treasury through +greatly increased grants. If you are a ratepaying householder, +and your landlord were suddenly to announce that in future he +would pay the rates, you would rejoice in the prospect of having +that much more money to spend on yourself. A similar announcement +by the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be equally welcome. +It would relieve the congestion at the Treasury, and send +a flood of money back from the heart to the extremities.</p> + +<p>Then there is the combination of raised wages in the confiscated +industries with a flood of cheap capital pumped to all the business +centres through the confiscated banks. The raised wages +would check the flow of income to the Treasury by reducing +dividends; and the cheapening of capital would enable new businesses +to be started and old ones re-equipped to meet the demand +created by the increased purchasing power (pocket money) of the +wage workers and the disburdened ratepayers.</p> + +<p>And there is always a good deal to be done in the way of public +expenditure on roads; on reclamations of land from the sea; on +afforestation; on building great dams across valleys and barrages +across rivers and tideways to concentrate waterflow on turbine +engines; on stations for the distribution of the power thus gained; +on the demolition of slum towns that should never have been +built, and their replacement by properly planned, healthy and +handsome garden cities; and on a hundred other things that +Capitalism never dreams of doing because it is impossible to +appropriate their advantages as commercial profit. The demand +for labor created by such operations would absorb all the employable +unemployed, and leave only the superannuated and the incurably +unemployable on the dole, with, of course, the children,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_282">[Pg 282]</span> +on whom much more money could and should be spent than at +present, with great uncommercial profit to the next generation.</p> + +<p>All this sounds very reassuring, and costs little to describe on +paper. But a few minutes’ reflection will dispel all hope that it could +occur instantly and spontaneously through the uncompensated +transfer of all existing shares and title-deeds to the Government. +The Ministry of Health would have to produce a huge scheme +for the grants-in-aid to the cities; and Parliament would wrangle +for months over it. As to glutting the existing banks with spare +money to lend without any further interference with them, the +results would include an orgy of competitive enterprise, overcapitalization, +overproduction, hopeless shops and businesses +started by inexperienced or silly or rash people or people who are +all three: in short, a boom followed by a slump, with the usual unemployment, +bankruptcies, and so forth. To keep that part of the +program under control, it would be necessary to set up a new department +of the Treasury to replace the present boards of predatory +company directors; to open banks wherever the post offices +are doing substantial business; and to staff the new banks with +specially trained civil servants. And all that would take longer +than it takes a ruined citizen to starve.</p> + +<p>As to raising industrial wages and reducing prices with the +object of eliminating profit, that is so precisely the contrary of the +policy which the existing managers of our industry have trained +themselves to pursue, and which alone they understand, that +their replacement by civil servants would be just as necessary as +in the case of the banks. Such replacements could be effected +only as part of an elaborate scheme requiring long preliminary +cogitation and a practical preparation involving the establishment +of new public departments of unprecedented magnitude.</p> + +<p>Public works, too, cannot be set on foot offhand in the manner +of Peter the Great, who, when asked to dictate the route to be +taken by his new road from Moscow to Petrograd, took up a +ruler and drew a straight line on the map from the word Moscow +to the Neva. If Peter had had to get a proposal for a turbine +barrage through a parliament with a fiery Welsh contingent determined +that it should be across the Severn, and an equally +touchy Scots contingent bent on having it across the Kyle of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_283">[Pg 283]</span> +Tongue, he would have found many months slipping by him before +he could set the first gang of navvies to work.</p> + +<p>I need not weary you by multiplying instances. Wholesale +nationalization without compensation is catastrophic: the patient +dies before the remedy has time to operate. If you prefer a +mechanical metaphor, the boiler bursts because the safety valves +jam. The attempted nationalization would produce a revolution. +You may say “Well, why not? What I have read in this book has +made me impatient for revolution. The fact that any measure +would produce a revolution is its highest recommendation”.</p> + +<p>If that is yours view, your feelings do you credit: they are or have +been shared by many good citizens. But when you go thoroughly +into the matter you will realize that revolutions do not nationalize +anything, and often make it much more difficult to nationalize +them than it would have been without the revolution if only the +people had had some education in political economy. If a revolution +were produced by unskilled Socialism (all our parliamentary +parties are dangerously unskilled at present) in the teeth of a +noisy and inveterate Capitalist Opposition, it would produce +reaction instead of progress, and give Capitalism a new lease of +life. The name of Socialism would stink in the nostrils of the +people for a generation. And that is just the sort of revolution +that an attempt to nationalize all property at a blow would provoke. +You must therefore rule out revolution on this particular +issue of out-and-out uncompensated and unprepared general +nationalization versus a series of carefully prepared and compensated +nationalizations of one industry after another.</p> + +<p>Later on, we shall expatiate a little on what revolutions can do +and what they cannot. Meanwhile, note as a canon of nationalization +(economists like to call their rules for doing anything +canons) that all nationalizations must be prepared and compensated. +This will be found an effectual safeguard against too many +nationalizations being attempted at a time. We might even say +against more than one nationalization being attempted at a time; +only we must not forget that industries are now so amalgamated +before they are ripe for nationalization that it is practically impossible +to nationalize one without nationalizing half a dozen +others that are inextricably mixed up with it. You would be surprised<span class="pagenum" id="Page_284">[Pg 284]</span> +to learn how many other things a railway company does +besides running trains. And if you have ever gone to sea in a big +liner you have perhaps sometimes looked round you and wondered +whether the business of making it was called shipbuilding +or hotel building, to say nothing of engineering.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c62">62</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">WHY CONFISCATION HAS SUCCEEDED HITHERTO</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">N</span>OW that I have impressed on you at such length as a +canon of nationalization that Parliament must always +buy the owners out and not simply tax them out, I am +prepared to be informed that the canon is dead against the facts, +because the direct attack on property by simple confiscation: that is, +by the Government taking the money of the capitalists away from +them by main force and putting it into the public treasury, has +already, without provoking reaction or revolution, been carried +by Conservative and Liberal Governments to lengths which +would have seemed monstrous and incredible to nineteenth century +statesmen like Gladstone, proving that you can introduce +almost any measure of Socialism or Communism into England +provided you call it by some other name. Propose Socialistic +confiscation of the incomes of the rich, and the whole country +will rise to repel such Russian wickedness. Call it income tax, +supertax, and estate duties, and you can lift enough hundreds of +millions from the pockets of our propertied class to turn the +Soviet of Federated Russian Republics green with envy.</p> + +<p>Take a case or two in figures. Gladstone thought it one of his +triumphs as Chancellor of the Exchequer to reduce the income +tax to twopence in the pound, and hoped to be able to abolish it +altogether. Instead of which it went up to six shillings in 1920, +and stopped at that only because it was supplemented by an additional +income tax (Supertax or Surtax) on the larger incomes, and +a partial abolition of inheritance which makes the nation heir to a +considerable part of our property when we die possessed of any. +Just imagine the fuss there would have been over this if it had +been proposed by a Socialist Prime Minister as Confiscation, +Expropriation, and Nationalization of Inheritance on the Communist<span class="pagenum" id="Page_285">[Pg 285]</span> +principles of the prophet Marx! Yet we took it lying down.</p> + +<p>You have perhaps not noticed how this taxation is arrived at in +Parliament at present. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is the +Minister who has to arrange the national housekeeping for the +year, and screw out of a reluctant House of Commons its consent +to tax us for the housekeeping money; for with the negligible exception +of the interest on certain shares in the Suez Canal and in +some ten companies who had to be helped to keep going during +the war the nation has no income from property. Whom he will +be allowed to tax depends on the sort of members who have been +returned to Parliament. Without their approval his Budget, as he +calls his proposals for taxation, cannot become law; and until it +becomes law nobody can be compelled to pay the taxes. In Gladstone’s +time Parliament consisted practically of landlords and +capitalists and employers, the handful of working class members +being hopelessly outvoted by the other three sections combined, +or even single. Each of these sections naturally tried to throw as +much of the burden of taxation as possible on the others; but all +three were heartily agreed in throwing on the working class as +much of it as they could without losing too many working class +votes at the next election. Therefore the very last tax they wished +to sanction was the income tax, which all of them had to pay +directly, and which the wage workers escaped, as it does not apply +to small incomes. Thus the income tax became a sort of residual +tax or last resort: an evil to be faced only when every other device +for raising money had been found insufficient. When Gladstone +drove it down from sixpence to fourpence, and from fourpence to +twopence, and expressed his intention of doing without it altogether, +he was considered a very great Chancellor of the Exchequer +indeed. To do this he had to raise money by putting +taxes on food and drink and tobacco, on legal documents of different +kinds, from common receipts and cheques and contracts to +bills of exchange, share certificates, marriage settlements, leases +and the like. Then there were the customs, or duties payable on +goods sent into the country from abroad. The industrial employers, +who were great importers of raw materials, and wanted +food to be cheap because cheap food meant low wages, said “Let +them come in free, and tax the landlords”. The country gentlemen<span class="pagenum" id="Page_286">[Pg 286]</span> +said “Tax imports, especially corn, to encourage agriculture”. +This created the great Free Trade controversy on which +the Tories fought the Liberals for so many years. But both parties +always agreed that income tax should not be imposed until every +other means of raising the money had been exhausted, and that +even then it should be kept down to the lowest possible figure.</p> + +<p>When Socialism became Fabianized and began to influence +Parliament through a new proletarian Labor Party, budgeting +took a new turn. The Labor Party demanded that the capitalists +should be the first to pay, and not the last, and that the taxation +should be higher on unearned than on earned incomes. This involved +a denial of the need for keeping Government expenditure +and taxation down to the lowest possible figure. When taxation +consists in taking money away from people who have not earned +it and restoring it to its real earners by providing them with +schools, better houses, improved cities, and public benefits of all +sorts, then clearly the more the taxation the better for the nation. +Where Gladstone cried “I have saved the income tax payers of +the country another million. Hurrah!” a Labor Chancellor will +cry “I have wrung another million from the supertaxed idlers, +and spent it on the welfare of our people! Hooray!”</p> + +<p>Thus for the last fifteen years we have had a running struggle in +Parliament between the Capitalist and Labor parties: the former +trying to keep down the income tax, the supertax, the estate +duties, and public expenditure generally, and the latter trying to +increase them. The annual debates on the Budget always turn +finally on this point, though it is seldom frankly faced; and the +capitalists have been losing bit by bit until now (in the nineteen-twenties) +we have advanced from Gladstone’s income tax of 2d. +in the pound to rates of from four to six shillings, with, on incomes +exceeding £2000, surtaxes that range from eighteen pence +to six shillings according to the amount of the income; whilst on +the death of a property owner his heirs have to hand over to the +Government a share of the estate ranging from one per cent of its +fictitious capital value when it is a matter of a little over £100, to +forty per cent when it exceeds a couple of millions.</p> + +<p>That is to say, if your uncle leaves you five guineas a year you +have to pay the Government seventy-three days income. If he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_287">[Pg 287]</span> +leaves you a hundred thousand a year you pay eight years income, +and starve for the eight years unless you can raise the money by +mortgaging your future income, or have provided for it by insuring +your life at a heavy premium for the nation’s benefit.</p> + +<p>Now suppose this income of a hundred thousand a year belongs +to an aristocratic family in which military service as an officer is a +tradition which is practically obligatory. In a war it may easily +happen, as it did sometimes during the late war, that the owner +of such a property and his two brothers next in succession are +killed within a few months. This would bring the income of +£100,000 a year down to £12,000, the difference having been +confiscated by the Government. If we were to read in The Morning +Post that the Russian Soviet had taken £78,000 a year from +a private family without paying a penny of compensation, most of +us would thank heaven that we were not living in a country where +such Communistic monstrosities are possible. Yet our British +anti-Socialist Governments, both Liberal and Conservative, do it +as a matter of routine, though their Chancellors of the Exchequer +go on making speeches against Socialistic confiscation as if nobody +outside Russia ever dreamt of such a thing!</p> + +<p>That is just like us. All the time we are denouncing Communism +as a crime, every street lamp and pavement and water tap and +police constable is testifying that we could not exist for a week +without it. Whilst we are shouting that Socialistic confiscation of +the incomes of the rich is robbery and must end in red revolution, +we are actually carrying it so much further than any other fully +settled country that many of our capitalists have gone to live in +the south of France for seven months in the year to avoid it, +though they affirm their undying devotion to their native country +by insisting that our national anthem shall be sung every Sunday +on the Riviera as part of the English divine service, whilst the +Chancellor of the Exchequer at home implores heaven to “frustrate +their knavish tricks” until he can devise some legal means of +defeating their evasions of his tax collectors.</p> + +<p>But startling from the Victorian point of view as are the sums +taken annually from the rich, they have not in the lump gone beyond +what the property owners can pay in cash out of their incomes, +nor what the Government is prepared to throw back into<span class="pagenum" id="Page_288">[Pg 288]</span> +circulation again by spending it immediately. They have transferred +purchasing power from the rich to the poor, producing minor +commercial crises here and there, and often seriously impoverishing +the old rich; but they have been accompanied by such a development +of capitalism that there are more rich, and richer rich, +than ever; so that the luxury trades have had to expand instead of +contract, giving more employment instead of less. And they have +proved that you may safely confiscate income derived from property +provided you can immediately redistribute it. But you cannot +tax it to extinction at a single mortal blow. You have always to +consider most carefully how far and how fast you can go without +crashing. The rule that the Government must not tax at all until +it has an immediate use for the money it takes is fundamental: it +holds in every case. The rule that if it uses it to nationalize an +already established commercial industry or service it must have a +new public department ready to take the business over, and must +compensate the owners from whom it takes it, is also invariable. +When the object is not nationalization, but simple redistribution +of income within the capitalist system by transferring purchasing +power from one set of people to another, usually from a richer set +to a poorer set, thus changing the demand in the shops from dear +luxuries to comparatively cheap necessities, then the process +must go no faster than the capitalist shops can adapt themselves to +this change. Else it may produce enough bankruptcies to make +the Government very unpopular at the next election.</p> + +<p>Let us study a sensational instance in which we have incurred a +heavy additional burden of unearned income, so strongly resented +by the mass of the people that our Governments, whether +Labor or Conservative, may not long be able to resist the demand +for its redistribution.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_289">[Pg 289]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c63">63</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW THE WAR WAS PAID FOR</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>N 1914 we went to war. War is frightfully expensive and +frightfully destructive: it results in a dead loss as far as money +is concerned. And everything has to be paid for on the nail; +for you cannot kill Germans with promissory notes or mortgages +or national debts: you must have actual stores of food, clothing, +weapons, munitions, fighting men, and nursing, car driving, +munition making women of military age. When the army has +worn out the clothes and eaten up the food, and fired off the munitions, +and shed its blood in rivers, there is nothing eatable, drinkable, +wearable, or livable-in left to shew for it: nothing visible or +tangible but ruin and desolation. For most of these military stores +the Government in 1914-18 went heavily into debt. It took the +blood and work of the young men as a matter of course, compelling +them to serve whether they liked it or not, and breaking up +their businesses, when they had any, without compensation of +any kind. But being a Capitalist Government it did not take all +the needed ready money from the capitalists in the same way. It +took some of it by taxation. But in the main, it borrowed it.</p> + +<p>Naturally the Labor Party objected very strongly to this exemption +of the money of the rich from the conscription that was +applied ruthlessly to the lives and livelihoods and limbs of the +poor. Its protests were disregarded. The spare subsistence needed +to support the soldiers and the workers who were producing food +and munitions for them, instead of being all taken without compensation +by taxation, was for the most part hired from capitalists, +their price being the right to take without working, for every +hundred pounds worth of spare subsistence lent, five pounds a +year out of the future income of the country for waiting until the +hundred pounds they put down was repaid to them in full.</p> + +<p>Roughly, and in round figures, what happened was that the +National Debt of 660 millions owing in 1914 from former wars +was increased by the new war to over 7000 millions. Until we are +able to repay this in full we have to pay more than 350 millions a +year to the lenders for waiting; and as the current expenses of our +civil services (300 millions), with our army, our navy, our air<span class="pagenum" id="Page_290">[Pg 290]</span> +force, and all the other socialized national establishments, come +to more than as much again, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has +now to budget for more than two millions a day, and get that out +of our pockets as best he can. And as it is no use asking the proletarians +for it at a time when perhaps a million or so of them are +unemployed, and have to be supported out of the taxes instead of +paying any, he has to make the property holders contribute, in +income tax, supertax, and estate duties, over 380 millions a year: +that is, a million and fifty thousand a day, or more than half the +total taxation. This is confiscation with a vengeance.</p> + +<p>Does it strike you that there is something funny about this business +of borrowing most of the 7000 millions from our own capitalists +by promising to pay them, say 325 millions a year whilst +they are waiting for repayment, and then taxing them to the tune +of 382 millions a year to pay not only their own waiting money +but that of the foreign lenders as well? They are paying over 50 +millions a year more than they are getting, and are therefore, as a +class, losing by the transaction. The Government pays them with +one hand, and takes the money back again, plus over 17 per cent +interest, with the other. Why do they put up with it so tamely?</p> + +<p>The explanation is easy. If the Government took back from +each holder of War Loan exactly what it had paid him plus three +and sixpence in the pound, all the holders would very promptly +cry “Thank you for worse than nothing: we will cancel the debt; +and much good may it do you”. But that is not what happens. The +holders of War Loan Stock are only a part of the general body of +property owners; but all the property owners have to pay income +tax and death duties, and, when their income exceeds £2000, +supertax. Those who did not lend money to the Government for +the war get nothing from it. Those who did lend get the 325 +millions a year all to themselves; but their liability for the taxation +out of which it is paid is shared with all the other property +owners. Therefore, though the property owners as a whole lose +by the transaction, those property owners who hold War Loan +Stock gain by it at the expense of those who do not. The Government +not only robs capitalist Peter to pay capitalist Paul, but robs +both of more than it pays to Paul; yet though Peter and Paul +taken together are poorer, Paul taken by himself is richer, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_291">[Pg 291]</span> +therefore supports the Government in the arrangement, whilst +Peter complains that the burden of taxation is intolerable.</p> + +<p>To illustrate, my wife and I are capitalists, but I hold some War +Loan stock, whilst all her money is in bank, railway, and other +stocks. We are both taxed equally to pay me the interest on my +War Loan; but as the Government pays me that interest and does +not pay her anything, I gain by the transaction at her expense; so +that if we were not, as it happens, on the communal footing of +man and wife, we should never agree about it. Most capitalists do +not understand the deal, and are in effect humbugged by it; but +those who do understand it will never be unanimous in resisting +it; consequently it is voteproof at the parliamentary elections.</p> + +<p>This quaint state of things enables the Labor Party to demonstrate +that it would pay the propertied class, as a whole, to cancel +the National Debt, and put an end to the absurdity of a nation +complaining that it is staggering under an intolerable burden of +debt when as a matter of fact it owes most of the money to itself. +The cancellation of the debt (except the fraction due to foreigners) +would be simply a redistribution of income between its citizens +without costing the nation, as a whole, a single farthing.</p> + +<p>The plan of raising public money by borrowing money from +capitalists instead of confiscating it by direct taxation is called +funding; and lending money to the Government used to be called +putting it in the Funds. And as the terms of the borrowing are +that the lender is to have an income for nothing by waiting until +his money is repaid, we get the queer phenomenon of lenders +who, instead of being anxious to get their money back, dread +nothing more; so that the Government, in order to get the loans, +has actually to promise that it will not pay back the loan before a +certain date, the further off the better. According to Capitalist +morality people who live on their capital instead of on interest (as +the payment for waiting is called) are spendthrifts and wasters. +The capitalist must never consume his spare subsistence himself +even when it is of a kind that will keep until he is hungry again. +He must use it to purchase an income; and if the purchaser stops +paying the income and repays the sum lent him, the lender must +not spend that sum, but must immediately buy another income +with it, or, as we say, invest it.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_292">[Pg 292]</span></p> + +<p>This is not merely a matter of prudence: it is a matter of necessity; +for as investing capital means lending it to be consumed before +it rots, it can never really be restored to the investor. Investing +it means, as we have seen, allowing a body of workmen to eat +it up whilst they are engaged in preparing some income producing +concern like a railway or factory; and when it is once consumed +no mortal power can bring it back into existence. If you do +a man or a company or a Government the good turn of letting +them use up what you can spare this year, he or she or they may +do you the good turn of letting you have an equivalent if they can +spare it twenty years hence, and pay you for waiting meanwhile; +but they cannot restore what you actually lend them.</p> + +<p>The war applied our spare money, not to a producing concern +but to a destroying one. In the books of the Bank of England are +written the names of a number of persons as the owners of capital +to the value of 7000 million pounds. They are said in common +speech to be “worth 7000 millions”. Now they are in fact +“worth” nothing at all. Their 7000 millions have long since been +eaten, drunk, worn out, or blown to smithereens, along with +much other valuable property and precious lives, on battle-fields +all over the world. We are therefore in the ridiculous position of +pretending that our country is enriched by property to the value +of 7000 millions when as a matter of fact it is impoverished by +having to find 350 fresh millions a year for people who are not +doing a stroke of work for her in return: that is, who are consuming +a huge mass of wealth without producing any. It is as if a +bankrupt, asked if he has any assets, should reply proudly, “Oh +no: I have made ducks and drakes of all my assets; but then I +have a tremendous lot of debts”. The 7000 millions of capital +standing in the names of the stockholders in the Bank of England +is not wealth, it is debt. If we flatly repudiated it, the nation would +be richer not only by 350 millions a year, but by the work the +stockholders would have to do to support themselves when their +incomes were cut off. The objection to repudiating it is not that it +would make the nation poorer, but that repudiation would seem +a breach of contract after which nobody would ever lend money to +the Government again. Besides, the United States, which lent us +a thousand millions of it, might distrain on us for that amount by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_293">[Pg 293]</span> +force of arms. Therefore we protest that nothing would induce us +to commit such an act of cynical dishonesty. But that does not +prevent us, as far as the debt is due to our own capitalists, from +paying them honestly with one hand, and forcibly taking back +the money plus seventeen per cent interest with the other.</p> + +<p>By the way, lest somebody should come along and assure you +that these figures are inaccurate, and that I am not to be trusted, I +had better warn you that the figures are in round numbers; that +they vary from year to year through paying off and fluctuation of +values; that the thousand millions borrowed from America were +lent by us to allies of whom some cannot afford to pay us at all, +and others, who can, are trying how little we can be induced to +take; that the rest of the money was raised through the banks in +such a way that indignant statisticians have proved that we accepted +indebtedness for nearly twice what we actually spent; that +the rise in the market price of hiring spare money must have enriched +the capitalists more than the war taxation impoverished +them: in short, that the simplicity of the case can be addled by a +hundred inessential circumstances when the object is to addle +and not to elucidate. My object being elucidatory, I have left +them all out, as I want to shew you the nest, not the hedge.</p> + +<p>The point is that the war has produced an enormous consumption +of capital; and instead of this consumption leaving behind it +an addition to our industrial plant and means of communication +and other contrivances for increasing our output of wealth, it has +effected a wholesale destruction of such things, leaving the world +with less income to distribute than before. The fact that it has +swept away three empires, and substituted republicanism for +monarchy as the prevalent form of government in Europe, thus +bringing Europe into line with America as a republican continent, +may seem to you to be worth the money; or, as this is not in +the least what was intended by the British or any other of the +belligerent Powers, it may seem to you a scandalous disaster. But +that is a matter of sentiment, not of economics. Whether you regard +the political result with satisfaction or dismay, the cost of +the war remains the same, and so does the effect of our way of +paying it on the distribution of our national income. We are all +heavily taxed to enable that section of the capitalist class which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_294">[Pg 294]</span> +invested in War Loan for five per cent interest (a high rate considering +the security), to draw henceforth a million a day from +the fruits of our daily labor without contributing to them. True, +we take that much, and more, back from the whole capitalist class +by taxation; so that what really happens is a redistribution of +income among the capitalists, leaving the proletariat rather better +off than worse, though unfortunately it is not the sort of redistribution +that makes for equality of income or discredit of idleness. +But it illustrates the point of this chapter, which is that a virtual +confiscation of capital to the amount of thousands of millions +proved perfectly feasible when the Government had employment +in the shape of national service, even in work of destruction, +instantly ready for an unlimited number of proletarians, male and +female. Those had been halcyon days but for the bloodshed.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c64">64</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">NATIONAL DEBT REDEMPTION LEVIES</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>LTHOUGH the taxation of capital is nonsensical, it does +not follow that every proposal presented to you in that +form must necessarily be impracticable. It is true that the +Government, if it wants ready money, can obtain it only +by confiscating income; but this does not rule out operations for +which no ready money is required, nor does it prevent the Government +from taking not only the income of a proprietor, but the +source of his income: that is, his property, as well. To take a possibility +that is quite likely to become a fact in your experience, +suppose the Government were driven to the conclusion that the +National Debt, or some part of it, must be wiped out, either because +the taxation needed to pay the interest of it is hampering +capitalist enterprise, which would be a Conservative Government’s +reason, or for the sake of redistributing income more +equally, which would be a Socialist Government’s reason! To pay +off what we have borrowed from America, or from foreigners +of any nationality, would need ready money; and therefore the +simple wiping out of this part of the national debt would be impossible +except by flat repudiation, which would destroy our +credit abroad and probably involve us in a war of distraint. But<span class="pagenum" id="Page_295">[Pg 295]</span> +that part of the debt which we owe to ourselves could be wiped +out without a farthing of ready money by a tax presented and +assessed as a tax on capital, or rather a levy on capital (to indicate +that it was not to be an annual tax but only a once-in-a-way tax). +Take the war debt as an illustration of the possibility of a total +wipe-out. Let us suppose for the sake of simplicity that as much of +the National Debt as the Government owes to its own subjects is +£100, all lent to it by one woman (call her Mary Anne) for the +war, and, of course, long since spent and blown to bits, leaving +nothing behind but the obligation of the Government to pay +Mary Anne £5 a year out of the taxes. Imagine also that there is +only one other capitalist in the country (say Sarah Jane), whose +property consists of £100 from stocks and land yielding an income +of £5 a year. That is, Sarah Jane owns the entire industrial +plant of the country; and Mary Anne is the sole domestic (as distinguished +from foreign) national creditor. The Chancellor of the +Exchequer brings in a tax of 100 per cent on capital, and demands +£100 from Sarah Jane and £100 from Mary Anne. Neither of +them can pay £100 ready money out of their £5; but Sarah Jane +can hand over all her share certificates to the Government; and the +Government can transfer Mary Anne’s War Loan of £100 to itself. +Mary and Sarah, left destitute, will have to work for their +livings; and all the industrial plant of the country will have passed +into the hands of the Government; that is, been nationalized.</p> + +<p>In this transaction there is no physical impossibility, no selling +of worthless shares for non-existent ready money, no rocketing of +the Bank Rate, nothing but simple expropriation. The fact that +the £200 at stake are really thousands of millions, and that there +are many Marys and many Sarahs, each with her complement of +Toms and Dicks, alters the size of the transaction, but not its +balance. The thing could be done. Further, if the disturbance +created by a sudden and total expropriation would be too great, it +could be done in instalments of any desired magnitude. The 100 +per cent tax on capital could be 50 per cent or 5 per cent or 2½ per +cent every ten years or what you please. If 100 per cent meant a +catastrophe (as it would) and 10 per cent only a squeeze, then the +Government could content itself with the squeeze.</p> + +<p>By such a levy the Government could take off the taxation it had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_296">[Pg 296]</span> +formerly imposed to pay the home War Loan interest, and use +the dividends of the confiscated shares to pay the interest on our +war debt to America, taking off also the taxation that now pays +that interest. If it were a Conservative Government it would take +it off in the form of a reduction of income tax, supertax, excess +profits tax (if any), death duties, and other taxes on property and +big business. A Labor Government would leave these taxes untouched, +and take taxes off food, or increase its contributions to +the unemployed fund, its grants-in-aid to the municipalities for +public work, or anything else that would benefit the proletariat +and make for equality of income. Thus the levy could be manipulated +to make the rich richer as easily as to raise the general level +of well-being; and this is why it is just as likely to be done by a +Capitalist as by a Labor Government until the domestic war debt +is—shall we say liquidated, as repudiated sounds so badly?</p> + +<p>The special objection to such practicable levies is that they are +raids on private property rather than orderly and gradual conversions +of it into public property. The objection to raids is that +they destroy the sense of security which induces the possessors of +spare money to invest it instead of spreeing it. Insecurity discourages +saving among those who can afford to save, and encourages +reckless expenditure. If you have a thousand pounds to +spare, and have not the slightest doubt that by investing it you +can secure a future income of £50 a year, subject only to income +tax, you will invest it. If you are led to think it just as likely as not +that if you invest it the Government will presently take it or some +considerable part of it from you under pretext of a Debt Redemption +Levy, you will probably conclude that you may as well spend +it while you are sure of it. It would be much better for the country +and for yourself if you could feel sure that if the Government took +your property it would buy it from you at full market price, or, if +that were for any reason impracticable, compensate you fully for +it. It is true that, as we found when we went into the question +of compensation, this apparently conservative way of doing it is +really as expropriative as the direct levy, because the Government +raises the purchase money or compensation by taxing property; +so that the proprietors buy each other out and are not as a body +compensated at all; but the sense of insecurity created by the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_297">[Pg 297]</span> +raiding method is demoralizing, as you will understand if you +read the description by Thucydides of the plague at Athens, +which applies to all plagues, pathological or financial. Plagues +destroy the sense of security of life: people come to feel that they +will probably be dead by the end of the week, and throw their +characters away for a day’s pleasure just as capitalists throw their +money away when it is no longer safe. A raid on property, as distinguished +from a regular annual income tax, is like a plague in +this respect. Also it forms a bad precedent and sets up a raiding +habit. Thus domestic debt redemption levies, though physically +practicable, are highly injudicious.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c65">65</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE CONSTRUCTIVE PROBLEM SOLVED</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU may now stop for breath, as you are at last in possession +not only of the object of Socialism, which is simply +equality of income, but of the methods by which it can be +attained. You know why coal mining and banking should be +nationalized, and how the expropriation of the coalowners and +bankers can be compensated so as to avoid injustice to individuals +or any shock to the sense of security which is necessary +to prevent the continued investment of spare money as capital. +Now when you have the formula for these two nationalizations, +one of a material industry involving much heavy manual work, +and the other a service conducted by sedentary brain work, you +have a formula for all nationalizations. And when you have the +formula for the constitutional compensated expropriation of the +coalowners and bankers by taxation you have the formula for the +expropriation of all proprietors. Knowing how to nationalize industry +you know how to place the Government in control of the +distribution of the income produced by industry. We have not +only found these formulas, but seen them tested in practice in our +existing institutions sufficiently to have no more doubt that they +would work than we have that next year’s budget will work. +Therefore we need no longer be worried by demands for what +people call a constructive program. There it is for them; and what +will surprise them most about it is that it does not contain a single<span class="pagenum" id="Page_298">[Pg 298]</span> +novelty. The difficulties and the novelty are not, as they imagine, +in the practical part of the business, which turns out to be quite +plain sailing, but in the metaphysical part: that is, in the will to +equality. We know how to take the distribution of the national +income out of the hands of the private owners of property and +place it under the control of the Government. But the Government +can distribute it unequally if it decides to do so. Instead of +destroying the existing inequality it can intensify it. It can maintain +a privileged class of idlers with huge incomes, and give them +State security for the continuance of those incomes.</p> + +<p>It is this possibility that may enlist and to a certain extent has +already enlisted the most determined opponents of Socialism on +the side of nationalization, expropriative taxation, and all the +constructive political machinery of Socialism, as a means of redistributing +income, the catch in it being that the redistribution +at which they aim is not an equal distribution, but a State-guaranteed +unequal one. John Bunyan, with his queer but deep insight, +pointed out long ago that there is a way to hell even from +the gates of heaven; that the way to heaven is therefore also the +way to hell; and that the name of the gentleman who goes to hell +by that road is Ignorance. The way to Socialism, ignorantly pursued, +may land us in State Capitalism. Both must travel the same +road; and this is what Lenin, less inspired than Bunyan, failed to +see when he denounced the Fabian methods as State Capitalism. +What is more, State Capitalism, plus Capitalist Dictatorship +(Fascism), will compete for approval by cleaning up some of the +dirtiest of our present conditions: raising wages; reducing death +rates; opening the career to the talents; and ruthlessly cashiering +inefficiency, before in the long run succumbing to the bane of inequality, +against which no civilization can finally stand out.</p> + +<p>This is why, though you are now equipped with a complete +answer to those who very properly demand from Socialists constructive +plans, practical programs, a constitutional parliamentary +routine, and so forth, you are still not within eight score pages +of the end of this book. We have still to discuss not only the +pseudo-Socialism against which I have just warned you, but other +things which I cannot omit without leaving you more or less +defenceless against the alarmist who, instead of being sensibly<span class="pagenum" id="Page_299">[Pg 299]</span> +anxious about constructive methods, is quite convinced that +the world can be turned upside down in a day by an unwashed +Russian in a red tie and an uncombed woman with a can of petrol +if only they are wicked enough. These poor scared things will ask +you what about revolution? what about marriage? what about +children? what about sex? when, as they assume, Socialism will +have upset all our institutions and substituted for our present +population of sheep a raving pack of mad dogs. No doubt you can +tell them to go away, or to talk about such matters as they are +capable of understanding; but you will find that they are only the +extreme instances of a state of mind that is very common. Not +only will plenty of your most sensible friends want to discuss +these subjects in connection with Socialism, but you yourself will +be as keen about them as they. So now that we know exactly +what Socialism aims at and how it can be done, let us leave all +that as settled, and equip ourselves for general conversation on +or around the subject.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c66">66</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SHAM SOCIALISM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE example of the war shews how easy it is for a government +to confiscate the incomes of one set of citizens, +and hand them over to another without any intention of +equalizing distribution or effecting any nationalization of industries +or services. If any class or trade or clique can obtain control +of Parliament, it can use its power to plunder any other class or +trade or clique, to say nothing of the nation as a whole, for its own +benefit. Such operations are of course always disguised as reforms +of one kind or another, or as political necessities; but they are +really intrigues to use the State for selfish ends. They are not on +that account to be opposed as pernicious: rogues with axes to +grind must use popular reforms as bait to catch votes for Acts of +Parliament in which they have some personal interest. Besides, +all reforms are lucrative to somebody. For instance, the landlords +of a city may be the warmest supporters of street improvements, +and of every public project for making the city more +attractive to residents and tourists, because they hope to reap the +whole money value of the improvements in raised rents. When a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_300">[Pg 300]</span> +public park is opened, the rents of all the houses looking on that +park go up. When some would-be public benefactor endows a +great public school for the purpose of making education cheap, +he unintentionally makes all the private houses within reach of it +dear. In the long run the owners of the land take from us as rent +in one form or another everything that we can do without. But +the improvements are none the less improvements. Nobody +would destroy the famous endowed schools of Bedford because +rents are higher there than in towns which possess no such exceptional +advantage. When Faust asked Mephistopheles what he +was, Mephistopheles answered that he was part of a power that +was always willing evil and always doing good; and though our +landlords and capitalists are certainly not always either willing +evil or doing good, yet Capitalism justifies itself and was adopted +as an economic principle on the express ground that it provides +selfish motives for doing good, and that human beings will do +nothing except for selfish motives. Now though the best things +have to be done for the greater glory of God, as some of us say, +or for the enlargement of life and the bettering of humanity, as +others put it, yet it is very true that if you want to get a philanthropic +measure enacted by a public body, parliamentary or +municipal, you may find it shorter to give the rogues an axe to +grind than to stir up the philanthropists to do anything except +preach at the rogues. Rogues, by which perhaps rather invidious +name I designate persons who will do nothing unless they get +something out of it for themselves, are often highly effective persons +of action, whilst idealist talkers only sow the wind, leaving +the next generation of men of action to reap the whirlwind.</p> + +<p>It is already a well-established method of Capitalism to ask the +Government to provide for some private enterprise on the ground +of its public utility. Some good has been done in this way: for +instance, some of our modern garden cities and suburbs could +not have been built if the companies that built them had not been +enabled, under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act, to +borrow a large share of their capital from the Government on the +understanding that the shareholders were poor people holding +no more than £200 capital apiece. But this limitation is quite +illusory, because, though the companies may not issue more than<span class="pagenum" id="Page_301">[Pg 301]</span> +£200 in shares to any individual, they may and do borrow unlimited +sums by creating what is called Loan Stock; and the very +same person who is not allowed to have more than £200 in shares +may have two hundred millions in Loan Stock if the company can +use them. Consequently these garden cities, which are most commendable +enterprises in their way, are nevertheless the property +of rich capitalists. As I hold a good deal of stock in them myself I +am tempted to claim that their owners are specially philanthropic +and public-spirited men, who have voluntarily invested their +capital where it will do the most good and not where it will make +the most profit for them; but they are not immortal; and we have +no guarantee that their heirs will inherit their disinterestedness. +Meanwhile the fact remains that they have built up their property +largely with public money: that is, by money raised by taxing the +rest of the community, and that this does not make the nation the +owner of the garden city, nor even a shareholder in it. The Government +is simply a creditor who will finally be paid off, leaving +the cities in the hands of their capitalist proprietors. The tenants, +though led to expect a share in the surplus profits of the city, find +such profits practically always applied to extending the enterprise +for the benefit of fresh investors. The garden cities and suburbs +are an enormous improvement on the manufacturing towns +produced by unaided private enterprise; but as they do not pay +their proprietors any better than slum property, nor indeed as +well, it is quite possible that this consideration may induce the +future owners to abolish their open spaces and overcrowd them +with houses until they are slums. To guarantee the permanence +of the improvement it would be safer for the Government to buy +out the shareholders than for the shareholders to pay off the Government, +though even that would fail if the Government acted on +Capitalist principles by selling the cities to the highest bidders.</p> + +<p>A more questionable development of this exploitation of the +State by Capitalism and Trade Unionism is the subsidy of +£10,000,000 paid by the Government to the coalowners in 1925 +to avoid a strike. The coal miners said they would not work unless +they got such and such wages. The employers vowed they could +not afford to keep their mines open unless the men would accept +less; and a great press campaign was set up to persuade us that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_302">[Pg 302]</span> +the country was on the verge of ruin through excessive wages +when as a matter of fact the country was in a condition that at +many earlier periods would have been described as cheerfully +prosperous. Finally the Government, to avert a strike which +would have paralyzed the main industries of the country, had +either to make up out of the taxes the wages offered by the employers +to the wages demanded by the men, or else nationalize +the mines. Being a Capitalist Government, pledged not to nationalize +anything, it chose to make up the wages out of the taxes. +When the £10,000,000 was exhausted, the trouble began again. +The Government refused to renew the subsidy; the employers +refused to go on without it unless the miners worked eight hours +a day instead of seven; the miners refused to work more or take +less; there was a big strike, in which the workers in several other +industries at first took part “sympathetically” until they realized +that by using up the funds of the Trade Unions on strike pay they +were hindering the miners instead of helping them; and many +respectable people were, as usual on such occasions, frightened +out of their wits and into the belief that the country was on the +verge of revolution. And there was this excuse for them: that +under fully-developed Capitalism civilization is always on the +verge of revolution. We live as in a villa on Vesuvius.</p> + +<p>During the strike the taxpayer was no longer exploited by the +owners; but the ratepayer was exploited by the workers. A man +on strike has no right to outdoor relief; but his wife and children +have. Consequently a married miner with two children could depend +on receiving a pound a week at the expense of the ratepayers +whilst he was refusing to work. This development of +parochial Communism really knocks the bottom out of the Capitalist +system, which depends on the ruthless compulsion of the +proletariat to work on pain of starvation or imprisonment under +detestable conditions in the workhouse. Thus you have had the +Government first giving outdoor relief (the ten million subsidy) +to the owners at the expense of the taxpayers, and then the local +authorities giving outdoor relief to the proletariat at the expense +of the ratepayers, the Government being manned mostly by +capitalists and the local authorities by proletarians.</p> + +<p>It was in the proletarian quarters of London, notably in Poplar,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_303">[Pg 303]</span> +that the Poor Law Guardians first claimed the right to give outdoor +relief at full subsistence rates to all unemployed persons, +thereby freeing their proletarian constituents from “the lash of +starvation”, and enabling them to hold out for the highest wages +their trades could afford. The mining districts followed suit during +the coal strike of 1926. This right was contested by the Government, +which tried to supplant the parochial authorities by the +central Ministry of Health. The Ministry, through the auditors +of public accounts, surcharged the Guardians with the part of the +outdoor relief which they considered excessive; but as the Guardians +could not have paid the surcharge even if the proceedings +taken against them had not failed, the Government took the administration +of the Poor Law into its own hands, and passed Acts +to confirm its powers to do so. This was essentially an attempt by +the Capitalist central Government to recover the weapon of starvation +which the proletarian local authorities had taken out of the +owners’ hands. But the day had gone by for the ultra-capitalist relief +rules of the nineteenth century, when, as I well recollect, the +Registrar-General’s returns of the causes of the deaths during the +year always included starvation as a matter of course. The lowest +scale of relief which the Government ventured to propose would +have seemed ruinously extravagant and demoralizing to the +Gradgrinds and Bounderbys denounced by Dickens in 1854.</p> + +<p>As to the demoralization, they would not have been very far +wrong. If mine-owners, or any other sort of owners, find that +when they get into difficulties through being lazy, or ignorant, or +too grasping, or behind the times, or all four, they can induce the +Government to confiscate the taxpayers’ incomes for subsidies to +get them out of their difficulties, they will go from bad to worse. +If miners, or any other sort of workers, find that the local authorities +will confiscate the incomes of the ratepayers to feed them +when they are idle, their incentive to pay their way by their labor +will be, to say the least, perceptibly slackened. Yet it is no use +simply refusing to make these confiscations. If the nation will not +take its industries out of the hands of private owners it must +enable them to carry them on, whether they can make them pay or +not. If the owners will not pay subsistence wages the nation must; +for it cannot afford to have its children undernourished and its<span class="pagenum" id="Page_304">[Pg 304]</span> +civil and military strength weakened, though it was fool enough +to think it could in Queen Victoria’s time. Subsidies and doles +are demoralizing, both for employers and proletarians; but they +stave off Socialism, which people seem to consider worse than +pauperized insolvency, Heaven knows why!</p> + +<p>Still, governments need not be so shamelessly unbusinesslike as +they are when subsidies are in question. The subsidizing habit +was acquired by the British Government during the war, when +certain firms had to be kept going at all costs, profit or no profit, +because their activities were indispensable. It was against all Capitalist +principles; but in war economic principles are thrown to +the wind like Christian principles; and the habits of war are not +cured instantly by armistices. In 1925, when the Government was +easily blackmailed into paying the mine-owners ten millions of +the money of the general taxpayer (your money and mine), it +might at least have secured for us an equivalent interest in the +mines. It might have obliged the owners to mortgage their property +to the nation for the means to carry on, as they would have +had to do if they had raised the money in the ordinary commercial +way. As to the miners, they felt no responsibility, because, as the +owners bought labor in the market exactly as they bought pit +props, there was no more excuse for asking the miners to admit +indebtedness for the subsidy than the dealers in pit props. On +every principle of Capitalism the Government should either have +refused to interfere, and have let the comparatively barren mines +which could not afford to pay the standard wage for the standard +working day go smash, or else it should have advanced the millions +by way of mortgage, not on the worthless security of the defaulting +mines, but on that of all the coal mines, good and bad. +The interest on the mortgage would in that case have been paid to +the nation by the good mines, which would thus have been compelled +to make up the deficits of the bad ones; and if the interest +had not been paid, the Government could finally have nationalized +the mines by simple foreclosure instead of by purchase.</p> + +<p>But capitalists are by no means in favor of having Capitalist +principles applied to themselves in their dealings with the State. +Besides, why should the fortunate owners of solvent mines subsidize +the owners of insolvent ones? If the Government chooses<span class="pagenum" id="Page_305">[Pg 305]</span> +to subsidize bad mines, let it be content with the security of the +bad mines. It ended in the Government making the owners a +present of the ten millions. The owners had to pass it on to the +miners as wages: at least that was the idea; and it was more or less +the fact also. But whether we regard it as a subsidy to the miners +or to the owners or to both, it was none the less confiscated from +the general taxpayer and handed as alms to favored persons.</p> + +<p>The people who say that such subsidies are Socialistic, whether +with the object of discrediting them or recommending them, are +talking nonsense: they might as well say that the perpetual pensions +conferred by Charles II on his illegitimate children were +Socialistic. They are frank exploitations of the taxpayer by bankrupt +Capitalism and its proletarian dependents. Socialist agitators, +far from supporting such subsidies, will shout at you that +you are paying part of the men’s wages whilst the mine-owners +take all the profits; that if you will stand that, you will stand anything; +that you are paying for nationalization and not getting it; +that you are being saddled with a gigantic system of outdoor +relief for the rich in addition to their rents, their dividends, and +the doles they have left you to pay to their discarded employees; +that the capitalists, having plundered everything else, land, capital, +and labor, are now plundering the Treasury; that, not content +with overcharging you for every article you buy, they are +now taxing you through the Government collector; and that as +they will have to hand over a share of what they take from you in +this way as wages, the Trade Unions are taking good care to make +the Labor Party support the subsidies in Parliament.</p> + +<p>Meanwhile you hear from all quarters angry denunciations of +Poplarism as a means by which the rate collector robs you of +your possibly hardearned money, often to the tune of twentyfour +shillings for every pound of the value of your house, to keep idle +ablebodied laborers eating their heads off at a higher rate of expenditure +than you, perhaps, can afford in your own house.</p> + +<p>All this, with due allowance for platform rhetoric, is true. The +attempt to maintain a failing system by subsidies plus Poplarism +burns the candle at both ends, and makes straight for industrial +bankruptcy. But you will not, if you are wise, waste your forces in +resentful indignation. The capitalists are not making a conscious<span class="pagenum" id="Page_306">[Pg 306]</span> +attempt to rob you. They are the flies on the wheel of their own +system, which they understand as little as you did before we sat +down to study it. All they know is that Trade Unionism is playing +their own game against them with such success that more and +more of the overcharges (to you) that formerly went to profit are +now going to wages. They cry to the Government to save them, +and it saves them (at your expense) partly because it is afraid of +a big strike; partly because it wants to put off the alternative of +nationalization as long as possible; partly because it has to consider +the proletarian vote at the next general election; and mostly +because it can think of nothing better to do in the rare moments +when it has time to think at all. The British employers, the British +Trade Unionists, and the British Government have no deep designs: +so far it is just hand to mouth with them; and you need not +waste any moral indignation on them. But please note the word +British, thrice repeated in the last sentence, and also the words +“so far”. The American employers and financiers are far more +self-conscious than our business men and working men are; and +the Americans are teaching our people their methods. Modern +scientific discoveries have set them dreaming of enormously increased +production; and they have found out that as the world +depends on the people who work, whether with head or hand, +they can by combining prevent idle and incapable owners of land +and capital from getting too much of the increase. They know +that they can neither realize their dream nor combine properly by +using their own brains; and they are now paying large salaries to +clever persons whose sole business is to think for them. Suppose +you were the managing head of a big business, and that you were +determined not to tolerate Trade Unionism among your workpeople, +and therefore had to treat them well enough to prevent +them feeling the want of a union. In England your firm would be +called “a rat house”, in America simply a non-union house. Imagine +yourself visited by a well-dressed lady or gentleman with +the pleasant nonchalance of a person of proved and conscious +ability and distinction. She (we will assume that she is a lady) has +called to suggest that you should order all your workpeople to +join the union of their trade, of which she is the pampered representative. +You gasp, and would order her out if you dared; but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_307">[Pg 307]</span> +how can one shew the door to a superior and perfectly self-confident +person. She proceeds to explain whilst you are staring at +her. She says it will be worth your while: that her union is prepared +to put some new capital into your business, and that it will +come to a friendly arrangement with you as to the various trade +restrictions to which you so much object. She points out that if +instead of working to increase the dividends of your idle shareholders +you were just to give them what they are accustomed to +expect, and use the rest of the profit for bettering the condition of +the people who are doing the work (including yourself), the business +would receive a fresh impulse, and you and all the really +effective people in it make much more money. She suggests ways +of doing it that you have never dreamt of. Can you see any reason +except stupid conservatism for refusing such a proposal?</p> + +<p>This is not a fancy picture. It has actually occurred in America +as the result of the Trade Unions employing first-rate business +brains to think for them, and not grudging them salaries equal to +the wages of a dozen workmen. When English Trade Unions become +Americanized as English big business is becoming Americanized +they will do the same. Our big businesses are already +picking out brainy champions from the universities and the public +services to do just such jobs for them. Both big business and +skilled labor will presently be managing their affairs scientifically, +instead of dragging heavily and unimaginatively through +the old ruts. And when this is accomplished they will enslave the +unskilled, unorganized proletariat, including, as we have seen, +the middle-class folk who have no aptitude for money making. +They will enslave the Government. And they will do it mostly by +the methods of Socialism, effecting such manifest improvements +in the condition of the masses that it will be inhuman to stop +them. The organized workers will live, not in slums, but in places +like Port Sunlight, Bournville, and the Garden Cities. Employers +like Mr Ford, Lord Leverhulme and Mr Cadbury will be the +rule and not the exception; and the sense of helpless dependence +on them will grow at the expense of individual adventurousness. +The old communal cry of high rates and a healthy city will be replaced +by Mr Ford’s cry of high wages and colossal profits.</p> + +<p>Those profits are the snag in the stream of prosperity. If they<span class="pagenum" id="Page_308">[Pg 308]</span> +are unequally distributed they will wreck the system that has produced +them, and involve the nation in the catastrophe. In spite +of all the apparent triumphs of increased business efficiency the +Socialists will still have to insist on public control of distribution +and equalization of income. Without that, capitalist big business, +in league with the aristocracy of Trade Unionism, will control +the Government for its private ends; and you may find it very +difficult, as a voter, to distinguish between the genuine Socialism +that changes private into public ownership of our industries, +and the sham Socialism that confiscates the money of one set of +citizens without compensation only to hand it over to another +set, not to make our incomes more equal, but to give more to +those who have already too much.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c67">67</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">CAPITALISM IN PERPETUAL MOTION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>ND now, learned lady reader (for by this time you know +much more about the vital history and present social problems +of your country and of the world than an average +Capitalist Prime Minister), do you notice that in these ceaseless +activities which keep all of us fed and clothed and lodged, and +some of us even pampered, <span class="allsmcap">NOTHING STAYS PUT</span>? Human society +is like a glacier: it looks like an immovable and eternal field of +ice; but it is really flowing like a river; and the only effect of its +glassy rigidity is that its own unceasing movement splits it up +into crevasses that make it frightfully dangerous to walk on, all +the more as they are beautifully concealed by natural whitewash +in the shape of snow. Your father’s bankruptcy, your husband’s, +or your own may precipitate you at any moment into a little crevasse. +A big one may suddenly swallow a whole empire, as three +of them were swallowed in 1918. If, as is most likely, you have +been brought up to believe that the world is a place of permanent +governments, settled institutions, and unchangeable creeds in +which all respectable people believe, to which they all conform, +and which are unalterable because they are founded for all eternity +on Magna Carta, the Habeas Corpus Act, the Apostles’ +Creed, and the Ten Commandments, what you have gathered<span class="pagenum" id="Page_309">[Pg 309]</span> +here of the continual and unexpected changes and topsy-turvy +developments of our social order, the passing of power from one +class to another, the changes of opinion by which what was applauded +as prosperity and honor and piety at the beginning of +the nineteenth century came to be execrated as greedy villainy at +the end of it, and what were prosecuted as criminal conspiracies +under George IV are legalized and privileged combinations, +powerful in Parliament, under George V, may have driven you to +ask, what is the use of your drudging through all these descriptions +and explanations if by the time you have reached the end of +the book everything will have changed? I can only assure you +that the way to understand the changes that are going on is to +understand the changes that have gone before, and warn you +that many women have spoilt their whole lives and misled their +children disastrously by not understanding them.</p> + +<p>Besides, the things I have been describing have not passed +wholly away. There are still old-fashioned noblemen who lord it +over the countryside as their ancestors have done for hundreds of +years, sometimes benevolently, sometimes driving the inhabitants +out to make room for sheep or deer at their pleasure. There +are still farmers, large and small. There are still many petty employers +carrying on small businesses singly or in firms of two or +three partners. There are still joint stock companies that have not +been merged in Trusts. There are still multitudes of employees +who belong to no Trade Union, and are as badly sweated as the +woman who sat in unwomanly rags and sang the Song of the +Shirt. There are still children and young persons who are cruelly +over-worked in spite of the Acts of Parliament that reach only the +factories and workshops. The world at large, though it contains +London and Paris and New York, also contains primitive villages +where gas, electric light, tap water and main drainage are as unknown +as they were to King Alfred. Our famous universities and +libraries and picture galleries are within travelling distance of +tribes of savages and cannibals, and of barbarian empires. Thus +you can see around you living examples of all the stages of the +Capitalist System I have described. Indeed, if you come, or your +parents came (like mine) from one of those families of more than +a dozen children in the genteel younger-son class which were<span class="pagenum" id="Page_310">[Pg 310]</span> +more common formerly than they are today, you are certain to +have found, without going further than your parents, your +brothers and sisters, your uncles and aunts, your first cousins, +and perhaps yourself, examples of every phase of the conditions +produced by Capitalism in that class during the last two centuries, +to say nothing of the earlier half medieval phases in which +most women, especially respectable women, are still belated.</p> + +<p>Beside the Changing and the Changed stand the Not Yet +Changed; and we have to deal with all three in our daily business. +Until we know what has happened to the Changed we shall not +understand what is going to happen to the Not Yet Changed, +and may ourselves, with the best intentions, effect mischievous +changes, or oppose and wreck beneficial ones. If we look for +guidance to the articles in our party newspapers (all living on profiteers’ +advertisements) or the speeches of party politicians, or the +gossip of our politically ignorant and class-prejudiced neighbors +and relatives, which is unfortunately just what most of us do, we +are sure to be either misguided and corrupted or exasperated.</p> + +<p>Take, as a warning, those adventures of Capitalism in pursuit +of profits which I sketched for you in Chapter 37 and the few +following ones. They are always described to you in books and +newspapers as the history of the British race, or (in France) the +French nation, or (in Germany or Italy) the grand old German +or Latin stock, dauntlessly exercising its splendid virtues and +talents in advancing civilization at home and establishing it +among the heathen abroad. Capitalism can be made to look very +well on paper. But beware of allowing your disillusion to disable +you by plunging you into disgust and general cynical incredulity. +Our thrilling columns of national self-praise and mutual admiration +must not be dismissed as mere humbug. Without great +discoverers and inventors and explorers, great organizers and +engineers and soldiers, hardy and reckless sailors, great chemists +and mathematicians, devoted missionaries and desperate adventurers, +our capitalists would be no better off today than they +would have remained in Greenland or Thibet. But the extraordinary +men whose exploits have made the capitalists rich were +not themselves capitalists. The best of them received little or no +encouragement from capitalists, because there was seldom any<span class="pagenum" id="Page_311">[Pg 311]</span> +prospect of immediate profit from their labors and adventures. +Many of them were and are not only poor but persecuted. And +when the time comes, mostly after their deaths, to bring their +discoveries and conquests into everyday use, the work is done by +the hungry ones: the capitalists providing only the spare food +they have neither sown nor reaped, baked nor brewed, but only +collected from the hungry as rent or interest, and appropriated +under laws made by capitalist legislators for that purpose. British +brains, British genius, British courage and resolution have made +the great reputation of Britain, as the same qualities in other +nations have made the other great national reputations; but the +capitalists as such have provided neither brains, genius, courage, +nor resolution. Their contribution has been the spare food on +which the geniuses have lived; and this the capitalists did not produce: +they only intercepted it during its transfer from the hungry +ones who made it to the hungry ones who consumed it.</p> + +<p>Note that I say the capitalists <i>as such</i>; for the accident of a +person being both a capitalist and a genius may happen just as +easily as the accident of being both a genius and a pauper. Nature +takes no notice of money. It is not likely that a born capitalist +(that is, the inheritor of a fortune) will be a genius, because it is +not likely that anybody will be born a genius, the phenomenon +being naturally rare; but it may happen to capitalists occasionally, +just as it has happened to princes. Queen Elizabeth was able +to tell her ministers that if they put her into the street without +anything but her petticoat she could make her living with the +best of them. At the same time Queen Mary of Scotland was +proving that if she had been put into the street with a hundred +millions of money and an army of fifty thousand men she would +have made a mess of it all somehow and come to a bad end. But +their being queens had nothing to do with that: it was their +personal quality as women that made the difference. In the same +way, when one born capitalist happens to be a genius and another +a waster, the capital produces neither the ability nor the worthlessness. +Take away their capital, and they remain just the same: +double it, and you double neither their ability nor their imbecility. +The stupidest person in the country may be the richest: the +cleverest and greatest may not know where tomorrow’s dinner is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_312">[Pg 312]</span> +to come from. I repeat, capitalists as such need no special ability, +and lose nothing by the lack of it. If they seem able to feed Peter +the Laborer it is only because they have taken the food from Paul +the Farmer; and even this they have not done with their own +hands: they have paid Matthew the Agent to do it, and had his +salary from Mark the Shopkeeper. And when Peter is a navvy, +Paul an engineer, Matthew the manager of a Trust, and Mark a +banker, the situation remains essentially unchanged. Peter and +Paul, Matthew and Mark, do all the work: the capitalist does +nothing but take as much of what they make as she can without +starving them (killing the goose that lays the golden eggs).</p> + +<p>Therefore you may disregard both the Capitalist papers which +claim all the glories of our history as the fruit of Capitalist virtue +and talent, and the anti-Capitalist papers which ascribe all our +history’s shames and disgraces to the greed of the capitalists. +Waste neither your admiration nor your indignation. The more +you understand the system, the better you will see that the most +devout personal righteousness cannot evade it except by political +changes which will rescue the whole nation from it.</p> + +<p>But though the capitalist as such does nothing but invest her +money, Capitalism does a great deal. When it has filled the home +markets with all the common goods the people can afford to pay +for out of their wages, and all the established fashionable luxuries +the rich will buy, it must apply its fresh accumulations of spare +money to more out-of-the-way and hazardous enterprises. It is +then that Capitalism becomes adventurous and experimental; +listens to the schemes of hungry men who are great inventors or +chemists or engineers; and establishes new industries and services +like telephones, motor charabancs, air services, wireless concerts, +and so forth. It is then that it begins to consider the question +of harbors, which, as we saw, it would not look at whilst there +was still room for new distilleries. At the present moment an +English company has undertaken to build a harbor at a cost of a +million pounds for a Portuguese island in the Atlantic, and even +to make it a free port (that is, charge no harbor dues) if the Government +of the island lets it collect and keep the customs duties.</p> + +<p>The capitalists, though they are very angry when the hungry +ask for Government help of any kind, have no scruples about<span class="pagenum" id="Page_313">[Pg 313]</span> +asking it for themselves. The railways ask the Government to +guarantee their dividends; the air services ask for large sums +from the Government to help them to maintain their aeroplanes +and make money out of them; the coalowners and the miners +between them extort subsidies from the Government by threatening +a strike if they do not get it; and the Government, under +the Trades Facilities Acts, guarantees loans to private capitalists +without securing any share in their enterprises for the nation, +which provides them with capital cheaply, but has to pay profiteering +prices for their goods and services all the same. In the +end there is hardly any conceivable enterprise that can be made to +pay dividends that Capitalism will not undertake as long as it can +find spare money; and when it cannot it is quite ready to extract +money from the Government—that is, to take it forcibly from the +people by taxes—by assuring everyone that the Government can +do nothing itself for the people, who must always come to the +capitalists to get it done for them in return for substantial profits, +dividends, and rents. Its operations are so enormous that it alters +the size and meaning of what we call our country. Trading companies +of capitalists have induced the Government to give them +charters under which they have seized large and populous islands +like Borneo, whole empires like India, and great tracts of country +like Rhodesia, governing them and maintaining armies in them +for the purpose of making as much money out of them as possible. +But they have taken care to hoist the British flag, and make use +directly or indirectly, of the British army and navy at the cost of +the British taxpayers to defend these conquests of theirs; and in +the end the British Commonwealth has had to take over their +responsibilities and add the islands and countries they have +seized to what is called the British Empire, with the curious result, +quite unintended by the British people, that the centre of +the British Empire is now in the East instead of in Great Britain, +and out of every hundred of our fellow subjects only eleven are +whites, or even Christians. Thus Capitalism leads us into enterprises +of all sorts, at home and abroad, over which we have no +control, and for which we have no desire. The enterprises are not +necessarily bad: some of them have turned out well; but the +point is that Capitalism does not care whether they turn out well<span class="pagenum" id="Page_314">[Pg 314]</span> +or ill for us provided they promise to bring in money to the +shareholders. We never know what Capitalism will be up to next; +and we never can believe a word its newspapers tell us about its +doings when the truth seems likely to be unpopular.</p> + +<p>It is hard to believe that you may wake up one morning, and +learn from your newspaper that the Houses of Parliament and +the King have moved to Constantinople or Baghdad or Zanzibar, +and that this insignificant island is to be retained only as a +meteorological station, a bird sanctuary, and a place of pilgrimage +for American tourists. But if that did happen, what could you do? +It would be a perfectly logical development of Capitalism. And +it is no more impossible than the transfer of the mighty Roman +empire from Rome to Constantinople was impossible. All you +could do, if you wished to be in the fashion, or if your business +or that of your husband could be conducted only in a great metropolitan +centre, would be to go east after the King and Parliament, +or west to America and cease to be a Briton.</p> + +<p>You need not, however, pack up just yet. But what you really +need do is rid your mind of the notion that mere Conservatism, +in its general sense of a love for the old ways and institutions you +were brought up with, will be of any avail against Capitalism. +Capitalism, in its ceaseless search for investment, its absolute +necessity for finding hungry men to eat its spare bread before it +goes stale, breaks through every barrier, rushes every frontier, +swallows every religion, levels every institution that obstructs it, +and sets up any code of morals that facilitates it, as soullessly as it +sets up banks and lays cables. And you must approve and conform, +or be ruined, and perhaps imprisoned or executed.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c68">68</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE RUNAWAY CAR OF CAPITALISM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">C</span>APITALISM, then, keeps us in perpetual motion. Now +motion is not a bad thing: it is life as opposed to stagnation, +paralysis, and death. It is novelty as opposed to monotony; +and novelty is so necessary to us that if you take the best +thing within your reach (say the best food, the best music, the +best book, the best state of mind, or the best anything that remains<span class="pagenum" id="Page_315">[Pg 315]</span> +the same always), and if you stick to it long enough you +will come to loathe it. Changeable women, for instance, are more +endurable than monotonous ones, however unpleasant some of +their changes may be: they are sometimes murdered but seldom +deserted; and it is the ups and downs of married life that make it +bearable. When people shake their heads because we are living +in a restless age, ask them how they would like to live in a stationary +one and do without change. Nobody who buys a motor car +says “the slower the better”. Motion is delightful when we can +control it, guide it, and stop it when it is taking us into danger.</p> + +<p>Uncontrolled motion is terrible. Fancy yourself in a car which +you do not know how to steer and cannot stop, with an inexhaustible +supply of petrol in the tank, rushing along at fifty miles an +hour on an island strewn with rocks and bounded by cliff precipices! +That is what living under Capitalism feels like when +you come to understand it. Capital is running away with us; and +we know that it has always ended in the past by taking its passengers +over the brink of the precipice at the foot of which are +strewn the ruins of empires. The desperately pressing present +problem for all governments is how to get control of this motion; +make safe highways for it; and steer it along those highways. If +only we could stop it whilst we sit down and think! But no: the +car will not stop: on the contrary it goes faster and faster as capital +accumulates in greater and greater quantities, and as we multiply +our numbers. One statesman after another snatches at the wheel +and tries his hand. Kings try their hands; dictators try their +hands; democratic prime ministers try their hands; committees +and Soviets try their hands; and we look hopefully to them for a +moment, imagining that they have got control because they do it +with an air of authority, and assure us that it will be all right if +only we will sit quiet. But Capital runs away with them all; and +we palpitate between relief when our ungovernable vehicle blunders +into a happy valley, and despair when we hear the growl of +the waves at the foot of the cliffs grow louder and louder instead +of dying away in the distance. Blessed then are those who do not +know and cannot think: to them life seems a joyride with a few +disagreeable incidents that must be put up with. They sometimes +make the best rulers, just as the best railway signalman is he who<span class="pagenum" id="Page_316">[Pg 316]</span> +does not feel his responsibility enough to be frightened out of his +wits by it. But in the long run civilization depends on our governments +gaining an intelligent control of the forces that are running +away with Capitalism; and for that an understanding of them is +necessary. Mere character and energy, much as we admire them, +are positively mischievous without intellect and knowledge.</p> + +<p>Our present difficulty is that nobody understands except a few +students whose books nobody else reads, or here and there a +prophet crying in the wilderness and being either ignored by the +press or belittled as a crank. Our rulers are full of the illusions of +the money market, counting £5 a year as £100. Our voters have +not got even so far as this, because nine out of ten of them, women +or men, have no more experience of capital than a sheep has of a +woollen mill, though the wool comes off its own back.</p> + +<p>But between the government and the governed there is a very +important difference. The governments do not know how to +govern; but they know that government is necessary, and that +it must be paid for. The voters regard government as a tyrannical +interference with their personal liberty, and taxation as the +plunder of the private citizen by the officials of a tyrannous state. +Formerly this did not matter much, because the people had no +votes. Queen Elizabeth, for instance, told the common people, +and even the jurymen and the Knights of the Shires who formed +the Parliament in her time, that affairs of State were not their +business, and that it was the grossest presumption on their part to +have any opinion of their own on such matters. If they attempted +to argue with her she threw them into prison without the smallest +hesitation. Yet even she could not extract money enough from +them in taxes to follow up her political successes. She could +barely hold her own by being quite right about the incompetence +of the commoners and knights, and being herself the most competent +person of her time. These two advantages made her independent +of the standing armies by which other despots maintained +themselves. She could depend on the loyalty of her people +because she was able, as we say, to deliver the goods. When her +successors attempted to be equally despotic without being able +to deliver the goods, one of them was beheaded, and the other +driven out of the country. Cromwell rivalled her in ability; but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_317">[Pg 317]</span> +though he was a parliament man, he was finally driven to lay +violent hands on Parliament, and rule by armed force.</p> + +<p>As to the common people, the view that their poverty and political +ignorance disqualified them for any share in the government +of the country was accepted until within my own lifetime. Within +my father’s lifetime the view that to give every man a vote (to say +nothing of every woman) was ridiculous and, if acted on, dangerous, +seemed a matter of course not only to Tories like the old +Duke of Wellington, but to extreme revolutionaries like the +young poet Shelley. It seems only the other day that Mr Winston +Churchill declared that Labor is not fit to govern.</p> + +<p>Now you probably agree with Queen Elizabeth, Cromwell, +Wellington, Shelley, and Mr Winston Churchill. At all events if +you do you are quite right. For although Mr Ramsay MacDonald +easily convinced the country that a Labor Government can govern +at least as well as either the Liberal or Conservative Governments +who have had the support of Mr Churchill, the truth is +that none of them can govern: Capitalism runs away with them +all. The hopes that we founded on the extension of the franchise, +first to working men and finally to women, which means in effect +to all adults, have been disappointed as far as controlling Capitalism +is concerned, and indeed in most other respects too. The first +use the women made of their votes was to hurl Mr MacDonald +out of Parliament and vote for hanging the Kaiser and making +Germany pay for the war, both of them impossibilities which +should not have imposed on even a male voter. They got the vote +mainly by the argument that they were as competent politically +as the men; and when they got it they at once used it to prove that +they were just as incompetent. The only point they scored at the +election was that the defeat of Mr MacDonald by their vote in +Leicester shewed that they were not, as the silliest of their opponents +had alleged, sure to vote for the best-looking man.</p> + +<p>What the extension of political power to the whole community +(Democracy, as they call it) has produced is a reinforcement of +the popular resistance to government and taxation at a moment +when nothing but a great extension of government and taxation +can hope to control the Gadarene rush of Capitalism towards the +abyss. And this has produced a tendency which is the very last<span class="pagenum" id="Page_318">[Pg 318]</span> +that the old Suffragists and Suffragettes dreamt of, or would have +advocated if they had dreamt of it: namely, a demand for the +abandonment of parliamentary government and the substitution +of a dictatorship. In desperation at the failure of Parliament to +rescue industry from the profiteers, and currency from the financiers +(which means rescuing the livelihood of the people from +the purely predatory side of Capitalism), Europe has begun to +clamor for political disciplinarians to save her. Victorious France, +with her currency in the gutter, may be said to be advertising for +a Napoleon or a political Messiah. Italy has knocked its parliament +down and handed the whip to Signor Mussolini to thrash +Italian democracy and bureaucracy into some sort of order and +efficiency. In Spain the king and the military commander-in-chief +have refused to stand any more democratic nonsense, and +taken the law into their own hands. In Russia a minority of devoted +Marxists maintain by sheer force such government as is +possible in the teeth of an intensely recalcitrant peasantry. In +England we should welcome another Cromwell but for two considerations. +First, there is no Cromwell. Second, history teaches +us that if there were one, and he again ruled us by military force +after trying every sort of parliament and finding each worse than +the other, he would be worn out or dead after a few years; and +then we should return like the sow to her wallowing in the mire +and leave the restored profiteers to wreak on the corpse of the +worn-out ruler the spite they dared not express whilst he was +alive. Thus our inability to govern ourselves lands us in such a +mess that we hand the job over to any person strong enough to +undertake it; and then our unwillingness to be governed at all +makes us turn against the strong person, the Cromwell or Mussolini, +as an intolerable tyrant, and relapse into the condition of +Bunyan’s Simple, Sloth, and Presumption the moment his back +is turned or his body buried. We clamor for a despotic discipline +out of the miseries of our anarchy, and, when we get it, clamor +out of the severe regulation of our law and order for what we call +liberty. At each blind rush from one extreme to the other we +empty the baby out with the bath, learning nothing from our +experience, and furnishing examples of the abuses of power and +the horrors of liberty without ascertaining the limits of either.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_319">[Pg 319]</span></p> + +<p>Let us see whether we cannot clear up this matter of government +versus liberty a little before we give up the human race as +politically hopeless.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c69">69</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE NATURAL LIMIT TO LIBERTY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">O</span>NCE for all, we are not born free; and we never can be +free. When all the human tyrants are slain or deposed +there will still be the supreme tyrant that can never be slain +or deposed, and that tyrant is Nature. However easygoing +Nature may be in the South Sea Islands, where you can bask in +the sun and have food for the trouble of picking it up, even there +you have to build yourself a hut, and, being a woman, to bear and +rear children with travail and trouble. And, as the men are handsome +and quarrelsome and jealous, and, having little else to do +except make love, combine exercise with sport by killing oneanother, +you have to defend yourself with your own hands.</p> + +<p>But in our latitudes Nature is a hard taskmaster. In primitive +conditions it was only by working strenuously early and late that +we could feed and clothe and shelter ourselves sufficiently to be +able to survive the rigors of our climate. We were often beaten by +famine and flood, wolves and untimely rain and storms; and at +best the women had to bear large families to make up for the +deaths of children. They had to make the clothes of the family +and bake its bread as well as cook its meals. Such leisure as a +modern woman enjoys was not merely reprehensible: it was impossible. +A chief had to work hard for his power and privileges +as lawgiver, administrator, and chief of police; and had even his +most pampered wife attempted to live as idly and wastefully as +thousands of ordinary ladies now do with impunity, he would +certainly have corrected her with a stick as thick as his thumb, +and been held not only guiltless, but commendably active in the +discharge of his obvious social duty. And the women were expected +to do the like by their daughters instead of teaching them, +as Victorian ladies did, that to do anything useful is disgraceful, +and that if, as inevitably happens, something useful has to be +done, you must ring for a servant and by no means do it yourself.</p> + +<p>Now commercial civilization has been at root nothing more<span class="pagenum" id="Page_320">[Pg 320]</span> +than the invention of ways of doing Nature’s tasks with less labor. +Men of science invent because they want to discover Nature’s +secrets; but such popular inventions as the bow and spear, the +spade and plough, the wheel and arch, come from the desire to +make work easier out of doors. Indoors the spinning wheel and +loom, the frying-pan and poker, the scrubbing brush and soap, +the needle and safety pin, make domestic work easier. Some inventions +make the work harder, but also much shorter and more +intelligent, or else they make operations possible that were impossible +before: for instance, the alphabet, Arabic numerals, +ready reckoners, logarithms, and algebra. When instead of putting +your back into your work you put the horse’s or ox’s back +into it, and later on set steam and explosive spirits and electricity +to do the work of the strained backs, a state of things is reached in +which it becomes possible for people to have less work than is +good for them instead of more. The needle becomes a sewing +machine, the sweeping brush becomes a vacuum cleaner, and +both are driven from a switch in the wall by an engine miles away +instead of being treadled and wielded by foot and hand. In Chapter +42 we had a glance at the way in which we lost the old manual +skill and knowledge of materials and of buying and selling, first +through division of labor (a very important invention), and then +through machinery. If you engage a servant today who has been +trained at a first-rate institution in the use of all the most modern +domestic machinery, and take her down to a country house, I +will not go quite so far yet as to warn you that though she knows +how to work the buttons on an automatic electric lift or step on +and off an escalator without falling on her nose, she cannot walk +up or downstairs; but it may come to that before long. Meanwhile +you will have on your hands a supercivilized woman whom +you will be glad to replace by a girl from the nearest primitive +village, if any primitive villages are left in your neighborhood.</p> + +<p>Let us, however, confine ourselves to the bearing of all this on +that pet topic of the leisured class, our personal liberty.</p> + +<p>What is liberty? Leisure. What is leisure? Liberty. If you can +at any moment in the day say “I can do as I please for the next +hour” then for that hour you are at liberty. If you say “I must +now do such and such things during the next hour whether I like<span class="pagenum" id="Page_321">[Pg 321]</span> +it or not” then you are not at liberty for that hour in spite of +Magna Carta, the Declaration of Rights (or of Independence), +and all the other political title-deeds of your so-called freedom.</p> + +<p>May I, without being too intrusive, follow you throughout your +daily routine? You are wakened in the morning, whether you like +it or not, either by a servant or by that nerve-shattering abomination +an alarum clock. You must get up and light the fire and wash +and dress and prepare and eat your breakfast. So far, no liberty. +You simply must. Then you have to make your bed, wash up the +breakfast things, sweep and tidy-up the place, and tidy yourself +up, which means that you must more or less wash and re-dress +your person until you are presentable enough to go out and buy +fresh supplies of food and do other necessary shopping. Every +meal you take involves preparation, including cooking, and washing +up afterwards. In the course of these activities you will have +to travel from place to place, which even in the house often +means treadmill work on the stairs. You must rest a little occasionally. +And finally you must go to sleep for eight hours.</p> + +<p>In addition to all this you must earn the money to do your shopping +and pay your rent and rates. This you can do in two main +ways. You can work in some business for at least eight hours a +day, plus the journeys to and from the place where you work. Or +you can marry, in which case you will have to do for your husband +and children all the preparation of meals and marketing that you +had to do for yourself, to wash and dress the children until they +are able to wash and dress themselves, and to do all the other +things that belong to the occupation of wife and mother, including +the administration of most of the family income. If you add +up all the hours you are forced to spend in these ways, and subtract +them from the twenty-four hours allowed you by Nature to +get through them in, the remainder will be your daily leisure: that +is, your liberty. Historians and journalists and political orators +may assure you that the defeat of the Armada, the cutting off of +King Charles’s head, the substitution of Dutch William for Scottish +James on the throne, the passing of the Married Women’s +Property Acts, and the conquest by the Suffragettes of Votes +for Women, have set you free; and in moments of enthusiasm +roused by these assurances you may sing fervently that Britons<span class="pagenum" id="Page_322">[Pg 322]</span> +never never will be slaves. But though all these events may have +done away with certain grievances from which you might be +suffering if they had not occurred, they have added nothing to +your leisure and therefore nothing to your liberty. The only Acts +of Parliament that have really increased liberty: that is, added to +the number of minutes in which a woman’s time is her own, are +the Factory Acts which reduced her hours of industrial labor, the +Sunday Observance Acts which forbid commercial work on every +seventh day, and the Bank Holiday Acts.</p> + +<p>You see, then, that the common trick of speaking of liberty as +if we were all either free or slaves, is a foolish one. Nature does +not allow any of us to be wholly free. In respect of eating and +drinking and washing and dressing and sleeping and the other +necessary occasions of physical life, the most incorrigible tramp, +sacrificing every decency and honesty to freedom, is as much a +slave for at least ten or eleven hours a day as a constitutional king, +who has to live an almost entirely dictated life. An enslaved +negress who has six hours a day to herself has more liberty than +a “free” white woman who has only three. The white woman is +free to go on strike, and the negress is not; but the negress can +console herself by her freedom to commit suicide (fundamentally +much the same thing), and by pitying the Englishwoman +because, having so much less liberty, she is only poor white trash.</p> + +<p>Now in our desire for liberty we all sympathize with the tramp. +Our difference from him, when we do differ, is that some of us +want leisure so that we may be able to work harder at the things +we like than slaves, except under the most brutal compulsion, +work at the things they must do. The tramp wastes his leisure +and is miserable: we want to employ our leisure and be happy. +For leisure, remember, is not rest. Rest, like sleep, is compulsory. +Genuine leisure is freedom to do as we please, not to do nothing.</p> + +<p>As I write, a fierce fight between the miners and the mine-owners +has culminated in the increase of the miners’ daily working +hours from seven to eight. It is said that the miners want a +seven hours working day. This is the wrong way to put it. What +the miners want is not seven hours mining but seventeen hours +off, out of which Nature will take at least ten for her occasions, +and locomotion another. Thus the miner, by rigidly economizing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_323">[Pg 323]</span> +his time, cutting out all loafing, and being fortunate in the +weather and season, might conceivably manage to have six hours +of effective leisure out of the twenty-four on the basis of seven +hours earning and eleven hours for sleep, recreation, loafing and +locomotion. And it is this six hours of liberty that he wants to +increase. Even when the immediate object of his clamor for +shorter hours of work is only a mask for his real intention of +working as long as before but receiving overtime pay (half as +much again) for the last hour, his final object is to obtain more +money to spend on his leisure. The pieceworker, the moment the +piecework rate enables him to earn as much in three or four days +as he has been accustomed to earn in a week, is as likely as not to +take two or three days off instead of working as long as before +for twice as much money. He wants leisure more than money.</p> + +<p>But the conclusive instance is that of property. Women desire +to be women of property because property secures to them the +maximum of leisure. The woman of property need not get up at +six in the morning to light the fire. She need not prepare her +husband’s breakfast nor her own. She need not wash-up nor +empty the slops nor make the beds. She need not do the marketing, +nor any shopping except the sort she enjoys. She need not +bother more about her children than she cares to. She need not +even brush her own hair; and if she must still eat and sleep and +wash and move from place to place, these operations are made as +luxurious as possible. She can count on at least twelve hours +leisure every day. She may work harder at trying on new dresses, +hunting, dancing, visiting, receiving, bridge, tennis, mountain +climbing, or any other hobby she may have, than a laborer’s wife +works at her compulsory housekeeping; but she is doing what +she likes all the time, and not what she must. And so, having her +fill of liberty, she is usually an ardent supporter of every political +movement that protects her privilege, and a strenuous and sometimes +violently abusive opponent of every political movement +that threatens to curtail her leisure or reduce the quantity of +money at her disposal for its enjoyment. She clings to her position +because it gives her the utmost possible liberty; and her +grievance is that she finds it difficult to obtain and retain domestic +servants because, though she offers them higher wages and better<span class="pagenum" id="Page_324">[Pg 324]</span> +food and lodging and surroundings than they can secure for +themselves as industrial employees, she also offers them less freedom. +Their time, as they say, is never their own except for occasional +evenings out. Formerly women of all classes, from governesses +to scullery maids, went into domestic service because the +only alternative was rough work in unbearably coarse company, +and because, with comparatively gentle dispositions, they were +for the most part illiterate and ignorant. Nowadays, being imprisoned +in schools daily for at least nine years, they are no longer +illiterate; and there are many occupations open to them (for instance, +in city offices) that were formerly reserved for men. Even +in rough employment the company is not so rough as it used to +be; besides, women of gentle nurture are no longer physically disabled +for them by the dress and habits that made the Victorian +woman half an invalid. A hundred years ago a housemaid was so +different from a herring-gutter or a ragpicker that she was for all +business purposes an animal of another species. Today they are +all “young ladies” in their leisure hours; and the single fact that +a housemaid has less leisure than an industrial employee makes it +impossible to obtain a housemaid who is not half imbecile in a +factory town, and not easy to get one in a fishing port.</p> + +<p>It is the same with men. But do not conclude that every woman +and every man desires freedom above all things. Some people +are very much afraid of it. They are so conscious that they cannot +fend for themselves either industrially or morally that they feel +that the only safe condition for them is one of tutelage, in which +they will always have someone to tell them not only what to do +but how to behave. Women of this kind seek domestic service, +and men military service, not in spite of the forfeiture of their +freedom but because of it. Were it not for this factor in the problem +it would be harder to get domestic servants and soldiers than +it is. Yet the ideal of the servant and soldier is not continual tutelage +and service: it is tutelage relieved by an occasional spree. +They both want to be as free as they dare. Again, the very last +thing the ordinary industrial male worker wants is to have to think +about his work. That is the manager’s job. What he wants to +think about is his play. For its sake he wants his worktime to be as +short, and his playtime as long, as he can afford. Women, from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_325">[Pg 325]</span> +domestic necessity and habit, are more accustomed to think about +their work than men; for a housewife must both work and manage; +but she also is glad when her work is over.</p> + +<p>The great problem of the distribution of the national income +thus becomes also a problem of the distribution of necessary work +and the distribution of leisure or liberty. And this leisure or +liberty is what we all desire: it is the sphere of romance and infinite +possibilities, whilst worktime is the sphere of cut and dried +compulsory reality. All the inventions and expedients by which +labor is made more productive are hailed with enthusiasm, and +called progress, because they make more liberty possible for us. +Unfortunately, we distribute the leisure gained by the invention +of the machines in the most absurd way that can be conceived. +Take your woman of property whom we have just discussed, with +her fifteen hours leisure out of the twenty-four. How does she +obtain that leisure? Not by inventing anything, but by owning +machines invented by somebody else and keeping the leisure they +produce all to herself, leaving those who actually work the machines +with no more leisure than they had before. Do not blame +her: she cannot help herself, poor lady! that is Capitalist law.</p> + +<p>Look at it in the broader case of the whole nation. Modern +methods of production enable each person in the nation to produce +much more than they need consume to keep themselves alive +and reproduce themselves. That means that modern methods +produce not only a national fund of wealth but a national fund of +leisure or liberty. Now just as you can distribute the wealth so as +to make a few people monstrously rich whilst leaving all the rest +as poor as before, you can distribute the leisure in such a way as +to make a few people free for fifteen hours a day whilst the rest +remain as they were, with barely four hours to dispose of as they +please. And this is exactly what the institution of private property +has done, and why a demand for its abolition and for the equal +distribution of the national leisure or liberty among the whole +population has arisen under the banner of Socialism.</p> + +<p>Let us try to make a rough picture of what would happen if +leisure, and consequently productive work, were equally distributed. +Let us pretend that if we all worked four hours a day for +thirtyfive years each of us could live as well as persons with at<span class="pagenum" id="Page_326">[Pg 326]</span> +least a thousand a year do now. Let us assume that this state +of things has been established by general agreement, involving +a compromise between the people who want to work only two +hours and live on a five-hundred-a-year scale and those who want +to work four hours and live twice as expensively!</p> + +<p>The difficulty then arises that some kinds of work will not fit +themselves into instalments of four hours a day. Suppose you are +married, for example. If your husband is in business there is no +trouble for him. He does every day what he now does on Saturday: +that is, begins at nine and knocks off at one. But what about +your work? The most important work in the world is that of bearing +and rearing children; for without that the human race would +presently be extinct. All women’s privileges are based on that +fact. Now a woman cannot be pregnant for four hours a day, and +normal for the rest of it. Nor can she nurse her infant for four +hours and neglect it until nine next morning. It is true that pregnancy +does not involve complete and continuous disablement +from every other productive activity: indeed, no fact is better +established by experience than that any attempt to treat it as such +is morbid and dangerous. As some writers inelegantly express it, +it is not a whole time job. Nursing is much more continuously +exacting, as children in institutions who receive only what ignorant +people call necessary attention mostly die, whilst home children +who are played with and petted and coddled and tossed and +sung-to survive with a dirty rag or two for clothing, and a +thatched cabin with one room and a clay floor for habitation.</p> + +<p>A four hours working day, then, does not mean that everybody +can begin work at nine and leave off at one. Pregnancy and nursing +are only items in the long list of vitally important occupations +that cannot be interrupted and resumed at the sound of a hooter. +It is possible in a factory to keep a continuous process going by +having six shifts of workers to succeed oneanother during the +twentyfour hours, so that each shift works no more than four +hours; but a ship, being a home as well as a workplace, cannot +accommodate six crews. Even if we built warships big enough to +hold 5000 and carry food for them, the shifts could not retire from +Jutland battles at the end of each spell of four hours. Nor is such +leisure as is possible on board ship the equivalent of shore leisure,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_327">[Pg 327]</span> +as the leisured passengers, with their silly deck games, and their +agonized scamperings fore and aft for exercise know only too well.</p> + +<p>Then there are the jobs that cannot be done in shifts because +they must be done by the same person throughout with a continuance +that stretches human endurance to the utmost limit. A +chemist or physicist watching an experiment, an astronomer +watching an eclipse, a doctor or nurse watching a difficult case, a +Cabinet minister dealing with news from the front during a war, +a farmer saving his hay in the face of an unfavorable weather +forecast, or a body of scavengers clearing away a snowfall, must +go on if necessary until they drop, four hours or no four hours. +Handel’s way of composing an oratorio was to work at it night and +day until it was finished, keeping himself awake as best he might. +Explorers are lucky if they do not die of exhaustion, as many of +them have, from prolonged effort and endurance.</p> + +<p>A four hour working day therefore, though just as feasible as +an eight hour day is now, or the five day week which is the latest +cry, is in practice only a basis of calculation. In factory and office +work, and cognate occupations out of doors, it can be carried out +literally. It may mean short and frequent holidays or long and +rare ones. I do not know what happens to you in this respect; +but in my own case, in spite of the most fervent resolutions to +order my work more sensibly, and of the fact that an author’s +work can as a rule quite well be divided into limited daily periods, +I am usually obliged to work myself to the verge of a complete +standstill and then go away for many weeks to recuperate. Eight +or nine months overwork, and three or four months change and +overleisure, is very common among professional persons.</p> + +<p>Then there is a vital difference between routine work and what +is called creative or original work. When you hear of a man +achieving eminence by working sixteen hours a day for thirty +years, you may admire that apparently unnatural feat; but you +must not conclude that he has any other sort of ability: in fact +you may quite safely put him down as quite incapable of doing +anything that has not been done before, and doing it in the old +way. He never has to think or invent. To him today’s work is a +repetition of yesterday’s work. Compare him, for example, with +Napoleon. If you are interested in the lives of such people you<span class="pagenum" id="Page_328">[Pg 328]</span> +are probably tired of hearing how Napoleon could keep on working +with fierce energy long after all the members of his council +were so exhausted that they could not even pretend to keep +awake. But if you study the less often quoted memoirs of his +secretary Bourrienne you will learn that Napoleon often moodled +about for a week at a time doing nothing but play with children +or read trash or waste his time helplessly. During his enforced +leisure in St Helena, which he enjoyed so little that he probably +often exclaimed, after Cowper’s Selkirk, “Better live in the midst +of alarms than dwell in this horrible place”, he was asked how +long a general lasted. He replied, “Six years”. An American +president is not expected to last more than four years. In England, +where there is no law to prevent a worn-out dotard from +being Prime Minister, even so imposing a parliamentary figure +as Gladstone had to be practically superannuated when he tried +to continue into the eighteen-nineties the commanding activities +which had exhausted him in the seventies. To descend to more +commonplace instances you cannot make an accountant work +as long as a bookkeeper, nor a historian as continuously as a +scrivener or typist, though they are performing the same arithmetical +and manual operations. One will be tired out in three +hours: the other can do eight without turning a hair with the help +of a snack or a cup of tea to relieve her boredom occasionally. In +the face of such differences you cannot distribute work equally +and uniformly in quantities measured by time. What you can do +is to give the workers, on the whole, equal leisure, bearing in +mind that rest and recuperation are not leisure, and that periods +of necessary recuperation in idleness must be counted as work, +and often very irksome work, to those who have been prostrated +by extraordinary efforts excessively prolonged.</p> + +<p>The long and short of it is that freedom with a large F, general +and complete, has no place in nature. In practice the questions +that arise in its name are, first, how much leisure can we afford +to allow ourselves? and second, how far can we be permitted to +do what we like when we are at leisure? For instance, may we +hunt stags on Dartmoor? Some of us say no; and if our opinion +becomes law, the liberty of the Dartmoor Hunt will be curtailed +to that extent. May we play golf on Sundays during church<span class="pagenum" id="Page_329">[Pg 329]</span> +hours? Queen Elizabeth would not only have said no, but made +churchgoing compulsory, and thereby have made Sunday a half-holiday +instead of a whole one. Nowadays we enjoy the liberty +of Sunday golf. Under Charles II, on the other hand, women +were not allowed to attend Quaker meetings, and were flogged if +they did. In fact attendance at any sort of religious service except +that of the Church of England was a punishable offence; and +though it was not possible to enforce this law fully against Roman +Catholics and Jews, its penalties were ruthlessly inflicted on +George Fox and John Bunyan, though King Charles himself +sympathized with them. It cost us a revolution to establish comparative +“liberty of conscience”; and we can now build and attend +handsome temples of The Church of Christ Scientist, and form +fantastic Separatist sects by the score if it pleases us.</p> + +<p>On the other hand many things that we were free to do formerly +we may not do now. In England until quite lately, as in Italy to +this day, when a woman married, all her property became her +husband’s; and if she had the ill luck to marry a drunken blackguard, +he could leave her to make a home for herself and her +children by her own work, and then come back and seize everything +she possessed and spend it in drink and debauchery. He +could do it again and again, and sometimes did. Attempts to +remedy this were denounced by happily married pious people as +attacks on the sanctity of the marriage tie; and women who advocated +a change were called unwomanly; but at last commonsense +and decency prevailed; and in England a married woman is now +so well protected from plunder and rapine committed by her +husband that a Married Men’s Rights agitation has begun.</p> + +<p>Outside the home a factory owner might and did work little +children to death with impunity, and do or leave undone anything +he liked in his factory. Today he can no more do what he likes +there than you can do what you like in Westminster Abbey. He is +compelled by law to put up in a conspicuous place a long list of +the things he must do and the things he may not do, whether he +likes it or not. And when he is at leisure he is still subject to laws +that restrict his freedom and impose duties and observances on +him. He may not drive his motor car faster than twenty miles an +hour (though he always does), and must drive on the left and pass<span class="pagenum" id="Page_330">[Pg 330]</span> +on the right in England, and drive to the right and pass on the left +in France. In public he must wear at least some clothing, even +when he is taking a sunbath. He may not shoot wild birds or catch +fish for sport except during certain seasons of the year; and he +may not shoot children for sport at all. And the liberty of women +in these respects is limited as the liberty of men is.</p> + +<p>I need not bother you with more instances: you can think of +dozens for yourself. Suffice it that without leisure there is no +liberty, and without law there is no secure leisure. In an ideal +free State, the citizen at leisure would find herself headed off by +a police officer (male or female) whenever she attempted to do +something that her fellow citizens considered injurious to them, +or even to herself; but the assumption would be that she had a +most sacred right to do as she pleased, however eccentric her +conduct might appear, provided it was not mischievous. It is the +contrary assumption that she must not do anything that she is +not expressly licensed to do, like a child who must come to its +mother and ask leave to do anything that is not in the daily +routine, that destroys liberty. There is in British human nature, +and I daresay in human nature in general, a very strong vein of +pure inhibitiveness. Never forget the children in Punch, who, +discussing how to amuse themselves, decided to find out what +the baby was doing and tell it it mustnt. Forbiddance is an exercise +of power; and we all have a will to personal power which +conflicts with the will to social freedom. It is right that it should +be jealously resisted when it leads to acts of irresponsible tyranny. +But when all is said, the people who shout for freedom without +understanding its limitations, and call Socialism or any other +advance in civilization slavery because it involves new laws as +well as new liberties, are as obstructive to the extension of leisure +and liberty as the more numerous victims of the Inhibition Complex +who, if they could, would handcuff everybody rather than +face the risk of having their noses punched by somebody.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_331">[Pg 331]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c70">70</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">RENT OF ABILITY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">H</span>AVING cleared up the Liberty question by a digression +(which must have been a relief) from the contemplation +of capital running away with us, perhaps another digression +on the equally confused question of the differences +in ability between one person and another may not be out of +place; for the same people who are in a continual scare about +losing the liberty which they have mostly not got are usually +much troubled about these differences. Years ago I wrote a +small book entitled Socialism and Superior Brains which I need +not repeat here, as it is still accessible. It was a reply to the late +William Hurrell Mallock, who took it as a matter of course, +apparently, that the proper use of cleverness in this world is to +take advantage of stupid people to obtain a larger share than they +of the nation’s income. Rascally as this notion is, it is too common +to be ignored. The proper social use of brains is to increase the +amount of wealth to be divided, not to grab an unfair share of it; +and one of the most difficult of our police problems is to prevent +this grabbing, because it is a principle of Capitalism that everyone +shall use not only her land and capital, but her cunning, to obtain +as much money for herself as possible. Capitalism indeed compels +her to do so by making no other provision for the clever ones +than what they can make out of their cleverness.</p> + +<p>Let us begin by taking the examples which delight and dazzle +us: that is, the possessors of some lucrative personal talent. A lady +with a wonderful voice can hire a concert room to sing in, and +admit nobody who does not pay her. A gentleman able to paint a +popular picture can hang it in a gallery with a turnstile at the door, +passable only on payment. A surgeon who has mastered a dangerous +operation can say to his patient, in effect, “Your money or +your life”. Giants, midgets, Siamese twins, and two-headed singers +exhibit themselves for money as monsters. Attractive ladies receive +presents enough to make them richer than their plainer or +more scrupulous neighbors. So do fascinating male dancing partners. +Popular actresses sometimes insist on being pampered and +allowed to commit all sorts of follies and extravagances on the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_332">[Pg 332]</span> +ground that they cannot keep up their peculiar charm without +them; and the public countenances their exactions fondly.</p> + +<p>These cases need not worry us. They are very scarce: indeed if +they became common their power to enrich would vanish. They +do not confer either industrial power or political privilege. The +world is not ruled by prima donnas and painters, two-headed +nightingales and surgical baronets, as it is by financiers and industrial +organizers. Geniuses and monsters may make a great +deal of money; but they have to work for it: I myself, through the +accident of a lucrative talent, have sometimes made more than a +hundred times as much money in a year as my father ever did; but +he, as an employer, had more power over the lives of others than +I. A practical political career would stop my professional career +at once. It is true that I or any other possessor of a lucrative talent +or charm can buy land and industrial incomes with our spare +money, and thus become landlords and capitalists. But if that +resource were cut off, by Socialism or any other change in the +general constitution of society, I doubt whether anyone would +grudge us our extra spending money. An attempt by the Government +to tax it so as to reduce us to the level of ordinary mortals +would probably be highly unpopular, because the pleasure we +give is delightful and widespread, whilst the harm we do by our +conceit and tantrums and jealousies and spoiltness is narrowly +limited to the unfortunate few who are in personal contact with +us. A prima donna with a rope of pearls ten feet long and a +coronet of Kohinoors does not make life any worse for the girl +with a string of beads who, by buying a five shilling ticket, helps +to pay for the pearls: she makes it better by enchanting it.</p> + +<p>Besides, we know by our own experience, not only of prima +donnas but of commercial millionaires, that regular daily personal +expenditure cannot be carried beyond that of the richest +class to be found in the community. Persons richer than that, like +Cecil Rhodes, Andrew Carnegie, and Alfred Nobel, the inventor +of dynamite (to name only the dead), cannot spend their incomes, +and are forced to give away money in millions for galleries +and museums which they fill with magnificent collections and +then leave to the public, or for universities, or churches, or prizes, +or scholarships, or any sort of public object that appeals to them.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_333">[Pg 333]</span> +If equality of income were general, a freak income here and there +would not enable its possessor to live differently from the rest. A +popular soprano might be able to fill the Albert Hall for 100 +nights in succession at a guinea a head for admission; but she +could not obtain a lady’s maid unless ladies’ maids were a social +institution. Nor could she leave a farthing to her children unless +inheritance were a social institution, nor buy an unearned and as +yet unproduced income for them unless Capitalism were a social +institution. Thus, though it is always quite easy for a Government +to checkmate any attempt of an individual to become richer than +her neighbors by supertaxing her or directly prohibiting her +methods, it is unlikely that it will ever be worth while to do so +where the method is the exercise of a popular personal talent.</p> + +<p>But when we come to that particular talent which makes its +money out of the exercise of other people’s talents, the case becomes +gravely different. To allow Cleopatra to make money out +of her charms is one thing: to allow a trader to become enormously +rich by engaging five hundred Cleopatras at ten pounds +a week or less, and hiring them out at ten pounds a day or more, +is quite another. We may forgive a burglar in our admiration of +his skill and nerve; but for the fence who makes money by purchasing +the burglar’s booty at a tenth of its value it is impossible +to feel any sympathy. When we come to reputable women and +honest men we find that they are exploited in the same way. +Civilization makes matters worse in this respect, because civilization +means division of labor. Remember the pin makers and pin +machines. In a primitive condition of society the maker of an +article saves the money to buy the materials, selects them, purchases +them, and, having made the article out of these materials, +sells it to the user or consumer. Today the raising of the money +to buy the materials is a separate business; the selection and purchasing +is another separate business; the making is divided between +several workers or else done by a machine tended by a +young person; and the marketing is yet another separate business. +Indeed it is much more complicated than that, because the +separate businesses of buying materials and marketing products +are themselves divided into several separate businesses; so that +between the origin of the product in raw material from the hand<span class="pagenum" id="Page_334">[Pg 334]</span> +of Nature and its final sale across the counter to you there may be +dozens of middlemen, of whom you complain because they each +take a toll which raises the price to you, and it is impossible for +you to find out how many of them are really necessary agents in +the process and how many mere intercepters and parasites.</p> + +<p>The same complication is found in that large part of the world’s +work which consists, not in making things, but in service. The +woman who once took the wool that her husband had just shorn +from their sheep, and with her own hands transformed it into a +garment and sold it to the wearer, or clothed her family with it, is +now replaced by a financier, a shipper, a woolbroker, a weaving +mill, a wholesaler, a shopkeeper, a shop assistant, and Heaven +knows how many others besides, each able to do her own bit of +the process but ignorant of the other bits, and unable to do even +her own bit until all the others are doing their bits at the same +time. Any one of them without the others would be like an artillery +man without a cannon or a shop assistant with nothing to sell.</p> + +<p>Now if you go through all these indispensable parties to any industry +or service, you will come on our question of exceptional +ability in its most pressing and dangerous form. You will find, for +instance, that whereas any ablebodied normal woman can be +trained to become a competent shop assistant, or a shorthand +typist and operator of a calculating machine (arithmetic is done +by machines nowadays), or a factory hand, or a teacher, hardly +five out of every hundred can manage a business or administer an +estate or handle a large capital. The number of persons who can +do what they are told is always greatly in excess of the number +who can tell others what to do. If an educated woman asks for +more than four or five pounds a week in business, nobody asks +whether she is a good woman or a bad one: the question is, is +there a post for her in which she will have to make decisions, and +if so, can she be trusted to make them. If the answer is yes, she +will be paid more than a living wage: if not, no.</p> + +<p>Even when there is no room for original decisions, and there is +nothing to do but keep other people hard at their allotted work, +and maintain discipline generally, the ability to do this is an exceptional +gift and has a special value. It may be nothing more +admirable than the result of a combination of brute energy with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_335">[Pg 335]</span> +an unamiable indifference to the feelings of others; but its value +is unquestionable: it makes its possessor a forewoman or foreman +in a factory, a wardress in a prison, a matron in an institution, a +sergeant in the army, a mistress in a school, and the like. Both the +managing people and the mere disciplinarians may be, and often +are, heartily detested; but they are so necessary that any body of +ordinary persons left without what they call superiors, will immediately +elect them. A crew of pirates, subject to no laws except +the laws of nature, will elect a boatswain to order them about and +a captain to lead them and navigate the ship, though the one may +be the most insufferable bully and the other the most tyrannical +scoundrel on board. In the revolutionary army of Napoleon an +expeditionary troop of dragoons, commanded by an officer who +became terrified and shammed illness, insisted on the youngest +of their number, a boy of sixteen, taking command, because he +was an aristocrat, and they were accustomed to make aristocrats +think for them. He afterwards became General Marbot: you will +find the incident recorded in his memoirs. Every woman +knows that the most strongminded woman in the house can set +up a domestic tyranny which is sometimes a reign of terror. +Without directors most of us would be like riderless horses in a +crowded street. The philosopher Herbert Spencer, though a very +clever man, had the amiable trait in his character of an intense +dislike to coercion. He could not bring himself even to coerce +his horse; and the result was that he had to sell it and go on foot, +because the horse, uncoerced, could do nothing but stop and +graze. Tolstoy, equally a professed humanitarian, tamed and managed +the wildest horses; but he did it by the usual method of +making things unpleasant for the horse until it obeyed him.</p> + +<p>However, horses and human beings are alike in that they very +seldom object to be directed: they are usually only too glad to be +saved the trouble of thinking and planning for themselves. Ungovernable +people are the exception and not the rule. When +authority is abused and subordination made humiliating, both +are resented; and anything from a mutiny to a revolution may ensue; +but there is no instance on record of a beneficially and tactfully +exercised authority provoking any reaction. Our mental +laziness is a guarantee of our docility: the mother who says<span class="pagenum" id="Page_336">[Pg 336]</span> +“How dare you go out without asking my leave?” presently finds +herself exclaiming “Why cant you think for yourself instead of +running to me for everything?” But she would be greatly astonished +if a rude motor car manufacturer said to her, “Why cant +you make a car for yourself instead of running to me for it?”</p> + +<p>I am myself by profession what is called an original thinker, my +business being to question and test all the established creeds and +codes to see how far they are still valid and how far worn out or +superseded, and even to draft new creeds and codes. But creeds +and codes are only two out of the hundreds of useful articles that +make for a good life. All the other articles I have to take as they +are offered to me on the authority of those who understand them; +so that though many people who cannot bear to have an established +creed or code questioned regard me as a dangerous revolutionary +and a most insubordinate fellow, I have to be in most +matters as docile a creature as you could desire to meet. When a +railway porter directs me to number ten platform I do not strike +him to earth with a shout of “Down with tyranny!” and rush +violently to number one platform. I accept his direction because +I want to be directed, and want to get into the right train. No +doubt if the porter bullied and abused me, and I, after submitting +to this, found that my train really started from number seven +platform and that the number ten train landed me in Portsmouth +when my proper destination was Birmingham, I should rise up +against that porter and do what I could to contrive his downfall; +but if he had been reasonably civil and had directed me aright I +should rally to his defence if any attempt were made to depose +him. I have to be housekept-for, nursed, doctored, and generally +treated like a child in all sorts of situations in which I do not know +what to do; and far from resenting such tutelage I am only too +glad to avail myself of it. The first time I was ever in one of those +electric lifts which the passengers work for themselves instead of +being taken up and down by a conductor pulling at a rope, I almost +cried, and was immensely relieved when I stepped out alive.</p> + +<p>You may think I am wandering from our point; but I know too +well by experience that there is likely to be at the back of your +mind a notion that it is in our nature to resent authority and subordination +as such, and that only an unpopular and stern coercion<span class="pagenum" id="Page_337">[Pg 337]</span> +can maintain them. Have I not indeed just been impressing on +you that the miseries of the world today are due in great part to +our objection, not merely to bad government, but to being +governed at all? But you must distinguish. It is true that we dislike +being interfered with, and want to do as we like when we +know what to do, or think we know. But when there is something +that obviously must be done, and only five in every hundred of us +know how to do it, then the odd ninetyfive will not merely be led +by the five: they will clamor to be led, and will, if necessary, kill +anyone who obstructs the leaders. That is why it is so easy for +ambitious humbugs to get accepted as leaders. No doubt competent +leadership may be made unpopular by bad manners and +pretension to general superiority; and subordination may be +made intolerable by humiliation. Leaders who produce these results +should be ruthlessly cashiered, no matter how competent +they are in other respects, because they destroy self-respect and +happiness, and create a dangerous resentment complex which reduces +the competence and upsets the tempers of those whom +they lead. But you may take it as certain that authority and subordination +in themselves are never unpopular, and can be trusted +to re-establish themselves after the most violent social convulsion. +What is to be feared is less their overthrow than the idolization +of those who exercise authority successfully. Nelson +was idolized by his seamen; Lenin was buried as a saint by revolutionary +Russia; Signor Mussolini is adored in Italy as The +Leader (Il Duce); but no anarchist preaching resistance to authority +as such has ever been popular or ever will be.</p> + +<p>Now it is unfortunately one of the worst vices of the Capitalist +system that it destroys the social equality that is indispensable to +natural authority and subordination. The very word subordination, +which is properly co-ordination, betrays this perversion. +Under it directing ability is sold in the market like fish; and, like +sturgeon, it is dear because it is scarce. By paying the director +more than the directee it creates a difference of class between +them; and the difference of class immediately changes a direction +or command which naturally would not only not be resented but +desired and begged for, into an assertion of class superiority +which is fiercely resented. “Who are you that you should order<span class="pagenum" id="Page_338">[Pg 338]</span> +me about? I am as good as you”, is an outburst that never occurs +when Colonel Smith gives an order to Lieutenant the Duke of +Tencounties. But it very often rises to the lips of Mrs Hicks +(though she may leave it unspoken out of natural politeness or +fear of consequences), who lives in a slum, when she receives +from Mrs Huntingdon Howard, who lives in a square, an order, +however helpful to her, given in a manner which emphasizes, and +is meant to emphasize, the lady’s conviction that Mrs Hicks is an +inferior sort of animal. And Mrs Howard sometimes feels, when +Lady Billionham refuses to know her, that Lord Billionham’s +rank is but the guinea’s stamp: her man Huntingdon’s the gowd +for a’ that. Nothing would please her better than to take her super-incomed +neighbor down a peg. Whereas if Mrs Hicks and Mrs +Huntingdon Howard and Lady Billionham all had equal incomes, +and their children could intermarry without derogation, +they would never dream of quarrelling because they (or their +husbands) could tell oneanother what to do when they did not +know themselves. To be told what to do is to escape responsibility +for its consequences; and those who fear any dislike of +such telling between equals know little of human nature.</p> + +<p>The worst of it is that Capitalism produces a class of persons so +degraded by their miserable circumstances that they are incapable +of responding to an order civilly given, and have to be +fiercely scolded or cursed and kicked before any work can be got +out of them; and these poor wretches in turn produce a class of +slavedrivers who know no other methods of maintaining discipline. +The only remedy is not to produce such people. They are +abortions produced by poverty, and will disappear with it.</p> + +<p>Reluctance to command is a more serious difficulty. When a +couple of soldiers are sent on any duty one of them must be made +a corporal for the occasion, as there must be someone to make the +decisions and be responsible for them. Usually both men object: +each trying to shove the burden on to the other. When they differ +in this respect the Platonic rule is to choose the reluctant man, as +the probability is that the ambitious one is a conceited fool who +does not feel the responsibility because he does not understand it. +This kind of reluctance cannot be overcome by extra pay. It may +be overcome by simple coercion, as in the case of common jurors.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_339">[Pg 339]</span> +If you are a direct ratepayer you may find yourself at any moment +summoned to serve on a jury and make decisions involving the +disgrace or vindication, the imprisonment or freedom, the life or +death of your fellowcreatures, as well as to maintain the rights of +the jury against the continual tendency of the Bench to dictate its +decisions. You are not paid to do this: you are forced to do it, just +as men were formerly pressed into the navy or forced to sit in +Parliament against their will and that of their constituents.</p> + +<p>But though in the last resort coercion remains available as a +means of compelling citizens to undertake duties from which +they shrink, it is found in practice that fitness for special kinds of +work carries with it a desire to exercise it, even at serious material +disadvantages. Mozart could have made much more money as a +valet than he did as the greatest composer of his time, and indeed +one of the greatest composers of all time; nevertheless he chose to +be a composer and not a valet. He knew that he would be a bad +valet, and believed that he could be a good composer; and this +outweighed all money considerations with him. When Napoleon +was a subaltern he was by no means a success. When Nelson was +a captain he was found so unsatisfactory that he was left without a +ship on half pay for several years. But Napoleon was a great +general and Nelson a great admiral; and I have not the smallest +doubt, nor probably have you, that if Napoleon and Nelson had +been forced to choose between being respectively a drummer boy +and a cabin boy and being a general and an admiral for the same +money, they would have chosen the job in which their genius had +full scope. They would even have accepted less money if they +could have secured their proper job in no other way. Have we not +already noted, in Chapter 6, how the capitalist system leaves +men of extraordinary and beneficent talent, poor whilst making +nonentities and greedy money hunters absurdly rich?</p> + +<p>Let us therefore dismiss the fear that persons of exceptional +ability need special inducements to exercise that ability to the +utmost. Experience proves that even the most severe discouragements +and punishments cannot restrain them from trying to do +so. Let us return to the real social problem: that of preventing +them from taking advantage of the vital necessity and relative +scarcity of certain kinds of ability to extort excessive incomes.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_340">[Pg 340]</span></p> + +<p>In socialized services no difficulty arises. The civil servant, the +judge, the navy captain, the field marshal, the archbishop, however +extraordinary able, gets no more than any routineer of his +rank and seniority. A real gentleman is not supposed to sell himself +to the highest bidder: he asks his country for a sufficient provision +and a dignified position in return for the best work he can +do for it. A real lady can say no less. But in capitalist commerce +they are both forced to be cads: that is, to hold up to ransom those +to whom their services are indispensable, and become rich at +their expense. The mere disciplinarian cannot extort very much +because disciplinarians of one sort or another are not very scarce. +But the organizer and financier is in a strong position. The owner +of a big business, if his employees ask for anything more than a +subsistence wage as their share of its product, can always say +“Well, if you are not satisfied, take the business and work it yourself +without me”. This they are unable to do. The Trade Union +to which his employees belong may be tempted to take him at his +word; but it soon finds itself unable to carry on, that sort of management +not being its job. He says in effect, and often in so many +words, “You cannot do without me; so you must work on my +terms”. They reply with perfect truth “Neither can you do without +us: let us see you organize without any workers to organize”. +But he beats them; and the reason is not that he can do without +them any more than they can do without him (or her), but that his +bargain for the use of his ability is not really made with them but +with the landlords whose land he is using and the capitalists who +have lent him the capital for his enterprise. It is to them that he +can say unanswerably “You cannot do without me”. They may +say “Yes we can. We can tell the workers that unless they give up +everything they can make out of our land and capital to us except +what is enough to keep them alive and renew themselves from +generation to generation they shall starve; because they cannot +produce without land and capital, and we own all there is available +of both”. “That is true” retorts the able organizer and financier; +“but please to remember that without an elaborate scientific organization +of their labor they can produce no more than a mob of +allotment holders, or of serfs on a tenth century manor, whereas +if I organize them for you industrially and financially I can multiply<span class="pagenum" id="Page_341">[Pg 341]</span> +their product a thousandfold. Even if you have to pay me +a large share of the increase due to my ability you are still far +richer than if you did without me.” And to this there is no reply. +In this way there arises under Capitalism not only a rent of land +and a rent of capital (called interest), but a rent of ability (called +profit); and just as in order to secure equality of income it becomes +necessary to nationalize land and capital, so it becomes +necessary to nationalize ability. We already do this in part by taxing +profits. But we do it completely only when, as in the public +services, we give it direct national or municipal employment.</p> + +<p>Note that rent of ability is a form of rent of labor. Rent is a +word that it is very necessary to understand, and that very few people +do understand: they think it is only what they have to pay to +their landlord. But technically rent is a price that arises whenever +there are differences in the yield of any particular source of wealth. +When there is a natural difference between the yield of one field +and another, or one coal-mine and another, or between the advantages +of one building site and another, people will pay more for +the better than for the worse; and that extra price is rent. Similarly, +when there is a difference between the business ability of +one person and another, the price of that difference is rent. You +cannot abolish rent, because you cannot abolish the natural difference +between one cornfield and another, one coal-field and +another, or one person and another; but you can nationalize it by +nationalizing the land, the mines, and the labor of the country +either directly or by national appropriation of their product by +taxation, as to which latter method, as we have seen, there are +limits. Until this is done, rent of ability in profiteering will make +its possessors rich enough to make their children idle landlords +and capitalists and destroy economic equality. Great astronomers, +chemists, mathematicians, physicists, philosophers, explorers, +discoverers, teachers, preachers, sociologists, and saints may be +so poor that their wives are worn-out in a constant struggle to +keep up appearances and make both ends meet; but the business +organizers pile millions on millions whilst their unfortunate +daughters carry about diamonds and sables to advertize their +parent’s riches, and drink cocktails until they feel so bad inside +that they pay large sums to surgeons to cut them open and find<span class="pagenum" id="Page_342">[Pg 342]</span> +out what is the matter with them. If you reproach these organizers +for their inordinate gains, they tell you—or they would tell +you if they understood their own position and could express it +intelligibly—that every penny they make is made by making +money for other people as well; that before they can spend a +farthing on themselves they must provide rent for the landlord, +interest for the capitalist, and wages for the proletarian on a scale +that would be impossible without them; and that England can +support five times the number of people she could a hundred +years ago because her industries are better organized and more +amply financed by them and their like. This is true; but you need +not be abashed by it; for which of us has not to provide rent +for the landlord, interest for the capitalist, and wages for the +laborer before we can spend a penny on ourselves? And why +should the organizer and financier be paid more for the exercise +of his particular faculty than we who have to co-operate with him +by the exercise of our particular faculties before he can produce +a loaf of bread or a glass of milk? It is not natural necessity but +the capitalist system that enables him to snatch more than his fellow +workers from the welter of competitive commerce; and while +this lasts we shall have the financier’s daughter saying to the +scavenger’s daughter “What would your common dirty father do +without my father, who is going to be made a lord?” and the +scavenger’s daughter retorting “What would your greedy robber +of a father do if my father did not keep the streets clean for him?” +Of course you have never heard a lady or a young person talk +like that. And probably you never will. They are too polite and +too thoughtless to discuss their father’s positions. Besides, they +never speak to oneanother. But if they did, and anything upset +their tempers, their last words before they came to blows would +be just those which I have imagined. If you doubt it, read what +the capitalist papers say about Trade Unionists and Socialists, +and what the proletarian papers say about landlords and capitalists +and bosses. Do you suppose that the charwoman, who has +worked in her own necessary way all her life as hard as or harder +than any financier, and in the end has nothing to leave to her +daughter but her pail and scrubbing brush, really believes, or +ever will believe, that Lady Billionham, inheriting a colossal income<span class="pagenum" id="Page_343">[Pg 343]</span> +from her father the financier, has any moral right to her +money? Or, if your father had discovered and worked out the +theory of relativity, and was acknowledged throughout the world +to have the greatest mind since Newton’s, would you consider it +morally satisfactory to be obliged to jump at an offer of marriage +from a Chicago pork king to enable your illustrious parent to +have more than one presentable suit of clothes, knowing all the +time that if it had not been for the work of men like your father in +pure science not a wheel in the whole vast machinery of modern +production would be turning, nor a bagman be able to travel +faster than Marco Polo? Privately appropriated rent, whether of +land, capital, or ability, makes bad blood; and it is of bad blood +that civilizations die. That it is why it is our urgent business to +see that Lord Billionham gets no more than Einstein, and neither +of them more than the charwoman. You cannot equalize their +abilities, but fortunately you can equalize their incomes. Billionham’s +half-crown is as good as Einstein’s two-and-sixpence; and +the charwoman’s thirty pennies will buy as much bread as either. +Equalize them in that respect, and their sons and daughters will +be intermarriageable, which will be a very good thing for them, +and lead to an enormous improvement of our human stock, the +quality of which is the most important thing in the world.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c71">71</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">PARTY POLITICS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU are now in possession of enough knowledge of Socialism +and Capitalism to enable you to understand what is +going on in the world industrially and politically. I shall +not advise you to discuss these matters with your friends. They +would listen in distressed silence and then tell the neighborhood +that you are what they imagine a Bolshevik to be.</p> + +<p>It is possible, however, that you may be interested in current +party politics yourself, even to the extent of attending party meetings, +applauding party candidates, canvassing for party votes, and +experiencing all the emotions of party enthusiasm, party loyalty, +and party conviction that the other party and its candidate are +enemies of the human race. In that case I must give you a warning.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_344">[Pg 344]</span></p> + +<p>Do not rush to the conclusion that Socialism will be established +by a Socialist party and opposed by an anti-Socialist party. Within +my lifetime I have seen the Conservatives, when in opposition, +vehemently opposing and denouncing a measure proposed by +the Liberals, and, when they had defeated the Liberals and come +into power, pass that very measure themselves in a rather more +advanced form. And I have seen the Liberals do the same, and +this, too, not in matters of no great consequences, but in such far-reaching +social changes as Free Trade, the enfranchisement of +the working classes, the democratization of local government, +and the buying-out of the Irish landlords. The Spanish lady in +Byron’s poem, who, “swearing she would ne’er consent, consented”, +was a model of consistency compared to our party governments. +We have at present a Capitalist party opposed by a +Labor party; but it is quite possible that all the legislative steps +towards Socialism will be taken when the anti-Socialist party is in +power, and pretty certain that at least half of them will. When +they are proposed by a Capitalist Government they will be opposed +by the Labor Opposition, and when they are proposed by a +Labor Government they will be opposed by the Capitalist Opposition, +because “it is the business of an Opposition to oppose”.</p> + +<p>There is another possibility which may disappoint your expectation. +The Labor Party is growing rapidly. Twenty years ago it +did not exist officially in Parliament. Today it is the official Opposition. +If it continues to grow at this rate the time is not very far +off when it will take practically complete possession of the House +of Commons. The Conservatives and Liberals left will, even in +coalition, be too few to constitute an effective Opposition, much +less form a Government. But beware of assuming that the result +will be a unanimous House of Commons with an unopposed +Labor Government carrying everything before it. Do not even +assume that the Labor Party will split into two parties, one Conservative +and the other Progressive. That would be the happiest +of the possibilities. The danger is that it may split into half a +dozen or more irreconcilable groups, making parliamentary government +impossible. That is what happened in the Long Parliament +in the seventeenth century, when men were just what they +are now, except that they had no telephones nor airplanes. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_345">[Pg 345]</span> +Long Parliament was united at first by its opposition to the King. +But when it cut off the King’s head, it immediately became so disunited +that Cromwell, like Signor Mussolini today, had at last to +suppress its dissensions by military force, and rule more despotically +than ever the King had dared. When Cromwell died, it reassembled +and split up again worse than ever, bringing about +such a hopeless deadlock in government that there was no way +out of the mess but to send for the dead King’s son and use him, +under his father’s title, as the figurehead of a plutocratic oligarchy +exercising all the old kingly powers and greatly extending them.</p> + +<p>If six hundred Labor members were returned at the next +General Election history might repeat itself. The Socialists, the +Trade Unionists who are not Socialists, the Communists who are +not Communists but only pseudo-Bolshevists, the Republicans, +the Constitutional-Monarchists, the old Parliamentary hands +who are pure Opportunists, and the uncompromising Idealists, +to say nothing of the Churchmen and Anti-clericals (Episcopalians +and Separatists), the Deists and Atheists, would come to +loggerheads at once. As far as I can see, nothing could avert a +repetition of the seventeenth century catastrophe, or the modern +Italian and Spanish ones, except a solid Socialist majority of +members who really know what Socialism means and are prepared +to subordinate all their traditional political and religious +differences to its establishment. Unfortunately most of the people +who call themselves Socialists at present do not know what Socialism +means, and attach its name to all sorts of fads and faiths +and resentments and follies that have nothing to do with it. A +Labor electoral triumph may end either in another Cromwell or +Napoleon III or Mussolini or General Primo di Rivera if there +happens to be one at hand, or in the passing of power to any +party that is solid enough to keep together and vote together, +even though its solidarity be the solidarity of sheepish stupidity +or panic-stricken retreat. Stupidity and cowardice never lose this +advantage. You must have noticed among your acquaintances +that the very conventional ones have all the same old opinions, +and are quite impervious to new ones, whilst the unconventional +ones are all over the shop with all sorts of opinions, and disagree +with and despise oneanother furiously. That is why, though all<span class="pagenum" id="Page_346">[Pg 346]</span> +progress depends on the unconventional people who want to +change things, they have so little influence politically. They pull +hard; but they do not pull together; and they pull in different +directions. The people whom in your moments of impatience +with their dullness you call stick-in-the-muds either pull all together +and in the same direction (generally backwards), or, more +formidably still, stand together solid and foursquare, refusing +to move in any direction. Against stupidity, said Schiller, the +gods themselves fight in vain. Long before Schiller, Solomon said +“Let a bear robbed of her whelps meet a man, rather than a fool +in his folly”. They were both right.</p> + +<p>Yet it is a mistake to vote for stupidity on the ground that +stupid people do not quarrel among themselves. Within the +limits of their conservatism they quarrel more irreconcilably, because +more unreasonably, than comparatively clever people. That +is why we call them pigheaded. If six hundred of them were returned +at the next General Election, so that they had no longer +anything to fear from Labor or Liberalism or any other section, +it would be just as impossible to keep them together as if they +were proletarians. In 1924 the country was stampeded by a ridiculous +anti-Russian scare into returning anti-Socialists in a majority +of more than two to one. The result was, not a very solid +Government, but a very fragmentary one. It soon split up into +reckless Diehard Coercionists, timid Compromisers, cautious +Opportunists, Low Church Protestants, Anglican Catholics, +Protectionists from the Midlands, Free Traders from the ports, +country gentlemen, city bosses, Imperialists, Little Englanders, +innocents who think that Trade Unions ought to be exterminated +like nests of vipers, and practical business men who know +that big business could not be carried on without them, advocates +of high expenditure on the fighting forces as Empire Insurance, +blind resisters of taxation as such, Inflationists, Gold Bugs, High +Tories who would have Government authority and interference +everywhere, Laisser-faire doctrinaires who would suffer it as +nearly as possible nowhere, and Heaven knows how many others, +all pulling the Cabinet different ways, paralyzing it and neutralizing +oneanother, whilst the runaway car of Capitalism kept rushing +them into new places and dangerous situations all the time.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_347">[Pg 347]</span></p> + +<p>During the first half of my own lifetime: that is, during the +latter half of the nineteenth century, the Conservative and Liberal +parties were much more equally balanced than at present. The +Governments were on their good behavior because their majorities +were narrow. The House of Commons was then respected +and powerful. With the South African war a period of large +majorities set in. Immediately the House of Commons began to +fall into something very like contempt in comparison with its +previous standing. The majorities were so large that every Government +felt that it could do what it liked. That quaint conscience +which was invented by English statesmen to keep themselves +honest, and called by everybody Public Opinion, was overthrown +as an idol, and the ignorance, forgetfulness, and follies of the +electorate were traded on cynically until the few thinkers who +read the speeches of the political leaders and could remember for +longer than a week the pledges and statements they contained, +were amazed and scandalized at the audacity with which the +people were humbugged. The specific preparations for war with +Germany were concealed, and finally, when suspicion became +acute, denied; and when at last we floundered into the horror of +1914-18, which left the English Church disgraced, and the great +European empires shattered into struggling Republics (the very +last thing that the contrivers of the war intended), the world had +lost faith in parliamentary government to such an extent that it +was suspended and replaced by dictatorship in Italy, Spain, and +Russia without provoking any general democratic protest beyond +a weary shrug of the shoulders. The old parliamentary +democrats were accomplished and endless talkers; but their unreal +theory that nothing political must be done until it was understood +and demanded by a majority of the people (which meant +in effect that nothing political must ever be done at all) had disabled +them as men of action; and when casual bodies of impatient +and irresponsible proletarian men of action attempted to +break up Capitalism without knowing how to do it, or appreciating +the nature and necessity of government, a temper spread in +which it was possible for Signor Mussolini to be made absolute +managing director (Dictator or Duce) of the Italian nation as its +savior from parliamentary impotence and democratic indiscipline.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_348">[Pg 348]</span></p> + +<p>Socialism, however, cannot perish in these political storms and +changes. Socialists have courted Democracy, and even called +Socialism Social-Democracy to proclaim that the two are inseparable. +They might just as plausibly argue that the two are +incompatible. Socialism is committed neither way. It faces +Caesars and Soviets, Presidents and Patriarchs, British Cabinets +and Italian Dictators or Popes, patrician oligarchs and plebeian +demagogues, with its unshaken demonstration that they cannot +have a stable and prosperous State without equality of income. +They may plead that such equality is ridiculous. That will not +save them from the consequences of inequality. They must equate +or perish. The despot who values his head and the crowd that fears +for its liberty are equally concerned. I should call Socialism not +Democratic but simply Catholic if that name had not been taken +in vain so often by so many Churches that nobody would understand +me.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c72">72</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">THE PARTY SYSTEM</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">O</span>UR Party System does not mean, as many people suppose, +that differences of opinion always divide human +beings into parties. Such differences existed ages before +the Party System was ever dreamt of.</p> + +<p>What it means is that our monarchs, instead of choosing whom +they please to advise them as Cabinet Ministers in ruling the +realm (to form a Government, as we say), must choose them all +from whatever party has a majority in the House of Commons, +however much they may dislike them or mistrust their ability, or +however obvious it may be that a more talented Cabinet could be +formed by selecting the ablest men from both parties.</p> + +<p>This system carries with it some quaint consequences. Not only +must the King appoint to high offices persons whom he may privately +regard as disastrous noodles, or whose political and religious +principles he may abhor: the ordinary member of Parliament and +the common voter are placed in a similar predicament, because +every vote given in the House or at a parliamentary election becomes +a vote on the question whether the Party in office is to remain +there or not. For instance, a Bill is introduced by the Government<span class="pagenum" id="Page_349">[Pg 349]</span> +to allow women to vote at the same age as men, or to put +a tax on bachelors, or to institute pensions for widowed mothers, +or to build ten more battleships, or to abolish or extend divorce, +or to raise the age for compulsory school attendance, or to increase +or diminish taxation, or anything else you please. Suppose +this Bill is brought in by a Conservative Government, and you +are a Conservative member of Parliament! You may think it a +most detestable and mischievous Bill. But if you vote against it, +and the Bill is thrown out, the Conservative Government will no +longer be in a majority, or, as we say, it will no longer possess the +confidence of the House. Therefore it must go to the King and +resign, whereupon the King will dissolve Parliament; and there +will be a General Election at which you will have to stand again +(which will cost you a good deal of money and perhaps end in +your defeat) before anything else can be done. Now if you are a +good Conservative you always feel that however much you may +dislike this Bill or that Bill, yet its passing into law would be a +less evil than an overthrow of the Conservative Government, and +the possible accession to power of the Labor Party. Therefore +you swallow the Bill with a wry face, and vote just as the Government +Whips tell you to, flatly against your convictions.</p> + +<p>But suppose you are a member of the Labor Party instead, and +think the Bill a good one. Then you are in the same fix: you must +vote against it and against your convictions, because however +good you may think the Bill, you think that a defeat of the Government +and a chance for the Labor Party to return to power +would be still better. Besides, if the Bill is good, the Labor Party +can bring it in again and pass it when Labor wins a majority.</p> + +<p>If you are only a voter you are caught in the same cleft stick. It +may be plain to you that the candidate of your Party is a political +imbecile, a pompous snob, a vulgar ranter, a conceited self-seeker, +or anything else that you dislike, and his opponent an +honest, intelligent, public-spirited person. No matter: you must +vote for the Party candidate, because, if you do not, your Party +may be defeated, and the other Party come into power. And, anyhow, +however disagreeable your candidate may be personally, +when he gets into the House he will have to vote as the Party +Whips tell him to; so his personal qualities do not matter.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_350">[Pg 350]</span></p> + +<p>The advantage of this system is that a House of Commons consisting +of about a dozen capable ministers and their opponents: +say twenty-five effectives all told, and 590 idiots with just enough +intelligence to walk into the lobby pointed out to them by the +Whips and give their names at the door, can carry on the government +of the country quite smoothly, when 615 independents, with +opinions and convictions of their own, voting according to those +opinions and convictions, would make party government impossible. +It was not, however, on this ground that the party system +was introduced, though it has a great deal to do with its maintenance. +It was introduced because our Dutch king William the +Third, of glorious, pious, and immortal memory, discovered that +he could not fight the French king, Louis XIV, <i>le Roi Soleil</i>, with +a House of Commons refusing him supplies and reducing the +army just as each member thought fit. A clever statesman of that +time named Robert Spencer, second Earl of Sunderland, pointed +out to him that if he chose his ministers always from the strongest +party in the House of Commons, which happened just then to be +the Whig party, that party would have to back him through the +war and make its followers do the same, just as I have described. +King William hated the Whigs, being a strong Tory himself; +and he did not like Sunderland’s advice. But he took it, and thereby +set up the Party System under which we are ruled.</p> + +<p>Is there any practicable alternative to the Party System? Suppose, +for instance, that there was a general revolt against being +compelled to vote for dummies and nincompoops, and that independent +candidates became so popular that all party candidates +were defeated by them, or, if you think that is going too far, suppose +independent candidates returned in such numbers that they +could defeat any Government by casting their votes in the House +against it, like the old Irish Nationalist Party! Such a revolt +already exists and always will exist. The upshot of the General +Elections is determined, not by the voters who always vote for +their party right or wrong, but by a floating body of independent +electors who vote according to their interests and preferences, +and often support one party at one election and the opposite party +at the next. It is these unattached people who win the odd trick +which decides which party shall govern. They either know nothing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_351">[Pg 351]</span> +about the Party System, or snap their fingers at it and vote +just as they please. It is probable that they outnumber the party +voters, and return party members to Parliament only because, as +no others are selected as candidates by the party organizations, +there is seldom any independent candidate to vote for.</p> + +<p>It is conceivable that the King might some day find himself confronted +by a House of Commons in which neither party had a +majority, the effective decision resting with members belonging +to no party. In that case His Majesty might appeal in vain to the +party leaders to form a Government. This situation has occurred +several times of late in France, where it has been brought about +by the existence in the French Chamber of so many parties that +none of them is in a majority; so that a leader can form a Government +only by inducing several of these parties to combine for the +moment, and thus make what is called a Block. But this is not always +easy; and even when it is accomplished, and the Blockmaker +forms a Government, it is so hard to keep the Block together that +nobody expects it to last for five years, as our party governments +do: its lifetime is anything from a week to six months. There have +been moments lately in France when we did not know from one +day to another who was Prime Minister there, M. Briand, M. +Herriot, M. Painlevé, or M. Poincaré. And what has happened +in France may happen here, either through an overwhelming +party majority causing the party to split up into hostile groups +and thus substitute half a dozen parties, all in a minority, for the +two parties which are necessary to the working of the Party System, +or through the return of enough independent members to +make any Party Government dependent on them. You will therefore +be justified if you ask me rather anxiously whether Parliament +can not be worked on some other than the Party System.</p> + +<p>As a matter of fact in this country we have, beside the House of +Commons, parliaments all over the place. We have the great city +Corporations, the County Councils, the Borough Councils, the +District Councils, and so on down to the Parish meetings in the +villages; and not one of them is worked on the Party System. +They get on quite well without it. If you mention this, you will be +at once contradicted, because on many of these bodies party feeling +is intense. The members hold party meetings. The elections<span class="pagenum" id="Page_352">[Pg 352]</span> +are fought on party cries. Votes are taken on party lines, and +members of the party which is in the minority are sometimes excluded +from the committee chairmanships, which are the nearest +things to ministerial offices available, though such exclusion is +considered sharp practice if pushed too far. But all this does not +involve the Party System any more than a pot of jam and a pound +of flour constitute a roly-poly pudding. There is no Prime Minister +and no Cabinet. The King does not meddle in the business: he +does not send for the most prominent men and ask them to form +a Government. There is no Government in the House of Commons +sense of the word, though the city or county is nevertheless +governed, and often governed with an efficiency which puts the +House of Commons to shame. Every member can vote as he +thinks best without the slightest risk of throwing his party out of +power and bringing on a General Election. If a motion is defeated, +nobody resigns: if it is carried, nobody’s position is +changed. Things are not done in that very puzzling way.</p> + +<p>The way they are done is simple enough. The Council is elected +for three years; and until the three years are up there can be no +general election. Its business is conducted by committees: Public +Health Committees, Electric Lighting Committees, Finance +Committees, and so forth. These committees meet separately, +and set forth their conclusions as to what the Council ought to do +in their departments in a series of resolutions. When the whole +Council meets, these strings of resolutions are brought up as the +reports of the Committees, and are confirmed or rejected or +amended by the general vote. Many of our Labor members of the +House of Commons have served their parliamentary apprenticeship +on local bodies under this straightforward system.</p> + +<p>The two systems, though widely different today, spring from +the same root. Before Sunderland prompted William III to introduce +the Party System, the King used to appoint committees, +which were then all called cabinets, to deal with the different departments +of government. These cabinets were committees of +his Council; and in this stage they were the model of the municipal +committees I have just described. The secretaries of the +cabinets, called Secretaries of States, met to concert their activities. +The activities thus concerted formed their policy; and they themselves,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_353">[Pg 353]</span> +being all cabinet ministers, came to be called THE Cabinet, +after which the word was no longer applied to other bodies. +In politics it now means nothing else, the old cabinets being +called Offices (Home Office, War Office, Foreign Office, etc.), +Boards, Chanceries, Treasuries, or anything except cabinets.</p> + +<p>The rigidity of the Party System, as we have seen, depends on +the convention that whenever the Government is defeated on a +division in the House, it must “appeal to the country”: that is, +the Cabinet Ministers must resign their offices, and the King dissolve +the Parliament and have a new one elected. But this leads to +such absurd consequences when the question at issue is unimportant +and the vote taken when many members are absent, and +at all times it reduces the rank and file of the members to such +abject voting machines, that if it were carried out to the bitter +end members might as well stay at home and vote by proxy on +postcards to the Whips, as shareholders do at company meetings. +Such slavery is more than even parliamentary flesh and blood, to +say nothing of brains, can stand; consequently Governments are +forced to allow their followers some freedom by occasionally declaring +that the measure under discussion is “not a Party Question”, +and “taking off the Whips”, which means that members +may vote as they please without fear of throwing their Party out +of office and bringing on a General Election. This practice is +bound to grow as members become more independent and therefore +more apt to split up into groups. The tendency already is for +Governments to resign only when they are defeated on an explicit +motion that they possess or have forfeited the confidence of +the House, except, of course, when the division is on one of those +cardinal points of policy which, if decided against the Government, +would involve an appeal to the country in any case. No +doubt the Whips will continue to threaten weak-minded members +that the slightest exercise of independence will wreck the +Government; and those whose election expenses are paid out of +party funds will find that when the Party pays the piper the +Whips call the tune; but I think you may take it (in case you +should think of going into Parliament) that the House of Commons +is becoming less and less like a stage on which an opera +chorus huddles round a few haughty soloists, never opening its<span class="pagenum" id="Page_354">[Pg 354]</span> +hundred mouths except to echo these principals and give them +time to breathe. It is already evident that the more women there +are in the House, the more refractory it will be to the logical extremes +of party discipline, and the sooner party questions will +become the exceptions and open questions the rule.</p> + +<p>Here, however, I must warn you of another possibility. The +two Houses of Parliament are as much out of date as instruments +for carrying on the public business of a modern community as a +pair of horses for drawing an omnibus. In 1920 two famous +Socialist professors of political science, Sidney and Beatrice +Webb, published a Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth +of Great Britain. In that Constitution the notion of going on with +our ancient political machinery at Westminster is discarded as +impracticable, and its present condition described as one of creeping +paralysis. Instead, it is proposed that we should have two +parliaments, one political and the other industrial, the political +one maintaining the cabinet system, and the industrial one the +municipal system. I cannot go into the details of such a change +here: you will find them in the book. I mention it just to prepare +you for such happenings. Certain it is that if our old Westminster +engine is left as it is to cope with the modern developments of +Capitalism, Capitalism will burst it; and then something more +adequate must be devised and set up, whether we like it or not.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c73">73</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">DIVISIONS WITHIN THE LABOR PARTY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU now see how essential it is to the working of our parliamentary +system, under a Labor or any other Government, +that the Cabinet should have a united party behind +it, large enough to outvote any other party in the House. You see +also that whereas a party only barely large enough to do this is +held together by the fear of defeat, a party so large that the whole +House belongs to it ceases to be a party at all, and is sure to split +up into groups which have to be combined into blocks of groups +before a Cabinet can be formed and government effectively carried +on. In the nineteenth century we were all sure that this could +never occur. In the twentieth it is as certain as anything of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_355">[Pg 355]</span> +kind can be that the Proletariat will extend its present invasion of +Parliament until it achieves in effect complete conquest. Therefore +we had better examine a few questions on which the apparent +unanimity in the Labor Party is quite delusive.</p> + +<p>To interest you I am tempted to begin with the question of the +virtual exclusion of women from certain occupations. This morning +I received a letter from the Government College of Lahore in +the Punjab which contains the following words: “The number of +people in India speaking Urdu of one kind or another is about +96,000,000. Out of this number 46,000,000 are women who are +mostly in purdah and do not go out.” Now I dare not tell you, +even if I knew, how many members of the Labor Party believe +that the proper place for women is in purdah. There are enough, +anyhow, to start a very pretty fight with those who would remove +all artificial distinctions between men and women. But I must +pass over this because, vital as it is, it will not split the Labor +Party more than it has split the older parties. If men were the +chattel slaves of women in law (as some of them are in fact), or +women the chattel slaves of men in fact (as married women used +to be in law), that would not affect the change from Capitalism to +Socialism. Let us confine ourselves to cases that would affect it.</p> + +<p>It is fundamental in Socialism that idleness shall not be tolerated +on any terms. And it is fundamental in Trade Unionism that +the worker shall have the right at any moment to down tools and +refuse to do another stroke until his demands are satisfied. It is +impossible to imagine a flatter contradiction. And the question of +the right to strike is becoming more acute every year. We have +seen how the little businesses have grown into big businesses, and +the big businesses into Trusts that control whole industries. But +the Trade Unions have kept up with this growth. The little unions +have grown into big unions; and the big unions have combined +into great federations of unions; consequently the little strikes +have become terribly big strikes. A modern strike of electricians, +a railway strike, or a coal strike can bring these industries, and +dozens of others which depend on them, to a dead stop, and cause +unbearable inconvenience and distress to the whole nation.</p> + +<p>To make strikes more effective, a new sort of Trade Union has +developed, called an Industrial Union to distinguish it from the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_356">[Pg 356]</span> +old Craft Unions. The Craft Union united all the men who lived +by a particular craft or trade: the carpenters, the masons, the +tanners and so on. But there may be men of a dozen different +crafts employed in one modern industry: for instance, the building +industry employs carpenters, masons, bricklayers, joiners, +plumbers, slaters, painters, and various kinds of laborers, to say +nothing of the clerical staffs; and if these are all in separate unions +a strike by one of them cannot produce the effect that a strike of +all of them would. Therefore unions covering the whole industry +without regard to craft (Industrial Unions) have been formed. +We now have such bodies as the Transport Workers’ Union and +the National Union of Railway Workers, in which workers from +dozens of different trades are combined. They can paralyze the +whole industry by a strike. In the nineteenth century very few +strikes or lock-outs were big enough to be much noticed by the +general public. In the twentieth there have already been several +which were national calamities. The Government has been forced +to interfere either by trying to buy the disputants off with subsidies, +or to persuade the employers and the strikers to come to +some agreement. But as the Government has no power either to +force the men to go back to work or the employers to grant their +demands, its intervention is not very effective, and never succeeds +until a great deal of mischief has been done. It has been driven at +last to attempt a limitation of the magnitude of strikes by an Act +of 1927 forbidding “sympathetic” strikes and lock-outs, lock-outs +being included to give the Act an air of fair play. But as this Act +does not forbid the formation of industrial unions, nor take away +the right to strike or lock-out when a grievance can be established +(as of course it always can), it is only a gesture of impotent rage, +useless as a remedy, but significant of the growing indisposition +of the nation to tolerate big strikes. They are civil wars between +Capital and Labor in which the whole country suffers.</p> + +<p>The Socialist remedy for this dangerous nuisance is clear. Socialism +would impose compulsory social service on all serviceable +citizens, just as during the war compulsory military service was +imposed on all men of military age. When we are at war nowadays +no man is allowed to plead that he has a thousand a year of +his own and need not soldier for a living. It does not matter if he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_357">[Pg 357]</span> +has fifty thousand: he has to “do his bit” with the rest. In vain +may he urge that he is a gentleman, and does not want to associate +with common soldiers or be classed with them. If he is not a +trained officer he has to become a private, and possibly find that +his sergeant has been his valet, and that his lieutenant, his major, +his colonel, and his brigadier are respectively his tailor, his bootmaker, +his solicitor, and the manager of his favourite golfing +hotel. The penalty of neglect to discharge his duties precisely and +punctually even at the imminent risk of being horribly wounded +or blown to bits, is death. Now the righteousness of military service +is so questionable that the man who conscientiously refuses +to perform it can justify himself by the test proposed by the philosopher +Kant: that is, he can plead that if everybody did the same +the world would be much safer, happier, and better.</p> + +<p>A refusal of social service has no such excuse. If everybody +refused to work, nine-tenths of the inhabitants of these islands +would be dead within a month; and the rest would be too weak to +bury them before sharing their fate. It is useless for a lady to +plead that she has enough to live on without work: if she is not +producing her own food and clothing and lodging other people +must be producing them for her; and if she does not perform +some equivalent service for them she is robbing them. It is absurd +for her to pretend that she is living on the savings of her +industrious grandmother; for not only is she alleging a natural +impossibility, but there is no reason on earth why she should be +allowed to undo by idleness the good that her grandmother did +by industry. Compulsory social service is so unanswerably right +that the very first duty of a government is to see that everybody +works enough to pay her way and leave something over for the +profit of the country and the improvement of the world. Yet it is +the last duty that any government will face. What governments +do at present is to reduce the mass of the people by armed force to +a condition in which they must work for the capitalists or starve, +leaving the capitalists free from any such obligation, so that capitalists +can not only be idle but produce artificial overpopulation +by withdrawing labor from productive industry and wasting it in +coddling their idleness or ministering to their vanity. This our +Capitalist Governments call protecting property and maintaining<span class="pagenum" id="Page_358">[Pg 358]</span> +personal liberty; but Socialists believe that property, in that +sense, is theft, and that allowable personal liberty no more includes +the right to idle than the right to murder.</p> + +<p>Accordingly, we may expect that when a Labor House of Commons +is compelled to deal radically with some crushing national +strike, the Socialists in the Labor Party will declare that the +remedy is Compulsory Social Service for all ablebodied persons. +The remnants of the old parties and the non-Socialist Trade +Unionists in the Labor Party will at once combine against the +proposal, and clamor for a subsidy to buy off the belligerents instead. +Subsidy or no subsidy, the Trade Unionists will refuse +to give up the right to strike, even in socialized industries. The +strike is the only weapon a Trade Union has. The employers will +be equally determined to maintain their right to lock-out. As to +the landlords and capitalists, their dismay can be imagined. They +will be far more concerned than the employers and financiers, +because employers and financiers are workers: to have to work is +no hardship to them. But the real ladies and gentlemen, who +know no trade, and have been brought up to associate productive +work with social inferiority, imprisonment in offices and factories, +compulsory early rising, poverty, vulgarity, rude manners, +roughness and dirt and drudgery, would see in compulsory social +service the end of the world for them and their class, as indeed it +happily will be, in a sense. The condition of many of them would +be so pitiable (or at least they would imagine it to be so) that they +would have to be provided with medical certificates of disability +until they died out; for, after all, it is not their fault that they +have been brought up to be idle, extravagant, and useless; and +when that way of life (which, by the way, they often make surprisingly +laborious) is abolished, they may reasonably claim the +same consideration as other people whose occupation is done +away with by law. We can afford to be kind to them.</p> + +<p>However that may be, it is certain that the useless classes will +join the Trade Unionists in frantic opposition to Compulsory +Social Service. If the Labor ministers, being, as they now mostly +are, Socialists, attempt to bring in a Compulsory Service Bill, +they may be defeated by this combination, in which case there +would be a general election on the question; and at this general<span class="pagenum" id="Page_359">[Pg 359]</span> +election the contest would not be between the Labor Party and +the Capitalists, but between the Conservative or Trade Unionist +wing of the Labor Party, which would be called the Right, and +the Socialist wing, which would be called the Left. So that even if +the present Conservatives be wiped out of Parliament there may +still be two parties contending for power; and the Intelligent +Woman may be canvassed to vote Right or Left, or perhaps White +or Red, just as she is now canvassed to vote Conservative or Labor.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c74">74</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">RELIGIOUS DISSENSIONS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">H</span>OWEVER, two parties would not hurt the House of +Commons, as it is worked by the division of the members +into two sets, one carrying on the government and the +other continually criticizing it and trying to oust it and become +itself the Government. This two-division system is not really a +two-party system in the sense that the two divisions represent +different policies: they may differ about nothing but the desire +for office. From the proletarian point of view the difference between +Liberals and Conservatives since 1832 has been a difference +between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. But this did not matter, +because the essence of the arrangement is that the Government +shall be unsparingly and unceasingly criticized by a rival set of +politicians who are determined to pick every possible hole in its +proceedings. Government and Opposition might be called Performance +and Criticism, the performers and critics changing +places whenever the country is convinced that the critics are +right and the performers wrong.</p> + +<p>The division of the House of Commons into two parties with +different policies suits this situation very well. But its division +into half a dozen parties would not suit it at all, and might, as we +have seen, deadlock parliamentary government altogether. Now +there is abundant material for a dozen parties in the British proletariat. +Take the subject of religion, inextricably bound up with +the parliamentary question of education in public elementary +schools. It is unlikely that a Proletarian House of Commons will +suffer the nation’s children to go on being taught Capitalist and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_360">[Pg 360]</span> +Imperialist morality in the disguise of religion; and yet, the +moment the subject is touched, what a hornet’s nest is stirred up! +Parents are inveterate proselytizers: they take it as a matter of +course that they have a right to dictate their children’s religion. +This right was practically undisputed, unless the parents were +professed atheists, when all children who had any schooling went +either to Biblical private schools or to public schools and universities +where the established religion was the State religion. Nowadays +Unitarian schools, Quaker schools, Roman Catholic schools, +Methodist schools, Theosophist schools, and even Communist +schools may be chosen by parents and guardians (not by the children) +to suit their own private religious eccentricities.</p> + +<p>But when schooling is made a national industry, and the Government +sets up schools all over the country, and imposes daily +attendance on the huge majority of children whose parents cannot +afford to send their children to any but the State school, a conflict +arises over the souls of the children. What religion is to be taught +in the State school? The Roman Catholics try to keep their children +out of the State school (they must send them to some school +or other) by subscribing money themselves to maintain Roman +Catholic schools alongside the State schools: and the other denominations, +including the Church of England, do the same. +But unless they receive State aid: that is, money provided by +taxing and rating all citizens indiscriminately, they cannot afford +to take in all the children, or to keep up to a decent standard +the schooling of those whom they do take in. And the moment it +is proposed to give them money out of the rates and taxes, the +trouble begins. Rather than pay rates to be used in making +Roman Catholics or even Anglo-Catholics of little English children, +Nonconformist Protestant ratepayers will let themselves +be haled before the magistrates and allow their furniture to be +sold up. They would go to the stake if that were the alternative +to paying Peter’s Pence to the Scarlet Woman and setting children’s +feet in the way to eternal damnation. For it is not in Ireland +alone that Protestants and Roman Catholics believe each that the +other will spend eternity immersed in burning brimstone. Church +of England zealots hold that belief even more convincedly about +village Dissenters than about Roman Catholics.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_361">[Pg 361]</span></p> + +<p>The opinions of the parties are so irreconcilable, and the passion +of their hostility so fierce, that the Government, when it is once +committed to general compulsory education, either directly in +its own schools or by subsidies to other schools, finds itself driven +to devise some sort of neutral religion that will suit everybody, or +else forbid all mention of the subject in school. An example of +the first expedient is the Cowper-Temple clause in the Education +Act of 1870, which ordains that the Bible shall be read in schools +without reference to any creed or catechism peculiar “to any one +denomination”. The total prohibition expedient is known as +Secular Education, and has been tried extensively in Australia.</p> + +<p>The Cowper-Temple plan does not meet the case of the Roman +Catholics, who do not permit indiscriminate access to the Bible, +nor of the Jews, who can hardly be expected to accept the reading +of the New Testament as religious instruction. Besides, if the +children are to learn anything more than the three Rs, they must +be taught Copernican astronomy, electronic physics, and evolution. +Now it is not good sense to lead a child at ten o’clock to +attach religious importance to the belief that the earth is flat and +immovable, and the sky a ceiling above it in which there is a +heaven furnished like a king’s palace, and, at eleven, that the +earth is a sphere spinning on its axis and rushing round the sun in +limitless space with a multitude of other spheres. Nor can you +reasonably order that during the religious instruction hour the +children are to be informed that all forms of life were created +within six days, including the manufacture of a full-grown woman +out of a man’s rib, and, when the clock strikes, begin explaining +that epochs of millions of years were occupied in experiments in +the production of various forms of life, from prodigious monsters +to invisibly small creatures, culminating in a very complicated +and by no means finally satisfactory form called Woman, who +specialized a variety of herself, in some respects even less satisfactory, +called Man. This would not matter if the teacher might +explain that as the astronomy and biology of the Bible are out +of date, and we think we know better nowadays, they have been +discarded like the barbarous morality of the Israelitish kings and +the idol to which they made human sacrifices. But such explanations +would frustrate the Cowper-Temple clause, under which the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_362">[Pg 362]</span> +children were to be left to make what they could of the contradictions +between their religious and secular instruction. They usually +solve it by not thinking about it at all, provided their parents let +them alone on the subject, which is not always the case.</p> + +<p>As to the alternative of giving no religious instruction, and confining +school teaching to what is called Secular or Matter-of-Fact +Education, it is not really a possible plan, because children +must be taught conduct as well as arithmetic, and the ultimate +sanctions of conduct are metaphysical, by which imposing phrase +I mean that from the purely matter-of-fact point of view there is +no difference between a day’s thieving and a day’s honest work, +between placid ignorance and the pursuit of knowledge for its +own sake, between habitual lying and truth-telling: they are all +human activities or inactivities, to be chosen according to their +respective pleasantness or material advantages, and not to be preferred +on any other grounds. When you find your children acting, +as they often do (like their elders), quite secularly, and lying, +stealing, or idling, you have to give them either a matter-of-fact +or a religious reason for ceasing to do evil and learning to do well. +The matter-of-fact reason is temptingly easy to manufacture. +You can say “If I catch you doing that again I will clout your +head, or smack your behind, or send you to bed without your +supper, or injure you in some way or other that you will not like”. +Unfortunately these secular reasons, though easy to devise and +apply, and enjoyable if you have a turn that way, always seem +avoidable by cunning concealment and a little additional lying. +You know what becomes of the pseudo-morality produced by +whipping the moment your back is turned. And what is your own +life worth if it has to be spent spying on your children with a cane +in your hand? Hardly worth living, I should say, unless you are +one of the people who love caning as others love unnatural sensualities, +in which case you may fall into the hands of the Society +for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, which will make short +work of your moral pretensions. In any case you will find yourself +strongly tempted to whack your children, not really to compel +them to conduct themselves for their own good, but to conduct +themselves in the manner most convenient to yourself, +which is not always nor even often the same thing.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_363">[Pg 363]</span></p> + +<p>Finally, if you are not selfish and cruel, you will find that you +must give the children some reason for behaving well when no +one is looking, and there is no danger of being found out, or +when they would rather do the forbidden thing at the cost of a +whacking than leave it undone with impunity. You may tell them +that God is always looking, and will punish them inevitably when +they die. But you will find that posthumous penalties are not immediate +enough nor real enough to deter a bold child. In the +end you must threaten it with some damage to a part of it called +its soul, of the existence of which you can give it no physical demonstration +whatever. You need not use the word soul: you can +put the child “on its honor”. But its honor also is an organ which +no anatomist has yet succeeded in dissecting out and preserving +in a bottle of spirits of wine for the instruction of infants. When it +transgresses you can resort to scolding, calling it a naughty, +dirty, greedy little thing. Or you may lecture it, telling it solemnly +that “it is a sin to steal a pin” and so forth. But if you could find +such a monster as an entirely matter-of-fact child, it might receive +both scoldings and lectures unmoved, and ask you “What +then? What is a sin? What do you mean by naughty, greedy? I +understand dirty; but why should I wash my hands if I am quite +comfortable with them dirty. I understand greedy; but if I like +chocolates why should I give half of them to Jane?” You may retort +with “Have you no conscience, child?”; but the matter-of-fact +reply is “What is conscience?” Faced with this matter-of-fact +scepticism you are driven into pure metaphysics, and must teach +your child that conduct is a matter, not of fact, but of religious +duty. Good conduct is a respect which you owe to yourself in +some mystical way; and people are manageable in proportion to +their possession of this self-respect. When you remonstrate with +a grown-up person you say “Have you no self-respect?” But +somehow one does not say that to an infant. If it tells a lie, you do +not say “You owe it to yourself to speak the truth”, because the +little animal does not feel any such obligation, though it will later +on. If you say “You must not tell lies because if you do nobody +will believe what you say”, you are conscious of telling a thundering +lie yourself, as you know only too well that most lies are quite +successful, and that human society would be impossible without<span class="pagenum" id="Page_364">[Pg 364]</span> +a great deal of goodnatured lying. If you say “You must not tell +lies because if you do you will find yourself unable to believe anything +that is told to you”, you will be much nearer the truth; but +it is a truth that a child cannot understand: you might as well tell +it the final truth of the matter, which is, that there is a mysterious +something in us called a soul, which deliberate wickedness kills, +and without which no material gain can make life bearable. How +can you expect a naughty child to take that in? If you say “You +must not tell a lie because it will grieve your dear parents”, the +effect will depend on how much the child cares whether its parents +are grieved or not. In any case to most young children their +parents are as gods, too great to be subject to grief, as long as the +parents play up to that conception of them. Also, as it is not easy +to be both loved and feared, parents who put on the majesty of +gods with their children must not allow the familiarity of affection, +and are lucky if their children do not positively hate them. +It is safer and more comfortable to invent a parent who is everybody’s +Big Papa, even Papa’s papa, and introduce it to the child +as God. And it must be a god that children can imagine. It must +not be an abstraction, a principle, a vital impulse, a life force, or +the Church of England god who has neither body, parts, nor +passions. It must be, like the real papa, a grown-up person in +Sunday clothes, very very good, terribly powerful, and all-seeing: +that is, able to see what you are doing when nobody is looking. In +this way the child who is too young to have a sufficiently developed +self-respect and intelligent sense of honor: in short, a conscience, +is provided with an artificial, provisional, and to a great +extent fictitious conscience which tides it over its nonage until it +is old enough to attach a serious meaning to the idea of God.</p> + +<p>In this way it was discovered in the nursery, long before Voltaire +said it, that “if there were no God it would be necessary to +invent Him”. After Voltaire’s death, when the government of +France fell into the hands of a set of very high-principled professional +and middle-class gentlemen who had no experience of +government, and ended by making such a mess of it that France +would have been ruined if they had not fortunately all cut oneanother’s +heads off on the highest principles, the most high-principled +of them all, an intensely respectable lawyer named<span class="pagenum" id="Page_365">[Pg 365]</span> +Robespierre, who had tried to govern without God because a +good many of the stories told to children about God were evidently +not strictly true, found that governments dealing with +nations could no more do without God than parents dealing with +their families. He, too, declared, echoing Voltaire, that if there +were no God it would be necessary to invent one. He had previously, +by the way, tried a goddess whom he called the Goddess of +Reason; but she was no use at all, not because she was a goddess +(for Roman Catholic children have a Big Mamma, or Mamma’s +mamma, who is everybody’s mamma, and makes the boys easier +to manage, as well as a Big Papa), but because good conduct is +not dictated by reason but by a divine instinct that is beyond +reason. Reason only discovers the shortest way: it does not discover +the destination. It would be quite reasonable for you to +pick your neighbor’s pocket if you felt sure that you could make +a better use of your money than she could; but somehow it would +not be honorable; and honor is a part of divinity: it is metaphysics: +it is religion. Some day it may become scientific psychology; +but psychology is as yet in its crudest infancy; and when it grows +up it will very likely be too difficult not only for children but for +many adults, like the rest of the more abstruse sciences.</p> + +<p>Meanwhile we must bear in mind that our beliefs are continually +passing from the metaphysical and legendary into the scientific +stage. In China, when an eclipse of the sun occurs, all the +intelligent and energetic women rush out of doors with pokers +and shovels, trays and saucepan lids, and bang them together to +frighten away the demon who is devouring the sun; and the perfect +success of this proceeding, which has never been known to +fail, proves to them that it is the right thing to do. But you, who +know all about eclipses, sit calmly looking at them through bits of +smoked glass, because your belief about them is a scientific belief +and not a metaphysical one. You probably think that the women +who are banging the saucepans in China are fools; but they are +not: you would do the same yourself if you lived in a country +where astronomy was still in the metaphysical stage.</p> + +<p>You must also beware of concluding, because their conduct +seems to you ridiculous, and because you know that there is no +demon, that there is no eclipse. You may say that nobody could<span class="pagenum" id="Page_366">[Pg 366]</span> +make a mistake like that; but I assure you that a great many +people, seeing how many childish fables and ridiculous ceremonies +have been attached to the conception of divinity, have +rushed to the conclusion that no such thing as divinity exists. +When they grow out of believing that God is an old gentleman +with a white beard, they think they have got rid of everything +that the old gentleman represented to their infant minds. On the +contrary, they have come a little nearer to the truth about it.</p> + +<p>Now the English nation consists of many million parents and +children of whom hardly any two are in precisely the same stage +of belief as to the sanctions of good conduct. Many of the parents +are still in the nursery stage: many of the children are in the comparatively +scientific stage. Most of them do not bother much +about it, and just do what their neighbors do and say they believe +what most of their neighbors say they believe. But those who do +bother about it differ very widely and differ very fiercely. Take +those who, rejecting the first article of the Church of England, +attach to the word God the conception of a Ruler of the universe +with the body, parts, and passions of man, but with unlimited +knowledge and power. Here at least, you might think, we have +agreement. But no. There are two very distinct parties to this +faith. One of them believes in a God of Wrath, imposing good +conduct on us by threats of casting us for ever into an inconceivably +terrible hell. Others believe in a God of Love, and openly +declare that if they could be brought to believe in a God capable +of such cruelty as hell implies, they would spit in his face. Others +hold that conduct has nothing to do with the matter, and that +though hell exists, anyone, however wicked, can avoid it by believing +that God accepted the cruel death of his own son as an +expiation of their misdeeds, whilst nobody, however virtuous, +can avoid it if she has the slightest doubt on this point. Others +declare that neither conduct nor belief has anything to do with it, +as every person is from birth predestined to fall into hell or mount +into heaven when they die, and that nothing that they can say or +do or believe or disbelieve can help them. Voltaire described us as +a people with thirty religions and only one sauce; and though +this was a great compliment to the activity and independence of +our minds, it held out no hope of our ever agreeing about religion.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_367">[Pg 367]</span></p> + +<p>Even if we could confine religious instruction to subjects which +are supposed to have passed from the metaphysical to the scientific +stage, which is what the advocates of secular education mean, +we should be no nearer to unanimity; for not only do our scientific +bigots differ as fiercely as those of the sects and churches, and +try to obtain powers of ruthless persecution from the Government, +but their pretended advances from the metaphysical to the scientific +are often disguised relapses into the pre-metaphysical stage +of crude witchcraft, ancient augury, and African “medicine”.</p> + +<p>Roughly speaking, governments in imposing education on the +people have to deal with three fanaticisms: first, that which +believes in a God of Wrath, and sees in every earthquake, every +pestilence, every war: in short, every calamity of impressive or +horrifying magnitude, a proof of God’s terrible power and a warning +to sinners; second, that which believes in a God of Love in +conflict with a Power of Evil personified as the Devil; and third, +that of the magicians and their dupes, believing neither in God nor +devil, claiming that the pursuit of knowledge is absolutely free +from moral law, however atrocious its methods, and pretending +to work miracles (called “the marvels of science”) by which they +hold the keys of life and death, and can make mankind immune +from disease if they are given absolute control over our bodies.</p> + +<p>A good many women are still so primitive and personal in religious +matters that their first impulse on hearing them discussed +at all is to declare that their beliefs are the only true beliefs, and +must of course be imposed on everyone, all other beliefs to be +punished as monstrous blasphemies. They do not regard Jehovah, +Allah, Brahma, as different names for God: if they call +God Brahma they regard Allah and Jehovah as abominable idols, +and all Christians and Moslems as wicked idolaters whom no respectable +person would visit. Or if Jehovah, they class Moslems +and Indians as “the heathen”, and send out missionaries to convert +them. But this childish self-conceit would wreck the British +Empire if our rulers indulged it. Only about 11 per cent of +British subjects are Christians: the enormous majority of them +call God Allah or Brahma, and either do not distinguish Jesus +from any other prophet or have never even heard of him. Consequently +when a woman goes into Parliament, central or local, she<span class="pagenum" id="Page_368">[Pg 368]</span> +should leave the sectarian part of her religion behind her, and +consider only that part of it which is common to all the sects and +Churches, however the names may differ. Unfortunately this is +about the last thing that most elected persons ever dream of +doing. They all strive to impose their local customs, names, institutions, +and even languages on the schoolchildren by main force.</p> + +<p>Now there is this to be said for their efforts, that all progress +consists in imposing on children nobler beliefs and better institutions +than those at present inculcated and established. For instance, +as every Socialist believes that Communism is more nobly +inspired and better in practice than private property and competition, +her object in entering Parliament is to impose that belief +on her country by having it taught to the children in the public +schools so that they may grow up to regard it as the normal obvious +truth, and to abhor Capitalism as a disastrous idolatry. At +present she finds herself opposed by statesmen who quite lately +spent a hundred millions of English public money in subsidizing +military raids on the Russian Government because it was a +Socialist Government. To such statesmen Socialist, Communist, +Bolshevist, are synonyms for Scoundrel, Thief, Assassin. In +opposition to them the Socialists compare Labor exploited by +landlords and capitalists to Christ crucified between two thieves. +They both say that we no longer persecute in the name of religion; +but this means only that they refuse to call the creeds they +are persecuting religions, whilst the beliefs they do call religions +have become comparatively indifferent to them. To put down +sedition, rebellion, and attacks on property, or, on the other hand, +to make an end of the robbery of the poor, suppress shameless +idleness, and restore the land of our country, which God made +for us all, to the whole people, seems simple enforcement of the +moral law, and not persecution; therefore those who do it are not, +they think, persecutors, to prove which they point to the fact that +they allow us all to go to church or not as we please, and to believe +or disbelieve in transubstantiation according to our fancy. Do +not be deceived by modern professions of toleration. Women are +still what they were when the Tudor sisters sent Protestants to +the stake and Jesuits to the rack and gallows; when the defenders +of property and slavery in Rome set up crosses along the public<span class="pagenum" id="Page_369">[Pg 369]</span> +roads with the crucified followers of the revolted gladiator slave +Spartacus dying horribly upon them in thousands; and when the +saintly Torquemada burnt alive every Jew he could lay hands on +as piously as he told his beads. The difference between the Socialist +versus Capitalist controversy and the Jew versus Christian +controversy or the Roman Catholic versus Protestant controversy +is not that the modern bigot is any more tolerant or less +cruel than her ancestors, nor even that the proletarians are too +numerous and the proprietors too powerful to be persecuted. If +the controversy between them could be settled by either party +exterminating the other, they would both do their worst to settle +it in that way. History leaves us no goodnatured illusions on this +point. From the wholesale butcheries which followed the suppression +of the Paris Commune of 1871 to the monstrous and +quite gratuitous persecution of Russians in the United States +of America after the war of 1914-18, in which girls were sentenced +to frightful terms of imprisonment for remarks that might +have been made by any Sunday School teacher, there is abundant +evidence that modern diehards are no better than medieval +zealots, and that if they are to be restrained from deluging +the world in blood and torture in the old fashion it will not be +by any imaginary advance in toleration or in humanity. At this +moment (1927) our proprietary classes appear to have no other +conception of the Russian Soviet Government and its sympathizers +than as vermin to be ruthlessly exterminated; and when +the Russian Communist and his western imitators speak of the +proprietors and their political supporters as “bourgeois”, they +make no secret of regarding them as enemies of the human race. +The spirit of the famous manifesto of 1792, in which the Duke +of Brunswick, in the name of the monarchs of Europe, announced +that he meant to exterminate the French Republican +Government and deliver up the cities which tolerated it to “military +execution and total subversion”, is reflected precisely in the +speeches made by our own statesmen in support of the projected +expedition against the Union of Soviet Republics which was +countermanded a few years ago only because the disapproval of +the British proletarian voters became so obvious that the preparations +for the Capitalist Crusade had to be hastily dropped.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_370">[Pg 370]</span></p> + +<p>It is therefore very urgently necessary that I should explain to +you why it is that a Labor Party can neither establish Socialism +by exterminating its opponents, nor its opponents avert Socialism +by exterminating the Socialists.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c75">75</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">REVOLUTIONS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">Y</span>OU must first grasp the difference between revolutions +and social changes. A revolution transfers political power +from one party to another, or one class to another, or even +one individual to another, just as a conquest transfers it from +one nation or race to another. It can be and often is effected by +violence or the threat of violence. Of our two revolutions in the +seventeenth century, by which political power in England was +transferred from the throne to the House of Commons, the first +cost a civil war; and the second was bloodless only because the +King ran away. A threat of violence was sufficient to carry the +nineteenth century revolution of 1832, by which the political +power was transferred from the great agricultural landowners to +the industrial urban employers. The South American revolutions +which substitute one party or one President for another are +general elections decided by shooting instead of by voting.</p> + +<p>Now the transfer of political power from our capitalists to our +proletariat, without which Socialist propaganda would be suppressed +by the Government as sedition, and Socialist legislation +would be impossible, has already taken place in form. The proletarians +can outvote the capitalists overwhelmingly whenever +they choose to do so. If on the issue of Socialism versus Capitalism +all the proletarians were for Socialism and all the capitalists +for Capitalism, Capitalism would have had to capitulate to overwhelming +numbers long ago. But the proletarians who live upon +the incomes of the capitalists as their servants, their tradesmen, +their employees in the luxury trades, their lawyers and doctors +and so on, not to mention the troops raised, equipped, and paid +by them to defend their property (in America there are private +armies of this kind) are more violently Conservative than the +capitalists themselves, many of whom, like Robert Owen and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_371">[Pg 371]</span> +William Morris, not to mention myself, have been and are ardent +Socialists. The Countess of Warwick is a noted Socialist; so you +have seen a Socialist Countess (or at least her picture); but have +you ever seen a countess’s dressmaker who was a Socialist? If the +capitalists refused to accept a parliamentary decision against +them, and took to arms, like Charles I, they would have in many +places a majority of the proletariat on their side.</p> + +<p>If you are shocked by the suggestion that our capitalists would +act so unconstitutionally, consider the case of Ireland, in which +after thirty years of parliamentary action, and an apparently final +settlement of the Home Rule question by Act of Parliament, the +establishment of the Irish Free State was effected by fire and +slaughter, the winning side being that which succeeded in burning +the larger number of the houses of its opponents.</p> + +<p>Parliamentary constitutionalism holds good up to a certain +point: the point at which the people who are outvoted in Parliament +will accept their defeat. But on many questions people feel +so strongly, or have such big interests at stake, that they leave the +decision to Parliament only as long as they think they will win +there. If Parliament decides against them, and they see any +chance of a successful resistance, they throw Parliament over and +fight it out. During the thirty years of the parliamentary campaign +for Irish Home Rule there were always Direct Action men +who said “It is useless to go to the English Parliament: the +Unionists will never give up their grip of Ireland until they are +forced to; and you may as well fight it out first as last”. And these +men, though denounced as wanton incendiaries, turned out to +be right. The French had to cut off the heads of both king and +queen because the king could not control the queen, and the +queen would not accept a constitutional revolution, nor stop trying +to induce the other kings of Europe to march their armies into +France and slaughter the Liberals for her. In England we beheaded +our king because he would not keep faith with the Liberal +Parliament even after he had fought it and lost. In Spain at this +moment the King and the army have suppressed Parliament, and +are ruling by force of arms on the basis of divine right, which is +exactly what Cromwell did in England after he had cut off King +Charles’s head for trying to do the same. Signor Mussolini, a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_372">[Pg 372]</span> +Socialist, has overridden parliament in Italy, his followers having +established what is called a reign of terror by frank violence.</p> + +<p>These repudiations of constitutionalism in Spain and Italy have +been made, not to effect any definite social change, but because +the Spanish and Italian governments had become so unbearably +inefficient that the handiest way to restore public order was for +some sufficiently energetic individuals to take the law into their +own hands and just break people’s heads if they would not behave +themselves. And it may quite possibly happen that even if the +most perfect set of Fabian Acts of Parliament for the constitutional +completion of Socialism in this country be passed through +Parliament by duly elected representatives of the people; swallowed +with wry faces by the House of Lords; and finally assented +to by the King and placed on the statute book, the capitalists may, +like Signor Mussolini, denounce Parliament as unpatriotic, pernicious, +and corrupt, and try to prevent by force the execution of +the Fabian Acts. We should then have a state of civil war, with, no +doubt, the Capitalist forces burning the co-operative stores, and +the proletarians burning the country houses, as in Ireland, in +addition to the usual war routine of devastation and slaughter.</p> + +<p>As we have seen, the capitalists would be at no loss for proletarian +troops. The war would not be as the Marxist doctrinaires +of the Class War seem to imagine. In our examination of the +effect of unequal distribution of income we found that it is not +only the rich who live on the poor, but also the servants and +tradesmen who live on the money the rich spend, and who have +their own servants and tradesmen. In the rich suburbs and +fashionable central quarters of the great cities, and all over the +South of England where pleasant country houses are dotted over +the pleasantest of the English counties, it is as hard to get a Labor +candidate into Parliament as in Oxford University. If the unearned +incomes of the rich disappeared, places like Bournemouth +would either perish like the cities of Nineveh and Babylon, or +else the inhabitants would have, as they would put it, to cater for +a different class of people; and many of them would be ruined +before they could adapt themselves to the new conditions. Add +to these the young men who are out of employment, and will fight +for anyone who will pay them well for an exciting adventure,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_373">[Pg 373]</span> +with all the people who dread change of any sort, or who are +duped by the newspapers into thinking Socialists scoundrels, or +who would be too stupid to understand such a book as this if they +could be persuaded to read anything but a cheap newspaper; and +you will see at once that the line that separates those who live on +rich customers from those who live on poor customers: in other +words which separates those interested in the maintenance of +Capitalism from those interested in its replacement by Socialism, +is a line drawn not between rich and poor, capitalist and proletarian, +but right down through the middle of the proletariat to +the bottom of the very poorest section. In a civil war for the maintenance +of Capitalism the capitalists would therefore find masses +of supporters in all ranks of the community; and it is their knowledge +of this that makes the leaders of the Labor Party so impatient +with the extremists who talk of such a war as if it would be +a Class War, and echo Shelley’s very misleading couplet “Ye are +many: they are few”. And as the capitalists know it too, being +reminded of it by the huge number of votes given for them by the +poor at every election, I cannot encourage you to feel too sure +that their present denunciations of Direct Action by their opponents +mean that when their own sooner-or-later inevitable defeat +by Labor in Parliament comes, they will take it lying down.</p> + +<p>But no matter how the government of the country may pass +from the hands of the capitalists into those of the Socialist proletarians, +whether by peaceful parliamentary procedure or the +bloodiest conceivable civil war, at the end of it the survivors will +be just where they were at the beginning as far as practical Communism +is concerned. Returning a majority of Socialists to Parliament +will not by itself reconstruct the whole economic system +of the country in such a way as to produce equality of income. +Still less will burning and destroying buildings or killing several +of the opponents of Socialism, and getting several Socialists killed +in doing so. You cannot wave a wand over the country and say +“Let there be Socialism”: at least nothing will happen if you do.</p> + +<p>The case of Russia illustrates this. After the great political revolution +of 1917 in that country, the Marxist Communists were +so completely victorious that they were able to form a Government +far more powerful than the Tsar had ever really been. But<span class="pagenum" id="Page_374">[Pg 374]</span> +as the Tsar had not allowed Fabian Societies to be formed in +Russia to reduce Socialism to a system of law, this new Russian +Government did not know what to do, and, after trying all sorts +of amateur experiments which came to nothing more than pretending +that there was Communism where there was nothing but +the wreck of Capitalism, and giving the land to the peasants, who +immediately insisted on making private property of it over again, +had to climb down hastily and leave the industry of the country to +private employers very much as the great ground landlords of +our cities leave the work of the shops to their tenants, besides +allowing the peasant farmers to hold their lands and sell their produce +just as French peasant proprietors or English farmers do.</p> + +<p>This does not mean that the Russian Revolution has been a +failure. In Russia it is now established that capital was made for +Man, and not Man for Capitalism. The children are taught the +Christian morality of Communism instead of the Mammonist +morality of Capitalism. The palaces and pleasure seats of the +plutocrats are used for the recreation of workers instead of for the +enervation of extravagant wasters. Idle ladies and gentlemen are +treated with salutary contempt, whilst the worker’s blouse is duly +honored. The treasures of art, respected and preserved with a +cultural conscientiousness which puts to shame our own lootings +in China, and our iconoclasms and vandalisms at home, are accessible +to everyone. The Greek Church is tolerated (the Bolsheviks +forbore to cut off their Archbishop’s head as we cut off Archbishop +Laud’s); but it is not, as the Church of England is, allowed +without contradiction to tell little children lies about the Bible +under pretence of giving them religious instruction, nor to teach +them to reverence the merely rich as their betters. That sort of +doctrine is officially and very properly disavowed as Dope.</p> + +<p>All this seems to us too good to be true. It places the Soviet +Government in the forefront of cultural civilization as far as good +intention goes. But it is not Socialism. It still involves sufficient +inequality of income to undo in the long run enough of its +achievements to degrade the Communist Republic to the level of +the old Capitalist Republics of France and America. In short, +though it has made one of those transfers of political power which +are the object of revolutions, and are forced through by simple<span class="pagenum" id="Page_375">[Pg 375]</span> +slaughter and terror, and though this political transfer has increased +Russian self-respect and changed the moral attitude of +the Russian State from pro-Capitalist to anti-Capitalist, it has +not yet established as much actual Communism as we have in +England, nor even raised Russian wages to the English level.</p> + +<p>The explanation of this is that Communism can spread only as +Capitalism spread: that is, as a development of existing economic +civilization and not by a sudden wholesale overthrow of it. What +it proposes is not a destruction of the material utilities inherited +from Capitalism, but a new way of managing them and distributing +the wealth they produce. Now this development of Capitalism +into a condition of ripeness for Socialization had not been reached +in Russia; consequently the victorious Communist Bolsheviks in +1917 found themselves without any highly organized Capitalistic +industry to build upon. They had on their hands an enormous +agricultural country with a population of uncivilized peasants, ignorant, +illiterate, superstitious, cruel, and land-hungry. The cities, +few and far between, with their relatively insignificant industries, +often managed by foreigners, and their city proletariats living on +family wages of five and threepence a week, were certainly in revolt +against the misdistribution of wealth and leisure; but they +were so far from being organized to begin Socialism that it was +only in a very limited sense that they could be said to have begun +urban civilization. There were no Port Sunlights and Bournvilles, +no Ford factories in which workmen earn £9 in a five-day +week and have their own motor cars, no industrial trusts of +national dimensions, no public libraries, no great public departments +manned by picked and tested civil servants, no crowds of +men skilled in industrial management and secretarial business +looking for employment, no nationalized and municipalized services +with numerous and competent official staffs, no national insurance, +no great Trade Union organization representing many +millions of workmen and able to extort subsidies from Capitalist +governments by threatening to stop the railways and cut off the +coal supply, no fifty years of compulsory schooling supplemented +by forty years of incessant propaganda of political science by +Fabian and other lecturers, no overwhelming predominance of +organized industry over individualist agriculture, no obvious<span class="pagenum" id="Page_376">[Pg 376]</span> +breakdown of Capitalism under the strain of the war, no triumphant +rescue by Socialism demonstrating that even those public +departments that were bywords for incompetence and red tape +were far more efficient than the commercial adventurers who derided +them. Well may Mr Trotsky say that the secret of the completeness +of the victory of the Russian Proletarian Revolution +over Russian Capitalist civilization was that there was virtually +no Capitalist civilization to triumph over, and that the Russian +people had been saved from the corruption of bourgeois ideas, +not by the famous metaphysical dialectic inherited by Marx from +the philosopher Hegel, but by the fact that they are still primitive +enough to be incapable of middle class ideas. In England, when +Socialism is consummated it will plant the red flag on the summit +of an already constructed pyramid; but the Russians have to +build right up from the sand. We must build up Capitalism before +we can turn it into Socialism. But meanwhile we must learn +how to control it instead of letting it demoralize us, slaughter us, +and half ruin us, as we have hitherto done in our ignorance.</p> + +<p>Thus the fact that the Soviet has had to resort to controlled +Capitalism and bourgeois enterprise, after denouncing them so +fiercely under the Tsardom in the phrases used by Marx to denounce +English Capitalism, does not mean that we shall have to +recant in the same way when we complete our transfer of political +power from the proprietary classes and their retainers to the +Socialist proletariat. The Capitalism which the Russian Government +is not only tolerating but encouraging would be for us, even +now under Capitalism, an attempt to set back the clock. We could +not get back to it if we tried, except by smashing our machinery, +breaking up our industrial organization, burning all the plans +and documents from which it could be reconstructed, and substituting +an eighteenth for a twentieth century population.</p> + +<p>The moral of all this is that though a political revolution may be +necessary to break the power of the opponents of Socialism if they +refuse to accept it as a Parliamentary reform, and resist it violently +either by organizing what is now called Fascism or a <i>coup d’état</i> +to establish a Dictatorship of the Capitalists, yet neither a violent +revolution nor a peacefully accepted series of parliamentary +reforms can by themselves create Socialism, which is neither a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_377">[Pg 377]</span> +battle cry nor an election catchword, but an elaborate arrangement +of our production and distribution of wealth in such a manner +that all our incomes shall be equal. This is why Socialists +who understand their business are always against bloodshed. +They are no milder than other people; but they know that bloodshed +cannot do what they want, and that the indiscriminate destruction +inseparable from civil war will retard it. Mr Sidney +Webb’s much quoted and in some quarters much derided “inevitability +of gradualness” is an inexorable fact. It does not, unfortunately, +imply inevitability of peacefulness. We can fight +over every step of the gradual process if we are foolish enough. +We shall come to an armed struggle for political power between +the parasitic proletariat and the Socialist proletariat if the Capitalist +leaders of the parasitic proletariat throw Parliament and +the Constitution over, and declare for a blood and iron settlement +instead of a settlement by votes. But at the end of the fighting we +shall all be the poorer, none the wiser, and some of us the deader. +If the Socialists win, the road to Socialism may be cleared; but the +pavement will be torn up and the goal as far off as ever.</p> + +<p>All the historical precedents illustrate this. A monarchy may be +changed into a republic, or an oligarchy into a democracy, or one +oligarchy supplanted by another, if the people who favor the +change kill enough of the people who oppose it to intimidate the +rest; and when the change is made you may have factions fighting +instead of voting for the official posts of power and honor until, +as in South America in the nineteenth century, violent revolutions +become so common that other countries hardly notice them; +but no extremity of fighting and killing can alter the distribution +of wealth or the means of producing it. The guillotining of 4000 +people in eighteen months during the French Revolution left the +people poorer than before; so that when the Public Prosecutor +who had sent most of the 4000 to the guillotine was sent there +himself, and the people cursed him as he passed to his death, he +said, “Will your bread be any cheaper tomorrow, you fools?” +That did not affect the Capitalist makers of the French Revolution, +because they did not want to make the bread of the poor +cheaper: they wanted to transfer the government of France from +the King and the nobles to the middle class. But if they had been<span class="pagenum" id="Page_378">[Pg 378]</span> +Socialists, aiming at making everything much cheaper except +human life, they would have had to admit that the laugh was with +Citizen Fouquier Tinville. And if William Pitt and the kings of +Europe had let the French Revolution alone, and it had been as +peaceful and parliamentary as our own revolutionary Reform +Bill of 1832, it would have been equally futile as far as putting +another pennorth of milk into baby’s mug was concerned.</p> + +<p>Whenever our city proletarians, in the days before the dole (say +1885 for instance), were driven by unemployment to threaten to +burn down the houses of the rich, the Socialists said “No: if you +are foolish enough to suppose that burning houses will put an end +to unemployment, at least have sense enough to burn down your +own houses, most of which are unfit for human habitation. The +houses of the rich are good houses, of which we have much too +few.” Capitalism has produced not only slums but palaces and +handsome villas, not only sweaters’ dens but first-rate factories, +shipyards, steamships, ocean cables, services that are not only +national but international, and what not. It has also produced a +great deal of Communism, without which it could not exist for a +single day (we need not go over all the examples already given: +the roads and bridges and so forth). What Socialist in his senses +would welcome a civil war that would destroy all or any of this, +and leave his party, even if it were victorious, a heritage of blackened +ruins and festering cemeteries? Capitalism has led up to +Socialism by changing the industries of the country from petty +enterprises conducted by petty proprietors into huge Trusts conducted +by employed proletarians directing armies of workmen, +operating with millions of capital on vast acreages of land. In +short, Capitalism tends always to develop industries until they +are on the scale of public affairs and ripe for transfer to public +hands. To destroy them would be to wreck the prospects of +Socialism. Even the proprietors who think that such a transfer +would be robbery have at least the consolation of knowing that +the thief does not destroy the property of the man he intends to +rob, being as much interested in it as the person from whom he +means to steal it. As to managing persons, Socialism will need +many more of them than there are at present, and will give them +much greater security in their jobs and dignity in their social<span class="pagenum" id="Page_379">[Pg 379]</span> +standing than most of them can hope for under Capitalism.</p> + +<p>And now I think we may dismiss the question whether the +return of a decisive majority of Socialists to Parliament will pass +without an appeal to unconstitutional violence by the capitalists +and their supporters. Whether it does or not may matter a good +deal to those unlucky persons who will lose their possessions or +their lives in the struggle if there be a struggle; but when the +shouting and the killing and the house burning are over the survivors +must settle down to some stable form of government. The +mess may have to be cleared up by a dictatorship like that of +Napoleon the Third, King Alfonso, Cromwell, Napoleon, Mussolini, +or Lenin; but dictatorial strong men soon die or lose their +strength, and kings, generals, and proletarian dictators alike find +that they cannot carry on for long without councils or parliaments +of some sort, and that these will not work unless they are +in some way representative of the public, because unless the +citizens co-operate with the police the strongest government +breaks down, as English government did in Ireland.</p> + +<p>In the long run (which nowadays is a very short run) you must +have your parliament and your settled constitution back again; +and the risings and <i>coups d’état</i>, with all their bloodshed and +burnings and executions, might as well have been cut out as far +as the positive constructive work of Socialism is concerned. So +we may just as well ignore all the battles that may or may not be +fought, and go on to consider what may happen to the present +Labor Party if its present constitutional growth be continued +and consummated by the achievement of a decisive Socialist +majority in Parliament, and its resumption of office, not, as in +1923-24, by the sufferance of the two Capitalist parties and +virtually under their control, but with full power to carry out a +proletarian policy, and, if it will, to make Socialism the established +constitutional order in Britain.</p> +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_380">[Pg 380]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c76">76</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">CHANGE MUST BE PARLIAMENTARY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">L</span>ET us assume, then, that we have resigned ourselves, as we +must sooner or later, to a parliamentary settlement of the +quarrels between the Capitalists and the Socialists. Mind: +I cannot, women and men being what they are, offer you any +sincere assurances that this will occur without all the customary +devilments. Every possible wrong and wicked way may be tried +before their exhaustion drives us back into the right way. +Attempts at a general strike, a form of national suicide which +sane people are bound to resist by every extremity of violent coercion, +may lead to a proclamation of martial law by the Government, +whether it be a Labor or a Capitalist Government, followed +by slaughtering of mobs, terroristic shelling of cities (as in the +case of Dublin), burning and looting of country houses, shooting +of police officers at sight as uniformed enemies of the people, and +a hectic time for those to whom hating and fighting and killing +are a glorious sport that makes life worth living and death worth +dying. Or if the modern machine gun, the bombing aeroplane, +and the poison gas shell make military coercion irresistible, or if +the general strikers have sufficient sense shot into them to see +that blockade and boycott are not good tactics for the productive +proletariat because they themselves are necessarily the first victims +of it, still Parliament may be so split up into contending +groups as to become unworkable, forcing the nation to fall back +on a dictatorship. The dictator may be another Bismarck ruling +in the name of a royal personage, or a forceful individual risen +from the ranks like Mahomet or Brigham Young or Signor Mussolini, +or a general like Cæsar or Napoleon or Primo di Rivera.</p> + +<p>In the course of these social convulsions you and I may be outraged, +shot, gas poisoned, burnt out of house and home, financially +ruined, just as anyone else may. We must resign ourselves to +such epidemics of human pugnacity and egotism just as we have +to resign ourselves to epidemics of measles. Measles are less +bitter to us because we have at least never done anything to encourage +them, whereas we have recklessly taught our children to +glorify pugnacity and to identify gentility and honor with the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_381">[Pg 381]</span> +keeping down of the poor and the keeping up of the rich, thus +producing an insanitary condition of public morals which makes +periodic epidemics of violence and class hatred inevitable.</p> + +<p>But sooner or later, the irreconcilables exterminate oneanother +like the Kilkenny cats; for when the toughest faction has exterminated +all the other factions it proceeds to exterminate itself. +And the dictators die as Cromwell died, or grow old and are sent +to the dustbin by ambitious young monarchs as Bismarck was; +and dictators and ambitious monarchs alike find that autocracy is +not today a practical form of government except in little tribes +like Brigham Young’s Latter Day Saints, nor even complete +there. The nearest thing to it that will now hold together is the +presidency of the United States of America; and the President, +autocrat as he is for his four years of office, has to work with a +Cabinet, deal with a Congress and a Senate, and abide the result +of popular elections. To this parliamentary complexion we must +all come at last. Every bumptious idiot thinks himself a born +ruler of men; every snob thinks that the common people must be +kept in their present place or shot down if society is to be preserved; +every proletarian who resents his position wants to strike +at something or somebody more vulnerable than the capitalist +system in the abstract; but when they have all done their worst the +dead they have slain must be buried, the houses they have burned +rebuilt, and the hundred other messes they have left cleared +up by women and men with sense enough to take counsel together +without coming to blows, and business ability enough to +organize the work of the community. These sensible ones may +not always have been sensible: some of them may have done their +full share of mischief before the necessary sanity was branded +into them by bitter experience or horrified contemplation of the +results of anarchy; but between the naturally sensible people and +the chastened ones there will finally be some sort of Parliament +to conduct the nation’s business, unless indeed civilization has +been so completely wrecked in the preliminary quarrels that +there is no nation worth troubling about left, and consequently +no national business to transact. That has often happened.</p> + +<p>However, let us put all disagreeable possibilities out of our +heads for the moment, and consider how Socialism is likely to advance<span class="pagenum" id="Page_382">[Pg 382]</span> +in a Parliament kept in working order by the establishment +of two main parties competing for office and power: one professing +to resist the advance and the other to further it, but both +forced by the need for gaining some sort of control of the runaway +car of Capitalism to take many steps when in power which +they vehemently denounced when in opposition, and in the long +run both contributing about equally (as hitherto) to the redistribution +of the national income and the substitution of public for +private property in land and industrial organization.</p> + +<p>Do not fear that I am about to inflict a complete program on +you. Even if I could foresee it I know better than to weary you to +that extent. All I intend is to give you a notion of the sort of legislation +that is likely to be enacted, and of the sort of opposition it +is likely to provoke; so that you may be better able to judge on +which side you should vote when an election gives you the chance, +or when a seat on some parliamentary body, local or central, calls +you to more direct action. You must understand that my designs +on you do not include making you what is called a good party +woman. Rather do I seek to add you to that floating body of openminded +voters who are quite ready to vote for this party today and +for the opposite party tomorrow if you think the balance of good +sense and practical ability has changed (possibly by the ageing of +the leaders) or that your former choice has taken a wrong turn +concerning some proposed measure of cardinal importance. Good +party people think such openmindedness disloyal; but in politics +there should be no loyalty except to the public good. If, however, +you prefer to vote for the same side every time through thick and +thin, why not find some person who has made the same resolution +in support of the opposite party? Then, as they say in Parliament, +you can pair with her: that is, you can both agree never to +vote at all, which will have the same effect as if you voted opposite +ways; and neither of you need ever trouble to vote again.</p> + +<p>We are agreed, I take it, that practical Socialism must proceed +by the Government nationalizing our industries one at a time by a +series of properly compensated expropriations, after an elaborate +preparation for their administration by a body of civil servants, +who will consist largely of the old employees, but who will be +controlled and financed by Government departments manned by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_383">[Pg 383]</span> +public servants very superior in average ability, training, and +social dignity to the commercial profiteers and financial gamblers +who now have all our livelihoods at their mercy.</p> + +<p>Now this preparation and nationalization will hardly be possible +unless the voters have at least a rough notion of what the +Government is doing, and approve of it. They may not understand +Socialism as a whole; but they can understand nationalization +of the coal mines quite well enough to desire it and vote for +its advocates, if not for the sake of the welfare of the nation, at +least for the sake of getting their coal cheaper. Just so with the +railways and transport services generally: the most prejudiced +Conservatives may vote for their nationalization on its merits as +an isolated measure, for the sake of cheaper travelling and reasonable +freights for internal produce. A few big nationalizations +effected with this sort of popular support will make nationalization +as normal a part of our social policy as old age pensions +are now, though it seems only the other day that such pensions +were denounced as rank Communism, which indeed they are.</p> + +<p>There is therefore no hope for Capitalism in the difficulty that +baffled the Soviet in dealing with the land: that is, that the Russian +people were not Communists, and would not work the Communist +system except under a compulsion which it was impossible +to apply on a sufficiently large scale, because if a system can +be maintained only by half the ablebodied persons in the country +being paid to do nothing but stand over the other half, rifle in +hand, then it is not a practicable system and may as well be +dropped first as last. But a series of properly prepared nationalizations +may not only be understood and voted for by people who +would be quite shocked if they were called Socialists, but would +fit in perfectly with the habits of the masses who take their bread +as it comes and never think about anything of a public nature. +To them the change would be only a change of masters, to +which they are so accustomed that it would not strike them as a +change at all, whilst it would be also a change in the remuneration, +dignity, and certainty of employment, which is just what +they are always clamoring for. This overcomes the difficulty, +familiar to all reformers, that it is much easier to induce people to +do things in the way to which they are accustomed, even though<span class="pagenum" id="Page_384">[Pg 384]</span> +it is detestably bad for them, than to try a new system, even +though it promises to be millennially good for them.</p> + +<p>Socialistic legislation, then, will be no mere matter of forbidding +people to be rich, and calling a policeman when the law is +broken. It means an active interference in the production and +distribution of the nation’s income; and every step of it will require +a new department or extension of the civil service or the +municipal service to execute and manage it. If we had sense +enough to make a law that every baby, destitute or not, should +have plenty of bread and milk and a good house to shelter it, that +law would remain a dead letter until all the necessary bakeries +and dairies and builders’ yards were ready. If we made a law that +every ablebodied adult should put in a day’s work for his or her +country every day, we could not carry out that law until we had a +job ready for everybody. All constructive and productive legislation +is quite different from the Ten Commandments: it means +the employment of masses of men, the establishing of offices and +works, the provision of large sums of money to start with, and +the services of persons of special ability to direct. Without these, +all the Royal or Dictatorial Proclamations, all the Commandments, +and all the Communist Manifestoes are waste paper as far +as the establishment of practical Socialism is concerned.</p> + +<p>You may therefore take it that the change from inequality to +equality of income, though it will be made by law and cannot be +made in any other way, will not be made by simply passing a +single Act of Parliament ordering everybody to have the same +income, with arithmetical exactness in every case. Dozens of extensions +of the civil and municipal services, dozens of successive +nationalizations, dozens of annual budgets, all warmly contested +on one ground or another, will take us nearer and nearer to Equality +of Income until we are so close that the evil of such trifling +inequalities as may be left is no longer serious enough to be worth +bothering about. At present, when one baby has a hundred thousand +a year, and a hundred other babies are dying of insufficient +nourishment, equality of income is something to be fought for +and died for if necessary. But if every baby had its fill, the fact +that here and there a baby’s father or mother might get hold of an +extra five shillings or five pounds would not matter enough to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_385">[Pg 385]</span> +induce anyone to cross the street to prevent it.</p> + +<p>All social reforms stop short, not at absolute logical completeness +or arithmetical exactness, but at the point at which they have +done their work sufficiently. To a poor woman the difference between +a pound a week and a guinea a week is very serious, because +a shilling is a large sum of money to her. But a woman with +twenty pounds a week would not engage in a civil war because +some other woman had twenty guineas. She would not feel the +difference. Therefore we need not imagine a state of society +in which we should call the police if somebody made a little +extra money by singing songs or selling prize chrysanthemums, +though we might come to consider such conduct so sordidly unladylike +that even the most impudent woman would not dare do +it openly. As long as we were all equally well off, so that anybody’s +daughter could marry anybody else’s son without any question of +marrying above or beneath her, we should be contented enough +not to haggle over halfpence in the division of the national income. +For all that, equality of income should remain a fundamental +principle, any noticeable departure from which would be +jealously watched, and tolerated, if at all, with open eyes. There +are no limits to the possibility of its enforcement.</p> + +<p>This does not mean that there are no limits to any device of +Socialism: for example, to the process of nationalizing industry +and turning private employees into Government employees. We +could not nationalize everything even if we went mad on nationalization +and wanted to. There will never be a week in which the +Sunday papers will report that Socialism was established in Great +Britain last Wednesday, on which occasion the Queen wore a red +silk scarf fastened on the shoulder with a circlet of rubies consecrated +and presented to her by the Third International, and containing +a portrait of Karl Marx with the famous motto, “Proletarians +of All Lands: Unite”. It is far more likely that by the +time nationalization has become the rule, and private enterprise +the exception, Socialism (which is really rather a bad name for +the business) will be spoken of, if at all, as a crazy religion held +by a fanatical sect in that darkest of dark ages, the nineteenth century. +Already, indeed, I am told that Socialism has had its day, +and that the sooner we stop talking nonsense about it and set to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_386">[Pg 386]</span> +work, like the practical people we are, to nationalize the coal mines +and complete a national electrification scheme, the better. And I, +who said forty years ago that we should have had Socialism already +but for the Socialists, am quite willing to drop the name if +dropping it will help me to get the thing.</p> + +<p>What I meant by my jibe at the Socialists of the eighteen-eighties +was that nothing is ever done, and much is prevented, by +people who do not realize that they cannot do everything at once.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c77">77</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SUBSIDIZED PRIVATE ENTERPRISE</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>HILST we are nationalizing the big industries and +the wholesale businesses we may have to leave a good +many unofficial retailers to carry on the work of petty +distribution much as they do at present, except that we may control +them in the matter of prices as the Trusts do, whilst allowing +them a better living than the landlords and capitalists allow them, +and relieving them from the continual fear of bankruptcy inseparable +from the present system. We shall nationalize the mines +long before we nationalize the village smithy and make the village +blacksmith a public official. We shall have national or municipal +supplies of electric power laid on from house to house long +before we meddle with the individual artists and craftsmen and +scientific workers who will use that power, to say nothing of the +housemaids who handle the vacuum cleaners. We shall nationalize +land and large-scale farming without simultaneously touching +fancy fruit farming and kitchen gardening. Long after +Capitalism as we know it shall have passed away more completely +than feudalism has yet passed away there may be more +men and women working privately in businesses of their own +than there ever can be under our present slavish conditions.</p> + +<p>The nationalization of banking will make it quite easy for private +businesses to be carried on under Socialism to any extent +that may be found convenient, and will in fact stimulate them +vigorously. The reduction of the incomes derived from them to +the common level could be effected by taxing them if they were +excessive. But the difficulty is more likely to be the other way:<span class="pagenum" id="Page_387">[Pg 387]</span> +that is, the people in the private businesses might find themselves, +as most of them do at present, poorer than they would be in public +employment. The immense fortunes that are made in private +businesses to-day are made by the employment of workers who, +as they cannot live without access to the products of land and +capital, must either starve or consent to work for the landlords +and capitalists for much less than their work creates. But when +everybody could get a job in one of the nationalized industries, +and receive an income which would include his or her share of the +rent of the nationalized land, and the interest on the nationalized +capital, no private employer could induce anyone to come and +work for wages unless the wages were big enough to be equivalent +to the advantages of such public employment; therefore private +employment could not create poverty, and would in fact +become bankrupt unless the employers were either clever and +useful enough to induce the public to pay them handsomely for +their products or services, or else were content, for the sake of +doing things in their own way, to put up with less than they could +make in some national establishment round the corner. To maintain +their incomes at the national level some of them might actually +demand and receive subsidies from the Government. To take +a very simple instance: in an out-of-the-way village or valley, +where there was not enough business to pay a carrier, the Government +or local authority might find that the most economical and +sensible plan was to pay a local farmer or shopkeeper or innkeeper +a contribution towards the cost of keeping a motor lorry +on condition that he undertook the carrying for the district.</p> + +<p>In big business, as we have seen, this process has actually begun. +When Trade Unionism forced up the wages of the coal miners to +a point at which the worst coal mines could not afford to continue +working, the owners, though devout opponents of Socialism, demanded +and obtained from a Conservative Government a subsidy +of £10,000,000 to enable them to make both ends meet. But +it was too ridiculous to tax the general public to keep a few bad +mines going, and incidentally to keep up the monstrous prices +charged for coal, when the mines as a whole were perfectly well +able to pay a decent living wage, which was all the Trade Unions +asked for. The subsidy was stopped; and a terrific lock-out ensued.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_388">[Pg 388]</span> +All this could have been prevented by nationalizing the +coal mines and thus making it possible to keep up wages and reduce +the price of coals to the public simultaneously. However, +that is not our point at present. What comes in here is that the +capitalists themselves have established the Socialistic practice of +subsidizing private businesses when they do not yield sufficient +profit to support those engaged in them, though they are too +useful to be dispensed with. The novelty, by the way, is only in +subsidizing common industries. Scientific research, education, +religion, popular access to rare books and pictures, exploration, +carriage of mails oversea, and the like are partly dependent on +Government grants, which are subsidies under another name.</p> + +<p>What is more, capitalists are now openly demanding subsidies +to enable them to start their private enterprises. The aeroplane +lines, for instance, boldly took it as a matter of course that the +Government should help them, just as it had helped the dye industry +during the war (and been sorry for it afterwards). I draw +your attention specially to this new capitalistic method because by +it you are not only invited to throw over the Capitalist principle +of trusting to unaided competitive private enterprise for the +maintenance of our industries, but taxed to take all the risks of it +whilst the capitalists take all the profits and keep prices as high as +possible against you, thus fleecing you both ways. They cannot +consistently object (though they do object) when workmen ask +the Government to guarantee them a living wage as well as guaranteeing +profits and keeping up prices for their employers.</p> + +<p>When Socialism is the order of the day these capitalistic exploitations +of the taxpayer will have provided plenty of precedents +for subsidizing experimental private ventures in new industries +or inventions and new methods, or, as in the case of the +village carrier, making it worth somebody’s while to undertake +some necessary service that is not for the moment worth nationalizing. +In fact this will be the most interesting part of Socialism +to clever business people. Direct and complete nationalizations +will be confined mostly to well established routine services.</p> + +<p>There are doctrinaire Socialists who will be shocked at the suggestion +that a Socialist Government should not only tolerate +private enterprise, but actually finance it. But the business of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_389">[Pg 389]</span> +Socialist rulers is not to suppress private enterprise as such, but +to attain and maintain equality of income. The substitution of +public for private enterprise is only one of several means to that +end; and if in any particular instance the end can be best served +for the moment by private enterprise, a Socialist Government +will tolerate private enterprise, or subsidize private enterprise, or +even initiate private enterprise. Indeed Socialism will be more +elastic and tolerant than Capitalism, which would leave any district +without a carrier if no private carrier could make it pay.</p> + +<p>Note, however, that when a private experiment in business has +been financed by the State, and has been successful in establishing +some new industry or method or invention as part of the +routine of national production and service, it will then be nationalized, +leaving private enterprise to return to its proper business +of making fresh experiments and discovering new services, instead +of, as at present, wallowing in the profits of industries which +are no longer experimental. For example, it has for many years +past been silly to leave railways in the hands of private companies +instead of nationalizing them, especially as the most hidebound +bureaucrat could not have been more obsoletely reactionary, uninventive, +and obstructive than some of our most pretentious +railway chairmen have been. Everything is known about railway +locomotion that need be known for nationalization purposes. But +the flying services are still experimenting, and may be treated as +State-aided private enterprises until their practice becomes as +well established and uniform as railway practice.</p> + +<p>Unfortunately this is so little understood that the capitalists, +through their agents the employers and financiers, are now persuading +our Conservative governments into financing them at +the taxpayers’ expense without retaining the taxpayers’ interest +in the venture. For instance, the £10,000,000 subsidy to the +coalowners should clearly have been given by way of mortgage +on the mines. For every £100 granted to private enterprise the +Government should demand a share certificate. Otherwise, if and +when it subsequently nationalizes the enterprise, it will be asked +to compensate the proprietors for the confiscation of its own +capital; and though this, as we have seen in our study of compensation, +does not really matter, it does matter very seriously that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_390">[Pg 390]</span> +the State should not have at least a shareholder’s control. To +make private adventurers an unconditional present of public +money is to loot the Treasury and plunder the taxpayer.</p> + +<p>So, you see, the difference between Capitalist and Socialist governments +is not as to whether nationalization should be tolerated; +for neither could get on for a day without it: the difference is as to +how far it should be carried and how fast pushed. Capitalist governments +regard nationalization and municipalization as evils to +be confined to commercially unprofitable works; so as to leave +everything profitable to the profiteers. When they acquire land +for some temporary public purpose, they sell it to a private person +when they have done with it, and use the price to reduce the income +tax. Thereby a piece of land which was national property +becomes private property; and the unearned incomes of the income +taxpayers are increased by the relief from taxation. Socialist +governments, on the other hand, push the purchase of land for the +nation at the expense of the capitalists as hard and as fast as they +can, and oppose its resale to private individuals fiercely. But they +are often held back and even thrown back, just as the Russian +Soviet was, by the inexorable necessity for keeping land and capital +in constant and energetic use. If the Government takes an +acre of fertile land or a ton of spare subsistence (capital) that it +is not prepared instantly to cultivate or feed productive labor +with, then, whether it likes or not, it must sell it back again into +private hands and thus retrace the step towards Socialism which +it took without being sufficiently prepared for it. During the war, +when private enterprise broke down hopelessly, and caused an +appalling slaughter of our young soldiers in Flanders by leaving +the army without shells, the munitions had to be made in national +factories. When the war was over, the Capitalist Government of +1918 sold off these factories as fast as it possibly could for an old +song, in spite of the protests of the Labor Party. Some of the +factories were unsaleable, either because they were in such out-of-the-way +places (lest they should be bombarded) that private +enterprise thought it could do better elsewhere, or because private +enterprise was so wretchedly unenterprising. Yet when a +Labor Government took office it, too, had to try to sell these remaining +war factories because it could not organize enough new<span class="pagenum" id="Page_391">[Pg 391]</span> +public enterprises to employ them for peace purposes.</p> + +<p>This was another object-lesson in the impossibility of taking +over land from the landlords and capital from the capitalists +merely because doing so is Socialistic, without being ready to +employ it productively. If you do, you will have to give it back +again, as the Moscow Soviet had. You must take it only when you +have some immediate use for it, and are ready to start on the job +next morning. If a Capitalist Government were forced by a wave +of successful Socialist propaganda to confiscate more property +than it could administer, it might quite easily be forced to reissue +it (not at all unwillingly, and with triumphant cries of “I told +you so”) to private employers on much worse terms for the nation +than those on which it is held at present.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c78">78</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE?</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HEN as to the rate at which the change can take place. If +it be put off too long, or brought about too slowly, there +may be a violent revolution which may produce a dismal +equality by ruining everybody who is not murdered. But equality +produced in that way does not last. Only in a settled and highly +civilized society with a strong Government and an elaborate code +of laws can equality of income be attained or maintained. Now +a strong Government is not one with overwhelming fighting +forces in its pay: that is rather the mark of a panicky Government. +It is one that commands the moral approval of an overwhelming +majority of the people. To put it more particularly, it is one in +which the police and the other executive officers of the Government +can always count on the sympathy and, when they need it, +the co-operation of the citizens. A morally shocking Government +cannot last, and cannot carry out such changes as the change +from our present system to Socialism, which are matters of long +business arrangements and extensions of the Civil Service. They +must be made thoughtfully, bit by bit; and they must be popular +enough to establish themselves too solidly for changes of Government +to shake them, like our postal system or our Communism in +roads, bridges, police, drainage, and highway lighting.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_392">[Pg 392]</span></p> + +<p>It is a great pity that the change cannot be made more quickly; +but we must remember that when Moses delivered the Israelites +from their bondage in Egypt, he found them so unfitted for freedom, +that he had to keep them wandering round the desert for +forty years, until those who had been in bondage in Egypt were +mostly dead. The trouble was not the distance from Egypt to the +Promised Land, which was easily walkable in forty weeks, but +the change of condition, and habit, and mind, and the reluctance +of those who had been safe and well treated as slaves to face +danger and hardship as free adventurers. We should have the +same trouble if we attempted to impose Socialism all in a lump on +people not brought up to it. They would wreck it because they +could not understand it nor work its institutions; and some of +them would just hate it. The truth is, we are at present wandering +in the desert between the old Commercialism and the new Socialism. +Our industries and our characters and our laws and our +religions are partly commercialized, partly nationalized, partly +municipalized, partly communized; and the completion of the +change will take place like the beginning of it: that is, without +the unintelligent woman knowing what is happening, or +noticing anything except that some ways of life are getting harder +and some easier, with the corresponding exclamations about not +knowing what the world is coming to, or that things are much +better than they used to be. Mark Twain said “It is never too late +to mend: there is no hurry”; and those who dread the change may +comfort themselves by the assurance that there is more danger +of its coming too slowly than too quickly, even though the +more sloth the more suffering. It is well that we who are hopelessly +unfitted for Socialism by our bringing-up will not live for +ever. If only it were possible for us to cease corrupting our children +our political superstitions and prejudices would die with us; +and the next generation might bring down the walls of Jericho. +Fortunately, the advantages to be gained by Socialism for the +proletariat, and the fact that proletarian parents are a huge majority +of the electorate, may be depended on to bias moral education +more and more in favor of the movement towards Socialism.</p> + +<p>I purposely avoid anticipating any moral pressure of public +opinion against economic selfishness. No doubt that will become<span class="pagenum" id="Page_393">[Pg 393]</span> +part of the national conscience under Socialism, just as under +Capitalism children are educated to regard success in life as +meaning more money than anyone else and no work to do for it. +But I know how hard it is for you to believe that public opinion +could change so completely. You may have observed that at +present, although people do not always choose the occupation at +which they can make the most money, and indeed will give up +lucrative jobs to starve at more congenial ones, yet, when they +have chosen their job, they will take as much as they can get for +it; and the more they can get the better they are thought of. So I +have assumed that they will continue to do so as far as they are +allowed (few of them have any real liberty of this kind now), +though I can quite conceive that in a Socialist future any attempt +to obtain an economic advantage over one’s neighbors, as distinguished +from an economic advantage for the whole community, +might come to be considered such exceedingly bad form that +nobody could make it without losing her place in society just as a +detected card-sharper does at present.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c79">79</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SOCIALISM AND LIBERTY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HE dread of Socialism by nervous people who do not understand +it, on the ground that there would be too much +law under it, and that every act of our lives would be regulated +by the police, is more plausible than the terrors of the ignorant +people who think it would mean the end of all law, because +under Capitalism we have been forced to impose restrictions +that in a socialized nation would have no sense, in order to save +the proletariat from extermination, or at least from extremities +that would have provoked it to rebellion. Here is a little example. +A friend of mine who employed some girls in an artistic business +in which there was not competition enough to compel him to do +his worst in the way of sweating them, took a nice old riverside +house, and decorated it very prettily with Morris wall-papers, +furnishing it in such a way that the girls could have their tea comfortably +in their workrooms, which he made as homelike as possible. +All went well until one day a gentleman walked in and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_394">[Pg 394]</span> +announced himself to my friend as the factory inspector. He +looked round him, evidently much puzzled, and asked where the +women worked. “Here” replied my friend, with justifiable pride, +confident that the inspector had never seen anything so creditable +in the way of a factory before. But what the inspector said +was “Where is the copy of the factory regulations which you are +obliged by law to post up on your walls in full view of your employees?” +“Surely you dont expect me to stick up a beastly ugly +thing like that in a room furnished like a drawing room” said my +friend. “Why, that paper on the wall is a Morris paper: I cant +disfigure it by pasting up a big placard on it.” “You are liable +to severe penalties” replied the inspector “for having not only +omitted to post the regulations, but for putting paper on your +walls instead of having them limewashed at the intervals prescribed +by law.” “But hang it all!” my friend remonstrated, “I +want to make the place homely and beautiful. You forget that the +girls are not always working. They take their tea here.” “For +allowing your employees to take their meals in the room where +they work you have incurred an additional penalty” said the inspector. +“It is a gross breach of the Factory Acts.” And he walked +out, leaving my friend an abashed criminal caught redhanded.</p> + +<p>As it happened, the inspector was a man of sense. He did not +return; the penalties were not exacted; the Morris wall-papers remained; +and the illicit teas continued; but the incident illustrates +the extent to which individual liberty has been cut down under +Capitalism for good as well as for evil. Where women are concerned +it is assumed that they must be protected to a degree that +is unnecessary for men (as if men were any more free in a factory +than women); consequently the regulations are so much stricter +that women are often kept out of employments to which men are +welcomed. Besides the factory inspector there are the Commissioners +of Inland Revenue inquiring into your income and making +you disgorge a lot of it, the school attendance visitors taking +possession of your children, the local government inspectors +making you build and drain your house not as you please but as +they order, the Poor Law officers, the unemployment insurance +officers, the vaccination officers, and others whom I cannot think +of just at present. And the tendency is to have more and more of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_395">[Pg 395]</span> +them as we become less tolerant of the abuses of our capitalist +system. But if you study these interferences with our liberties +closely you will find that in practice they are virtually suspended +in the case of people well enough off to be able to take care of themselves: +for instance, the school attendance officer never calls at +houses valued above a certain figure, though the education of the +children in them is often disgracefully neglected or mishandled. +Poor Law officers would not exist if there were no poor, nor unemployment +insurance officers if we all got incomes whether we +were employed or not. If nobody could make profits by sweating, +nor compel us to work in uncomfortable, unsafe, insanitary factories +and workshops, a great deal of our factory regulations +would become not only superfluous but unbearably obstructive.</p> + +<p>Then consider the police: the friends of the honest woman and +the enemies and hunters of thieves, tramps, swindlers, rioters, +confidence tricksters, drunkards, and prostitutes. The police +officer, like the soldier who stands behind him, is mainly occupied +today in enforcing the legalized robbery of the poor which takes +place whenever the wealth produced by the labor of a productive +worker is transferred as rent or interest to the pockets of an idler +or an idler’s parasite. They are even given powers to arrest us for +“sleeping out”, which means sleeping in the open air without +paying a landlord for permission to do so. Get rid of this part of +their duties, and at the same time of the poverty which it enforces, +with the mass of corruption, thieving, rioting, swindling, and +prostitution which poverty produces as surely as insanitary squalor +produces smallpox and typhus and you get rid of the least +agreeable part of our present police activity, with all that it involves +in prisons, criminal courts, and jury duties.</p> + +<p>By getting rid of poverty we shall get rid of the unhappiness and +worry which it causes. To defend themselves against this, women, +like men, resort to artificial happiness, just as they resort to artificial +insensibility when they have to undergo a painful operation. +Alcohol produces artificial happiness, artificial courage, artificial +gaiety, artificial self-satisfaction, thus making life bearable for +millions who would otherwise be unable to endure their condition. +To them alcohol is a blessing. Unfortunately, as it acts by +destroying conscience, self-control, and the normal functioning<span class="pagenum" id="Page_396">[Pg 396]</span> +of the body, it produces crime, disease, and degradation on such +a scale that its manufacture and sale are at present prohibited +by law throughout the United States of America, and there is a +strong movement to introduce the same prohibition here.</p> + +<p>The ferocity of the resistance to this attempt to abolish artificial +happiness shows how indispensable it has become under +Capitalism. A famous American Prohibitionist was mobbed by +medical students in broad daylight in the streets of London, and +barely escaped with the loss of one eye, and his back all but +broken. If he had been equally famous for anything else, the +United States Government would have insisted on the most +ample reparation, apology, and condign punishment of his assailants; +and if this had been withheld, or even grudged, American +hotheads would have clamored for war. But for the enemy of the +anæsthetic that makes the misery of the poor and the idleness of +the rich tolerable, turning it into a fuddled dream of enjoyment, +neither his own country nor the public conscience of ours could +be moved even to the extent of a mild censure on the police. It +was evident that had he been torn limb from limb the popular +verdict would have been that it served him jolly well right.</p> + +<p>Alcohol, however, is a very mild drug compared with the most +effective modern happiness producers. These give you no mere +sodden self-satisfaction and self-conceit: they give you ecstasy. It +is followed by hideous wretchedness; but then you can cure that +by taking more and more of the drug until you become a living +horror to all about you, after which you become a dead one, to +their great relief. As to these drugs, not even a mob of medical +students, expressly educated to make their living by trading in +artificial health and happiness, dares protest against strenuous +prohibition, provided they may still prescribe the drug; nevertheless +the demand is so great in the classes who have too much +money and too little work that smuggling, which is easy and very +profitable, goes on in spite of the heaviest penalties. Our efforts +to suppress this trade in artificial happiness has already landed us +in such interferences with personal liberty that we are not allowed +to purchase many useful drugs for entirely innocent purposes +unless we first pay (not to say bribe) a doctor to prescribe it.</p> + +<p>Still, prohibition of the fiercer drugs has the support of public<span class="pagenum" id="Page_397">[Pg 397]</span> +opinion. It is the prohibition of alcohol that rouses such opposition +that the strongest governments shrink from it in spite of +overwhelming evidence of the increase in material well-being +produced by it wherever it has been risked. You prove to people +that as teetotallers they will dwell in their own houses instead of +in a frowsy tenement, besides keeping their own motor car, having +a bank account, and living ten years longer. They angrily +deny it; but when you crush their denials by unquestionable +American statistics they tell you flatly that they had rather be +happy for thirty years in a tenement without a car or a penny to +put in the bank than be unhappy for forty years with all these +things. You find a wife distracted because her husband drinks +and is ruining her and her children; yet when you induce him to +take the pledge, you find presently that she has tempted him to +drink again because he is so morose when he is sober that she +cannot endure living with him. And to make his drunkenness +bearable she takes to drink herself, and lives happily in shameless +degradation with him until they both drink themselves dead.</p> + +<p>Besides, the vast majority of modern drinkers do not feel any +the worse for it, because they do not miss the extra efficiency they +would enjoy on the water waggon. Very few people are obliged +by their occupations to work up to the extreme limit of their +powers. Who cares whether a lady gardener or a bookkeeper or +a typist or a shop assistant is a teetotaller or not, provided she +always stops well short of being noticeably drunk? It is to the +motorist or the aeroplane pilot that a single glass of any intoxicant +may make the difference between life and death. What would be +sobriety for a billiard marker would be ruinous drunkenness for +a professional billiard player. The glass of stimulant that enlivens +a routine job is often dropped because when the routineer plays +golf “to keep herself fit” she finds that it spoils her putting. Thus +you find that you can sometimes make a worker give up alcohol +partly or wholly by giving her more leisure. She finds that a +woman who is sober enough to do her work as well as it need be +done is not sober enough to play as well as she would like to do it. +The moment people are in a position to develop their fitness, as +they call it, to the utmost, whether at work or at play, they begin +to grudge the sacrifice of the last inch of efficiency which alcohol<span class="pagenum" id="Page_398">[Pg 398]</span> +knocks off, and which in all really fine work makes the difference +between first rate and second rate. If this book owed any of its +quality to alcohol or to any other drug, it might amuse you more; +but it would be enormously less conscientious intellectually, and +therefore much more dangerous to your mind.</p> + +<p>If you put all this together you will see that any social change +which abolishes poverty and increases the leisure of routine +workers will destroy the need for artificial happiness, and increase +the opportunities for the sort of activity that makes people very +jealous of reducing their fitness by stimulants. Even now we +admit that the champion athlete must not drink whilst training; +and the nearer we get to a world in which everyone is in training +all the time the nearer we shall get to general teetotalism, and +to the possibility of discarding all those restrictions on personal +liberty which the prevalent dearth of happiness and consequent +resort to pernicious artificial substitutes now force us to impose.</p> + +<p>As to such serious personal outrages as compulsory vaccination +and the monstrous series of dangerous inoculations which +are forced on soldiers, and at some frontiers on immigrants, they +are only desperate attempts to stave off the consequences of bad +sanitation and overcrowding by infecting people with disease +when they are well and strong in the hope of developing their +natural resistance to it by exercise sufficiently to prevent them +from catching it when they are ailing and weak. The poverty of +our doctors forces them to support such practices in the teeth of +all experience and disinterested science; but if we get rid of poor +doctors and overcrowded and insanitary dwellings we get rid of +the diseases which terrify us into these grotesque witch rituals; +and no woman will be forced to expose her infant to the risk of a +horrible, lingering, hideously disfiguring death from generalized +vaccinia lest it should catch confluent smallpox, which, by the +way, is, on a choice between the two evils, much to be preferred. +Dread of epidemics: that is, of disease and premature death, has +created a pseudo-scientific tyranny just as the dread of hell created +a priestly tyranny in the ages of faith. Florence Nightingale, a +sensible woman whom the doctors could neither humbug nor +bully, told them that what was wrong with our soldiers was dirt, +bad food, and foul water: in short, the conditions produced by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_399">[Pg 399]</span> +war in the field and poverty in the slum. When we get rid of +poverty the doctors will no longer be able to frighten us into imposing +on ourselves by law pathogenic inoculations which, under +healthy conditions, kill more people than the diseases against +which they pretend to protect them. And when we get rid of Commercialism, +and vaccines no longer make dividends for capitalists, +the fairy tales by which they are advertized will drop out of the +papers, and be replaced, let us hope, by disinterested attempts to +ascertain and publish the scientific truth about them, which, by +the way, promises to be much more hopeful and interesting.</p> + +<p>As to the mass of oppressive and unjust laws that protect property +at the expense of humanity, and enable proprietors to drive +whole populations off the land because sheep or deer are more +profitable, we have said enough about them already. Naturally +we shall get rid of them when we get rid of private property.</p> + +<p>Now, however, I must come to one respect in which official interference +with personal liberty would be carried under Socialism +to lengths undreamed of at present. We may be as idle as we +please if only we have money in our pockets; and the more we +look as if we had never done a day’s work in our lives and never +intend to, the more we are respected by every official we come in +contact with, and the more we are envied, courted, and deferred +to by everybody. If we enter a village school the children all rise +and stand respectfully to receive us, whereas the entrance of a +plumber or carpenter leaves them unmoved. The mother who +secures a rich idler as a husband for her daughter is proud of it: +the father who makes a million uses it to make rich idlers of his +children. That work is a curse is part of our religion: that it is a +disgrace is the first article in our social code. To carry a parcel +through the streets is not only a trouble, but a derogation from +one’s rank. Where there are blacks to carry them, as in South +Africa, it is virtually impossible for a white to be seen doing such +a thing. In London we condemn these colonial extremes of snobbery; +but how many ladies could we persuade to carry a jug of +milk down Bond Street on a May afternoon, even for a bet?</p> + +<p>Now it is not likely, human laziness being what it is, that under +Socialism anyone will carry a parcel or a jug if she can induce +somebody else (her husband, say) to carry it for her. But nobody<span class="pagenum" id="Page_400">[Pg 400]</span> +will think it disgraceful to carry a parcel because carrying a parcel +is work. The idler will be treated not only as a rogue and a vagabond, +but as an embezzler of the national funds, the meanest sort +of thief. The police will not have much trouble in detecting such +offenders. They will be denounced by everybody, because there +will be a very marked jealousy of slackers who take their share +without “doing their bit”. The real lady will be the woman who +does more than her bit, and thereby leaves her country richer +than she found it. Today nobody knows what a real lady is; but +the dignity is assumed most confidently by the women who ostentatiously +take as much and give as nearly nothing as they can.</p> + +<p>The snobbery that exists at present among workers will also +disappear. Our ridiculous social distinctions between manual +labor and brain work, between wholesale business and retail business, +are really class distinctions. If a doctor considers it beneath +his dignity to carry a scuttle of coals from one room to another, +but is proud of his skill in performing some unpleasantly messy +operation, it is clearly not because the one is any more or less +manual than the other, but solely because surgical operations are +associated with descent through younger sons from the propertied +class, and carrying coals with proletarian descent. If the +petty ironmonger’s daughter is not considered eligible for marriage +with the ironmaster’s son, it is not because selling steel by +the ounce and selling it by the ton are attributes of two different +species, but because petty ironmongers have usually been poor +and ironmasters rich. When there are no rich and no poor, and +descent from the proprietary class will be described as “criminal +antecedents”, people will turn their hands to anything, and +indeed rebel against any division of labor that deprives them +of physical exercise. My own excessively sedentary occupation +makes me long to be a half-time navvy. I find myself begging my +gardener, who is a glutton for work, to leave me a few rough jobs +to do when I have written myself to a standstill; for I cannot go +out and take a hand with the navvies, because I should be taking +the bread out of a poor man’s mouth; nor should we be very comfortable +company for oneanother with our different habits and +speech and bringing-up, all produced by differences in our +parents’ incomes and class. But with all these obstacles swept<span class="pagenum" id="Page_401">[Pg 401]</span> +away by Socialism I could lend a hand at any job within my +strength and skill, and help my mates instead of hurting them, +besides being as good company for them as I am now for professional +persons or rich folk. Even as it is a good deal of haymaking +is done for fun; and I am persuaded (having some imagination, +thank Heaven!) that under Socialism open air workers +would have plenty of voluntary help, female as well as male, without +the trouble of whistling for it. Laws might have to be made +to deal with officiousness. Everything would make for activity +and against idleness: indeed it would probably be much harder to +be an idler than it is now to be a pickpocket. Anyhow, as idleness +would be not only a criminal offence, but unladylike and ungentlemanly +in the lowest degree, nobody would resent the laws +against it as infringements of natural liberty.</p> + +<p>Lest anyone should at this point try to muddle you with the inveterate +delusion that because capital can increase wealth people +can live on capital without working, let me go back just for a +moment to the way in which capital becomes productive.</p> + +<p>Let us take those cases in which capital is used, not for destructive +purposes, as in war, but for increasing production: that is, +saving time and trouble in future work. When all the merchandise +in a country has to be brought from the makers to the users on +packhorses or carts over bad roads the cost in time and trouble +and labor of man and beast is so great that most things have to be +made and consumed on the spot. There may be a famine in one +village and a glut in another a hundred miles off because of the +difficulty of sending food from one to the other. Now if there is +enough spare subsistence (capital) to support gangs of navvies +and engineers and other workers whilst they cover the country +with railways, canals, and metalled roads, and build engines and +trains, barges and motor cars to travel on them, to say nothing +of aeroplanes, then all sorts of goods can be sent long distances +quickly and cheaply; so that the village which formerly could not +get a cartload of bread and a few cans of milk from a hundred +miles off to save its life is able to buy quite cheaply grain grown in +Russia or America and domestic articles made in Germany or +Japan. The spare subsistence will be entirely consumed in the +operation: there will be no more left of it than of the capital lent<span class="pagenum" id="Page_402">[Pg 402]</span> +for the war; but it will leave behind it the roadways and waterways +and machinery by which labor can do a great deal more in a +given time than it could without them. The destruction of these +aids to labor would be a very different matter from our annual +confiscations of the National Debt by taxation. It would leave us +much poorer and less civilized: in fact most of us would starve, +because big modern populations cannot support themselves without +elaborate machinery and railways and so forth.</p> + +<p>Still, roadways and machines can produce nothing by themselves. +They can only assist labor. And they have to be continually +repaired and renewed by labor. A country crammed with +factories and machines, traversed in all directions by roadways, +tramways and railways, dotted with aerodromes and hangars and +garages, each crowded with aeroplanes and airships and motor +cars, would produce absolutely nothing at all except ruin and rust +and decay if the inhabitants ceased to work. We should starve +in the midst of all the triumphs of civilization because we could +not breakfast on the clay of the railway embankments, lunch on +boiled aeroplanes, and dine on toasted steam-hammers. Nature +inexorably denies to us the possibility of living without labor or +of hoarding its most vital products. We may be helped by past +labor; but we must live by present labor. By telling off one set of +workers to produce more than they consume, and telling off another +set to live on the surplus while the first set makes roads and +machines, we may make our labor much more productive, and +take out the gain either in shorter hours of work or bigger returns +from the same number of hours of work as before; but we cannot +stop working and sit down and look on while the roads and +machines make and fetch and carry for us without anyone lifting +a finger. We may reduce our working hours to two a day, or increase +our income tenfold, or even conceivably do both at once; +but by no magic on earth can any of us honestly become an idler. +When you see a person who does no productive or serviceable +work, you may conclude with absolute certainty that she or he is +spunging on the labor of other people. It may or may not be expedient +to allow certain persons this privilege for a time: sometimes +it is; and sometimes it is not. I have already described how +we offer at present, to anyone who can invent a labor-saving<span class="pagenum" id="Page_403">[Pg 403]</span> +machine, what is called a patent: that is, a right to take a share of +what the workers produce with the help of that machine for fourteen +years. When a man writes a book or a play, we give him, by +what is called copyright, the power to make everybody who reads +the book or sees the play performed pay him and his heirs something +during his lifetime and fifty years afterwards. This is our +way of encouraging people to invent machines and to write books +and plays instead of being content with the old handiwork, and +with the Bible and Shakespear; and as we do it with our eyes open +and with a definite purpose, and the privilege lasts no longer than +enough to accomplish its purpose, there is a good deal to be said +for it. But to allow the descendants of a man who invested a few +hundred pounds in the New River Water Company in the reign +of James I to go on for ever and ever living in idleness on the +incessant daily labor of the London ratepayers is senseless and +mischievous. If they actually did the daily work of supplying +London with water, they might reasonably claim either to work +for less time or receive more for their work than a water-carrier in +Elizabeth’s time; but for doing no work at all they have not a +shadow of excuse. To consider Socialism a tyranny because it will +compel everyone to share the daily work of the world is to confess +to the brain of an idiot and the instinct of a tramp.</p> + +<p>Speaking generally, it is a mistake to suppose that the absence +of law means the absence of tyranny. Take, for example, the tyranny +of fashion. The only law concerned in this is the law that we +must all wear something in the presence of other people. It does +not prescribe what a woman shall wear: it only says that in public +she shall be a draped figure and not a nude one. But does this +mean that a woman can wear what she likes? Legally she can; but +socially her slavery is more complete than any sumptuary law +could make it. If she is a waitress or a parlormaid there is no question +about it: she must wear a uniform or lose her employment +and starve. If she is a duchess she must dress in the fashion or be +ridiculous. In the case of the duchess nothing worse than ridicule +is the penalty of unfashionable dressing. But any woman who has +to earn her living outside her own house finds that if she is to +keep her employment she must also keep up appearances, which +means that she must dress in the fashion, even when it is not at all<span class="pagenum" id="Page_404">[Pg 404]</span> +becoming to her, and her wardrobe contains serviceable dresses a +couple of years out of date. And the better her class of employment +the tighter her bonds. The ragpicker has the melancholy +privilege of being less particular about her working clothes than +the manageress of a hotel; but she would be very glad to exchange +that freedom for the obligation of the manageress to be always +well dressed. In fact the most enviable women in this respect are +nuns and policewomen, who, like gentlemen at evening parties +and military officers on parade, never have to think of what they +will wear, as it is all settled for them by regulation and custom.</p> + +<p>This dress question is only one familiar example of the extent to +which the private employment of today imposes regulations on +us which are quite outside the law, but which are none the less +enforced by private employers on pain of destitution. The husband +in public employment, the socialized husband, is much +freer than the unsocialized one in private employment. He may +travel third class, wearing a lounge suit and soft hat, living in the +suburbs, and spending his Sundays as he pleases, whilst the others +must travel first class, wear a frock coat and tall hat, live at a +fashionable address, and go to church regularly. Their wives have +to do as they do; and the single women who have escaped from +the limitations of the home into independent activity find just the +same difference between public work and private: in public employment +their livelihood is never at the mercy of a private irresponsible +person as it is in private. The lengths to which women +are sometimes forced to go to please their private employers are +much more revolting than, for instance, the petty dishonesties in +which clerks are forced to become accomplices.</p> + +<p>Then there are estate rules: that is to say, edicts drawn up by +private estate owners and imposed on their tenants without any +legal sanction. These often prohibit the building on the estate of +any place of worship except an Anglican church, or of any public +house. They refuse houses to practitioners of the many kinds +that are now not registered by the General Medical Council. In +fact they exercise a tyranny which would lead to a revolution if it +were attempted by the King, and which did actually provoke us +to cut off a king’s head in the seventeenth century. We have to +submit to these tyrannies because the people who can refuse us<span class="pagenum" id="Page_405">[Pg 405]</span> +employment or the use of land have powers of life and death over +us, and can therefore make us do what they like, law or no law. +Socialism would transfer this power of life and death from private +hands to the hands of the constitutional authorities, and regulate +it by public law. The result would be a great increase of independence, +self-respect, freedom from interference with our tastes and +ways of living, and, generally, all the liberty we really care about.</p> + +<p>Childish people, we saw, want to have all their lives regulated +for them, with occasional holiday outbursts of naughtiness to relieve +the monotony; and we admitted that the ablebodied ones +make good soldiers and steady conventional employees. When +they are left to themselves they make laws of fashions, customs, +points of etiquette, and “what other people will say”, hardly daring +to call their souls their own, though they may be rich enough +to do as they please. Money as a means of freedom is thrown away +on these people. It is funny to hear them declaring, as they often +do, that Socialism would be unendurable because it would dictate +to them what they should eat and drink and wear, leaving them +no choice in the matter, when they are cowering under a social +tyranny which regulates their meals, their clothes, their hours, +their religion and politics, so ruthlessly that they dare no more +walk down a fashionable street in an unfashionable hat, which +there is no law to prevent them doing, than to walk down it naked, +which would be stopped by the police. They regard with dread +and abhorrence the emancipated spirits who, within the limits of +legality and cleanliness and convenience, do not care what they +wear, and boldly spend their free time as their fancy dictates.</p> + +<p>But do not undervalue the sheepish wisdom of the conventional. +Nobody can live in society without conventions. The reason why +sensible people are as conventional as they can bear to be is that +conventionality saves so much time and thought and trouble and +social friction of one sort or another that it leaves them much +more leisure for freedom than unconventionality does. Believe +me, unless you intend to devote your life to preaching unconventionality, +and thus make it your profession, the more conventional +you are, short of being silly or slavish or miserable, the +easier life will be for you. Even as a professional reformer you had +better be content to preach one form of unconventionality at a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_406">[Pg 406]</span> +time. For instance, if you rebel against high-heeled shoes, take +care to do it in a very smart hat.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c80">80</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SOCIALISM AND MARRIAGE</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">W</span>HEN promising new liberties, Socialists are apt to +forget that people object even more strongly to new +liberties than to new laws. If a woman has been +accustomed to go in chains all her life and to see other women +doing the same, a proposal to take her chains off will horrify +her. She will feel naked without them, and clamor to have any +impudent hussy who does not feel about them exactly as she does +taken up by the police. In China the Manchu ladies felt that way +about their crippled feet. It is easier to put chains on people than +to take them off if the chains look respectable.</p> + +<p>In Russia marriage under the Tsars was an unbreakable chain. +There was no divorce; but on the other hand there was, as with +us, a widespread practice of illicit polygamy. A woman could live +with a man without marrying him. A man could live with a +woman without marrying her. In fact each might have several +partners. In Russia under the Communist Soviet this state of +things has been reversed. If a married couple cannot agree, they +can obtain a divorce without having to pretend to disgrace themselves +as in Protestant England. That shocks many English +ladies, married or unmarried, who take the Book of Common +Prayer literally. But the Soviet does not tolerate illicit relations. +If a man lives with a woman as husband with wife he must marry +her, even if he has to divorce another wife to do it. The woman +has the right to the status of a wife, and must claim it. This seems +to many English gentlemen an unbearable tyranny: they regard +the Soviet legislators as monsters for interfering with male liberty +in this way; and they have plenty of female sympathizers.</p> + +<p>In countries and sects where polygamy is legal, the laws compelling +the husband to pay equal attention to all his wives are staggering +to a British husband, who is not now, as he was formerly, +legally obliged to pay any attention to his one wife, nor she to him.</p> + +<p>Now marriage institutions are not a part of Socialism. Marriage,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_407">[Pg 407]</span> +of which we speak as if it were one and the same thing all the +world over, differs so much from sect to sect and from country to +country that to a Roman Catholic or a citizen of the State of South +Carolina it means strict monogamy without the possibility of +divorce; whilst to our high caste fellow-subjects in India it means +unlimited polygamy, as it did to the Latter Day Saints of Salt +Lake City within my recollection. Between these extremes there +are many grades. There are marriages which nothing can break +except death or annulment by the Pope; and there are divorces +that can be ordered at a hotel like a bottle of champagne or a +motor car. There is English marriage, Scottish marriage, and +Irish marriage, all different. There is religious marriage and civil +marriage, civil marriage being a recent institution won from the +Churches after a fierce struggle, and still regarded as invalid and +sinful by many pious people. There is an established celibacy, the +negation of marriage, among nuns, priests, and certain Communist +sects. With all this Socialism has nothing directly to do. Equality +of income applies impartially to all the sects, all the States, and +all the communities, to monogamists, polygamists, and celibates, +to infants incapable of marriage and centenarians past it.</p> + +<p>Why, then, is it that there is a rooted belief that Socialism would +in some way alter marriage, if not abolish it? Why did quite +respectable English newspapers after the Russian revolution of +1917 gravely infer that the Soviet had not only nationalized land +and capital, but proceeded, as part of the logic of Socialism, to +nationalize women? No doubt the main explanation of that extravagance +is that the highly respectable newspapers in question +still regard women as property, nationalizable like any other property, +and were consequently unable to understand that this very +masculine view is inconceivable to a Communist. But the truth +under all such nonsense is that Socialism must have a tremendous +effect on marriage and the family. At present a married woman +is a female slave chained to a male one; and a girl is a prisoner in +the house and in the hands of her parents. When the personal +relation between the parties is affectionate, and their powers not +abused, the arrangement works well enough to be bearable by +people who have been brought up to regard it as a matter of +course. But when the parties are selfish, tyrannical, jealous, cruel,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_408">[Pg 408]</span> +envious, with different and antagonistic tastes and beliefs, incapable +of understanding oneanother: in short, antipathetic and +incompatible, it produces much untold human unhappiness.</p> + +<p>Why is this unhappiness endured when the door is not locked, +and the victims can walk into the street at any moment? Obviously +because starvation awaits them at the other side of the door. +Vows and inculcated duties may seem effective in keeping unhappy +wives and revolting daughters at home when they have no +alternative; but there must be an immense number of cases in +which wives and husbands, girls and boys, would walk out of the +house, like Nora Helmer in Ibsen’s famous play, if they could do +so without losing a single meal, a single night’s protection and +shelter, or the least loss of social standing in consequence.</p> + +<p>As Socialism would place them in this condition it would infallibly +break up unhappy marriages and families. This being +obviously desirable we need not pretend to deplore it. But we +must not expect more domestic dissolutions than are likely to +happen. No parent would tyrannize as some parents tyrannize +now if they knew that the result would be the prompt disappearance +of their children, unless indeed they disliked their children +enough to desire that result, in which case so much the better; +but the normal merely hasty parent would have to recover the +fugitives by apologies, promises of amendment, or bribes, and +keep them by more stringent self-control and less stringent parental +control. Husbands and wives, if they knew that their marriage +could only last on condition of its being made reasonably +happy for both of them, would have to behave far better to oneanother +than they ever seem to dream of doing now. There would +be such a prodigious improvement in domestic manners all round +that a fairly plausible case can be made out for expecting that far +fewer marriages and families will be broken up under Socialism +than at present. Still, there will be a difference, even though the +difference be greatly for the better. When once it becomes feasible +for a wife to leave her husband, not for a few days or weeks after a +tiff because they are for the moment tired of oneanother, but without +any intention of returning, there must be prompt and almost +automatic divorce, whether they like it or not. At present a deserted +wife or husband, by simply refusing to sue for divorce, can<span class="pagenum" id="Page_409">[Pg 409]</span> +in mere revenge or jealousy or on Church grounds, prevent the +deserter from marrying again. We should have to follow the good +example of Russia in refusing to tolerate such situations. Both +parties must be either married or unmarried. An intermediate +state in which each can say to the other “Well, if I cannot have +you nobody else shall” is clearly against public morality.</p> + +<p>It is on marriage that the secular State is likely to clash most +sensationally with the Churches, because the Churches claim +that marriage is a metaphysical business governed by an absolute +right and wrong which has been revealed to them by God, and +which the State must therefore enforce without regard to circumstances. +But to this the State will never assent, except in so far as +clerical notions happen to be working fairly well and to be shared +by the secular rulers. Marriage is for the State simply a licence to +two citizens to beget children. To say that the State must not +concern itself with the question of how many people the community +is to consist of, and, when a change is desired, at what +rate the number should be increased or reduced, is to treat the +nation as no sane person would dream of treating a ferryman. If +the ferryman’s boat will hold only ten passengers, and you tell +him that it has been revealed to you by God that he must take all +who want to cross over, even though they number a thousand, +the ferryman will not argue with you, he will refuse to take more +than ten, and will smite you with his oar if you attempt to detain +his boat and shove a couple more passengers into it. And, obviously, +the ten already aboard will help him for their own sakes.</p> + +<p>When Socialism does away with the artificial overpopulation +which Capitalism, as we have seen, produces by withdrawing +workers from productive employments to wasteful ones, the +State will be face to face at last with the genuine population +question: the question of how many people it is desirable to have +in the country. To get rid of the million or so for whom our capitalists +fail to find employment, the State now depends on a high +death-rate, especially for infants, on war, and on swarming like the +bees. Africa, America, and Australasia have taken millions of our +people from us in bee swarms. But in time all places comfortable +enough to tempt people to emigrate get filled up; and their inhabitants, +like the Americans and Australians today, close their<span class="pagenum" id="Page_410">[Pg 410]</span> +gates against further immigration. If we find our population still +increasing, we may have to discuss whether we should keep it +down, as we keep down the cat population, by putting the superfluous +babies into the bucket, which would be no wickeder than +the avoidable infant mortality and surgical abortion resorted +to at present. The alternative would be to make it a severely +punishable crime for married couples to have more than a prescribed +number of children. But punishing the parents would +not dispose of the unwanted children. The fiercest persecution +of the mothers of illegitimate children has not prevented illegitimate +children from being born, though it has made most of +them additionally undesirable by afflicting them with the vices +and infirmities of disgrace and poverty. Any State limiting the +number of children permitted to a family would be compelled not +only to tolerate contraception, but to inculcate it and instruct +women in its methods. And this would immediately bring it into +conflict with the Churches. Whether under such circumstances +the State would simply ignore the Churches or pass a law under +which their preachers could be prosecuted for sedition would +depend wholly on the gravity of the emergency, and not on the +principles of liberty, toleration, freedom of conscience, and so +forth which were so stirringly trumpeted in England in the +eighteenth century when the boot was on the other foot.</p> + +<p>In France at present the State is striving to increase the population. +It is thus in the position of the Israelites in the Promised +Land, and of Joseph Smith and his Mormons in the State of Illinois +in 1843, when only a rapid increase in their numbers could +rescue them from a condition of dangerous numerical inferiority +to their enemies. Joseph Smith did what Abraham did: he resorted +to polygamy. We, not being in any such peril ourselves, +have seen nothing in this but an opportunity for silly and indecent +jocularity; but there are not many political records more +moving than Brigham Young’s description of the horror with +which he received Joseph’s revelation that it was the will of God +that they should all take as many wives as possible. He had been +brought up to regard polygamy as a mortal sin, and did sincerely +so regard it. And yet he believed that Smith’s revelations were +from God. In his perplexity, he tells us, he found himself, when a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_411">[Pg 411]</span> +funeral passed in the street, envying the corpse (another mortal +sin); and there is not the slightest reason to doubt that he was perfectly +sincere. After all, it is not necessary for a married man to +have any moral or religious objection to polygamy to be horrified +at the prospect of having twenty additional wives “sealed” +to him. Yet Brigham Young got over his horror, and was married +more than thirty times. And the genuinely pious Mormon +women, whose prejudices were straiter than those of the men, +were as effectively and easily converted to polygamy as Brigham.</p> + +<p>Though this proves that western civilization is just as susceptible +to polygamy as eastern when the need arises, the French Government, +for very good reasons, has not ventured to propose it as +a remedy for underpopulation in France. The alternatives are +prizes and decorations for the parents of large families (families +of fifteen have their group portraits in the illustrated papers, and +are highly complimented on their patriotism), bounties, exemptions +from taxation, vigorous persecution of contraception as immoral, +facilities for divorce amounting to successive as distinguished +from simultaneous polygamy, all tending towards that +State endowment of parentage which seems likely to become a +matter of course in all countries, with, of course, encouragement +to desirable immigrants. To these measures no Church is likely +to object, unless indeed it holds that celibacy is a condition of +salvation, a doctrine which has never yet found enough practising +converts to threaten a modern nation with sterility. Compulsory +parentage is as possible as compulsory military service; but +just as the soldier who is compelled to serve must have his expenses +paid by the State, a woman compelled to become a mother +can hardly be expected to do so at her own expense.</p> + +<p>But the maintenance of monogamy must always have for its +basis a practical equality in numbers between men and women. +If a war reduced the male population by, say, 70 per cent, and +the female population by only one per cent, polygamy would +immediately be instituted, and parentage made compulsory, with +the hearty support of all the really popular Churches.</p> + +<p>Thus, it seems, the State, Capitalist or Socialist, will finally +settle what marriage is to be, no matter what the Churches say. A +Socialist State is more likely to interfere than a Capitalist one,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_412">[Pg 412]</span> +because Socialism will clear the population question from the +confusion into which Capitalism has thrown it. The State will +then, as I have said, be face to face with the real population question; +but nobody yet knows what the real population question +will be like, because nobody can now settle how many persons +per acre offer the highest possibilities of living. There is the Boer +ideal of living out of sight of your neighbors’ chimneys. There is +the Bass Rock ideal of crowding as many people on the earth as it +can support. There is the bungalow ideal and the monster hotel +ideal. Neither you nor I can form the least notion of how posterity +will decide between them when society is well organized enough +to make the problem practical and the issues clear.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c81">81</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SOCIALISM AND CHILDREN</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>N the case of young children we have gone far in our interference +with the old Roman rights of parents. For nine mortal +years the child is taken out of its parents’ hands for most of +the day, and thus made a State school child instead of a private +family child. The records of the Society for the Prevention of +Cruelty to Children are still sickening enough to shew how necessary +it is to protect children against their parents; but the bad +cases are scarce, and shew that it is now difficult for the worst +sort of parent to evade for long the school attendance officer, the +teacher, and the police. Unfortunately the proceedings lead to +nothing but punishment of the parents: when they come out of +prison the children are still in their hands. When we have beaten +the cat for cruelty we give it back its mouse. We have now, however, +taken a step in the right direction by passing an Act of +Parliament by which adoptive parents have all the rights of real +parents. You can now adopt a child with complete security +against the parents coming to claim the child back again whenever +it suits them. All their rights pass to you by the adoption. +Bad natural parents can be completely superseded by adoptive +ones: it remains only to make the operation compulsory where it +is imperative. Compulsory adoption is already an old established +institution in the case of our Poor Law Guardians. Oliver Twist<span class="pagenum" id="Page_413">[Pg 413]</span> +was a compulsory adopted child. His natural parents were replaced +by very unnatural ones. Mr Bumble is being happily +abolished; but there must still be somebody to adopt Oliver. +When equality of income makes an end of his social disadvantages +there will be no lack of childless volunteers.</p> + +<p>Our eyes are being opened more and more to the fact that in our +school system education is only the pretext under which parents +get rid of the trouble of their children by bundling them off into +a prison or child farm which is politely called a school. We also +know, or ought to know, that institutional treatment of children +is murderous for infants and bad for all children. Homeless infants +can be saved from that by adoption; but the elder children +are forcing us to face the problem of organizing child life as such, +giving children constitutional rights just as we have had to give +them to women, and ceasing to shirk that duty either by bundling +the children off to Bastilles called schools or by making the child +the property of its father (in the case of an illegitimate child, of its +mother) as we have ceased to shirk women’s rights by making +the woman the property of her husband. The beginnings of such +organization are already visible in the Girl Guides and the Boy +Scouts. But the limits to liberty which the State has to set and the +obligations which it has to impose on adults are as imperative for +children as for adults. The Girl Guide cannot be always guiding +nor the Boy Scout always scouting. They must qualify themselves +for adult citizenship by certain acquirements whether they like it +or not. That is our excuse for school: they must be educated.</p> + +<p>Education is a word that in our mouths covers a good many +things. At present we are only extricating ourselves slowly and, +as usual, reluctantly and ill humoredly, from our grossest stupidities +about it. One of them is that it means learning lessons, and +that learning lessons is for children, and ceases when they come +of age. I, being a septuagenarian, can assure you confidently that +we never cease learning to the extent of our capacity for learning +until our faculties fail us. As to what we have been taught in +school and college, I should say roughly that as it takes us all our +lives to find out the meaning of the small part of it that is true and +the error of the large part that is false, it is not surprising that +those who have been “educated” least know most. It is gravely<span class="pagenum" id="Page_414">[Pg 414]</span> +injurious both to children and adults to be forced to study subjects +for which they have no natural aptitude even when some +ulterior object which they have at heart gives them a fictitious +keenness to master it. Mental disablement caused in this way is +common in the modern examination-passing classes. Dickens’s +Mr Toots is not a mere figure of fun: he is an authentic instance +of a sort of imbecility that is dangerously prevalent in our public +school and university products. Toots is no joke.</p> + +<p>Even when a natural aptitude exists it may be overcome by the +repulsion created by coercive teaching. If a girl is unmusical, any +attempt to force her to learn to play Beethoven’s sonatas is torture +to herself and to her teachers, to say nothing of the agonies of her +audiences when her parents order her to display her accomplishment +to visitors. But unmusical girls are as exceptional as deaf +girls. The common case of a rooted loathing for music, and a +vindictive hope that Beethoven may be expiating a malevolent +life in eternal torment, is that of the normally musical girl who, +before she had ever heard a sonata or any other piece of music +played well enough to seem beautiful to her, has been set to practise +scales in a cold room, rapped over the knuckles when she +struck a wrong note, and had the Pathetic Sonata rapped and +scolded and bullied into her bar by bar until she could finger it +out without a mistake. That is still what school-taught music +means to many unfortunate young ladies whose parents desire +them to have accomplishments, and accordingly pay somebody +who has been handled in the same way to knock this particular +accomplishment into them. If these unhappy victims thought +that Socialism meant compulsory music they would die in the +last ditch fighting against it; and they would be right.</p> + +<p>If I were writing a book for men I should not speak of music: I +should speak of verses written in literary Latin (meaning a sort of +Latin that nobody ever spoke), of Greek, and of algebra. Many +an unhappy lad who would have voluntarily picked up enough +Latin and Greek to read Virgil, Horace, and Homer, or to whom +Descartes, Newton, and Einstein would be heroes such as Handel, +Mozart, Beethoven, and Wagner are to unspoilt musicians, +loathes every printed page except in a newspaper or detective story, +and shrinks from an algebraic symbol or a diagram of the parallelogram<span class="pagenum" id="Page_415">[Pg 415]</span> +of forces as a criminal from a prison. This is the result of +our educational mania. When Eton was founded, the idea was that +the boys should be roused at six in the morning and kept hard at +their Latin without a moment’s play until they went to bed. And +now that the tendency is to keep them hard at play instead, without +a moment for free work, their condition is hardly more promising. +Either way an intelligent woman, remembering her own +childhood, must stand aghast at the utter disregard of the children’s +ordinary human rights, and the classing of them partly +as animals to be tamed and broken in, for which, provided the +methods are not those of the trainer of performing animals, there +is something to be said, and partly as inanimate sacks into which +learning is to be poured <i>ad libitum</i>, for which there is nothing to +be said except what can be said for the water torture of the Inquisition, +in which the fluid was poured down the victims’ throats +until they were bloated to death. But there was some method in +this madness. I have already hinted to you what you must have +known very well, that children, unless they are forced into a quiet, +sedentary, silent, motionless, and totally unnatural association +with adults, are so troublesome at home that humane parents +who would submit to live in a bear-garden or a monkey-house +rather than be cruelly repressive, are only too glad to hand them +over to anyone who will profess to educate them, whilst the +desperate struggle of the genteel disendowed younger son and +unmarried daughter class to find some means of livelihood produces +a number of persons who are willing to make a profession +of child farming under the same highly plausible pretext.</p> + +<p>Socialism would abolish this class by providing its members +with less hateful and equally respectable employment. Nobody +who had not a genuine vocation for teaching would adopt teaching +as a profession. Sadists, female and male, who now get children +into their power so as to be able to torture them with impunity, +and child fanciers (who are sometimes the same people) +of the kind that now start amateur orphanages because they have +the same craze for children that some people have for horses and +dogs, although they often treat them abominably, would be +checkmated if the children had any refuge from them except the +homes from which they had been practically turned out, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_416">[Pg 416]</span> +from which they would be promptly returned to their tyrants +with the assurance that if they were punished it served them right +for being naughty. Within a few days of writing this I have read +as part of the day’s news of a case in which a mother summoned a +schoolmaster because he had first caned her boy for hiccuping, +which is not a voluntary action, and then, because the boy made +light of the punishment, fell on him in a fury and thrashed him +until he raised wheals on him that were visible eight days afterwards. +Magistrates are usually as lenient in dealing with these +assaults as with similar assaults by husbands on their wives (assaults +by wives are laughed out of court): indeed they usually +dismiss the case with a rebuke to the victim for being an unmanly +little coward and not taking his licking in good part; but this +time they admitted that the punishment, as they called it, was +too severe; and the schoolmaster had to pay the mother’s costs, +though nobody hinted at any unfitness on his part for the duties +he had assumed. And, in fairness, it did not follow that the man +was a savage or a Sadist, any more than it follows that married +people who commit furious assaults on one another have murderous +natural dispositions. The truth is that just as married life in +a one-room tenement is more than human nature can bear even +when there are no children to complicate it, life in the sort of +prison we call a school, where the teacher who hates her work is +shut in with a crowd of unwilling, hostile, restless children, sets +up a strain and hatred that explodes from time to time in onslaughts +with the cane, not only for hiccuping, but for talking, +whispering, looking out of the window (inattention), and even +moving. Modern psychological research, even in its rather grotesque +Freudian beginnings, is forcing us to recognize how serious +is the permanent harm that comes of this atmosphere of irritation +on the one side and suppression, terror, and reactionary +naughtiness on the other. Even those who do not study psychology +are beginning to notice that chaining dogs makes them +dangerous, and is a cruel practice. They will presently have misgivings +about chained children too, and begin to wonder whether +thrashing and muzzling them is the proper remedy.</p> + +<p>As a general result we find that what we call education is a +failure. The poor woman’s child is imprisoned for nine years<span class="pagenum" id="Page_417">[Pg 417]</span> +under pretext of teaching it to read, write, and speak its own +language: a year’s work at the outside. And at the end of the nine +years the prisoner can do none of these things presentably. In +1896, after twenty-six years of compulsory general education, the +secretary of the Union of Mathematical Instrument Makers told +me that most of his members signed with a mark. Rich male children +are kept in three successive prisons, the preparatory school, +the public school (meaning a very exclusive private school malversating +public endowments), and the university, the period of +imprisonment being from twelve to fourteen years, and the subjects +taught including classical languages and higher mathematics. +Rich female children, formerly imprisoned in the family +dungeon under a wardress called a governess, are now sent out +like their brothers. The result is a slightly greater facility in reading +and writing, the habits and speech of the rich idle classes, and +a moral and intellectual imbecility which leaves them politically +at the mercy of every bumptious adventurer and fluent charlatan +who has picked up their ways and escaped their education, and +morally on the level of medieval robber barons and early capitalist +buccaneers. When they are energetic and courageous, in +spite of their taming, they are public dangers: when they are mere +sheep, doing whatever their class expects them to do, they will +follow any enterprising bell-wether to the destruction of themselves +and the whole community. Fortunately humanity is so +recuperative that no system of suppression and perversion can +quite abort it; but as far as our standard lady’s and gentleman’s +education goes the very least that can be said against it is that +most of its victims would be better without it.</p> + +<p>It is, however, incidentally advantageous. The university student +who is determined not to study, gains from the communal +life of the place a social standing that is painfully lacking in the +people who have been brought up in a brick box in ill mannered +intercourse with two much older people and three or four younger +ones, all keeping what they call their company manners (meaning +an affectation which has no desirable quality except bare civility) +for the few similarly reared outsiders who are neither too poor to +be invited in nor too rich to condescend to enter the box. Nobody +can deny that these middle class families which cannot afford the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_418">[Pg 418]</span> +university for their sons, and must send them out as workers at +fifteen or so, appear utterly unpresentable vulgarians compared +to our university products. The woman from the brick box maintains +her social position by being offensive to the immense number +of people whom she considers her inferiors, reserving her +civility for the very few who are clinging to her own little ledge +on the social precipice; for inequality of income takes the broad, +safe, and fertile plain of human society and stands it on edge so +that everyone has to cling desperately to her foothold and kick +off as many others as she can. She would cringe to her superiors if +they could be persuaded to give her the chance, whereas at a university +she would have to meet hundreds of other young women +on equal terms, and to be at least commonly civil to everybody. It +is true that university manners are not the best manners, and that +there is plenty of foundation for the statement that Oxford and +Cambridge are hotbeds of exclusiveness, university snobs being +perhaps the most incorrigible of all snobs. For all that, university +snobbery is not so disabling as brick box snobbery. The university +woman can get on without friction or awkwardness with all +sorts of people, high or low, with whom the brick box woman +simply does not know how to associate. But the university curriculum +has nothing to do with this. On the contrary, it is the devoted +scholar who misses it, and the university butterfly, barely +squeezing through her examinations, who acquires it to perfection. +Also, it can now be acquired and greatly improved on by +young people who break loose from the brick box into the wider +social life of clubs and unofficial cultural associations of all kinds. +The manners of the garden city and the summer school are already +as far superior to the manners of the university college as +these are to the manners of the brick box. There is no word that +has more sinister and terrible connotations in our snobbish society +than the word promiscuity; but if you exclude its special +and absurd use to indicate an imaginary condition of sexual disorder +in which every petticoat and every coat and trousers fall +into oneanother’s embraces at sight, you will see that social promiscuity +is the secret of good manners, and that it is precisely +because the university is more promiscuous than the brick box, +and the Theosophical or Socialist summer school more promiscuous<span class="pagenum" id="Page_419">[Pg 419]</span> +than the college, that it is also the better mannered.</p> + +<p>Socialism involves complete social promiscuity. It has already +gone very far. When the great Duke of Wellington fell ill, he +said “Send for the apothecary”, just as he would have said “Send +for the barber”; and the apothecary no doubt “your Graced” him +in a very abject manner: indeed I can myself remember famous +old physicians, even titled ones, who took your fee exactly as a +butler used to take your tip. In the seventeenth century a nobleman +would sometimes admit an actor to an intimate friendship; +but when he wrote to him he began his letter, not “My dear So +and So”, but “To Betterton the player”. Nowadays a duke who +went on like that would be ridiculed as a Pooh Bah. Everybody +can now travel third class in England without being physically +disgusted by their fellow-travellers. I can remember when second +class carriages, now extinct, were middle class necessities.</p> + +<p>The same process that has levelled the social intercourse between +dukes and doctors or actors can level it between duchesses +and dairymaids, or, what seems far less credible, between doctors’ +wives and dairymaids. But whilst Socialism makes for this +sort of promiscuity it will also make for privacy and exclusiveness. +At present the difference between a dairymaid and any +decent sort of duchess is marked, not by a wounding difference +between the duchess’s address to the dairymaid and her address +to another duchess, but by a very marked difference between the +address of a dairymaid to the duchess and her address to another +dairymaid. The decent duchess’s civility is promiscuous; but her +intimate friendship and society is not. Civility is one thing, familiarity +quite another. The duchess’s grievance at present is that she +is obliged by her social and political position to admit to her house +and table a great many people whose tastes and intellectual interests +are so different from her own that they bore her dreadfully, +whilst her income cuts her off from familiar intercourse with +many poor people whose society would be delightful to her, but +who could not afford her expensive habits. Equality would bring +to the duchess the blessing of being able to choose her familiars +as far as they were willing to respond. She would no longer have +to be bored by men who could talk about nothing but fox hunting +or party politics when she wanted to talk about science or literature,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_420">[Pg 420]</span> +dressmaking or gardening, or, if her tastes were more curious, +the morbidities of psycho-analysis. Socialism, by steam-rollering +our class distinctions (really income distinctions) would +break us up into sets, cliques, and solitaries. The duchess would +play golf (if people could still find no more interesting employment +for their leisure) with any charwoman, and lunch with her +after; but the intimate circle of the duchess and the charwoman +would be more exclusive and highly selected than it can possibly +be now. Socialism thus offers the utmost attainable society and +the utmost attainable privacy. We should be at the same time +much less ceremonious in our public relations and much more +delicate about intruding on oneanother in our private ones.</p> + +<p>You may say, what has all this to do with education? Have we +not wandered pretty far from it? By no means: a great part of our +education comes from our social intercourse. We educate oneanother; +and we cannot do this if half of us consider the other half +not good enough to talk to. But enough of that side of the subject. +Let us leave the social qualifications which children, like +adults, pick up from their surroundings and from the company +they keep, and return to the acquirements which the State must +impose on them compulsorily, providing the teachers and schools +and apparatus; testing the success of the teaching; and giving +qualifying certificates to those who have passed the tests.</p> + +<p>It is now evident in all civilized States that there are certain +things which people must know in order to play their part as citizens. +There are technical things that must be learned, and intellectual +conceptions that must be understood. For instance, you +are not fit for life in a modern city unless you know the multiplication +table, and agree that you must not take the law into your +own hands. That much technical and liberal education is indispensable, +because a woman who could not pay fares and count +change, and who flew at people with whom she disagreed and +tried to kill them or scratch their eyes out, would be as incapable +of civilized life as a wild cat. In our huge cities reading is +necessary, as people have to proceed by written directions. In +a village or a small country town you can get along by accosting +the police officer, or the railway porter or station-master, or the +post-mistress, and asking them what to do and where to go; but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_421">[Pg 421]</span> +in London five minutes of that would bring business and locomotion +to a standstill: the police and railway officials, hard put to +it as it is answering the questions of foreigners and visitors from +the country, would be driven mad if they had to tell everybody +everything. The newspapers, the postal and other official guides, +the innumerable notice boards and direction posts, do for the +London citizen what the police constable or the nearest shopkeeper +rather enjoys doing for the villager, as a word with a +stranger seems an almost exciting event in a place where hardly +anything else happens except the motion of the earth.</p> + +<p>In the days when even the biggest cities were no bigger than our +country towns, and all civilized life was conducted on what we +should call village lines, “clergy”, or the ability to read and write, +was not a necessity: it was a means of extending the mental culture +of the individual for the individual’s own sake, and was quite +exceptional. This notion still sticks in our minds. When we force +a girl to learn to read, and make that an excuse for imprisoning +her in a school, we pretend that the object of it is to cultivate her +as an individual, and open to her the treasures of literature. That +is why we do it so badly and take so long over it. But our right to +cultivate a girl in any particular way against her will is not clear, +even if we could claim that sitting indoors on a hard seat and being +forbidden to talk or fidget or attend to anything but the teacher +cultivated a girl more highly than the free activities from which +this process cuts her off. The only valid reason for forcing her at +all costs to acquire the technique of reading, writing, and arithmetic +enough for ordinary buying and selling is that modern +civilized life is impossible without them. She may be said to have +a natural right to be taught them just as she has a natural right to +be nursed and weaned and taught to walk.</p> + +<p>So far the matter is beyond argument. It is true that in teaching +her how to write you are also teaching her how to forge cheques +and write spiteful anonymous letters, and that in teaching her to +read you are opening her mind to foul and silly books, and putting +into her hands those greatest wasters of time in the world, the +novels that are not worth reading (say ninetynine out of every +hundred). All such objections go down before the inexorable +necessity for the accomplishments that make modern life possible:<span class="pagenum" id="Page_422">[Pg 422]</span> +you might as well object to teaching her how to use a knife +to cut her food on the ground that you are also teaching her how +to cut the baby’s throat. Every technical qualification for doing +good is a technical qualification for doing evil as well; but it is +not possible to leave our citizens without any technical qualifications +for the art of modern living on that account.</p> + +<p>But this does not justify us in giving our children technical education +and damning the consequences. The consequences would +damn us. If we teach a girl to shoot without teaching her also that +thou shalt not kill, she may send a bullet through us the first time +she loses her temper; and if we proceed to hang her, she may say, +as so many women now say when they are in trouble, “Why did +nobody tell me?” This is why compulsory education cannot be +confined to technical education. There are parts of liberal education +which are as necessary in modern social life as reading and +writing; and it is this that makes it so difficult to draw the line +beyond which the State has no right to meddle with the child’s +mind or body without its free consent. Later on we may make +conditions: for instance, we may say that a surveyor must learn +trigonometry, a sea captain navigation, and a surgeon at least as +much dexterity in the handling of saws and knives on bones and +tissues as a butcher acquires. But that is not the same thing as +forcing everybody to be a qualified surveyor, navigator, or surgeon. +What we are now considering is how much the State must +force everyone to learn as the minimum qualification for life in a +civilized city. If the Government forces a woman to acquire the +art of composing Latin verses, it is forcing on her an accomplishment +which she can never need to exercise, and which she can +acquire for herself in a few months if she should nevertheless be +cranky enough to want to exercise it. There is the same objection +to forcing her to learn the calculus. Yet somewhere between forcing +her to learn to read and put two and two together accurately, +and forcing her to write sham Horace or learn the calculus, the +line must be drawn. The question is, where to draw it.</p> + +<p>On the liberal side of education it is clear that a certain minimum +of law, constitutional history, and economics is indispensable +as a qualification for a voter even if ethics are left entirely to +the inner light. In the case of young children, dogmatic commandments<span class="pagenum" id="Page_423">[Pg 423]</span> +against murder, theft, and the more obvious possibilities +of untutored social intercourse, are imperative; and it is here that +we must expect fierce controversy. I need not repeat all that we +have already been through as to the impossibility of ignoring this +part of education and calling our neglect Secular Education. If +on the ground that the subject is a controversial one you leave a +child to find out for itself whether the earth is round or flat, it will +find out that it is flat, and, after blundering into many mistakes +and superstitions, be so angry with you for not teaching it that it is +round, that when it becomes an adult voter it will insist on its own +children having uncompromising positive guidance on the point.</p> + +<p>What will not work in physics will not work in metaphysics +either. No Government, Socialist or anti-Socialist or neutral, +could possibly govern and administer a highly artificial modern +State unless every citizen had a highly artificial modern conscience: +that is, a creed or body of beliefs which would never +occur to a primitive woman, and a body of disbeliefs, or negative +creed, which would strike a primitive woman as fantastic blasphemies +that must bring down on her tribe the wrath of the +unseen powers. Modern governments must therefore inculcate +these beliefs and disbeliefs, or at least see that they are inculcated +somehow; or they cannot carry on. And the reason we are in such +a mess at present is that our governments are trying to carry on +with a set of beliefs and disbeliefs that belong to bygone phases of +science and extinct civilizations. Imagine going to Moses or +Mahomet for a code to regulate the modern money market!</p> + +<p>If we all had the same beliefs and disbeliefs, we could go +smoothly on, whether to our destruction or the millennium. But +the conflicts between contradictory beliefs, and the progressive +repudiations of beliefs which must continue as long as we have +different patterns of mankind in different phases of evolution, +will necessarily produce conflicts of opinion as to what should be +taught in the public schools under the head of religious dogma +and liberal education. At the present moment there are many +people who hold that it is absolutely necessary to a child’s salvation +from an eternity of grotesque and frightful torment in a lake +of burning brimstone that it should be baptized with water, as it +is born under a divine curse and is a child of wrath and sin, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_424">[Pg 424]</span> +that as it grows into a condition of responsibility it must be impressed +with this belief, with the addition that all its sins were +atoned for by the sacrifice of Christ, the Son of God, on the cross, +this atonement being effectual only for those who believe in it. +Failing such belief the efficacy of the baptism is annulled, and the +doom of eternal damnation reincurred. This is the official and +State-endowed religion in our country today; and there is still on +the statute book a law decreeing heavy punishments for anyone +who denies its validity, which no Cabinet dares repeal.</p> + +<p>Now it is not probable that a fully developed Socialist State will +either impress these beliefs on children or permit any private +person to do so until the child has reached what is called in another +connection the age of consent. The State has to protect the +souls of the children as well as their bodies; and modern psychology +confirms common experience in teaching that to horrify +a young child with stories of brimstone hells, and make it believe +that it is a little devil who can only escape from that hell by maintaining +a sinless virtue to which no saint or heroine has ever pretended, +is to injure it for life more cruelly than by any act of bodily +violence that even the most brutal taskmaster would dare to prescribe +or justify. To put it quite frankly and flatly, the Socialist +State, as far as I can guess, will teach the child the multiplication +table, but will not only not teach it the Church Catechism, but +if the State teachers find that the child’s parents have been teaching +it the Catechism otherwise than as a curious historical document, +the parents will be warned that if they persist the child +will be taken out of their hands and handed over to the Lord +Chancellor, exactly as the children of Shelley were when their +maternal grandfather denounced his son-in-law as an atheist.</p> + +<p>Further, a Socialist State will not allow its children to be taught +that polygamy, slaughter of prisoners of war, and blood sacrifices, +including human sacrifices, are divinely appointed institutions; +and this means that it will not allow the Bible to be introduced in +schools otherwise than as a collection of old chronicles, poems, +oracles, and political fulminations, on the same footing as the +travels of Marco Polo, Goethe’s Faust, Carlyle’s Past and Present +and Sartor Resartus, and Ruskin’s Ethics of the Dust. Also the +doctrine that our life in this world is only a brief preliminary episode<span class="pagenum" id="Page_425">[Pg 425]</span> +in preparation for an all-important life to come, and that it +does not matter how poor or miserable or plague ridden we are in +this world, as we shall be gloriously compensated in the next if we +suffer patiently, will be prosecuted as seditious and blasphemous.</p> + +<p>Such a change would not be so great as some of us fear, though +it would be a cataclysm if our present toleration and teaching of +these doctrines were sincere. Fortunately it is not. The people +who take them seriously, or even attach any definite meaning to +the words in which they are formulated, are so exceptional that +they are mostly marked off into little sects which are popularly +regarded as not quite sane. It may be questioned whether as much +as one per cent of the people who describe themselves as members +of the Church of England, sending their children to its baptismal +fonts, confirmation rite, and schools, and regularly attending +its services, either know or care what they are committed to +by its dogmas or articles, or read and believe them as they read +and believe the morning paper. Possibly the percentage of Nonconformists +who know the Westminster Confession and accept +it may be slightly larger, because Nonconformity includes the +extreme sects; but as these sects play the most fantastic variations +on the doctrine of the Catechism, Nonconformity covers views +which have been violently persecuted by the Church as blasphemous +and atheistic. I am quite sure that unless you have made +a special study of the subject you have no suspicion of the variety +and incompatibility of the British religions that come under the +general heading of Christian. No Government could possibly +please them all. Queen Elizabeth, who tried to do it by drawing +up thirtynine articles alternately asserting and denying the disputed +doctrines, so that every woman could find her own creed +affirmed there and the other woman’s creed denounced, has been +a complete failure except as a means of keeping tender consciences +and scrupulous intellects out of the Church. Ordinary +clergymen subscribe them under duress because they cannot +otherwise obtain ordination. Nobody pretends that they are all +credible by the same person at the same moment; and few people +even know what they are or what they mean. They could all be +dropped silently without any shock to the real beliefs of most of us.</p> + +<p>A Capitalist Government must inculcate whatever doctrine is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_426">[Pg 426]</span> +best calculated to make the common people docile wage slaves; +and a Socialist Government must equally inculcate whatever doctrine +will make the sovereign people good Socialists. No Government, +whatever its policy may be, can be indifferent to the formation +of the inculcated common creed of the nation. Society is +impossible unless the individuals who compose it have the same +beliefs as to what is right and wrong in commonplace conduct. +They must have a common creed antecedent to the Apostles’ +creed, the Nicene creed, the Athanasian creed, and all the other +religious manifestoes. Queen Mary Tudor and Queen Elizabeth, +King James the Second and King William the Third, could not +agree about the Real Presence; but they all agreed that it was +wrong to rob, murder, or set fire to the house of your neighbor. +The sentry at the gate of Buckingham Palace may disagree with +the Royal Family on many points, ranging from the imperial +policy of the Cabinet, or the revision of the Prayer Book, to which +horse to back for the Derby; but unless there were perfect harmony +between them as to the proper limits to the use of his rifle +and bayonet their social relation could not be maintained: there +could be neither king nor sentry. We all deprecate prejudice; but +if all of us were not animated sacks of prejudices, and at least nine-tenths +of them were not the same prejudices so deeply rooted that +we never think of them as prejudices but call them common +sense, we could no more form a community than so many snakes.</p> + +<p>This common sense is not all inborn. Some of it is: for instance, +a woman knows without being told that she must not eat her +baby, and that she must feed it and rear it at all hazards. But she +has not the same feeling about paying her rates and taxes, although +this is as necessary to the life of society as the rearing of +infants to the life of humanity. A friend of mine who was a highly +educated woman, the head of a famous college in the north of +London, fiercely disputed the right of the local authority to have +the drainage of the college examined by a public sanitary inspector. +Her creed was that of a jealously private lady brought up +in a private house; and it seemed an outrage to her that a man with +whom she was not on visiting terms should be legally privileged +to walk into the most private apartments of her college otherwise +than at her invitation. Yet the health of the community depends<span class="pagenum" id="Page_427">[Pg 427]</span> +on a general belief that this privilege is salutary and reasonable. +The enlargement of the social creed to that extent is the only way +to get rid of cholera epidemics. But this very able and highly instructed +lady, though still in the prime of life, was too old to learn.</p> + +<p>The social creed must be imposed on us when we are children; +for it is like riding, or reading music at sight: it can never become +a second nature to those who try to learn it as adults; and the +social creed, to be really effective, must be a second nature to us. +It is quite easy to give people a second nature, however unnatural, +if you catch them early enough. There is no belief, however +grotesque and even villainous, that cannot be made a part of +human nature if it is inculcated in childhood and not contradicted +in the child’s hearing. Now that you are grown up, nothing +could persuade you that it is right to lame every woman for life by +binding her feet painfully in childhood on the ground that it is +not ladylike to move about freely like an animal. If you are the +wife of a general or admiral nothing could persuade you that +when the King dies you and your husband are bound in honor to +commit suicide so as to accompany your sovereign into the next +world. Nothing could persuade you that it is every widow’s duty +to be cremated alive with the dead body of her husband. But if +you had been caught early enough you could have been made to +believe and do all these things exactly as Chinese, Japanese, and +Indian women have believed and done them. You may say that +these were heathen Eastern women, and that you are a Christian +Western. But I can remember when your grandmother, also a +Christian Western, believed that she would be disgraced for ever +if she let anyone see her ankles in the street, or (if she was “a real +lady”) walk there alone. The spectacle she made of herself when, +as a married woman, she put on a cap to announce to the world +that she must no longer be attractive to men, and the amazing +figure she cut as a widow in crape robes symbolic of her utter desolation +and woe, would, if you could see or even conceive them, +convince you that it was purely her luck and not any superiority +of western to eastern womanhood that saved her from the bound +feet, the suttee, and the hara-kiri. If you still doubt it, look at the +way in which men go to war and commit frightful atrocities because +they believe it is their duty, and also because the women<span class="pagenum" id="Page_428">[Pg 428]</span> +would spit in their faces if they refused, all because this has been +inculcated upon them from their childhood, thus creating the +public opinion which enables the Government not only to raise +enthusiastic volunteer armies, but to enforce military service by +heavy penalties on the few people who, thinking for themselves, +cannot accept wholesale murder and ruin as patriotic virtues.</p> + +<p>It is clear that if all female children are to have their minds +formed as the mind of Queen Victoria was formed in her infancy, +a Socialist State will be impossible. Therefore it may be taken as +certain that after the conquest of Parliament by the proletariat, +the formation of a child’s mind on that model will be prevented +by every means within the power of the Government. Children +will not be taught to ask God to bless the squire and his relations +and keep us in our proper stations, nor will they be brought up in +such a way that it will seem natural to them to praise God because +he makes them eat whilst others starve, and sing while others do +lament. If teachers are caught inculcating that attitude they will +be sacked: if nurses, their certificates will be cancelled, and jobs +found for them that do not involve intercourse with young children. +Victorian parents will share the fate of Shelley. Adults must +think what they please subject to their being locked up as lunatics +if they think too unsocially; but on points that are structural in +the social edifice, constitutional points as we call them, no quarter +will be given in infant schools. The child’s up-to-date second nature +will be an official second nature, just as the obsolete second nature +inculcated at our public schools and universities is at present.</p> + +<p>When the child has learnt its social creed and catechism, and +can read, write, reckon, and use its hands: in short, when it is +qualified to make its way about in modern cities and do ordinary +useful work, it had better be left to find out for itself what is good +for it in the direction of higher cultivation. If it is a Newton or a +Shakespear it will learn the calculus or the art of the theatre without +having them shoved down its throat: all that is necessary is +that it should have access to books, teachers, and theatres. If its +mind does not want to be highly cultivated, its mind should be let +alone on the ground that its mind knows best what is good for it. +Mentally, fallow is as important as seedtime. Even bodies can be +exhausted by overcultivation. Trying to make people champion<span class="pagenum" id="Page_429">[Pg 429]</span> +athletes indiscriminately is as idiotic as trying to make them Ireland +Scholars indiscriminately. There is no reason to expect that +Socialist rule will be more idiotic than the rule which has produced +Eton and Harrow, Oxford and Cambridge, and Squeers.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c82">82</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">SOCIALISM AND THE CHURCHES</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">H</span>OW far a Socialist State will tolerate a Church in our +sense at all is a pretty question. The quarrel between +Church and State is an old one. In speculating on it we +must for the moment leave our personal churchgoings and persuasions +out of account, and try to look at the question from the +outside as we look at the religions of the east; or, to put it bookishly, +objectively, not subjectively. At present, if a woman opens +a consulting room in Bond Street, and sits there in strange robes +professing to foretell the future by cards or crystals or revelations +made to her by spirits, she is prosecuted as a criminal for imposture. +But if a man puts on strange robes and opens a church in +which he professes to absolve us from the guilt of our misdeeds, +to hold the keys of heaven and hell, to guarantee that what he +looses or binds on earth shall be loosed and bound in heaven, to +alleviate the lot of souls in purgatory, to speak with the voice of +God, and to dictate what is sin and what is not to all the world +(pretensions which, if you look at them objectively, are far more +extravagant and dangerous than those of the poor sorceress with +her cards and tea leaves and crystals), the police treat him with +great respect; and nobody dreams of prosecuting him as an outrageous +impostor. The objective explanation of his immunity is +that a great many people do not think him an impostor: they believe +devoutly that he can do all these things that he pretends to +do; and this enables him and his fellow priests to organize themselves +into a powerful and rich body calling itself The Church, +supported by the money, the votes, and the resolution to die in its +defence, of millions of citizens. The priest can not only defy the +police as the common sorceress cannot: he has only to convince a +sufficient number of people of his divine mission to thrust the +Government aside; assume all its functions except the dirty work<span class="pagenum" id="Page_430">[Pg 430]</span> +that he does not care to soil his hands with and therefore leaves to +“the secular arm”; take on himself powers of life and death, +salvation and damnation; dictate what we shall all read and think; +and place in every family an officer to regulate our lives in every +particular according to his notions of right and wrong.</p> + +<p>This is not a fancy picture. History tells us of an emperor +crawling on his knees through the snow and lying there all night +supplicating pardon from the head of a Church, and of a king of +England flogging himself in the cathedral where a priest had +been murdered at his suggestion. Citizens have been stripped of +all their possessions, tortured, mutilated, burned alive, by priests +whose wrath did not spare even the dead in their graves, whilst +the secular rulers of the land were forced, against their own interest +and better sense, to abet them in their furious fanaticism.</p> + +<p>You may say that this was far off or long ago; that I am raking +up old tales of Canossa, of Canterbury in the middle ages, of +Spain in the fifteenth century, of Orange bogies like Bloody Mary +and Torquemada; that such things have not been done in England +since the British parliamentary government cut off Archbishop +Laud’s head for doing them; and that popes are now in +greater danger of being imprisoned, and priests and monks of +being exiled, by emperors and republicans alike, than statesmen +of being excommunicated. You may add that the British State +burnt women alive for coining and for rebellion, and pressed men +to death under heavy weights for refusing for their wives’ and +children’s sake to plead to charges of felony, long after priests had +dropped such methods of dealing with heretics.</p> + +<p>But even if women were still burnt at the stake as ruthlessly as +negroes are today by lynching mobs in America, there would still +be a struggle between Church and State as to which of them had +the right and power to burn. Who is to be allowed to exercise the +great powers that the Government of a modern civilized State +must possess if its civilization is to endure? The kings have subjugated +the barons; the parliaments have subjugated the kings; +democracy has been subjugated by plutocracy; and plutocracy is +blindly provoking the subjugated Demos to set up the proletarian +State and make an end of Capitalist Oligarchy. But there is a +rival power which has persisted and will persist through all these<span class="pagenum" id="Page_431">[Pg 431]</span> +changes; and that is Theocracy, the power of priests (sometimes +called parsons) organized into Churches professing to derive +their authority from God. Crushed in one form it arises in another. +When it was organized as the Church of Rome its abuses +provoked the Reformation in England and Northern Europe, +and in France the wrath of Voltaire and the French revolution. In +both cases it was disarmed until its power to overrule the State +was broken, and it became a mere tool of Plutocracy.</p> + +<p>But note what followed. The reaction against the priests went +so far in Britain, Switzerland, Holland, and America that at the +cry of No Popery every Roman Catholic trembled for his house +and every priest for his life. Yet under Laud and the Star Chamber +in England, and Calvin in Geneva, Theocracy was stronger +than ever; for Calvin outpoped all the popes, and John Knox in +Scotland made her princes tremble as no pope had ever done. But +perhaps you will say again “This was long ago: we have advanced +since them”. So you have always been told; but look at the +facts within my own recollection. Among my contemporaries +I can remember Brigham Young, President Kruger, and Mrs +Eddy. Joseph Smith, Junior, was martyred only twelve years +before I was born. You may never have heard of Joseph; but I +assure you his career was in many respects, up to the date of his +martyrdom, curiously like that of Mahomet, the obscure Arab +camel driver whose followers conquered half the world, and are +still making the position of the British Empire in Asia very difficult. +Joseph claimed direct revelation from God, and set up a +Theocracy which was carried on by Brigham Young, a Mormon +Moses, one of the ablest rulers on record, until the secular Government +of the United States became convinced that Mormon +Theocracy was not compatible with American Democracy, and +took advantage of the popular prejudice against its “plurality of +wives” (polygamy) to smash it. It is by no means dead yet; but +for the moment its teeth, which were sharp, are drawn; and its +place in the struggle is occupied by The Church of Christ Scientist, +founded by an American lady (who might have been yourself) +named Mrs Eddy. I often pass two handsome churches of +hers in London; and for all I know there may be others that are +out of my beat there. Now unless you happen to be a Mormon or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_432">[Pg 432]</span> +a Christian Scientist, it is probable that you think about Mrs +Eddy exactly as a Roman lady in the second century a.d. thought +about the mother of Christ, and about Joseph Smith as an English +lady in the Middle Ages thought about “the accurst Mahound” +You may be right or you may be wrong; but for all you +know Mrs Eddy a thousand years hence may be worshipped as +the Divine Woman by millions of civilized people, and Joseph +Smith may be to millions more what Mahomet now is to Islam. +You never can tell. People begin by saying “Is not this the carpenter’s +son?” and end by saying “Behold the Lamb of God!”</p> + +<p>The secular Governments, or States, of the future, like those of +the present and past, will find themselves repeatedly up against +the pretensions of Churches, new and old, to exercise, as Theocracies, +powers and privileges which no secular Government now +claims. The trouble becomes serious when a new Church attempts +to introduce new political or social institutions, or to revive +obsolete ones. Joseph Smith was allowed to represent himself +as having been directed by an angel to a place where a continuation +of the Bible, inscribed on gold plates, was buried in +the earth, and as having direct and, if necessary, daily revelations +from God which enabled him to act as an infallible lawgiver. +When he found plenty of able business women and men to believe +him, the Government of the United States held that their +belief was their own business and within their own rights as long +as Joseph’s laws harmonized with the State laws. But when +Joseph revived Solomonic polygamy the monogamic secular +Government had to cross swords with him. Not for many years +did it get the upper hand; and its adversary is not dead yet.</p> + +<p>Mrs Eddy did the opposite: she did not introduce a new institution; +but she challenged one of the standing institutions of the +secular State. The secular State prescribed pathogenic inoculations +as preventives of disease, and bottles of medicine and surgical +operations, administered and performed by its registered +doctors and surgeons, as cures; and anyone who left a child or an +invalid for whom she was responsible undoctored was punished +severely for criminal neglect. Some governments refused to admit +uninoculated persons into their territories. Mrs Eddy revived +the practice prescribed by St James in the New Testament, instructing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_433">[Pg 433]</span> +her disciples to have nothing to do with bottles and inoculations; +and immediately the secular government was at war +with Christian Science and began to persecute its healers.</p> + +<p>This case is interesting because it illustrates the fact that new +Churches sometimes capture the secular government by denying +that they are Churches. The conflict between Mrs Eddy and the +secular governments was really a conflict between the Church +of Christ Scientist and the new Church of Jenner and Pasteur +Scientists, which has the secular governments in its pocket +exactly as the Church of Rome had Charlemagne. It also incidentally +illustrates the tendency of all Churches to institute certain +rites to signalize the reception of children and converts into +the Church. The Jews prescribe a surgical operation, fortunately +not serious nor harmful. The Christian Churches prescribe water +baptism and anointing: also quite harmless. The babies object +vociferously; but as they neither foresee the rite nor remember +it they are none the worse. But the inoculations of the modern +Churches which profess Science, with their lists of miracles, their +biographies of their saints, their ruthless persecutions, their +threats of dreadful plagues and horrible torments if they are dis-obeyed, +their claims to hold the keys of mortal life and death, +their sacrifices and divinations, their demands for exemption +from all moral law in their researches and all legal responsibility +in their clinical practice, leave the pretensions of the avowed +priests and prophets nowhere, are dangerous and sometimes +deadly; and it is round this disguised Church that the persecutions +and fanaticisms of today rage. There is very little danger of +a British Parliament persecuting in the name of Christ, and none +at all of its persecuting in the name of Mahomet in the west; but +it has persecuted cruelly for a century in the name of Jenner; and +there is a very serious danger of its persecuting the general public +as it now persecutes soldiers in the name of Pasteur, whose portrait +is already on the postage stamps of the resolutely secularist +(as it imagines) French Republic. In the broadest thoroughfare of +fashionable London we have erected a startling brazen image of +the famous Pasteurite surgeon Lord Lister, who, when the present +age of faith in scientific miracles has passed, will probably be +described as a high priest who substituted carbolic acid for holy<span class="pagenum" id="Page_434">[Pg 434]</span> +water and consecrated oil as a magic cure for festering wounds. +His methods are no longer in fashion in the hospitals; and he has +been left far behind as a theorist; but when the centenary of his +birth was celebrated in 1927, the stories of his miracles, told with +boundless credulity and technical ignorance in all the newspapers, +shewed that he was really being worshipped as a saint.</p> + +<p>From this, I invite you to note how deceptive history may be. +The continual springing up of new Churches has always forced +secular governments to make and administer laws to deal with +them, because, though some of them are reasonable and respectable +enough to be left alone, and others are too strongly represented +in Parliament and in the electorate to be safely interfered +with, a good many of which you have never heard defy the laws +as to personal decency and violate the tables of consanguinity to +such an extent that if the authorities did not suppress them the +people would lynch them. That is why tribunals like the Inquisition +and the Star Chamber had to be set up to bring them to justice. +But as these were not really secular tribunals, being in fact +instruments of rival Churches, their powers were abused, the new +prophets and their followers being restrained or punished, not as +offenders against the secular law, but as heretics: that is, as dissenters +from the Church which had gained control of the secular +government: the Church of Rome in the case of the Inquisition, +and the Church of England in the case of the Star Chamber.</p> + +<p>The difficulty, you see, is that though there is a continual rivalry +between Churches and States for the powers of government, yet +the States do not disentangle themselves from the Churches, because +the members of the secular parliaments and Cabinets are +all Churchmen of one sort or another. In England this muddle is +illustrated by the ridiculous fact that the bishops of the Church +of England have seats as such in the House of Lords whilst the +clergy are excluded as such from the House of Commons. The +Parliaments are the rivals of the Churches and yet become their +instruments; so that the struggle between them is rather as to +whether the Churches shall exercise power directly, calling in the +secular arm merely to enforce their decisions without question, or +whether they shall be mere constituents of the Parliaments like +any other society of citizens, leaving the ultimate decisions to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_435">[Pg 435]</span> +State. If, however, any particular Church is powerful enough to +make it a condition of admission to Parliament, or of occupation +of the throne or the judicial bench, or of employment in the +public services or the professions, that the postulant shall be one +of its members, that Church will be in practice, if not in theory, +stronger than it could be as a Theocracy ruling independently of +the secular State. This power was actually achieved by the Church +of England; but it broke down because the English people would +not remain in one Church. They broke away from the Church of +England in all directions, and formed Free Churches. One of +these, called the Society of Friends (popularly called Quakers), +carried its repudiation of Church of England ecclesiasticism to +the length of denouncing priests as impostors, set prayers as an +insult to God (“addressing God in another man’s words”), and +church buildings as “steeple houses”; yet this body, by sheer +force of character, came out of a savage persecution the most respected +and politically influential of religious forces in the country. +When the Free Churches could no longer be kept out of +Parliament, and the Church of England could not be induced to +grant any of them a special privilege, there was nothing for it but +to admit everybody who was a Christian Deist of any denomination. +The line was still drawn at Jews and Atheists; but the Jews +soon made their way in; and finally a famous Atheist, Charles +Bradlaugh, broke down the last barrier to the House of Commons +by forcing the House to accept, instead of the Deist oath, a +form of affirmation which relieved Atheists from the necessity of +perjuring themselves before taking their seats. We are now accustomed +to Jewish Prime Ministers; and we do not know whether +our Gentile Prime Ministers are Atheists or not, because it never +occurs to us to ask the question. The King alone remains bound +by a coronation oath which obliges him to repudiate the Church +of many of his subjects, though he has to maintain that Church +and several others, some not even Christian, in parts of the Empire +where the alternative would be no Church at all.</p> + +<p>When Parliament is open to all the Churches, including the +Atheist Churches (for the Positivist Societies, the Ethical Societies, +the Agnostics, the Materialists, the Darwinian Natural +Selectionists, the Creative Evolutionists, and even the Pantheists<span class="pagenum" id="Page_436">[Pg 436]</span> +are all infidels and Atheists from the strict Evangelical or Fundamentalist +point of view), it becomes impossible to attach religious +rites to our institutions, because none of the Churches +will consent to make any rites but their own legally obligatory. +Parliament is therefore compelled to provide purely civil formalities +as substitutes for religious services in the naming of children, +in marriage, and in the disposal of the dead. Today the civil +registrar will marry you and name your children as legally as an +archbishop or a cardinal; and when there is a death in the family +you can have the body cremated either with any sort of ceremony +you please or no ceremony at all except the registration of the +death after certification of its cause by a registered doctor.</p> + +<p>As, in addition, you need not now pay Church rates unless you +want to, we have arrived at a point at which, from one end of our +lives to the other, we are not compelled by law to pay a penny to +the priest unless we are country landlords, nor attend a religious +service, nor concern ourselves in any way with religion in the +popular sense of the word. Compulsion by public opinion, or by +our employers or landlords, is, as we have seen, another matter; +but here we are dealing only with State compulsion. Delivered +from all this, we are left face to face with a body of beliefs calling +itself Science, now more Catholic than any of the avowed +Churches ever succeeded in being (for it has gone right round the +world), demanding, and in some countries obtaining, compulsory +inoculation for children and soldiers and immigrants, compulsory +castration for dysgenic adults, compulsory segregation and +tutelage for “mental defectives”, compulsory sanitation for our +houses, and hygienic spacing and placing for our cities, with +other compulsions of which the older Churches never dreamt, at +the behest of doctors and “men of science”. In England we are +still too much in the grip of the old ways to have done either our +best or our worst in this direction; but if you care to know what +Parliaments are capable of when they have ceased to believe what +oldfashioned priests tell them and lavish all their natural childish +credulity on professors of Science you must study the statute +books of the American State Legislatures, the “crowned republics” +of our own Dominions, and the new democracies of +South America and Eastern Europe. When all the States are captured<span class="pagenum" id="Page_437">[Pg 437]</span> +by the proletariat in the names of Freedom and Equality, +the cry may arise that the little finger of Medical Research (calling +itself Science) is thicker than the loins of Religion.</p> + +<p>Now what made the oldfashioned religion so powerful was that +at its best (meaning in the hands of its best believers) there was +much positive good in it, and much comfort for those who could +not bear the cruelty of nature without some explanation of life +that carried with it an assurance that righteousness and mercy +will have the last word. This is the power of Science also: it, too, +at its best has done enormous positive good; and it also at its +highest flight gives a meaning to life which is full of encouragement, +exultation, and intense interest. You may yourself be +greatly concerned as to whether the old or the new explanation is +the true one; but looking at it objectively you must put aside +the question of absolute truth, and simply observe and accept +the fact that the nation is made up of a relatively small number +of religious or scientific zealots, a huge mass of people who do +not bother about the business at all, their sole notion of religion +and morality being to do as other people in their class do, and +a good many Betwixt-and-Betweens. The neutrals are in one +sense the important people, because any creed may be imposed +on them by inculcation during infancy, whereas the believers and +unbelievers who think for themselves will let themselves be burnt +alive rather than conform to a creed imposed on them by any +power except their own consciences. It is over the inculcation, +involving the creation of that official second nature which we +discussed in the preceding chapter, that the State finds itself at +loggerheads with the Churches which have not captured it.</p> + +<p>Take a typical example or two. If any society of adults, calling +itself a Church or not, preaches the old doctrine of the resurrection +of the body at a great Last Judgment of all mankind, there +is no likelihood of the municipality of a crowded city objecting. +But if a survival of the childish idea that a body can be preserved +for resurrection by putting it into a box and burying it in the +earth, whereas reducing it to ashes in two hours in a cremation +furnace renders its resurrection impossible, leads any sect or +Church or individual to preach and practise intramural interment +as a religious duty, then it is pretty certain that the municipality<span class="pagenum" id="Page_438">[Pg 438]</span> +will not only keep such preaching out of its schools, but see to it +that the children are taught to regard cremation as the proper +way of disposing of the dead in towns, and forcibly prevent intramural +interment whether pious parents approve of it or not.</p> + +<p>If a Church, holding that animals are set apart from human +beings by having no souls, and were created for the use of mankind +and not for their own sakes, teaches that animals have no +rights, and women and men no duties to them, their teaching on +that point will be excluded from the schools and their members +prosecuted for cruelty to animals by the secular authority.</p> + +<p>If another Church wants to set up an abattoir in which animals +will be killed in a comparatively cruel manner instead of by a +humane killer in the municipal abattoir, it will not be allowed to +do it nor to teach children that it ought to be done, unless, indeed, +it commands votes enough to control the municipality to that +extent; and if its members refuse to eat humanely slaughtered +meat they will have to advance, like me, to vegetarianism.</p> + +<p>When the question is raised, as it will be sooner or later, of the +reservation of our cathedrals for the sermons of one particular +Church, it will not be settled on the assumption that any one +Church has a monopoly of religious truth. It is settled at present +on the Elizabethan assumption that the services of the Church of +England ought to please everybody; and it is quite possible that +if the services of the Church of England were purified from its +grosser sectarian superstitions, and a form of service arrived at +containing nothing offensive to anyone desiring the consolation +or stimulus of a religious ritual, the State might very well reserve +the cathedrals for that form of service exclusively, provided that, +as at present, the building were available most of the time for free +private meditation and prayer. (You may not have realized that +any Jew, any Mahometan, any Agnostic, any woman of any creed +or no creed, may use our cathedrals daily to “make her soul” between +the services.) To throw open the cathedrals to the rituals +of all the Churches is a physical impossibility. To sell them on +capitalist principles to the highest bidders to do what they like +with is a moral impossibility for the State, though the Church +has sold churches often enough. To simply make of them show +places like Stonehenge, and charge for admission, as the Church<span class="pagenum" id="Page_439">[Pg 439]</span> +of England sometimes does in the choir, would destroy their +value for those who cannot worship without the aid of a ritual.</p> + +<p>There is also the Russian plan of the State taking formal possession +of the material property of the national Church, and then +letting it go on as before, with the quaint difference that the statesmen +and officials, instead of posing as devout Churchmen, sincerely +or not, as in England, solemnly warn the people that the +whole business is a superstitious mummery got up to keep them +in submissive slavery by doping them with promises of bliss after +death if only they will suffer poverty and slavery patiently before +it. This, however, cannot last. It is only the reaction of the victorious +proletariat against the previous unholy alliance of the Church +with their former oppressors. It is mere anti-clericalism; and +when clericalism as we know it disappears, and Churches can +maintain themselves only as Churches of the people and not as spiritual +fortresses of Capitalism, the anti-clerical reaction will +pass away. The Russian Government knows that a purely negative +attitude towards religion is politically impossible; accordingly, +it teaches the children a new creed called Marxism, of +which more presently. Even in the first flush of the reaction the +Soviet was more tolerant than we were when our hour came to +revolt. We frankly robbed the Church of all it possessed and gave +the plunder to the landlords. Long after that we deliberately cut +off our Archbishop’s head. Certainly the Soviet made it quite +clear to the Russian archbishop that if he did not make up his +mind to accept the fact of the revolution and give to the Soviet +the allegiance he had formerly given to the Tsar, he would be +shot. But when he very sensibly and properly made up his mind +accordingly, he was released, and is now presumably pontificating +much more freely than the Archbishop of Canterbury.</p> + +<p>So far, I have dealt with the Churches objectively and not with +religion subjectively. It is an old saying: the nearer the Church +the farther from God. But we must cross the line just for a paragraph +or two. A live religion alone can nerve women to overcome +their dread of any great social change, and to face that extraction +of dead religions and dead parts of religions which is as necessary +as the extraction of dead or decaying teeth. All courage is religious: +without religion we are cowards. Men, because they have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_440">[Pg 440]</span> +been specialized for fighting and hunting whilst women, as the +child-bearers, have had to be protected from such risks, have got +into the way of accepting the ferocities of war and the daring +emulations of sportsmanship as substitutes for courage; and they +have imposed that fraud to some extent on women. But women +know instinctively, even when they are echoing male glory stuff, +that communities live not by slaughter and by daring death, but +by creating life and nursing it to its highest possibilities. When +Ibsen said that the hope of the world lay in the women and the +workers he was neither a sentimentalist nor a demagogue. You +cannot have read this far (unless you have skipped recklessly) +without discovering that I know as well as Ibsen did, or as you do, +that women are not angels. They are as foolish as men in many +ways; but they have had to devote themselves to life whilst men +have had to devote themselves to death; and that makes a vital +difference in male and female religion. Women have been forced +to fear whilst men have been forced to dare: the heroism of a +woman is to nurse and protect life, and of a man to destroy it and +court death. But the homicidal heroes are often abject cowards in +the face of new ideas, and veritable Weary Willies when they are +asked to think. Their heroism is politically mischievous and useless. +Knowing instinctively that if they thought about what they +do they might find themselves unable to do it, they are afraid to +think. That is why the heroine has to think for them, even to the +extent of often having no time left to think for herself. She needs +more and not less courage than a man; and this she must get from +a creed that will bear thinking of without becoming incredible.</p> + +<p>Let me then assume that you have a religion, and that the most +important question you have to ask about Socialism is whether it +will be hostile to that religion. The reply is quite simple. If your +religion requires that incomes shall be unequal, Socialism will do +all it can to persecute it out of existence, and will treat you much +as the government of British India treated the Thugs in 1830. If +your religion is compatible with equality of income, there is no +reason on earth to fear that a Socialist Government will treat it or +you any worse than any other sort of government would; and it +would certainly save you from the private persecution, enforced +by threats of loss of employment, to which you are subject under<span class="pagenum" id="Page_441">[Pg 441]</span> +Capitalism today, if you are in the employment of a bigot.</p> + +<p>There is, however, a danger against which you should be on +your guard. Socialism may be preached, not as a far-reaching +economic reform, but as a new Church founded on a new revelation +of the will of God made by a new prophet. It actually is so +preached at present. Do not be misled by the fact that the missionaries +of Church Socialism do not use the word God, nor call +their organization a Church, nor decorate their meeting-places +with steeples. They preach an inevitable, final, supreme category +in the order of the universe in which all the contradictions of the +earlier and lower categories will be reconciled. They do not speak, +except in derision, of the Holy Ghost or the Paraclete; but they +preach the Hegelian Dialectic. Their prophet is named neither +Jesus nor Mahomet nor Luther nor Augustine nor Dominic nor +Joseph Smith, Junior, nor Mary Baker Glover Eddy, but Karl +Marx. They call themselves, not the Catholic Church, but the +Third International. Their metaphysical literature begins with +the German philosophers Hegel and Feuerbach, and culminates +in Das Kapital, the literary masterpiece of Marx, described as +“The Bible of the working classes”, inspired, infallible, omniscient. +Two of their tenets contradict oneanother as flatly as the +first two paragraphs of Article 27 of the Church of England. One +is that the evolution of Capitalism into Socialism is predestined, +implying that we have nothing to do but sit down and wait for it +to occur. This is their version of Salvation by Faith. The other is +that it must be effected by a revolution establishing a dictatorship +of the proletariat. This is their version of Salvation by Works.</p> + +<p>The success of the Russian revolution was due to its leadership +by Marxist fanatics; but its subsequent mistakes had the same +cause. Marxism is not only useless but disastrous as a guide to +the practice of government. It gets no nearer to a definition of +Socialism than as a Hegelian category in which the contradictions +of Capitalism shall be reconciled, and in which political power +shall have passed to the proletariat. Germans and Clydeside Scots +find spiritual comfort in such abstractions; but they are unintelligible +and repulsive to Englishwomen, and could not by themselves +qualify anyone, English, Scotch, or German, to manage a +whelkstall for five minutes, much less to govern a modern State,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_442">[Pg 442]</span> +as Lenin very soon found out and very frankly confessed.</p> + +<p>But Lenin and his successors were not able to extricate the new +Russian national State they had set up from this new Russian international +(Catholic) Church any more than our Henry II or the +Emperor who had come to Canossa were able to extricate the +English State and the medieval Empire from the Church of +Rome. Nobody can foresee today whether the policy of Russia in +any crisis will be determined on secular and national grounds by +the Soviet or by the Third International on Marxist grounds. We +are facing the Soviet as Queen Elizabeth faced Philip of Spain, +willing enough to deal with him as an earthly king, but not as the +agent of a Catholic Theocracy. In Russia the State will sooner or +later have to break the temporal power of the Marxist Church +and take politics out of its hands, exactly as the British and other +Protestant States have broken the temporal power of the Roman +Church, and been followed much more drastically by the French +and Italian States. But until then the Church of Marx, the Third +International, will give as much trouble as the Popes did formerly. +It will give it in the name of Communism and Socialism, +and be resisted not only by Capitalists but by the Communists +and Socialists who understand that Communism and Socialism +are matters for States and not for Churches to handle. King John +was no less Christian than the Pope when he said that no Italian +priest should tithe and toll in his dominions; and our Labor +leaders can remain convinced Socialists and Communists whilst +refusing to stand any foreign or domestic interference from the +Third International or to acknowledge the divinity of Marx.</p> + +<p>Still, our Protestant repudiation of the authority of the new +Marxist Church should not make us forget that if the Marxist +Bible cannot be taken as a guide to parliamentary tactics, the +same may be said of those very revolutionary documents the +Gospels. We do not on that account burn the Gospels and conclude +that the preacher of The Sermon on the Mount has nothing +to teach us; and neither should we burn Das Kapital and ban Marx +as a worthless author whom nobody ought to read. Marx did not +get his great reputation for nothing: he was a very great teacher; +and the people who have not yet learnt his lessons make most +dangerous stateswomen and statesmen. But those who have really<span class="pagenum" id="Page_443">[Pg 443]</span> +learnt from him instead of blindly worshipping him as an infallible +prophet are not Marxists any more than Marx himself was a +Marxist. I myself was converted to Socialism by Das Kapital; +and though I have since had to spend a good deal of time pointing +out Marx’s mistakes in abstract economics, his total lack of experience +in the responsible management of public affairs, and the +unlikeness at close quarters of his typical descriptions of the proletariat +to any earthly working woman or of the bourgeoisie to any +real lady of property, you may confidently set down those who +speak contemptuously of Karl Marx either as pretenders who +have never read him or persons incapable of his great mental +range. Do not vote for such a person. Do not, however, vote for a +Marxist fanatic either, unless you can catch one young enough or +acute enough to grow out of Marxism after a little experience, as +Lenin did. Marxism, like Mormonism, Fascism, Imperialism, +and indeed all the would-be Catholicisms except Socialism and +Capitalism, is essentially a call to a new Theocracy. Both Socialism +and Capitalism certainly do what they can to obtain credit for +representing a divinely appointed order of the universe; but the +pressure of facts is too strong for their pretensions: they are +forced to present themselves at last as purely secular expedients +for securing human welfare, the one advocating equal distribution +of income, and the other private property with free contract, +as the secret of general prosperity.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c83">83</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">CURRENT CONFUSIONS</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap1">I</span> COULD go on like this for years; but I think I have now +told you enough about Socialism and Capitalism to enable you +to follow the struggle between them intelligently. You will find +it irritating at first to read the newspapers and listen to the commonplaces +of conversation on the subject, knowing all the time +that the writers and talkers do not know what they are writing and +talking about. The impulse to write to the papers, or intervene in +the conversation to set matters right, may be almost irresistible. +But it must be resisted, because if you once begin there will be +no end to it. You must sit with an air of placid politeness whilst<span class="pagenum" id="Page_444">[Pg 444]</span> +your neighbors, by way of talking politics, denounce the people +they do not like as Socialists, Bolshevists, Syndicalists, Anarchists, +and Communists on the one side, and Capitalists, Imperialists, +Fascists, Reactionaries, and Bourgeois on the other, +none of them having an idea of the meaning of these words clear +enough to be called without flattery the ghost of a notion. A +hundred years ago they would have called one another Jacobins, +Radicals, Chartists, Republicans, Infidels, and even, to express +the lowest depth of infamy, Co-operators; or, contrariwise, +Tories, Tyrants, Bloated Aristocrats, and Fundholders. None of +these names hurt now: Jacobins and Chartists are forgotten; republics +are the rule and not the exception in Europe as well as in +America; Co-operators are as respectable as Quakers; Bloated +Aristocracy is the New Pauperism; and the proletariat, with its +millions invested in Savings Certificates and Savings Bank deposits, +would not at all object to being described as having money +“in the funds”, if that expression were still current. But the names +in the mouths of the factions mean nothing anyhow. They are +mere electioneering vituperation. In France at elections the Opposition +posters always exhort the electors to vote against Assassins +and Thieves (meaning the Cabinet); and the Government +posters “feature” precisely the same epithets, whilst the candidates +in their own homes call their pet dogs Bandits when pretending +to scold them. It all means nothing. They had much +better call each other Asses and Bitches (they sometimes do, by +the way), because everyone knows that a man is not an ass nor a +woman a bitch, and that calling them so is only a coarse way of +insulting them; whereas most people do not know what the words +Bolshevik, Anarchist, Communist, and so forth mean, and are too +easily frightened into believing that they denote every imaginable +extremity of violence and theft, rapine and murder. The +Russian word Bolshevik, which has such a frightful sound to us, +means literally nothing more than a member of a parliamentary +majority; but as an English epithet it is only the political form +of Bogey or Blackguard or the popular Bloody, denoting simply +somebody or something with whom the speaker disagrees.</p> + +<p>But the names we hurl at oneanother are much less confusing +than the names we give ourselves. For instance, quite a lot<span class="pagenum" id="Page_445">[Pg 445]</span> +of people, mostly a very amiable mild sort of people, call themselves +Communist-Anarchists, which Conservatives interpret as +Double-Dyed Scoundrels. This is very much as if they called +themselves Roman Catholic Protestants, or Christian Jewesses, +or undersized giantesses, or brunette blondes, or married maids, +or any other flat contradiction in terms; for Anarchism preaches +the obliteration of statute law and the abolition of Governments +and States, whilst Communism preaches that all the necessary +business of the country shall be done by public bodies and regulated +by public law. Nobody could logically be in favor of both +all the time. But there is a muddled commonsense in the name +for all that. What the Communist-Anarchist really means is that +she is willing to be a Communist as to the work and obedience to +public law for everybody that is necessary to keep the community +healthy and solvent, and that then she wants to be let go her own +way. It is her manner of saying that she needs leisure and freedom +as well as taskwork and responsibility: in short, as I have heard it +expressed, that she does not want to be “a blooming bee”. That +is the attitude of all capable women; but to apply the term Communist-Anarchism +to it is so confusing, and so often perversely +adopted by the kind of muddler who, being against law and +public enterprise because she wants to be free, and against freedom +because freedom of contracts is a capitalist device for exploiting +the proletariat, spends her life in obstructing both Socialism +and Capitalism and never getting anywhere, that, on the whole, I +should not call myself a Communist-Anarchist if I were you.</p> + +<p>The truth is, we live in a Tower of Babel where a confusion of +names prevents us from finishing the social edifice. The Roman +Catholic who does not know what his Church teaches, the member +of the Church of England who would repudiate several of the +Thirty-Nine Articles if they were propounded to her without a +hint of where they came from, the Liberal who has never heard of +the principles of the Manchester School and would not have +understood them if she had, and the Tory who is completely +innocent of De Quincey’s Logic of Political Economy: that is +to say, the vast majority of Catholics, Protestants, Liberals, and +Tories, have their counterparts in the Socialists, the Communists, +the Syndicalists, the Anarchists, the Laborists, who denounce<span class="pagenum" id="Page_446">[Pg 446]</span> +Capitalism and middle class morality, and are saturated with both +all the time. The Intelligent Woman, as she reads the newspapers, +must allow for this as best she can. She must not only +remember that every professing Socialist is not necessarily a +Trade Unionist, and cannot logically be an Anarchist, but is +sometimes so little a Socialist that, when entrusted with public +business enough to bring her face to face with the Conservative +or Liberal leaders she has been denouncing, she will be flattered +to find that these eminent persons are quite of her real way of +thinking, and vote with them enthusiastically every time.</p> + +<p>The name Communist is at the present moment (1927) specially +applied to and adopted by those who believe that Capitalism +will never be abolished by constitutional parliamentary means in +the Fabian manner, but must be overthrown by armed revolution +and supplanted by the Muscovite Marxist Church. This is +politely called the policy of Direct Action. Conservative Diehards +who advocate a forcible usurpation of the government by the capitalists +as such call it a <i>coup d’état</i>. But a proletarian may be an advocate +of Direct Action without being a bit of a Communist. She +may believe that the mines should belong to the miners, the railways +to the railwaymen, the army to the soldiers, the churches to +the clergymen, and the ships to the crews. She may even believe +that the houses should belong to the housemaids, especially if she +is a housemaid herself. Socialism will not hear of this. It insists +that industries shall be owned by the whole community, and regulated +in the interests of the consumer (or customer), who must +be able to buy at cost price without paying a profit to anybody. +A shop, for instance, must not belong to the shop assistants, nor +be exploited by them for their profit: it must be run for the benefit +of the customers, the shop assistant’s safeguard against finding +herself sacrificed to the customer being that she is herself a customer +at the other shops, and the customer herself a worker in +other establishments. When incomes are equal, and everyone is +both a producer and a consumer, the producers and consumers +may be trusted to treat each other fairly from self-love if from +no more generous motive; but until then, to make any industry +the property of the workers in it would be merely to replace the +existing idle joint stock shareholders by working shareholders<span class="pagenum" id="Page_447">[Pg 447]</span> +profiteering on a much larger scale, as they would appropriate the +rent of their sites and make none of those contributions to a central +exchequer for the benefit of the nation that now take place +under parliamentary rule. The inequalities of income between, +say, miners in the richest mines and farmers on the poorest soils +would be monstrous. But I need not plague you with arguments: +the arrangement is impossible anyhow; only, as several of the +proletarian proposals, and cries of the day, including Trade +Unionism, Producers’ Co-operation, Workers’ Control, Peasant +Proprietorship, and the cruder misunderstandings of Syndicalism +and Socialism, are either tainted or saturated with it to such an +extent that it wrecked the proletarian movement in Italy after +the war and led to the dictatorship of Signor Mussolini, and as +it is often supposed to be part of Socialism, you had better beware +of it; for it has many plausible pseudo-socialistic disguises. It is +really only Poor Man’s Capitalism, like Poor Man’s Gout.</p> + +<p>On their negative side the proletarian Isms are very much alike: +they all bring the same accusations against Capitalism; and Capitalism +makes no distinction between them because they agree +in their hostility to it. But there is all the difference in the world +between their positive remedies; and any woman who voted for +Syndicalism or Anarchism or Direct Action disguised as Communism +indiscriminately under the impression that she was voting +for Socialism would be as mistaken as one who voted for +Conservatism or Liberalism or Imperialism or the Union Jack or +King and Country or Church and State indiscriminately under a +general impression that she was voting against Socialism.</p> + +<p>And so you have the curious spectacle of our Parliamentary +Labor Party, led by Socialists who are all necessarily Communists +in principle, and are advocating sweeping extensions of Communism, +expelling the so-called Communist Party from its ranks, +refusing to appear on the same platforms with its members in +public, and being denounced by it as bourgeois reactionaries. +It is most confusing until you know; and then you see that the +issue just now between the rival proletarian parties in England is +not Communism against Socialism: it is constitutional action, or +Fabianism as it used to be called, against Direct Action followed +by a dictatorship. And as Diehard Capitalism is now sorely<span class="pagenum" id="Page_448">[Pg 448]</span> +tempted to try a British-Fascist <i>coup d’état</i> followed by a dictatorship, +as opposed to Liberal constitutional Capitalism, the confusion +and disunion are by no means all on the Labor side. The extremists +of the Right and those of the Left are both propagandists +of impatient disgust with parliament as an institution. There is a +Right wing of the Right just as there is a Left wing of the Left; +whilst the Constitutional Centre is divided between Capitalism +and Socialism. You will need all your wits about you to find out +where you are and keep there during the coming changes.</p> + +<p>The proletarian party inherits from Trade Unionism the notion +that the strike is the classic weapon and the only safeguard of +proletarian labor. It is therefore dangerously susceptible to the +widespread delusion that if instead of a coal strike here and a railway +strike there, a lightning strike of waitresses in a restaurant +today, and a lightning strike of match girls in a factory tomorrow, +all the workers in all the occupations were to strike simultaneously +and sympathetically, Capitalism would be brought to its +knees. This is called The General Strike. It is as if the crew of +a ship, oppressed by its officers, were advised by a silly-clever +cabin boy to sink the ship until all the officers and their friends +the passengers were drowned, and then take victorious command +of it. The objection that the crew could not sail the ship without +navigating officers is superfluous, because there is the conclusive +preliminary objection that the crew would be drowned, cabin boy +and all, as well as the officers. In a General Strike ashore the productive +proletarians would be starved before the employers, capitalists, +and parasitic proletarians, because these would have possession +of the reserves of spare food. It would be national suicide.</p> + +<p>Obvious as this is, the General Strike has been attempted again +and again, notably on one occasion in Sweden, when it was very +thoroughly tried out; and though it has always necessarily collapsed, +it is still advocated by people who imagine that the +remedy for Capitalism is to treat labor as the capital of the proletariat +(that is, the spare money of those who have no money), +and to hold up the Capitalists by threat of starvation just as the +Capitalists have hitherto held up the proletariat. They forget that +the capitalists have never yet been so absurd as to attempt a +general lock-out. It would be much more sensible to support a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_449">[Pg 449]</span> +particular strike by calling all other strikes off, thus isolating the +particular employers aimed at, and enabling all the other workers +to contribute to the strike fund. But we have already discussed +the final impossibility of tolerating even particular strikes or lock-outs, +much less general ones. They will pass away as duelling has +passed away. Meanwhile be on your guard against propagandists +of the General Strike; but bear in mind too that the term is +now being used so loosely in the daily papers that we see it applied +to any strike in which more than one trade is concerned.</p> + +<p>A favorite plea of the advocates of the General Strike is that it +could prevent a war. Now it may be admitted that the fear of an +attempt at it does to some extent restrain governments from +declaring unpopular wars. Unfortunately once the first fellow-countryman +is killed or the first baby bombed, no war is unpopular: +on the contrary, it is as well known to our Capitalist +governments as it was to that clever lady the Empress Catherine +of Russia that when the people become rebellious there is nothing +like “a nice little war” for bringing them to heel again in a patriotic +ecstasy of loyalty to the Crown. Besides, the fundamental +objection to the general strike, that when everybody stops working +the nation promptly perishes, applies just as fatally to a strike +against war as to a strike against a reduction of wages. It is true +that if the vast majority in the belligerent nations, soldiers and all, +simultaneously became conscientious objectors, and the workers +all refused to do military service of any kind, whether in the field +or in the provisioning, munitioning, and transport of troops, no +declaration of war could be carried out. Such a conquest of the +earth by Pacifism seems millennially desirable to many of us; but +the mere statement of these conditions is sufficient to shew that +they do not constitute a general strike, and that they are so unlikely +to occur that no sane person would act on the chance of +their being realized. A single schoolboy militarist dropping a +bomb from an aeroplane into a group of children will make an +end of local pacifism in an instant until it becomes certain that the +bomber and his employers will be called to account before a competent +and dreaded tribunal. Meanwhile the fear of a so-called +General Strike against war will never deter any bellicose Government +from equipping and commissioning such adventurous<span class="pagenum" id="Page_450">[Pg 450]</span> +young aces. But no Government dare send them if it knew that +it would be blockaded by a combination of other nations sufficiently +strong to intimidate the most bellicose single nation.</p> + +<p>The formation of such a combination is the professed object of +the present League of Nations; and though there is no sign so +far of the leading military Powers even consulting it, much less +obeying and supporting it, when they have any weighty military +interests at stake, still even their military interests will force them +sooner or later to take the League seriously, substitute supernational +morality, law, and action, for the present international +anarchism, according to which it is proper for nations, under +certain forms, to murder and plunder foreigners, though it is a +crime for them to murder and plunder oneanother. No other +method of preventing war so far discovered is worth your attention. +It is very improbable even that our quaint and illogical +toleration of conscientious objection during the last war will ever +be repeated; and in any case the experiment proved its futility as +a preventive of war. The soldier in the trenches will always ask +why he should be shot for refusing to go “over the top” when his +brother at home is spared after refusing even to enter the trench. +The General Strike is still more futile. War cannot be stopped by +the refusal of individuals or even of whole trades to take part in +it: nothing but combinations of nations, each subordinating +what they call their sovereign rights to the world’s good, or at +least to the good of the combination, can prevail against it.</p> + +<p>This subordination of nationalism is called supernationalism, +and might be called catholicism if that word could be freed from +misleading historical associations. It already exists in the United +States of America, which are federated for certain purposes, including +currency and a <i>pax Americana</i> which was established at +the cost of a fierce war. There is no reason except pure devilment +why the States of Europe, or, to begin with, a decisive number +of them, should not federate to the same extent for the same +purposes. The Empires are changing into Commonwealths, or +voluntary federations, for common human purposes. Here, and +not in local antipatriotic strikes, are the real hopes of peace.</p> + +<p>You will find constitutional changes specially bothersome because +of the continual clashing between the tightening-up of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_451">[Pg 451]</span> +social discipline demanded by Socialism and the jealousy of official +power and desire to do what we like which we call Democracy. +Democracy has a very strong hold on organized labor. In the +Trade Unions every device is tried to make the vote of the whole +union supreme. When delegates vote at the Union Congresses +they are allowed a vote for every member of their respective +unions; and as far as possible the questions on which they cast +their hundreds of thousands of votes are settled beforehand in +the unions by the votes of the members; so that when the delegates +go to Congress they are not representatives but mere spokesmen +handing in the decisions of their unions. But these crude +democratic precautions defeat their own object. In practice, a +Trade Union secretary is the nearest thing on earth to an irremovable +autocrat. The “card vote” is not called for except to +decide questions on which the decisions could not be carried +out unless the delegates of the Big Powers of trade unionism +(that is, the unions whose membership runs into millions) could +outvote the delegates of the Little Powers; and as in the ranks of +Labor not only is “the career open to the talents” but absolutely +closed to nonentities, the leaders are much more arbitrary than +they would be in the House of Lords, where the hereditary peers +may include persons of average or less than average ability. Even +the humblest Trade Union secretary must have exceptional business +ability and power of managing people; and if anyone but a +secretary obtains a delegation to a Congress he must have at least +a talent for self-assertion. He may be for all public purposes an +idiot; but he must be a fairly blatant idiot, and to some extent +a representative one, or he could never persuade large bodies of +his equals to pick him out from the obscurity of his lot.</p> + +<p>Now as this oligarchy of bureaucrats and demagogues is the +result of the most jealous democracy, the oligarchs of labor are +determined to maintain the system which has placed them in +power. You must have noticed that some of the most imperiously +wilful women, unable to bear a moment’s contradiction, and +tyrannizing over their husbands, daughters, and servants until +nobody else in the house can call her soul her own, have been the +most resolute opponents of Women’s Rights. The reason is that +they know that as long as the men govern they can govern the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_452">[Pg 452]</span> +men. Just so a good many of the ablest and most arbitrary of the +leaders of Trade Unionism are resolutely democratic in Labor +politics because they know very well that as long as the workers +can vote they can make the workers vote as they please. They +are democrats, not because of their faith in the judgment, knowledge, +and initiative of the masses, but because of their experience +of mass ignorance, gullibility, and sheepishness. It is only +the idealists of the propertied and cultivated middle classes who +believe that the voice of the people is the voice of God: the typical +proletarian leader is a cynic in this matter, believing secretly that +the working folk will have to be born again and born differently +before they can be safely allowed to have their own silly way in +public affairs: indeed it is to make this rebirth possible that the +leaders are Socialists. They have often been strongly anti-Socialist. +Thus both the cynics and the idealists are strenuous defenders +of democracy, and regard the series of enfranchisements of the +people which began with the Conservative Act of 1867 and culminated +in Votes for Women, as a glorious page in the history of +the emancipation of mankind from tyranny and oppression, instead +of a reduction to absurdity of the notion that giving slaves +votes to defend their political rights and redress their wrongs is +much wiser than giving razors to infants for the same purpose.</p> + +<p>The naked truth is that democracy, or government by the +people through votes for everybody, has never been a complete +reality; and to the very limited extent to which it has been a +reality it has not been a success. The extravagant hopes which +have been attached to every extension of it have been disappointed. +A hundred years ago the great Liberal Reform Bill was +advocated as if its passage into law would produce the millennium. +Only the other day the admission of women to the electorate, +for which women fought and died, was expected to raise +politics to a nobler plane and purify public life. But at the election +which followed, the women voted for hanging the Kaiser; rallied +hysterically round the worst male candidates; threw out all the +women candidates of tried ability, integrity, and devotion; and +elected just one titled lady of great wealth and singular demagogic +fascination, who, though she justified their choice subsequently, +was then a beginner. In short, the notion that the female<span class="pagenum" id="Page_453">[Pg 453]</span> +voter is more politically intelligent or gentler than the male +voter proved as great a delusion as the earlier delusions that the +business man was any wiser politically than the country gentleman +or the manual worker than the middle class man. If there +were any disfranchised class left for our democrats to pin their repeatedly +disappointed hopes on, no doubt they would still clamor +for a fresh set of votes to jump the last ditch into their Utopia; +and the vogue of democracy might last a while yet. Possibly there +may be here and there lunatics looking forward to votes for children, +or for animals, to complete the democratic structure. But +the majority shows signs of having had enough of it. Discipline +for Everybody and Votes for Nobody is the fashion in Spain and +Italy; and for some years past in Russia the proletarian Government +has taken no more notice of an adverse vote than the British +Raj of an Indian jury’s verdict, except when it turns the majority +out of doors in the manner of Bismarck or Cromwell.</p> + +<p>These reactions of disgust with democracy are natural enough +where Capitalism, having first produced a huge majority of proletarians +with no training in management, responsibility, or the +handling of big money, nor any notion of the existence of such a +thing as political science, gives this majority the vote for the sake +of gaining party advantages by popular support. Even in ancient +Greece, where our proletarians were represented by slaves, and +only what we call the middle and upper classes voted, there was +the same reaction, which is hardly surprising in view of the fact +that one of the famous feats of Athenian democracy was to execute +Socrates for using his superior brains to expose its follies.</p> + +<p>Nevertheless, I advise you to stick to your vote as hard as you +can, because though its positive effects may do you more harm +than good, its negative effect may be of great value to you. If one +candidate is a Socratic person and the other a fool who attracts +you by echoing your own follies and giving them an air of patriotism +and virtuous indignation, you may vote for the fool, that +being as near as you can get to executing Socrates; and so far +your vote is all to the bad. But the fact that your vote, though only +one among many thousands, may conceivably turn the scale at +an election, secures you a consideration in Parliament which it +would be mad and cowardly for you to relinquish as long as inequality<span class="pagenum" id="Page_454">[Pg 454]</span> +of income prevents you from being really represented +by the members of the Government. Therefore cling to it tooth +and nail, however unqualified you may be to make a wise use of it.</p> + +<p>The Labor Party is in a continual dilemma on this point. At the +election of 1918 the leader of the Labor Party, a steadfast supporter +of votes for women, knew quite well that he would be defeated +in his old constituency by the vote of the suburban ladies; +and he was. The Labor Party, confronted by a scheme for making +Parliament more representative of public opinion by securing +due representation for minorities (called Proportional Representation), +finds itself forced to oppose it lest it should break Parliament +up into a host of squabbling groups and make parliamentary +government impossible. All reformers who use democracy as +a stepping stone to power find it a nuisance when they get there. +The more power the people are given the more urgent becomes +the need for some rational and well-informed superpower to +dominate them and disable their inveterate admiration of international +murder and national suicide. Voltaire said that there is +one person wiser than Mrs Anybody, and that is Mrs Everybody; +but Voltaire had not seen modern democracy at work: the democracy +he admired in England was a very exclusive oligarchy; and +the mixture of theocracy and hereditary autocracy that disgusted +him in France was not a fair test of aristocracy, or government by +the best qualified. We now know that though Mrs Everybody +knows where the shoe pinches and must therefore have a say in +the matter, she cannot make the shoe, and cannot tell a good shoemaker +from a bad one by his output of hot air on a platform. +Government demands ability to govern: it is neither Mrs Everybody’s +business nor Mrs Anybody’s, but Mrs Somebody’s. Mrs +Somebody will never be elected unless she is protected from the +competition of Mrs Noodle and Mrs Bounder and Mrs Noisy +Nobody and Mrs King-and-Country and Mrs Class War and +Mrs Hearth-and-Home and Mrs Bountiful and Mrs Hands-off-the-Church +and Mrs Please-I-want-everybody-to-love-me. If +democracy is not to ruin us we must at all costs find some trustworthy +method of testing the qualifications of candidates before +we allow them to seek election. When we have done that we may +have great trouble in persuading the right people to come forward.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_455">[Pg 455]</span> +We may even be driven to compel them; for those who +fully understand how heavy are the responsibilities of government +and how exhausting its labor are the least likely to shoulder +them voluntarily. As Plato said, the ideal candidate is the reluctant +one. When we discover such a test you will still have your +electoral choice between several Mrs Somebodys, which will +make them all respect you; but you will not be taken in by Mrs +Noodle and Co. because they will not be eligible for election. +Meanwhile, Heaven help us! we must do the best we can.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c84">84</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">PERORATION</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>ND now a last word as to your own spiritual centre. All +through this book we have been thinking of the public, +and of our two selves as members of the public. This is +our duty as citizens; but it may drive us mad if we begin +to think of public evils as millionfold evils. They are nothing of +the kind. What you yourself can suffer is the utmost that can be +suffered on earth. If you starve to death you experience all the +starvation that ever has been or ever can be. If ten thousand other +women starve to death with you, their suffering is not increased +by a single pang: their share in your fate does not make you ten +thousand times as hungry, nor prolong your suffering ten thousand +times. Therefore do not be oppressed by “the frightful sum +of human suffering”: there is no sum: two lean women are not +twice as lean as one nor two fat women twice as fat as one. +Poverty and pain are not cumulative: you must not let your spirit +be crushed by the fancy that it is. If you can stand the suffering +of one person you can fortify yourself with the reflection that the +suffering of a million is no worse: nobody has more than one +stomach to fill nor one frame to be stretched on the rack. Do not +let your mind be disabled by excessive sympathy. What the true +Socialist revolts against is not the suffering that is not cumulative, +but the waste that is. A thousand healthy, happy, honorable +women are not each a thousand times as healthy, happy, or honorable +as one; but they can co-operate to increase the health, happiness, +and honor possible for each of them. At present nobody can<span class="pagenum" id="Page_456">[Pg 456]</span> +be healthy, happy, or honorable: our standards are so low that +when we call ourselves so we mean only that we are not sick nor +crying nor lying nor stealing (legally or illegally) oftener than we +must agree to put up with under our Capitalist Constitution.</p> + +<p>We have to confess it: Capitalist mankind in the lump is detestable. +Class hatred is not a mere matter of envy on the part of the +poor and contempt and dread on the part of the rich. Both rich +and poor are really hateful in themselves. For my part I hate the +poor and look forward eagerly to their extermination. I pity the +rich a little, but am equally bent on their extermination. The +working classes, the business classes, the professional classes, the +propertied classes, the ruling classes, are each more odious than +the other: they have no right to live: I should despair if I did not +know that they will all die presently, and that there is no need on +earth why they should be replaced by people like themselves. I do +not want any human child to be brought up as I was brought up, +nor as any child I have known was brought up. Do you?</p> + +<p>And yet I am not in the least a misanthrope. I am a person of +normal affections, as you probably are; but for that very reason I +hate to be surrounded, not by people whose interests are the same +as my own, whom I cannot injure without injuring myself, and +who cannot injure me without injuring themselves, but by people +whose interest it is to get as much out of me as they possibly can, +and give me as little for it as possible (if anything). If I were poor, +my relatives, now that I am old, would have to support me to keep +me out of the workhouse, which means that they would have a +strong interest in my death. As I am rich enough to leave some +property, my children, if I had any, would be looking forward +impatiently to my funeral and the reading of my will. The whole +propertied class is waiting for dead men’s shoes all the time. If I +become ill and send for a doctor I know that if he does not prolong +my illness to the utmost, and send me to expensive nursing +homes to submit to still more expensive operations, he will be +taking bread out of his children’s mouths. My lawyer is bound +by all his affections to encourage me in litigation, and to make it +as protracted and costly as he can. Even my clergyman, partly +State supported as he is, dare not if I belong to the Church of +England rebuke me for oppressing the poor any more than he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_457">[Pg 457]</span> +dare champion me against the oppression of the rich if I were +poor. The teacher in the school where my neighbors’ children +have their morals formed would find herself in the gutter if she +taught any child that to live on what is called an independent +income without working is to live the life of a thief without the +risks and enterprise that make the pirate and the burglar seem +heroic to boys. My tradesmen’s business is to overcharge me as +much as they can without running too great a risk of being undersold +by trade rivals. My landlord’s business is to screw out of me +the uttermost extractable farthing of my earnings for his permission +to occupy a place on earth. Were I unmarried I should +be pursued by hordes of women so desperately in need of a husband’s +income and position that their utmost efforts to marry +me would be no evidence of their having the smallest personal +regard for me. I cannot afford the friendship of people much +richer than myself: those much poorer cannot afford mine. Between +those who do the daily work of my house, and are therefore +necessary partners in my work, and me there is a gulf of class +which is nothing but a gulf of unequal distribution of wealth. +Life is made lonely and difficult for me in a hundred unnecessary +ways; and so few people are clever and tactful and sensible and +self-controlled enough to pick their way through the world without +giving or taking offence that the first quality of capitalistic +mankind is quarrelsomeness. Our streets are fuller of feuds than +the Highlands or the Arabian desert. The social friction set up by +inequality of income is intense: society is like a machine designed +to work smoothly with the oil of equality, into the bearings of +which some malignant demon keeps pouring the sand of inequality. +If it were not for the big pools of equality that exist at +different levels, the machine would not work at all. As it is, the +seizings-up, the smashings, the stoppages, the explosions, never +cease. They vary in magnitude from a railway worker crushed in +the shunting-yard to a world war in which millions of men with +the strongest natural reasons for saving each others’ lives destroy +them instead in the cruellest manner, and from a squabble over +a penny in a one-room tenement to a lawsuit lasting twenty years +and reducing all the parties to it to destitution. And to outface +this miserable condition we bleat once a year about peace on<span class="pagenum" id="Page_458">[Pg 458]</span> +earth and good-will to men: that is, among persons to whom we +have distributed incomes ranging from a starvation dole to several +thousands a day, piously exhorting the recipients to love oneanother. +Have you any patience with it? I have none.</p> + +<p>Now you may, for all I know, be a sharp, cynical sort of person; +or you may be a nice, mushy, amiable, goodnatured one. If the +latter you will tell me that people are not governed so much by +money considerations as I make out: that your doctor hates to see +you ill and does his best to cure you; that your solicitor keeps you +out of litigation when you lose your temper and want to rush into +it; that your clergyman calls himself a Christian Socialist and +leads all the popular agitations against the oppression of the rich +by the poor; that your children were heartbroken when their +father died and that you never had a cross word with him about +his property or yours; that your servants have been with you for +forty years and have brought you up from your childhood more +devotedly and affectionately than your own parents, and have +remained part of the family when your children flew away from +the nest to new nests of their own; that your tradesmen have +never cheated you, and have helped you over hard times by giving +you long and forbearing credit: in short, that in spite of all I may +say, this Capitalist world is full of kindliness and love and good-fellowship +and genuine religion. Dr Johnson, who described his +life as one of wretchedness; Anatole France, who said he had +never known a moment’s happiness; Dean Swift, who saw in +himself and his fellowmen Yahoos far inferior to horses; and +Shakespear, to whom a man in authority was an angry ape, are +known to have been admired, loved, petted, entertained, even +idolized, throughout lives of honorable and congenial activity +such as fall to the lot of hardly one man in a billion; yet the obscure +billions manage to get on without unbearable discontent. +William Morris, whose abhorrence of Capitalism was far deeper +than that of persons of only ordinary mental capacity and sensibility, +said, when he was told that he was mortally ill, “Well, I +cannot complain: I have had a good time”.</p> + +<p>To all this consolation I have been able in this book to add that +Capitalism, though it richly deserves the very worst that Karl +Marx or even John Ruskin said of it and a good deal more that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_459">[Pg 459]</span> +they never thought of, was yet, in its origin, thoroughly well intentioned. +It was indeed much better intentioned than early +Christianity, which treated this world as a place of punishment +for original sin, of which the end was fortunately at hand. Turgot +and Adam Smith were beyond all comparison more sincere +guides to earthly prosperity than St Paul. If they could have foreseen +the history of the practical application of their principles in +the nineteenth century in England they would have recoiled in +horror, just as Karl Marx would have recoiled if he had been foreshewn +what happened in Russia from 1917 to 1921 through the +action of able and devoted men who made his writings their +Bible. Good people are the very devil sometimes, because, when +their good-will hits on a wrong way, they go much further along +it and are much more ruthless than bad people; but there is +always hope in the fact that they mean well, and that their bad +deeds are their mistakes and not their successes; whereas the +evils done by bad people are not mistakes but triumphs of wickedness. +And since all moral triumphs, like mechanical triumphs, +are reached by trial and error, we can despair of Democracy and +despair of Capitalism without despairing of human nature: indeed +if we did not despair of them as we know them we should +prove ourselves so worthless that there would be nothing left for +the world but to wait for the creation of a new race of beings +capable of succeeding where we have failed.</p> + +<p>Nevertheless I must warn my amiable optimist and meliorist +readers not only that all the virtues that comfort them are operating +in spite of Capitalism and not as part of it, but that they are +baffled by it in ways that are hidden from people who have not +examined the situation with a good deal of technical knowledge +and some subtlety. Take your honest and kindly doctor, and your +guardian angel solicitor. I quite admit that there are plenty of +them: the doctor who is a mercenary scoundrel and the lawyer +who is a mischievous and heartless rascal is as exceptional as any +other sort of criminal: I myself have never chanced to come across +one, and most likely you have not either. But I have come across +honest doctors whose treatment has been fatal, and honest lawyers +whose advice has been disastrous. So have you, perhaps.</p> + +<p>You know the very true saying that where there is a will there<span class="pagenum" id="Page_460">[Pg 460]</span> +is a way. Unfortunately the good will does not necessarily find +the right way. There are always dozens of ways, bad, good, and +indifferent. You must know some bad women who are doing +the right thing from bad motives side by side with good women +who are doing the wrong thing from the best motives in the +world. For instance, the number of children, especially first children, +who are guarded and swaddled and drugged and doctored +to death by the solicitude of their ignorantly affectionate mothers, +must be greater than that of the children who die of maternal +dislike and neglect. When silly people (writers, I regret to say, +some of them) tell you that a loving heart is enough, remind them +that fools are more dangerous than rogues, and that women with +loving hearts are often pitiable fools. The finding of the right +way is not sentimental work: it is scientific work, requiring observation, +reasoning, and intellectual conscientiousness.</p> + +<p>It is on this point of intellectual conscientiousness that we all +break down under pecuniary temptation. We cannot help it, because +we are so constituted that we always believe finally what +we wish to believe. The moment we want to believe something, +we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the +arguments against it. The moment we want to disbelieve anything +we have previously believed, we suddenly discover not only +that there is a mass of evidence against it, but that this evidence +was staring us in the face all the time. If you read the account of +the creation of the world in the book of Genesis with the eye of +faith you will not perceive a single contradiction in it. If you read +it with the eye of hostile critical science you will see that it consists +of two successive accounts, so different that they cannot both +be true. In modern books you will be equally baffled by your bias. +If you love animals and have a horror of injustice and cruelty, +you will read the books of wonderful discoveries and cures made +by vivisectors with a sickened detestation of their callous cruelty, +and with amazement that anyone could be taken in by such bad +reasoning about lies which have been reduced to absurdity by +force of flat fact every few years, only to be replaced by a fresh +crop. If, however, you have only a dread of disease for yourself +or your family, and feel that in comparison to relief from this +terror the sufferings of a few dogs and guinea-pigs are not worth<span class="pagenum" id="Page_461">[Pg 461]</span> +bothering about, you will find in the same books such authentic +and convincing miracles, such marvellous cures for all diseases, +such gospels of hope, monuments of learning, and infallible revelations +of the deepest truths of Science, that your indignation at +the derisive scepticism of the humanitarians may develop into an +enmity (heartily reciprocated) that may end in persecutions and +wars of science like the persecutions and wars of religion that +followed the Reformation, and were not new then.</p> + +<p>But, you will ask, what have Socialism and Capitalism to do +with the fact that belief is mostly bias. It is very simple. If by +inequality of income you give your doctors, your lawyers, your +clergymen, your landlords, or your rulers an overwhelming economic +interest in any sort of belief or practice, they will immediately +begin to see all the evidence in favor of that sort of +belief and practice, and become blind to all the evidence against +it. Every doctrine that will enrich doctors, lawyers, landlords, +clergymen, and rulers will be embraced by them eagerly and hopefully; +and every doctrine that threatens to impoverish them will +be mercilessly criticized and rejected. There will inevitably +spring up a body of biassed teaching and practice in medicine, +law, religion, and government that will become established and +standardized as scientifically, legally, religiously, constitutionally, +and morally sound, taught as such to all young persons entering +these professions, stamping those who dare dissent as outcast +quacks, heretics, sedition mongers, and traitors. Your doctor may +be the honestest, kindliest doctor on earth; your solicitor may be +a second father or mother to you; your clergyman may be a saint; +your member of Parliament another Moses or Solon. They may +be heroically willing to put your health, your prosperity, your +salvation, and your protection from injustice before their interest +in getting a few extra pounds out of you; but how far will that +help you if the theory and practice of their profession, imposed +on them as a condition of being allowed to pursue it, has been +corrupted at the root by pecuniary interest? They can proceed +only as the hospitals and medical schools teach them and order +them to proceed, as the courts proceed, as the Church proceeds, +as Parliament proceeds: that is their orthodoxy; and if the desire +to make money and obtain privileges has been operating all the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_462">[Pg 462]</span> +time in building up that orthodoxy, their best intentions and endeavors +may result in leaving you with your health ruined, your +pocket empty, your soul damned, and your liberties abrogated by +your best friends in the name of science, law, religion, and the +British constitution. Ostensibly you are served and protected by +learned professions and political authorities whose duty it is to +save life, minimize suffering, keep the public health as tested by +vital statistics at the highest attainable pitch, instruct you as to +your legal obligations and see that your legal rights are not infringed, +give you spiritual help and disinterested guidance when +your conscience is troubled, and make and administer, without +regard to persons or classes, the laws that protect you and regulate +your life. But the moment you have direct personal occasion +for these services you discover that they are all controlled by +Trade Unions in disguise, and that the high personal honor and +kindliness of their individual members is subject to the morality +of Trade Unionism, so that their loyalty to their union, which +is essentially a defensive conspiracy against the public, comes +first, and their loyalty to you as patient, client, employer, parishioner, +customer or citizen, next. The only way in which you can +set their natural virtues free from this omnipresent trade union +and governing class corruption and tyranny is to secure for them +all equal incomes which none of them can increase without increasing +the income of everybody else to exactly the same amount; +so that the more efficiently and economically they do their work +the lighter their labor will be and the higher their credit.</p> + +<p>Under such conditions you would find human nature good +enough for all your reasonable purposes; and when you took up +such books as Gulliver’s Travels or Candide which under Capitalism +are unanswerable indictments of mankind as the wickedest +of all known species, you would see in them only terribly vivid +clinical lectures on extinct moral diseases which were formerly +produced by inequality as smallpox and typhus were produced by +dirt. Such books are never written until mankind is horribly corrupted, +not by original sin but by inequality of income.</p> + +<p>Then the coveted distinction of lady and gentleman, instead of +being the detestable parasitic pretension it is at present, meaning +persons who never condescend to do anything for themselves<span class="pagenum" id="Page_463">[Pg 463]</span> +that they can possibly put on others without rendering them +equivalent service, and who actually make their religion centre +on the infamy of loading the guilt and punishment of all their +sins on an innocent victim (what real lady would do so base a +thing?), will at last take on a simple and noble meaning, and be +brought within the reach of every ablebodied person. For then +the base woman will be she who takes from her country more +than she gives to it; the common person will be she who does no +more than replace what she takes; and the lady will be she who, +generously overearning her income, leaves the nation in her debt +and the world a better world than she found it.</p> + +<p>By such ladies and their sons can the human race be saved, and +not otherwise.</p> + +<p> +<span class="smcap">Ayot St Lawrence</span>,<br> +   <i>16th March</i> 1927. +</p> +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_465">[Pg 465]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c85">APPENDIX</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp">INSTEAD OF A BIBLIOGRAPHY</p> + + +<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>HIS book is so long that I can hardly think that any woman will +want to read much more about Socialism and Capitalism for some +time. Besides, a bibliography is supposed to be an acknowledgment +by the author of the books from which his own book was compiled. Now +this book is not a compilation: it is all out of my own head. It was started +by a lady asking me to write her a letter explaining Socialism. I thought +of referring her to the hundreds of books which have been written on +the subject; but the difficulty was that they were nearly all written in +an academic jargon which, though easy and agreeable to students of +economics, politics, philosophy, and sociology generally, is unbearably +dry, meaning unreadable, to women not so specialized. And then, all these +books are addressed to men. You might read a score of them without +ever discovering that such a creature as a woman had ever existed. In +fairness let me add that you might read a good many of them without discovering +that such a thing as a man ever existed. So I had to do it all +over again in my own way and yours. And though there were piles of +books about Socialism, and an enormous book about Capitalism by Karl +Marx, not one of them answered the simple question, “What is Socialism?” +The other simple question, “What is Capital?” was smothered in a +mass of hopelessly wrong answers, the right one having been hit on (as +far as my reading goes) only once, and that was by the British economist +Stanley Jevons when he remarked casually that capital is spare money. +I made a note of that.</p> + +<p>However, as I know that women who frequent University Extension +lectures will not be satisfied until they have choked their brains by reading +a multitude of books on the subject; and as the history of Socialist +thought is instructive, I will say just a word or two in the customary +pedantic manner about the literary milestones on the road from Capitalism +to Socialism.</p> + +<p>The theory of Capitalism was not finally worked out until early in the +nineteenth century by Ricardo, a Jewish stockbroker. As he had a curious +trick of saying the opposite of what he meant whilst contriving somehow +to make his meaning clear, his demonstration was elegantly and +accurately paraphrased by a first rate literary artist and opium eater, +Thomas De Quincey, who could write readably and fascinatingly about +anything.</p> + +<p>The theory was that if private property in land and capital, and sanctity +of free contract between individuals, were enforced as fundamental constitutional +principles, the proprietors would provide employment for +the rest of the community on terms sufficient to furnish them with at +least a bare subsistence in return for continuous industry, whilst themselves<span class="pagenum" id="Page_466">[Pg 466]</span> +becoming rich to such excess that the investment of their superfluous +income as capital would cost them no privation. No attempt was +made to disguise the fact that the resultant disparity between the poverty +of the proletarian masses and the riches of the proprietors would produce +popular discontent, or that as wages fell and rents rose with +the increase of population, the contrast between laborious poverty and +idle luxury would provide sensational topics for Radical agitators. +Austin’s Lectures on Jurisprudence and Macaulay’s forecasts of the +future of America prove that the more clear-headed converts of the +theory of Capitalism had no millennial illusions.</p> + +<p>But they could see no practicable alternative. The Socialist alternative +of State organization of industry was inconceivable, because, as industry +had not yet finished the long struggle by which it extricated itself from +the obsolete restrictions and oppressions of medieval and feudal society, +State interference, outside simple police work, still seemed a tyranny to +be broken, not a vital activity to be extended. Thus the new Capitalist +economic policy was put forward in opposition, not to Socialism, but to +Feudalism or Paternal Oligarchy. It was dogmatically called Political +Economy absolute, complete, and inevitable; and the workers were told +that they could no more escape or modify its operation than change the +orbits of the planets.</p> + +<p>In 1840 a French proletarian, Proudhon, published an essay with the +startling title “What is Property? Theft”. In it he demonstrated that a +<i>rentier</i>, or person living, as we now put it, by owning instead of by +working, inflicts on society precisely the same injury as a thief. Proudhon +was a poor Frenchman; but a generation later John Ruskin, a rich +Englishman of the most conservative education and culture, declared that +whoever was not a worker was either a beggar or a robber, and published +accounts of his personal activities and expenditure to prove that +he had given good value for his rents and dividends. A generation later +again Cecil Rhodes, an ultra-imperialist, made a famous will bequeathing +his large fortune for public purposes, and attaching the condition that no +idler should ever benefit by it. It may be said that from the moment +when Capitalism established itself as a reasoned-out system to be taught +at the universities as standard political economy, it began to lose its +moral plausibility, and, in spite of its dazzling mechanical triumphs and +financial miracles, steadily progressed from inspiring the sanguine optimism +of Macaulay and his contemporaries to provoking a sentiment +which became more and more like abhorrence among the more thoughtful +even of the capitalists themselves.</p> + +<p>All such moral revolutions have their literary prophets and theorists; +and among them the first place was taken by Karl Marx, in the second +half of the nineteenth century, with his history of Capital, an overwhelming +exposure of the horrors of the industrial revolution and the condition +to which it had reduced the proletariat. Marx’s contribution to the abstract<span class="pagenum" id="Page_467">[Pg 467]</span> +economic theory of value, by which he set much store, was a blunder +which was presently corrected and superseded by the theory of +Jevons; but as Marx’s category of “surplus value” (Mehrwerth), meaning +rent, interest, and profits, represented solid facts, his blunder in no +way invalidated his indictment of the capitalist system, nor his historical +generalization as to the evolution of society on economic lines. His so-called +Historic Materialism is easily vulnerable to criticism as a law of +nature; but his postulate that human society does in fact evolve on its +belly, as an army marches, and that its belly biases its brains, is a safe +working one. Buckle’s much less read History of Civilization, also a +work of the mind changing sort, has the same thesis but a different moral: +to wit, that progress depends on the critical people who do not believe +everything they are told: that is, on scepticism.</p> + +<p>Even before Karl Marx the Capitalist economists had lost their confidence, +and its ordinary exponents become disingenuously evasive. Not +so the bigger men. John Stuart Mill began as a Ricardian and ended +as an avowed Socialist. Cairnes still saw no practicable alternative to +Capitalism; but his contempt for the “drones in the hive” who live by +owning was as thorough and outspoken as Ruskin’s. Their latest academic +successor, Mr Maynard Keynes, dismisses Laisser-faire contemptuously +as an exploded fallacy.</p> + +<p>After Cairnes a school of British Socialist economists arose, notably +Sidney and Beatrice Webb of the Fabian Society, who substituted the +term Political Science for Political Economy. They gave historical consciousness +to the proletarian movement by writing its history with the +intimate knowledge and biographical vivacity needed to give substance +to the abstract proletariat described by Marx. The evolution of Trade +Unionism, Co-operation, and proletarian politics (Industrial Democracy) +was reasoned out and documented by them. Their histories of English +local government and of the Poor Law cover a huge part of the general +field of British constitutional and administrative activity, past and +present. They cured Fabianism of the romantic amateurishness which +had made the older Socialist agitations negligible and ridiculous, and +contributed most of the Fabian Society’s practical proposals for the +solution of pressing problems. They shattered the old Capitalist theory +of the impotence of the State for anything but mischief in industry, and +demonstrated not only that communal and collective enterprise has already +attained a development undreamt of by Ricardo and his contemporaries, +but that Capitalism itself is dependent for its existence on State +guidance, and has evolved collective forms of its own which have taken +it far beyond the control of the individual private investor, and left it +ripe for transfer to national or municipal ownership. Their volume on +the decay of Capitalism has completed Marx’s work of driving Capitalism +from its old pretension to be normal, inevitable, and in the long run +always beneficial in modern society, to a position comparable to that of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_468">[Pg 468]</span> +an army digging itself into its last ditch after a long series of surrenders +and retreats. They estimate roughly that in its hundred years of supremacy +Capitalism justified its existence, <i>faute de mieux</i>, for the first +fifty years, and for the last fifty has been collapsing more and more on +its crazy foundation.</p> + +<p>Beatrice Webb’s curious mixture of spiritual and technical autobiography, +entitled My Apprenticeship, describes how an intelligent girl-capitalist, +with a sensitive social conscience and a will of her own, +critically impervious to mere persuasion, and impressible by first hand +evidence and personal experience only, was led to Socialism by stubbornly +investigating the facts of Capitalist civilization for herself. The Intelligent +Woman with a turn for investigation or an interest in character +study, or both, should read it.</p> + +<p>Between Karl Marx and the Webbs came Henry George with his +Progress and Poverty, which converted many to Land Nationalization. +It was the work of a man who had seen that the conversion of an +American village to a city of millionaires was also the conversion of a +place where people could live and let live in tolerable comfort to an +inferno of seething poverty and misery. Tolstoy was one of his notable +converts. George’s omission to consider what the State should do with +the national rent after it had taken it into the public treasury stopped +him on the threshold of Socialism; but most of the young men whom he +had led up to it went through (like myself) into the Fabian Society and +other Socialist bodies. Progress and Poverty is still Ricardian in theory: +indeed it is on its abstract side a repetition of De Quincey’s Logic of +Political Economy; but whereas De Quincey, as a true-blue British Tory +of a century ago, accepted the Capitalist unequal distribution of income, +and the consequent division of society into rich gentry and poor proletarians, +as a most natural and desirable arrangement, George, as an +equally true-blue American republican, was revolted by it.</p> + +<p>After Progress and Poverty the next milestone is Fabian Essays, edited +by myself, in which Sidney Webb first entered the field as a definitely +Socialist writer with Graham Wallas, whose later treatises on constitutional +problems are important, and Sydney Olivier (Lord Olivier) whose +studies of the phenomenon of the “poor white” in Africa and America, +facing the competition of the black proletariats created by negro slavery, +should be read by Colonial Ministers. In Fabian Essays Socialism is +presented for the first time as a completely constitutional political movement, +which the most respectable and least revolutionary citizen can join +as irreproachably as he might join the nearest Conservative club. Marx +is not mentioned; and his peculiar theory of value is entirely ignored, +the economic theories relied on being Jevons’ theory of value and +Ricardo’s theory of the rent of land, the latter being developed so as to +apply to industrial capital and interests as well. In short, Socialism appears +in Fabian Essays purged of all its unorthodox views and insurrectionary<span class="pagenum" id="Page_469">[Pg 469]</span> +Liberal associations. This is what distinguished the volume +at that time from such works as the England For All of Henry Mayers +Hyndman, the founder of the Social-Democratic Federation, who, until +1918, when the Russian Marxists outraged his British patriotism by +the treaty of Brest Litovsk, clung to Marx’s value theory, and to the +Marxian traditions of the barricade Liberalism of 1848, with a strong +dash of the freethinking gentlemanly cosmopolitanism of the advanced +republican <i>littérateurs</i> of the middle of the nineteenth century.</p> + +<p>After Fabian Essays treatises on Socialism followed, first singly, then +in dozens, then in scores, and now in such profusion that I never read +them unless I know the writers personally, nor always, I confess, even +then.</p> + +<p>If you read Sociology, not for information but for entertainment +(small blame to you!), you will find that the nineteenth-century poets and +prophets who denounced the wickedness of our Capitalism exactly as the +Hebrew prophets denounced the Capitalism of their time, are much more +exciting to read than the economists and writers on political science who +worked out the economic theory and political requirements of Socialism. +Carlyle’s Past and Present and Shooting Niagara, Ruskin’s Ethics of the +Dust and Fors Clavigera, William Morris’s News from Nowhere (the +best of all the Utopias), Dickens’s Hard Times and Little Dorrit, are +notable examples: Ruskin in particular leaving all the professed Socialists, +even Karl Marx, miles behind in force of invective. Lenin’s criticisms +of modern society seem like the platitudes of a rural dean in +comparison. Lenin wisely reserved his most blighting invectives for his +own mistakes.</p> + +<p>But I doubt whether nineteenth-century writers can be as entertaining +to you as they are to me, who spent the first forty-four years of my life +in that benighted period. If you would appreciate the enormous change +from nineteenth-century self-satisfaction to twentieth-century self-criticism +you can read The Pickwick Papers (jolly early Dickens) and +then read Our Mutual Friend (disillusioned mature Dickens), after which +you can try Dickens’s successor H. G. Wells, who, never having had any +illusions about the nineteenth century, is utterly impatient of its blunderings, +and full of the possibilities of social reconstruction. When you +have studied nineteenth-century county gentility in the novels of Anthony +Trollope and Thackeray for the sake of understanding your more behind-hand +friends, you must study it up-to-date in the novels of John Galsworthy. +To realize how ignorant even so great an observer as Dickens +could be of English life outside London and the main coaching routes +you can compare his attempt to describe the Potteries in Hard Times +with Arnold Bennett’s native pictures of the Five Towns; but to appreciate +his much more serious and complete ignorance of working-class history +and organization in his own day you would have to turn from fiction +to the Webbs’ History of Trade Unionism.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_470">[Pg 470]</span></p> + +<p>The earlier nineteenth-century literature, for all its invective, satire, +derision and caricature, made amiable by its generous indignation, was +not a literature of revolt. It was pre-Marxian. Post-Marxian literature, +even in its most goodhumored pages by men who never read Marx, is +revolutionary: it does not contemplate the survival of the present order, +which Thackeray, for instance, in his bitterest moods seems never to have +doubted.</p> + +<p>For women the division is made by Marx’s Norwegian contemporary +Ibsen rather than by Marx. Ibsen’s women are all in revolt against +Capitalist morality; and the clever ladies who have since filled our bookshelves +with more or less autobiographical descriptions of female frustration +and slavery are all post-Ibsen. The modern literature of male +frustration, much less copious, is post-Strindberg. In neither branch are +there any happy endings. They have the Capitalist horror without the +Socialist hope.</p> + +<p>The post-Marxian, post-Ibsen psychology gave way in 1914-18 to the +post-war psychology. It is very curious; but it is too young, and I too +old, for more than this bare mention of its existence and its literature.</p> + +<p>Finally I may mention some writings of my own, mostly in the form +of prefaces to my published plays. One of the oddities of English literary +tradition is that plays should be printed with prefaces which have nothing +to do with them, and are really essays, or manifestoes, or pamphlets, with +the plays as a bait to catch readers. I have exploited this tradition very +freely, puzzling many good people who thought the prefaces must be part +of the plays. In this guise I contended that poverty should be neither +pitied as an inevitable misfortune, nor tolerated as a just retribution for +misconduct, but resolutely stamped out and prevented from recurring as a +disease fatal to human society. I also made it quite clear that Socialism +means equality of income or nothing, and that under Socialism you would +not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, +taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered +that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, +you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you +were permitted to live you would have to live well. Also you would not +be allowed to have half a crown an hour when other women had only two +shillings, or to be content with two shillings when they had half a crown. +As far as I know I was the first Socialist writer to whom it occurred +to state this explicitly as a necessary postulate of permanent civilization; +but as nothing that is true is ever new I daresay it had been said again +and again before I was born.</p> + +<p>Two Fabian booklets of mine entitled Socialism and Superior Brains +and The Common Sense of Municipal Trading are still probably worth +reading, as they are written from personal experience of both.</p> + + +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<h2 class="nobreak" id="c86">INDEX</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c less sp"><span class="smcap">By</span> BEATRICE WHITE, M.A.</p> + +<ul class="index"> +<li class="ifrst">Abatement, smoke, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Aberdeen, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Abernethy, John, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ability, managerial, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">to maintain discipline, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">necessary to nationalize, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Abortion, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">surgical, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Abraham, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Access to rare books and pictures, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Accountants, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Acrobats, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Actors, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Actresses, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">popular, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Acts of Parliament, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, + <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Admiralty, the, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Adoption, compulsory, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Adulterators, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Adults, dysgenic, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Adventurers, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Advertisements, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Aerodromes, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Aeroplane lines, the, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Aeroplane pilots, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Aeroplanes, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Affiliation allowances, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Afforestation, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Africa, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, + <a href="#Page_409">409</a></li> + +<li class="indx">African markets, <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> + +<li class="indx">African “medicine”, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Agents, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Agitators, Socialistic, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Agnostics, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Agricultural harvests, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Agricultural laborers, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Air services, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Airships, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Albert Hall, the, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Alcohol, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Alexander the Great, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Alfonso, King, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Alfred, King, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Algeria, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Allah, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Alliances, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Allotment holders, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Almsgiving, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ambassadors, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ambulance porters, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> + +<li class="indx">America, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, + <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, + <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, + <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>, + <a href="#Page_430">430</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>, <a href="#Page_466">466</a></li> + +<li class="indx">America, United States of, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">anti-British feeling in, <a href="#Page_158">158-159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">American dollars, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">employers and financiers, methods of, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">hotheads, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">plantations, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">presidents, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">State Legislatures, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">statistics, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">villages, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Americans, the, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Amsterdam, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Amusements, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ananias and Sapphira, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anarchism, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>, <a href="#Page_447">447</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anarchists, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anarchy, <a href="#Page_29">29-30</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Andes, the, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anglican Churches, the, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anglo-Catholics, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anne, Queen, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anti-clericalism, <a href="#Page_439">439</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anti-clericals, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anti-Russian scare, the 1924, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Anti-Socialists, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Apostles, the, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Apostles’ creed, the, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Apothecaries, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Apprentice, The Sorcerer’s</i>, <a href="#Page_157">157-61</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Appropriation Act, the, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Arabian desert, the, <a href="#Page_457">457</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Arabs, the, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Archbishop Laud, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Archbishops, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Architects, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Arcos, raid on, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Aristocracy, the landed, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Aristotle, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Armada, the, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Armaments, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the race of, <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Armistice, the, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Army, the, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Arnold, Matthew, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Arnold, Whately, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Art, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Art of living, the, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Articles, the Thirty-nine, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Artificial happiness, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Artificial overpopulation, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Artists, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Asia, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">British Empire in, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Asquith, Herbert Henry, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Assaults in school, <a href="#Page_416">416</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Assistants, shop, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, + <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Associated work, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Astor property, the, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Astronomer Royal, the, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Astronomers, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Astronomy, Copernican, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Asylums, lunatic, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Athanasian creed, the, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Atheists, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Athenian democracy, <a href="#Page_453">453</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Athens, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Athletes, champion, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Atlantic, the, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Attendants, picture gallery, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Augury, ancient, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Augustine, Saint, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Austin’s Lectures on Jurisprudence, <a href="#Page_466">466</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Australasia, <a href="#Page_409">409</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Australia, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">uncles in, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Australians, the, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Austria, <a href="#Page_263">263</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Austrian Government, the, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Authority, <a href="#Page_37">37-8</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and subordination, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Authors, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Averaging. <i>See</i> Nationalization</li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Babies, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">superfluous, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Babylon, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bachelors, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Baghdad, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bagmen, <a href="#Page_343">343</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Baked-potato men, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bakers, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Baldwin, Stanley, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Balfour, Arthur James, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bank of England, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, + <a href="#Page_250">250</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bank Holiday, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bank Holiday Acts, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bank managers, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bank rate, the, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bank transactions, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Banker-General, <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bankers, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, + <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Banking, <a href="#Page_243">243-51</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">nationalization of, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264-8</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Banks, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Scottish and Irish, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">national and municipal, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Baptism, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Barbers, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bargemen, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Barges, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Barristers, <i>See</i> Lawyers</li> + +<li class="indx">Baronets, surgical, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bass Rock ideal, the, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bastille, the, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Battlefields, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Battleships, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Beachcombers, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Beaconsfield, Earl of, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Becket, Thomas à, <a href="#Page_430">430</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bedford, endowed schools of, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bees, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Beethoven, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Behaviour, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Belgium, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Belief, differences of, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">mostly bias, <a href="#Page_460">460</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bell, answering the, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bench, the, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bennett, Arnold, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Betterton, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Biarritz, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bible, the, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, + <a href="#Page_424">424</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">astronomy and biology of, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of the working classes, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bibles, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Big business, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">capitalist, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Billiard markers, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Birmingham, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">municipal bank of, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Birth control, <i>See</i> Contraception</li> + +<li class="indx">Bishops, <a href="#Page_434">434</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bismarck, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_453">453</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Blacklegs, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Blacksmiths, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">village, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bloated aristocrats, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Blocks, parliamentary, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Blockmakers, parliamentary, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Boards, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Boatswains, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Boer ideal, the, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bogey Bolshevism, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bogies, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bolsheviks, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, + <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Communist, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bolshevism, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bombay Ginning Mills, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bombing aeroplanes, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bonar Law, Mr, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bond Street, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Book of Common Prayer, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bookkeepers, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bookkeeping, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bookmakers, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bootle, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bootlegging, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bootmakers, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Boots, broken, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Borneo, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Borough Councils, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Borrovians, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Borrow, George, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Borrowing and hiring, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Borrowing from and taxing capitalists, <a href="#Page_290">290</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bound feet, <a href="#Page_427">427</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bounderby, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bountiful ladies, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bourgeois, the, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bournemouth, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bourneville, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bourrienne, memoirs of, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bourses, Continental, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Boy Scouts, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bradlaugh, Charles, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brahma, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brains, proper social use of, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bread, communization of, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bread and circuses, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Breadwinning, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Breaking a bank, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Breakwaters, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bremerhaven, <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brewers, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Briand, Aristide, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bricklayers, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brickmakers, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bridges, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brigadiers, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brigham Young, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a Mormon Moses, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bright, John, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brighton, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bristol, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Britain, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">British army and navy, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">brains, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Commonwealth, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">courage, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Empire, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">in Asia, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">flag, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">genius, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">human nature, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">husbands, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">people, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">proletariat, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">proletarian voters, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Museum, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">anti-Socialist governments, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">employers, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Government, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">race, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Raj, <a href="#Page_453">453</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">religions, variety and incompatibility of, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">taxpayers, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">workman, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">turf, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Socialists, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Isles, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Trade Unionists, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brobdingnag, the King of, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brummagem buttons, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Brunswick, Duke of, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Buccaneers, capitalist, <a href="#Page_417">417</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bucket shops, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Buckingham Palace, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Buckle’s History of Civilization, <a href="#Page_467">467</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Budget, the, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">annual debates on, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Budgets, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Building societies, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">trades, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bullion, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bulls and bears, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bumble, Mr, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bunyan, John, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">his Simple, Sloth, and Presumption, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bureaucracy. <i>See</i> Civil Service Burglars, <a href="#Page_457">457</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Bus conductors, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Business, wholesale, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">private, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Business ability, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Business man, the practical, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Business men, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Business principles, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Butchers, <a href="#Page_422">422</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Butler, Samuel, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Byron, Lord, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Cabinet, the, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cabinet Ministers, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cabinets, British, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cablegrams, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ca’canny, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cadbury, Mr, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cæsar, Julius, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cæsars, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cairnes, John Elliot, <a href="#Page_467">467</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Calculus, the, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Calcutta Sweep, the, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Calvin, John, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cambridge University, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Campbell-Bannerman, Sir Henry, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Canada, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Canadians, French, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Canals, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Candidates, the No-Compensation, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Candide, <a href="#Page_462">462</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Canossa, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Canterbury, <a href="#Page_430">430</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Capel Court, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Capital, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127-31</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">export of, <a href="#Page_140">140-44</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">definition of, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">driven abroad, <a href="#Page_34">34-5</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">homeless and at home everywhere, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">party of, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">levy, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">investing and “realizing”, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">taxation of, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">domestic, <a href="#Page_225">225-31</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Capitalism, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100-104</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>, + <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">adventurous and experimental, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">diehard, <a href="#Page_447">447</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Liberal constitutional, <a href="#Page_447">447</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">limitations of, <a href="#Page_133">133-7</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">mammonist morality of, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">in perpetual motion, <a href="#Page_308">308-14</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">on paper, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a principle of, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">provides selfish motives for doing good, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">secular, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">ruthless, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">uncontrollable, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">well-established method of, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">runaway car of, <a href="#Page_314">314-19</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Capitalist and genius, the, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Capitalist morality, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">law, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">system, one of worst vices of, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">papers, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Government and Opposition, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">crusade, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">exploitations of the taxpayers, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">oligarchy, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">mankind detestable, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and Socialist Governments, difference between, <a href="#Page_390">390</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Capitalists, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">dictatorship of, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Captains, navy, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">sea, <a href="#Page_422">422</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cardinals, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Careerists, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Careers open to women, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Carlyle, Thomas, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">his Past and Present, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Sartor Resartus, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Shooting Niagara, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Carnegie, Andrew, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Carnegie charities, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Carpenters, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">village, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Carriage of mails oversea, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Carriers, village, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> + +<li class="indx">C.O.D. parcel post, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Casual labor, <a href="#Page_118">118-20</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Casual people, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cathedrals, the, <a href="#Page_438">438</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Catholic Church, the, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Catholic theoracy, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Catholicism, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Catholics, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Celibacy, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chambermaids, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chancellor of the Exchequer, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, + <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chanceries, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Change, continuous, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">constructive, must be parliamentary, <a href="#Page_380">380-86</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Changes, social, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chaplains, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Charabancs, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Character, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Charity, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Charlemagne, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Charles I, King, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Charles, II, King, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chartists, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Charwomen, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, + <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>, + <a href="#Page_420">420</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chauffeurs, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cheap and nasty, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cheltenham, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chemists, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cheques and clearing houses, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cheques and Bills, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chicago municipal elections, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chicago pork kings, <a href="#Page_343">343</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Child-bearing, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Child fanciers, <a href="#Page_415">415</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Child farming, <a href="#Page_415">415</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Child labor, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Child life, organization of, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Children, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, <a href="#Page_362">362</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>, + <a href="#Page_392">392</a>, <a href="#Page_393">393</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>, <a href="#Page_460">460</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and parents, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_408">408</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and young persons overworked, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">bearing and rearing of, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">cost of, <a href="#Page_87">87-8</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">exposure of female, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">illegitimate, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">institutional treatment of, <a href="#Page_413">413</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">matter-of-fact, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Roman Catholic, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">ugly, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Children’s ordinary human rights, disregard of, <a href="#Page_415">415</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Children’s religion, dictated by parents, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Children’s wages, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> + +<li class="indx">China, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, + <a href="#Page_406">406</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Chocolate creams, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cholera epidemics, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_427">427</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Christ, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>, + <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the mother of, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Christ Scientist, the Church of, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Christian Science, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Christian Scientists, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Christian Socialists, <a href="#Page_458">458</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Christianity, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">early, <a href="#Page_459">459</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Christians, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">early, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Christmas, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">cards, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church, the, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>, + <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church Catechism, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>, <a href="#Page_425">425</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church of England, the, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, + <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>, + <a href="#Page_435">435</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>, <a href="#Page_457">457</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church of Jenner and Pasteur Scientists, the new, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church livings, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church rates, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church of Rome, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church, school and Press, <a href="#Page_63">63-5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church schools, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Church and State, quarrel between, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Churches, the, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">attitude towards marriage, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">dangerous pretensions of, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Churches, the Free, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Churchill, Winston, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Churchmen, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cinemas, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cinematography, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Circumcision, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Citizens, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> + +<li class="indx">City bosses, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">City corporations, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">City offices, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Civil servants, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, + <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Civil Service, the, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, + <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Civilians no longer spared in war, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Civilization a disease, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clandestine Communism and confiscation, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clares, the Poor, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Class distinctions, <a href="#Page_420">420</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Class hatred, <a href="#Page_456">456</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Class splits in the professions, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Class struggle, the, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Class war, the, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clearing houses, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cleopatra, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clergymen, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, + <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, + <a href="#Page_425">425</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clerical staffs, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clerks, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, + <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and clerking, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clever women, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clothes, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Sunday, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clubs, <a href="#Page_418">418</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Clydeside Scots, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Coal, cost under capitalism, <a href="#Page_107">107-9</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">how to cheapen, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">harvests, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">commission, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">mines, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">nationalization of, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>, + <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">owners, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">supply, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Coalmaster-General, wanted a, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cocktails, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Coinage, debasement of, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">value of gold coinage fixes itself, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> + +<li class="indx">College education, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Colonels, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Colonies, British, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Colored labor, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Colored persons, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Columbus, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Combinations of workers, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Commandments, the Ten, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Commercial civilization, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">profiteers, <a href="#Page_383">383</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Commercialism, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Commissioners of Inland Revenue, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Commissions fixing prices, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Common creed of the nation, formation of the, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Common people, the, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Common sense and prejudice, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Commonwealths, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Communisms, <a href="#Page_11">11-13</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, + <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">clandestine, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">reduces need for pocket money, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">parochial, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Christian morality of, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a development of existing economic civilization, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Communist, present connotation of, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Communist schools, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Communist-Anarchists, <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Communistic monstrosities, our, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Communists, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">pseudo-Bolshevist, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Companies and trusts, <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Companions, lady, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Company promotion, <a href="#Page_237">237</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Compensation for expropriation, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Compensation for nationalization, <a href="#Page_268">268-274</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Compensation really distributed confiscation, <a href="#Page_270">270-71</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Competitive method in industry, wasteful, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">inadmissable in case of ubiquitous services, <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Composers, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Compromisers, timid, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Compulsory schooling, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Compulsory social service, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conduct, difficulty of teaching, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Confectionery, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Confidence tricksters, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Confiscated income must be immediately redistributed, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Confiscation, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">without compensation, <a href="#Page_276">276-7</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">with a vengeance, <a href="#Page_290">290</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conscience, the national, <a href="#Page_393">393</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conscientious objectors, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">objection, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conscription, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conservatism, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_447">447</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conservative Act of 1867, <a href="#Page_452">452</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conservative Governments, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conservative Party, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conservatives, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, + <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Consols, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conspiracies <i>alias</i> Trade Unions, <a href="#Page_209">209</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Constables, police, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Constantinople, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Constitutional Monarchists, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Constructive problem solved, the, <a href="#Page_297">297-9</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Contraception, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88-9</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, + <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Contractors, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Contracts, civil, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Convalescent homes, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Conventions, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cooks, <a href="#Page_24">24-5</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Co-operative societies, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Co-operators, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Copper harvests, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Copyright conventions, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Copyrights, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cost price, <a href="#Page_107">107-11</a>. <i>See</i> Nationalization</li> + +<li class="indx">Cottage handicrafts, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">hospitals, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">industry, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cotton lords, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">spinners, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Country gentlemen, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Country houses, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> + +<li class="indx">County Councils, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">County ladies, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Covetousness, human, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cowper, William, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cowper-Temple Clause, the, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Crabbe, George, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Craft Unions, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Craftsmen, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Creative work, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Credit, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">real, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">tax on, <a href="#Page_249">249</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Crews, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Crime, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Crimean War, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Criminal Courts, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Law, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cromer, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cromwell, Oliver, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>, + <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_453">453</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Crusoe, Robinson, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Culture, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">reserves of now rather commercial than professional, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Currencies, private, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Current confusions, <a href="#Page_433">433-55</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Cynicism, not justified by the horrors of Capitalism, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Daily routine, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dairymaids, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dancing partners, fascinating male, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dartmoor, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dartmoor hunt, the, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Daughters, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">unmarried, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Day of Judgment, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Daylight in winter, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dealers in pit props, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dean Swift, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Death duties, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">stupid, <a href="#Page_230">230</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Death-rate, high, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Debasement of currency, called inflation, <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Debentures, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Debt, municipal, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Debt, the National, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, + <a href="#Page_294">294-7</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Debt redemption levy, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Deceased Wife’s Sister Act, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Declaration of Rights, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Decline of the employer, the, <a href="#Page_177">177-82</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Deer forests, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Deflation, <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Defoe, Daniel, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Deists, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Demagogues, plebeian, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Demand, effective, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">money market sense of, <a href="#Page_248">248-9</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Democracy, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_451">451</a>, <a href="#Page_452">452</a>, <a href="#Page_453">453</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">result of, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Democratic Prime Ministers, <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dens, sweaters’, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dentists, <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Department of Mines, creation of, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Department of Woods and Forests, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Depopulation, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Deposit at elections, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> + +<li class="indx">De Quincey, Thomas, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Derby, the, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Descartes, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Destitute persons, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Detective stories, <a href="#Page_415">415</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Devil, the, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Diagnostic of Socialism, the, <a href="#Page_92">92-5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Diamonds, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dickens, Charles, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">his Hard Times, Little Dorrit, Pickwick Papers, Our Mutual Friend, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dictators, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Italian, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Diehard coercionists, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Diminishing Return, Law of, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Diplomacy, <a href="#Page_60">60-61</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Diplomatic service, the, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Direct Action men, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Direct Action, policy of, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>, <a href="#Page_447">447</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dirty work, <a href="#Page_74">74-6</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Disablement above and below, <a href="#Page_164">164-8</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Discoveries, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Disease, venereal, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">hereditary, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Disguised Church, the, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Disraeli, Benjamin, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>. <i>See</i> Beaconsfield, Earl of</li> + +<li class="indx">Dissenters, the, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Distilleries, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Distribution, traumatic, not spontaneous, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">anomalous, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">seven ways of, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">by class, <a href="#Page_35">35-8</a></li> + +<li class="indx">District Councils, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Divide and govern, <a href="#Page_213">213-25</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dividing-up, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Division of labor, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Divisions within the Labor Party, <a href="#Page_354">354-9</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Divorce, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dock companies, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dock labor, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dockers, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dockyards, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Doctors, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, + <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, + <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, + <a href="#Page_400">400</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>, + <a href="#Page_459">459</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Doctrinaires, Marxist, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Doles, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Doles, depopulation and parasitic paradises, <a href="#Page_145">145-50</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Domestic capital, <a href="#Page_225">225-31</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Domestic debt redemption levies, objection to, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Domestic servants. <i>See</i> Servants</li> + +<li class="indx">Domestic work woman’s monopoly, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dominic, Saint, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dominions, the, <a href="#Page_437">437</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dope, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Downing tools, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Drainage, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Drawingroom amusements, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dress, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dress question, the, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dressing, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dressmakers, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">jobbing, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dressmaking, <a href="#Page_420">420</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Drink, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, + <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Drones, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Drugging, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Drugs, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Drunkards, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dublin, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ducal estates, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Duchesses, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dukes, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dustmen, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dwarfs, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Dysgenic reactions of inequality, <a href="#Page_54">54-6</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">adults, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Earthquakes, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Eastern Europe, <a href="#Page_437">437</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Eastern women, <a href="#Page_427">427</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Eclipses, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Eddy, Mrs, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Education, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">college, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a failure, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">impracticable, <a href="#Page_362">362</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">middle-class monopoly of, <a href="#Page_177">177-82</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">secular, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">stupidities about, <a href="#Page_413">413</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">technical, compulsory and liberal, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Socialist idea of, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Education Act of 1870, the, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of 1902, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Egypt, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">self-government in, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Egyptian fiasco, the, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Eight hours day, the, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Einstein, Albert, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Election of 1918, the, <a href="#Page_454">454</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Electric Lighting Committees, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Electric lighting, municipal, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Electric power, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Electricians, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Electrocution, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Electronic physics, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Elementary schools, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Elizabeth, Queen, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, + <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Elizabeth, statute of, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Emigration, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Emotional Socialism, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Empire, the medieval, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Empire insurance, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Empires, in collision, <a href="#Page_152">152-7</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">their origin in trade, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">ruins of, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">shifting centres of, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Employees, badly sweated, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>. <i>See</i> Trade Union Capitalism</li> + +<li class="indx">Employers, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">industrial, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and financiers, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">petty, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Victorian, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>.</li> +<li class="isub1"><i>See</i> Trade Union Capitalism</li> + +<li class="indx">Employers’ Federations, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Employment of first-rate business brains by Trade Unions, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Empress Catherine II of Russia, the, <a href="#Page_449">449</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Encyclopedias, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Engels, Friedrich, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Engine drivers, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Engineers, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> + +<li class="indx">England, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, + <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a>, + <a href="#Page_454">454</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Protestant, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English big business, Americanized, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English Church, the, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English ladies, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English market, the, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English nation, the, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English Parliament, the, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English pound, the, <a href="#Page_263">263</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English State, the, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English statesmen, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">English Trade Unions, Americanized, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Englishmen, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Enlightenment, modern, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Enough? How much is, <a href="#Page_41">41-9</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Epidemics, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">dread of, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Epileptics, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Episcopalians, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Equal wages for equal work, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Equality, positive reasons for, <a href="#Page_68">68-70</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Equality of income, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of opportunity, <a href="#Page_93">93-4</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Erewhon, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Errand boys, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Esquimaux, the, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Estate rules, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ethical societies, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Eton, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Eugenics, <a href="#Page_53">53-6</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Europe, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, + <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">kings of, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">States of, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">European empires, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Evasion of income tax, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Eve, the sin of, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Evolution, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Evolutionists, creative, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Exceptional ability, question of, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Excessive incomes, extortion of, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Exchequer, the 276;</li> +<li class="isub1">Chancellor of the, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, + <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Exclusion of women from the professions, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Executioners, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Experimenting, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Exploitation, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of the State by Capitalism and Trade Unionism, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Exploration, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">professional, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Explorers, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Exposure of female children, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Expropriation Act, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Expropriative taxation, <a href="#Page_298">298</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Extension of franchise, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">disappointing, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Extremists, <a href="#Page_373">373</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Fabian Acts of Parliament, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fabian Essays, <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fabian lecturers, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fabian methods, <a href="#Page_298">298</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fabian Society, the, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>, + <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fabianism or constitutional action, <a href="#Page_446">446-7</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factories, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">child labor in, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Ford, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">national, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">munition, <a href="#Page_390">390</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory Acts, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189-94</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, + <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory employees, condition of, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory foremen, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory girls, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory hands, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory inspectors, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory legislation, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory regulations, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory work, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Factory working day, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fairies, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fanaticisms, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Farm produce, transport of, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Farmers, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, + <a href="#Page_447">447</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">English, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Farming, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">large-scale, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">fancy fruit, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fascism (capitalist dictatorship), <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fascists, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fashion, tyranny of, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fashoda, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Father, the author’s, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Faust, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fecundity, human, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Federations, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Female virtue, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ferryman, <a href="#Page_409">409</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fertility, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Feudalism, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Feuerbach, L. A., <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Field-marshals, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Film actresses, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Filmstars, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Films, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Finance committees, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Financial gamblers, <a href="#Page_382">382</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Financiers, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, + <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">profiteering, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and bankers are money profiteers, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> + +<li class="indx">First-rate work, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fishermen, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fitters, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Flag, trade following the, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Flanders, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">battlefields in, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fluctuations on the Stock Exchange, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Flying Services, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Football, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ford, Henry, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ford factories, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Foreign markets. <i>See</i> Markets</li> + +<li class="indx">Foreign Office, the, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Foreign trade, <a href="#Page_150">150-52</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Foresters, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Forewomen and foremen, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Formulas, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Forth Bridge, the, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fourier, Charles, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fox, George, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Foxhunting, <a href="#Page_420">420</a></li> + +<li class="indx">France, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>, + <a href="#Page_364">364</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, + <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">decreasing population of, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> + +<li class="indx">France, Anatole, <a href="#Page_458">458</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Franchise, extension of, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">extension of, disappointing, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Francis, Saint, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Franciscans, the, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Free Churches, the, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Free Trade, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Free Traders, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Free Trade controversy, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Freedom, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">no place in nature, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">restricted, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> + +<li class="indx">French, the, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> + +<li class="indx">French Chamber, the, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">French Government, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411</a></li> + +<li class="indx">French nation, the, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">French peasant proprietors, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> + +<li class="indx">French Republic, the, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">French Revolution, the, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>, + <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Freud, Sigmund, <a href="#Page_416">416</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Frontiers, automatic advance of, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Fundholders, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Funding, <a href="#Page_291">291</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Galsworthy, John, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gambling, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Game Laws, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gamekeepers, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gaming Act, the, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Garages, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Garden cities, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the property of capitalists, <a href="#Page_301">301</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gardeners, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">lady, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gardening, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">kitchen, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gas, poison, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">General elections, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, + <a href="#Page_353">353</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">stampeding, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> + +<li class="indx">General Medical Council, the, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> + +<li class="indx">General Post Office, the, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> + +<li class="indx">General Strike, the, <a href="#Page_448">448</a></li> + +<li class="indx">General strikes, a form of national suicide, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">General teetotalism, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Generals, military, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Genesis, the book of, <a href="#Page_460">460</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Geneva, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Geniuses, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gentility without property, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gentlemen, our sort of, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gentry, the, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">landed, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> + +<li class="indx">George IV, King, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">George V, King, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">George, Henry, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">German employers, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li> + +<li class="indx">German Government, the, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li> + +<li class="indx">German money, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li> + +<li class="indx">German racial stock, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">German schools and universities, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Germans, the, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Germany, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, + <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">increasing population of, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">war with, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Giants, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gin Lane, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Girl Guides, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gladstone, W. E., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, + <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gleneagles hotel, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> + +<li class="indx">God, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, + <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, + <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>, + <a href="#Page_439">439</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_452">452</a>; the</li> +<li class="isub1">Church of England, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the greater glory of, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the idea of, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">ideas about, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_367">367</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">intentions of, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">not patriotic, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gold bugs, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gold currency, natural stability of the, <a href="#Page_263">263</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Goldsmith, Oliver, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Golf, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Sunday, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Golfing hotel managers, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gospels, the, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Governesses, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_416">416</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Government, the Capitalist, of 1914-1918, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the most sacred economic duty of, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and garden cities, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and governed, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and Opposition, or performance and criticism, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">as national landlord, financier and employer, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Government confiscation without preparation, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Government grants, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">in aid to municipalities, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Government intervention in strikes, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">intervention between Capital and Labor. <i>See</i> Factory legislation and Taxation</li> + +<li class="indx">Government subsidy to coalowners in 1925, the, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, + <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Government subsidies, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Government Whips, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Governments, failures and frauds of, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Italian and Spanish, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">misdeeds of, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gradgrind, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gradual expropriation possible, <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gramophones, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gravediggers, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Great Britain, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Great Western Railway, the, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Greece, ancient, <a href="#Page_453">453</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Greek, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the value of, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Greek Church, the, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Greenland, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Grocers, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ground rents, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Guardians, Poor Law, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Guards, railway, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Guides, postal and official, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gulliver’s Travels, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_462">462</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Gwynne, Nell, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Habeas Corpus Act, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hamlet, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Handel, G. F., <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Handicrafts, cottage, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Handloom weavers, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hand-to-mouth, the world lives from, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hangmen, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Happiness, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hara-kiri, <a href="#Page_427">427</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Harboro, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hardie, Keir, <a href="#Page_221">221</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Harrow, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hatmakers, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Haymaking, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Head waiters, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Health, Ministry of, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hearse drivers, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Heartlessness of parents, the apparent, <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hegel, G. W. F., <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hegelian dialectic, the, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Helmer, Nora, <a href="#Page_408">408</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Helplessness, of proprietary and working classes, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of individuals, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Henry IV, King, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Henry VIII, King, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hereditary disease, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Herring gutters, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Herriot, Édouard, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">High Tories, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">High wages and colossal profits, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Highland chieftains, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Highlands, the, <a href="#Page_457">457</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Highway lighting, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Highwaymen, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hiring spare money, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Historians, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hoarding, <a href="#Page_129">129-31</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hobbies, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hogarth, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hohenzollern family, the, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Holidays, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Holland, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Holy Ghost, the, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Home, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Home Office, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Home Rule Question, the, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Homer, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hood, Thomas, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Horace, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Horses, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">old, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hospitals, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">cottage, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hotel manageresses, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hotels, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hours of labor, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> + +<li class="indx">House of Commons, the, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, + <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>, + <a href="#Page_354">354</a>, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Labor members of, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a proletarian, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></li> + +<li class="indx">House of Lords, the, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>, <a href="#Page_451">451</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Housekeepers, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Housekeeping, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">national, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Housekeeping money, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Housemaids, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Houses, scarcity of, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Houses of Parliament, the, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">out of date, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> + +<li class="indx">How long will it take?, <a href="#Page_391">391-3</a></li> + +<li class="indx">How much is enough?, <a href="#Page_41">41-9</a></li> + +<li class="indx">How the War was paid for, <a href="#Page_289">289-94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">How wealth accumulates and men decay, <a href="#Page_161">161-4</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Human nature, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Human society like a glacier, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Human stock, improvement of, <a href="#Page_343">343</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hungry, the, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Husbandmen, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Husbands, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and wives, <a href="#Page_408">408</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Hyndman, Henry Mayers, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Ibsen, Henrik, <a href="#Page_408">408</a>, <a href="#Page_440">440</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Idealists, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Idiots, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Idle rich, the, <a href="#Page_59">59-62</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Idleness, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Idlers, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_400">400</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Idling, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Idolatry, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ignorance, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">about Socialism, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Illegitimate children, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Illinois, State of, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Immigrants, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Immigration, restricted, <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Imperialism, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>, <a href="#Page_447">447</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Imperialist morality, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Imperialists, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inability to govern, our, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Incentive, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Income, family, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Income tax, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and super tax and estate duties other names for confiscation, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and death duties and supertax, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">evasion of, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">rates a form of, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Increasing return, law of, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Independent candidates, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Independent Labor Party, foundation of the, <a href="#Page_221">221</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Independent voters, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a></li> + +<li class="indx">India, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_440">440</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Indians, the, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industrial employees, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industrial employers, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industrial male workers, the ordinary, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industrial organizers, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industrial and Provident Societies Act, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industrial Revolution, the, <a href="#Page_137">137-40</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industrial Unions, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industries, the big, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">competitive entry of the Government into, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Industry, the dye, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inequality of income, <a href="#Page_418">418</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inevitability of gradualness, the, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Infallibility, necessary dogma of, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Infant mortality, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Infant schools, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Infidels, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inflation, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inflationists, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ingoldsby Legends, The, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inheritance, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inhibition complex, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Innkeepers, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inoculations, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">dangerous, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">pathogenic, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Inquisition, the, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">water torture of, <a href="#Page_415">415</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Insurance, National, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Insurance premiums, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Insurance stamps, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Interest, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">positive and negative, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">exorbitant rates to the poor, <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> + +<li class="indx">International, the Third, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">International Anarchism, the present, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">International institutions, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Internationalism, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Invalids, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Invention, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">inventions and inventors, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">inventions, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">inventors, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Investing capital, <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Investment and enterprise, <a href="#Page_131">131-3</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ireland, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, + <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ireland scholars, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Irish Free State, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Irish Home Rule, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Irish ladies in the workhouse, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Irish Nationalist Party, the old, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Irish peers, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ironmasters, <a href="#Page_400">400</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ironmongers, <a href="#Page_400">400</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Islam, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Isle of Wight, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Israelites, the, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Italian nation, the, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Italy, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, + <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_453">453</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Jacobins, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">James I, King, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></li> + +<li class="indx">James II, King, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">James, Saint, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Japan, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jehovah, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jenner, Edward, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jericho, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jesuits, the, <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jesus. <i>See</i> Christ</li> + +<li class="indx">Jevons, Stanley, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jews, the, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>, + <a href="#Page_438">438</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Joan of Arc, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jobbing dressmakers, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> + +<li class="indx">John, King, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Johnson, Samuel, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Joiners, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Joint stock companies, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, + <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Joshua, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Journalists, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, + <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Judas Iscariot, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Judges, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Judgment, Day of, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Judgment, the Last, <a href="#Page_437">437</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Juries, trial by, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jurors, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jury duties, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jurymen, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Jutland, battle of, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Kaiser, the ex-, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_452">452</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Kantian test, the, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Kapital, Das, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Keynes, Maynard, <a href="#Page_467">467</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Kilkenny cats, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King, the, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, + <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, + <a href="#Page_427">427</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">his Speech, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Alfonso, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Alfred, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Charles I, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Charles II, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King George IV, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King George V, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Henry II, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Henry IV, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Henry VIII, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King James I, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King James II, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King John, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Lear, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Louis XIV, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King Philip II of Spain, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King William III, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">King William IV, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Kings, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Israelitish, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Kingsley, Charles, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Knights of the Shires, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Knox, John, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Kruger, President, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Krupp’s, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Kyle of Tongue, the, <a href="#Page_283">283</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Labor, capitalized, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">costly materials and equipment for, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">curse of, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">market value of, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of women and girls, <a href="#Page_196">196-204</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">party of, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor Chancellor, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor Government, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of 1923, <a href="#Page_221">221</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor House of Commons, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor leaders, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor markets, the, <a href="#Page_186">186-96</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor members, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor Opposition, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor Party, the, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, + <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">establishment of, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a political federation of Trade Unions and Socialist Societies, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">rapid growth of, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>,</li> +<li class="isub1">danger of splits in, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Socialists in, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the present, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor-saving appliances, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor-saving contrivances, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Labor-saving machinery, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laboratory work, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laborers, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laborists, the, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ladies, attractive, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">English, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">our sort of, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">real, <a href="#Page_400">400</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ladies’ maids, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lahore, Government College of, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laisser-faire, <a href="#Page_38">38-41</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laisser-faire doctrinaires, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lancashire, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Land, nationalization of, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Land Purchase Acts, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Land values, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Landlords, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and capitalists, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and raised rents, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Irish, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">powers of, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124-5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Langland, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lassalle, Ferdinand, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Latimer, Hugh, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Latin, literary, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>, <a href="#Page_415">415</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Latin stock, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Latin verses, <a href="#Page_422">422</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Latter Day Saints, the, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laud, Archbishop, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laundresses, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laundries, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Law, the Courts of, <a href="#Page_56">56-9</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Criminal, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Mosaic, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Law of Diminishing Return, the, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Law of Increasing Return, the, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laws, oppressive and unjust, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lawyers, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, + <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, + <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Laziness, mental, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">League of Nations, the. <i>See</i> Nations</li> + +<li class="indx">Lear, King, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Learned men, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Learning, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Legislation, Socialistic, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Leicester, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Leisure, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">distribution of, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lenin, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>, + <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Letters, anonymous, <a href="#Page_421">421</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">snowball, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Leverhulme, Lord, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Levies on capital are raids on private property, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lewis, George Cornewall, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Liberal impulse, the, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Liberal Party, the, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">working class members of, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">wiped out, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Liberalism, <a href="#Page_447">447</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">revolutionary traditions of, <a href="#Page_276">276</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Liberals, the, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>, + <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Liberty, the desire for, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the fear of, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">unfair distribution of, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">natural limit to, <a href="#Page_319">319-30</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and Socialism, <a href="#Page_393">393-406</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Liberty of conscience, comparative, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Libraries, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lies, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lieutenants, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lighthouses, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and lightships, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Limitations of Capitalism, <a href="#Page_133">133-7</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lisbon, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lister, Joseph, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Literary property, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Literature, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">treasures of, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Little Englanders, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Liveries, <a href="#Page_75">75-6</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Liverpool, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lloyd George, David, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Loan Stock, <a href="#Page_301">301</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Local Government, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Local Government inspectors, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lock-outs, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Logic of Political Economy, DeQuincey’s, <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">London, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, + <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, + <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, + <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">overpopulation of, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Socialist movement in, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> + +<li class="indx">London citizen, the, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">London Midland and Scottish Railway, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Long Parliament, the, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Looting by ladies, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Low Church Protestants, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Loyalty, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Luddites (machine wreckers), <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lumbermen, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Lunatic asylums, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Luther, Martin, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Luxury trades, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Macaulay, T. B., <a href="#Page_466">466</a></li> + +<li class="indx">MacDonald, James Ramsay, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Machine guns, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Machinery, <a href="#Page_138">138-9</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">displaces labor, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Machinery wrecking, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Machines, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Madeira, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Magee, Bishop, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Magistrates, <a href="#Page_416">416</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Magna Carta, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mahomet, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, + <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mahometans, <a href="#Page_438">438</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Majors, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Malaya, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Male prostitution, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mallock, William Hurrell, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Malverns, the, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mammon, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Man, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Man Question, the, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Management, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">routine, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">scientific, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Managerial ability, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Managers, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manchester, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manchester School, the, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manchester and Sheffield Outrages, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manchu ladies, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manifestoes, Communist, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manners, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_418">418</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mansion House funds, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manual labor, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manufacture of pins, the, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manufactured pleasures, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manufacturers, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Manufacturing towns, overcrowded slums of, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marbot, General, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marco Polo, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">travels of, <a href="#Page_424">424</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Markets, the struggle for, <a href="#Page_150">150-53</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marks, paper, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marriage, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">English, Scottish, and Irish, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marriage and the State, <a href="#Page_409">409</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marriages, unsuitable, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Married Men’s Rights agitation, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Married women, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Married Women’s Property Acts, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mars, <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Martyrs, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marx, Karl, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, + <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>, + <a href="#Page_443">443</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_466">466</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>, + <a href="#Page_469">469</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marxian class-consciousness, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marxism, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marxist Bible, the, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marxist Church, the, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marxist Communists, <a href="#Page_373">373</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marxist fanatics, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marxists, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Marx’s slogan, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mary Queen of Scots, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mary Tudor, Queen, <a href="#Page_426">426</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Masons, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Master of the Mint, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Match girls, <a href="#Page_448">448</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Materialists, the, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mathematicians, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mating, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Matrons, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Maurice, Frederick Denison, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mayfair, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Means of production, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Medieval robber barons, <a href="#Page_417">417</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Medical research, <a href="#Page_437">437</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Medical schools, <a href="#Page_416">416</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mediterranean, annexations of the African coast, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Members of Parliament, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">payment of, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Men of science, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mental “defectives”, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mental work, unremunerative, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mephistopheles, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Merchant princes, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Merchants, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">gold, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">coal, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Merit, promotion by, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and money, <a href="#Page_70">70-71</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Messiah, political, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Metaphysics, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Methodist schools, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Methodists, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Middle class, the, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Middle class manners, <a href="#Page_418">418</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Middle station in life, the, <a href="#Page_168">168-76</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Middlemen, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Midgets, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Military officers, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Military rank, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Military service, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">compulsory, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">righteousness of, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mill, John Stuart, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mill hands, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Millennium, the, <a href="#Page_423">423</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Millers, oldtime, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Millionaires, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">commercial, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mines, the, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">nationalization of, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>, + <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Miners, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>, <a href="#Page_447">447</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and mine owners, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">grievances of, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mining, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ministry of Health, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mint, the, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">nationalization of, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Royal, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Misdeeds of the landed gentry, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Miseries of the rich, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Missionaries, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern conscience, the, <a href="#Page_423">423</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern domestic machinery, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern examination-passing classes, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern garden cities and suburbs, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern Italian and Spanish <i>coups d’état</i>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern living, the art of, <a href="#Page_422">422</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern psychological research, <a href="#Page_416">416</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern psychology, <a href="#Page_424">424</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern toleration a myth, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Modern war, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Monarchs, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Money, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251-63</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">congested, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Martian, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">spare, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">measure of value, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a tool for buying and selling, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and merit, <a href="#Page_70">70-71</a>.</li> +<li class="isub1"><i>See</i> Capital, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Money lenders, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Money market, the, <a href="#Page_231">231-9</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">fluctuation of, <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Monogamy, <a href="#Page_411">411</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Monopoly, woman’s natural, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Monsters, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Monte Carlo, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Morality by Act of Parliament, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Morals, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Moratorium, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">More, Sir Thomas, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mormon theocracy, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mormon women, <a href="#Page_411">411</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mormonism, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mormons, the, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Morning Post, the, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Morocco, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Morris, William, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, + <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">his News from Nowhere, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Morris wallpapers, <a href="#Page_393">393</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mortality, excessive, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">infant, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mosaic Law, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Moscow, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Moscow Soviet, the, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Moses, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Moslems, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mother, the author’s, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mothers, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">soldiers’, <a href="#Page_155">155-6</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">widowed, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and wives, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Motion, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">uncontrolled, <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Motor bus companies, sham, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Motor cars, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, + <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Motor charabancs, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Motorists, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mount, Sermon on the, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mozart, W. A., <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Multiple shops, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Multiplication table, the, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipal banks on the Birmingham model, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipal building always insolvent, <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipal committees, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipal debt, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipal electric lighting, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipal exploitation, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipal service, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipal trading, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Municipalization, <a href="#Page_390">390</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Muscovite Marxist Church, the, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Museum, the British, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Music, school-taught, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Mussolini, Benito, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, + <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nakedness, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Napoleon, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, + <a href="#Page_335">335</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Napoleon III, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> + +<li class="indx">National Debt, the, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">cancellation of, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">increase of, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> + +<li class="indx">National Debt redemption levies, <a href="#Page_294">294-7</a></li> + +<li class="indx">National electrification scheme, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">National factories, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> + +<li class="indx">National Gallery, the, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> + +<li class="indx">National housekeeping, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li> + +<li class="indx">National Union of Railway Workers, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nationalists, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nationalization, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of banking, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264-8</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">must be prepared and compensated, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">theoretically sound, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of land, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">examples of, <a href="#Page_105">105-11</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nationalized banks, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nations, League of, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the present, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Natural limit to liberty, <a href="#Page_319">319-30</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Natural Selectionists, Darwinian, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nature, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, + <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, + <a href="#Page_320">320</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">cruelty of, <a href="#Page_437">437</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">hand of, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">human, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the supreme tyrant, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">tyranny of, <a href="#Page_80">80-83</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">voice of, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Navigators, <a href="#Page_422">422</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Navvies, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Navy captains, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Need for play, the, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Needle manufacturers, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Negro slavery, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nell Gwynne, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nelson, Horatio, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Neuters, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Neva, the, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> + +<li class="indx">New Capitalist method, the, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">New churches and secular governments, <a href="#Page_434">434</a></li> + +<li class="indx">New companies, insecurity of, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></li> + +<li class="indx">New pauperism, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">New River Water Company, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></li> + +<li class="indx">New Testament, the, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li> + +<li class="indx">New York, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Newspaper Articles, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Newspapers, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, + <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, + <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>, + <a href="#Page_421">421</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">respectable English, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Newton, Isaac, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nicene Creed, the, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Night cafés, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Night clubs, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nightingale, Florence, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nightingales, two-headed, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nineteenth century revolution of 1832, the, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nineveh, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nitrogen, supply of, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nobel, Alfred, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Noblemen, old-fashioned, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Non-commissioned officers, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nonconformist Protestant ratepayers, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nonconformists, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">persecution of, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nonconformity, <a href="#Page_425">425</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Northern Europe, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Novels, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nuns, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">enclosed, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nurses, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Nursing, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Ocean cables, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Officers, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">military, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">non-commissioned, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Oil harvests, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Oil shops, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Old age pensions, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Old horses, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Old-fashioned parents, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Oligarchs, patrician, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Oligarchy, <a href="#Page_30">30-35</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Oliver Twist, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Olivier, Sidney (Lord), <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Opera, the, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Opera singers, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Operators of calculating machines, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Opium war, the, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Opportunists, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">cautious, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Orators, political, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Order of production, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Organizers, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Outrages, Trade Union, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Overcrowding, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Overpopulation, artificial, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Overwork, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Owen, Robert, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Oxford University, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Pacific, the, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pacifism, <a href="#Page_449">449</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Painlevé, Paul, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Painters, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Palaces, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Palm Beach, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pampering, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Panem et circenses</i>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pantheists, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Paper money, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Papers, the, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">capitalist and anti-capitalist, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">capitalist, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the Sunday, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the daily, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">illustrated, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Paraclete, the, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parasitic paradises, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parasitic proletariat, revolt of the, <a href="#Page_277">277-9</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parasitism, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84-5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parcel Post, C.O.D. development of, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parentage, compulsory, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">State endowment of, <a href="#Page_411">411</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parents, the author’s, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and children, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_408">408</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">old-fashioned, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">old Roman rights of, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">natural and adoptive, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">proletarian, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Paris, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Paris Commune of 1871, the, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parish Councils, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parish meetings, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Park Lane, <a href="#Page_276">276</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parks, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_400">400</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parliament, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60-61</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, + <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">in Gladstone’s time, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and the Churches, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parliamentary Labor Party, the, <a href="#Page_447">447</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parliamentary struggle, the, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parlormaids, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Parsons, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Partnerships, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Party candidates, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Party discipline, less rigorous now, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Party newspapers, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Party politics, <a href="#Page_343">343-8</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Party System, the, <a href="#Page_348">348-54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Party Whips, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pasteur, Louis, <a href="#Page_433">433</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Patents, <a href="#Page_403">403</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Patriotism, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Paul, Saint, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, + <a href="#Page_459">459</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pauperization, national, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pawnbrokers, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Pax Americana</i>, the, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Payment of M.P.’s, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pearls, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">imitation, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Peasant proprietors, French, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Peasant proprietorship, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Peerages, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Peers, Irish, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pence, Peter’s, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Penn, William, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Penny postage, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Penny transport, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pensions, old age, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">widows’, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Penzance, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Persecution of Russians in America, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Personal liberty, the pet topic of the leisured class, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Personal property, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Personal righteousness, <a href="#Page_95">95-9</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Personal talent, possessors of, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Peru, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pessimism, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a by-product of capitalism, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pet dogs, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Peter, Saint, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Peter the Great, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Peterborough, the Bishop of, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Petrograd, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Philanthropy, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Philosophers, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Philosophy, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Phosphorus poisoning, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Physicians, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Physicists, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Physics, <a href="#Page_423">423</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pickpockets, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Picture galleries, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Picture gallery attendants, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Piece work, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Piece work wages, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Piece worker, the, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Piers, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pin machines, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pin makers, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pin money, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pin-making, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pinero, Sir Arthur, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pins, manufacture of, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pirate crews, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pirates, <a href="#Page_457">457</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pisteurs. <i>See</i> Dancing partners</li> + +<li class="indx">Pitt, William, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Plagues, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Plato, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Platonic rule, the, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Play, need for, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Playing, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Plays, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pleasures, manufactured, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Plumbers, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Plutocracy, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poincaré, Raymond, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poison gas, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poison gas shells, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Police, the, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>, <a href="#Page_393">393</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, + <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_400">400</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Police constables, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Police officers, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Policemen, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Policewomen, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Political disciplinarians, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Political economy, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">bad, <a href="#Page_50">50-51</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Polygamy, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Solomonic, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Polytechnics, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pooh-Bah, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poor, legalized robbery of the, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poor Law, the, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Government administration of, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poor Law Guardians, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, + <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poor Law officers, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poor Law relief, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poor relations, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poor white trash, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pope, the, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Popes, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poplar, <a href="#Page_302">302</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Poplarism, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Popular inventions, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Popularity of lavish expenditure, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Population, checks on, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">decrease in France and increase in Germany, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">importance of rate of increase, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Population question, the, <a href="#Page_83">83-92</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pork packers, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Port Sunlight, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Porters, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">ambulance, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">railway, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Portsmouth, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Positive reasons for equality, <a href="#Page_68">68-70</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Positivist societies, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Post Office, the, <a href="#Page_106">106-7</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Post Office Savings Bank, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Post offices and savings banks, national, <a href="#Page_267">267</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Postal conventions, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Postal system, the, <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Postmasters, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Postmaster-General, the, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Postmen, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Postmistresses, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Potter, Beatrice, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>. <i>See</i> Webb, Beatrice</li> + +<li class="indx">Poverty, <a href="#Page_42">42-5</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">abolition of, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">as a punishment, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Franciscan, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">infectious, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and pestilence, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and progress, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Powers, the leading military, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Practical business men, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prayer Book, revision of the, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Preachers, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Precedence, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pregnancy, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prejudice and common sense, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Preliminaries to nationalization, <a href="#Page_274">274-6</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Preparatory schools, <a href="#Page_417">417</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Presence, the Real, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Presidents, American, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Presidents and patriarchs, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Press, the, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>. <i>See</i> Newspapers</li> + +<li class="indx">Press, Church, and school, <a href="#Page_63">63-5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prices, <a href="#Page_260">260</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prices and profits, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Priests, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_429">429</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">power of, <a href="#Page_430">430</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prima donnas, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prime Minister, the average Capitalist, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prime Ministers, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Jewish and Gentile, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Primo di Rivera, General, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Primogeniture, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prince Rupert’s Drop, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prince of Wales, the, <a href="#Page_118">118</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Princes, merchant, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prisons, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Private enterprise, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131-3</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">proper business of, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and public utility, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Private property, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Privates, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prize-fighters, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prize-fights, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proclamations, royal or dictatorial, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Professional billiard players, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Professional classes, the, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Professional fees, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Professional politicians, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Professions open to women, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Professors, university, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Profiteers, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Profits, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">not a measure of utility, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and prices, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Progress and Poverty</i>, Henry George’s, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prohibition, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletarian dictators, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletarian leader, the typical, <a href="#Page_452">452</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletarian papers, the, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletarian parents, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletarian resistance to Capitalism, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletarian voters, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletarianism, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletarians, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, + <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proletariat, the, <a href="#Page_183">183-6</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, + <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a>, + <a href="#Page_448">448</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">parasitic and Socialist, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">plunder of, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and proprietariat, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Promiscuity, social, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Promised Land, the, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Promoters, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Promotion, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Property, literary, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">personal, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">private, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">real, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">secures maximum of leisure to owners, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Property owners, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proportional Representation, <a href="#Page_454">454</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proprietary Trade Unionism, <a href="#Page_447">447</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prostitutes, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Prostitution, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">male, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Protection, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Protectionists from the Midlands, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Protestants, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, + <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Proudhon, Joseph, <a href="#Page_466">466</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Pseudo-Socialism, <a href="#Page_298">298</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Psycho-analysis, the morbidities of, <a href="#Page_420">420</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Psychology, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Public departments, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Public Health Committees, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Public houses, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Public libraries, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Public opinion, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Public schools, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>, + <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Public trustee, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Public works, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Punch</i>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Punjab, the, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Purchasing power, transfer of from the rich to the Government, <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Purdah, women in, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></li> + +<li class="indx">“Pussyfoot” Johnson, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Quack cures, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">remedies, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Quaker meetings, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">schools, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Quakers, the, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Quarrelling, domestic, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Quartermaster-sergeants, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Queen, the, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Racehorse trainers, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Racing stables, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Radicals, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Radio, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Radium, the cost of, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ragpickers, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Raid on Russian Arcos Officers, the, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railroadmaster-General, wanted a, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway, the Great Western, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway, the London, Midland and Scottish, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway accidents, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway Board, wanted a, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway chairmen, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway guards, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway porters, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway signalmen, <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway travelling, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railway workers, <a href="#Page_457">457</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railwaymen, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Railways, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, + <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">State, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rank, military, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">“Rat-houses” (non-union), <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rate collectors, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ratepayers, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">exploited by workers, <a href="#Page_302">302</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rates, <a href="#Page_117">117-22</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and taxes, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Reactionaries, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Real property, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Reason, goddess of, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Recognition of Trade Unions, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Red Cross, the, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Red flag, the, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Red Indian morals, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Red Russian scare, the, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Redistribution of income, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Reform Bill of 1832, the, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>, <a href="#Page_452">452</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Reformation, the, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Reforms, disguised, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">popular, <a href="#Page_299">299</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Registrar, the civil, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Registrar-General, the, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Relations, poor, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Religion, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">male and female, <a href="#Page_440">440</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Religious dissensions, <a href="#Page_359">359-70</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Religious instruction hour, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rent, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122-6</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the meaning of, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rent of ability, <a href="#Page_331">331-43</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">called profit, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Republic, the Communist, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Republican Governments, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Republicans, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Research, scientific, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rest cures, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Restaurants, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Resting, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Restricting output, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Resumption of land by the Crown, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Retail trade less respectable than wholesale, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Retail traders, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Retail trades, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Revolt of the parasitic proletariat, <a href="#Page_277">277-9</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Revolution, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the industrial, <a href="#Page_137">137-40</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the Russian, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Revolutionists, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Revolutions, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370-79</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rhodes, Cecil, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rhodesia, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ricardo, David, <a href="#Page_465">465</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rich, the idle, <a href="#Page_59">59-62</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">miseries of the, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the new, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the old, now called the New Poor, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rich women, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Righteousness, personal, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rioters, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Riveters, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Riviera, the, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roads, <a href="#Page_391">391</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">metalled, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roadways, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roaming, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roberts of Kandahar, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Robespierre, Maximilien, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Robinson Crusoe, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rockefeller, John Davidson, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rockefeller charities, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rogues, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roi Soleil, le, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roman Catholic schools, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roman Catholicism, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roman Catholics, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, + <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roman Empire, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rome, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">ancient, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Church of, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Roulette table, the, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rousseau, Jean Jacques, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Routine, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Routine management, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Routine work, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Royal Academy of Arts, the, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Royal Family, the, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Rubber harvests, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ruined shopkeepers, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ruins of empires, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Runaway car of Capitalism, the, <a href="#Page_314">314-19</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ruskin, John, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>, <a href="#Page_466">466</a>, + <a href="#Page_467">467</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">his Ethics of the Dust, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Fors Clavigera, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russia, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, + <a href="#Page_373">373</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>, <a href="#Page_409">409</a>, + <a href="#Page_439">439</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a>, <a href="#Page_453">453</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">dictatorship in, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian Archbishop, the, <a href="#Page_439">439</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian Capitalist civilization, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian Communist, the, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian Government, the, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, + <a href="#Page_439">439</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian International Church, the, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian landlords, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian peasants, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">people, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian Revolution, the, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian Revolutionaries, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian Soviet, the, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, + <a href="#Page_406">406</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian State, the, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian subscription to Strike funds, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russian word Bolshevik, the, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Russians, the, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Sables, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sadists, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>, <a href="#Page_416">416</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Safety valves, <a href="#Page_279">279-84</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sailors, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saint Augustine, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saint Francis, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saint Helena, the island of, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saint Joan, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saint Paul, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, + <a href="#Page_459">459</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saint Peter, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saint Simon, the speculations of, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saints, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Salt Lake City, the Latter Day Saints of, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Samaritans, Good, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> + +<li class="indx">San Francisco, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sanitary inspectors, public, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sapphira, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saving, the fallacy of, <a href="#Page_6">6-7</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Savings banks, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Savings certificates, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Savior, the, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_463">463</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Saviors, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sawgrinders, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sawyers, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scabs, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scarecrows, boy, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scavengers, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scent, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Schadenfreude</i>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Schiller, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scholarships, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> + +<li class="indx">School, Church, and Press, <a href="#Page_63">63-5</a></li> + +<li class="indx">School attendance, compulsory, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li> + +<li class="indx">School attendance visitors, <a href="#Page_394">394</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></li> + +<li class="indx">School teaching, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Schoolchildren, <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Schoolmasters, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Schoolmistresses, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Schools, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, + <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">like Bastilles, <a href="#Page_413">413</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">like prisons or child-farms, <a href="#Page_413">413</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">public, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>, <a href="#Page_423">423</a>, + <a href="#Page_428">428</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">village, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">secondary, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">State, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">elementary, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">preparatory, <a href="#Page_417">417</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">infant, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Science, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>, + <a href="#Page_461">461</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and State compulsion, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">power of, <a href="#Page_437">437</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">professors of, <a href="#Page_436">436</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scientific management, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scotland, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, + <a href="#Page_431">431</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">shooting lodges in, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scotland Yard, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scriveners, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sculleries, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Scullerymaids, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sculptors, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sea captains, <a href="#Page_422">422</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Second-rate work, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Secondary schools, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Secretaries of State, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Self-government in Egypt, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Selfridge’s, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Selkirk, Alexander, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sempstresses, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sending capital out of the country, <a href="#Page_140">140-44</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sentries, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Separatist sects, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Serajevo murder, the, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Serbia, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Serfdom, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Serfs, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sergeants, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sermon on the Mount, the, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Servants, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118-19</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, + <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">domestic, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83-4</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, + <a href="#Page_323">323</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Service, domestic, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Service, military, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">compulsory, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">righteousness of, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Service flats, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Services, international and national, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Seven ways of distribution, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Seventeenth-century revolutions, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Severn, the, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sewermen, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sex, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sextons, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shaftesbury, Lord, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shakespear, William, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sham Socialism, <a href="#Page_299">299-308</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shareholders, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shares, buying and selling, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">imaginary, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">preference and ordinary, <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shaw, Bernard, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_470">470</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sheep runs, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sheffield, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sheffield sawgrinders, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shelley, Percy Bysshe, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shifting centres of empires, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ship captains, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shipyards, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shoes, high-heeled, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shooting boxes, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shop assistants, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, + <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shop Hours Act, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shopkeepers, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shopkeeping, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shopmen, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shopping, <a href="#Page_105">105-11</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shops, bucket, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">multiple, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Shorthand typists, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Showrooms, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Siamese twins, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Silk stockings, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Simple, Sloth, and Presumption, Bunyan’s, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Singers, two-headed, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Single taxers, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sirdar, the, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sisters, the Tudor, <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Skyscrapers, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slaters, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slave trade, the, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slavedrivers, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slavery, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slogan, Marx’s, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sloggers, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slumps, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slum towns, demolition of, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slum userers, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Slums, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, + <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, + <a href="#Page_378">378</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Smallpox epidemics, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Smith, Adam, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Smith, Joseph, <a href="#Page_410">410</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Smithies, village, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Smoke, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Smoke abatement, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Smuggling, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of drugs, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Snobbery, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Snowball letters, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soap kings, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Social changes, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Social creed, the, <a href="#Page_427">427</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Socialism, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">alarmist idea of, <a href="#Page_299">299</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and children, <a href="#Page_412">412-29</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and liberty, <a href="#Page_393">393-406</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and marriage, <a href="#Page_406">406-12</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and superior brains, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and the Churches, <a href="#Page_429">429-43</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">as a religion, <a href="#Page_441">441</a></li> +<li class="isub1">books on, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Catholic rather than democratic, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">constitutional, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> +<li class="isub1">constructive political machinery of, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">diagnostic of, <a href="#Page_92">92-4</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">dread of, <a href="#Page_393">393</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">emotional, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">establishment of, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">fancy, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">first and last commandment of, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">genuine and sham, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">idealist, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">matter of law, not personal righteousness, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">new, <a href="#Page_392">392</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">not charity, <a href="#Page_95">95-6</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">object of, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">secular, <a href="#Page_443">443</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">series of Parliamentary measures, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">unskilled, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">utopian and theocratic, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Socialist societies, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Socialist State and the child, the, <a href="#Page_424">424</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Socialists, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a mixed lot, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and Trade Unionists, Cabinet of, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">deprecate bloodshed, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">joining the, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">who are not Socialists, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Society of Friends, the, <a href="#Page_435">435</a></li> + +<li class="indx">S.P.C.C., the, <a href="#Page_362">362</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">records of, <a href="#Page_412">412</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sociologists, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Socrates, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_453">453</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soldiering, not advisable for women, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soldiers, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, + <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, + <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a>, <a href="#Page_405">405</a>, <a href="#Page_411">411</a>, + <a href="#Page_433">433</a>, <a href="#Page_436">436</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">demobilized, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soldiers’ mothers, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soldiers’ wives, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Solent, the, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Solicitors, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, + <a href="#Page_458">458</a>, <a href="#Page_459">459</a>, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Solomon, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Solomonic polygamy, <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Solon, <a href="#Page_461">461</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Sonata, the Pathetic</i>, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Song of the Shirt</i>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soot, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx"><i>Sorcerer’s Apprentice, The</i>, <a href="#Page_157">157-61</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sorceresses, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soul, the, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> + +<li class="indx">South Africa, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> + +<li class="indx">South African War, the, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">South America, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>, <a href="#Page_437">437</a></li> + +<li class="indx">South American Revolutions, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> + +<li class="indx">South Carolina, the State of, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a></li> + +<li class="indx">South of England, the, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> + +<li class="indx">South Sea Islands, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Southampton, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soviet, the Russian, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, + <a href="#Page_406">406</a>, <a href="#Page_407">407</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a>, <a href="#Page_442">442</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soviet legislators, the, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Soviets, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Spain, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a>, + <a href="#Page_453">453</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">dictatorship in, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Spare food, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Spare money. <i>See</i> Capital, and Capitalism</li> + +<li class="indx">Spartacus, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Spartan routine of the old rich, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Speculation, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239-43</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Speech, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Spencer, Herbert, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Spencer, Robert, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>. <i>See</i> Sunderland, Earl of</li> + +<li class="indx">Spinoza, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sport, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sports, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Squeers, Mr, <a href="#Page_429">429</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stage, the, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Standard wages, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Star Chamber, the, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_434">434</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stars and Stripes, the, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Starvation wages, <a href="#Page_198">198</a></li> + +<li class="indx">State Capitalism, <a href="#Page_298">298</a></li> + +<li class="indx">State interference, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">with Church teaching, <a href="#Page_437">437</a>, <a href="#Page_438">438</a></li> + +<li class="indx">State railways, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> + +<li class="indx">State schools, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Statesmen, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stationmasters, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Steamships, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Steel smelters, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stenographers. <i>See</i> Typists</li> + +<li class="indx">Stewardesses, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stock Exchange, the, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, + <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stockbreeding, <a href="#Page_53">53</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stockbrokers, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, + <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stockjobbers, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stonehenge, <a href="#Page_439">439</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Strawberries, January, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Strike, the General, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Strikes, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>, + <a href="#Page_356">356</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Socialist remedies for, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Strindberg, August, <a href="#Page_470">470</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Struggle between Capitalist and Labor Parties in Parliament, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Stupid women, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Subalterns, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Subsidies, exploitations of the taxpayer by bankrupt Capitalism, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Subsidies and doles demoralizing, <a href="#Page_303">303</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Subsidized private enterprise, <a href="#Page_386">386-91</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Subsistence wage, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sudan, the, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Suez Canal, the, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Suffragettes, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Suffragists, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Summer schools, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sunday clothes, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sunday golf, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sunday Observance Acts, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sunday school teachers, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sunderland, the Earl of, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Supernationalism, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Supertax, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Supply and demand, <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Surgeons, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>, <a href="#Page_422">422</a>, + <a href="#Page_432">432</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Surgical baronets, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Surveyors, <a href="#Page_422">422</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Suttee, <a href="#Page_427">427</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sweating, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sweating of one industry by another, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Sweden, <a href="#Page_448">448</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Swift, Dean, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_458">458</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Swindlers, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Switzerland, <a href="#Page_431">431</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Syndicalism, <a href="#Page_447">447</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Syndicalists, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Tailors, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Talent, exploitation of, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tanners, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tax collectors, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tax on credit, resultant chaos from, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Taxation, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of unearned incomes, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of capital as a means of nationalizing without compensating, <a href="#Page_277">277</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Taxes, <a href="#Page_111">111-17</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tea, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Teachers, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, + <a href="#Page_412">412</a>, <a href="#Page_416">416</a>, <a href="#Page_420">420</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">State, <a href="#Page_424">424</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Teaching, <a href="#Page_415">415</a>, <a href="#Page_424">424</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">coercive, <a href="#Page_414">414</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">corrupt, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Teetotallers, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Telegrams, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Telegraph rates, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Telephone messages, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Telephone operators, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Telephone and telegraph services, III, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Telephones, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, + <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Telephoning, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ten Commandments, the, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tenements, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thackeray, William Makepeace, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Theatre, the art of the, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Theatres, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Theocracy, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_435">435</a>, <a href="#Page_443">443</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Theosophist schools, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thibet, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thieves, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Third-class travel, <a href="#Page_419">419</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thirty-nine Articles, the, <a href="#Page_425">425</a>, <a href="#Page_441">441</a>, <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thompson, Big Bill, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Three R’s, the, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thrift, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thucydides, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thugs, the, <a href="#Page_440">440</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Thurso, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tides, the, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tied houses, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Time wages, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tinville, Fouquier, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Titles, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Toasters, electric, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tobacconists, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tokio, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Toll bridges, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tolstoy, Leo, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tono-Bungay, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Toots, Mr, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tories, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_444">444</a>, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and Whigs, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Torquemada, Thomas de, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_430">430</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tourists, American, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tower of Babel, the, <a href="#Page_445">445</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trade, the. <i>See</i> Drink</li> + +<li class="indx">Trade Union Capitalism, <a href="#Page_204">204-13</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trade Union secretaries, <a href="#Page_451">451</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trade Unionism, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_448">448</a>, <a href="#Page_462">462</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">weakness of, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">aristocracy of, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">first really scientific history of, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">a contradiction of Socialism, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trade Unionist Government, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trade Unionists, <a href="#Page_446">446</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">number of, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and Socialists, Cabinet of, <a href="#Page_221">221</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trade Unions, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>, + <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_462">462</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Capitalist, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trades Facilities Acts, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tradesmen, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_457">457</a>, + <a href="#Page_458">458</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trading stations, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trains, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tramps, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, + <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tramways, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">horse, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Transport services, <a href="#Page_383">383</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Transport Workers’ Union, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trappists, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Treasuries, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Treasury, the, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a>, + <a href="#Page_390">390</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Treasury notes, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, + <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Treaties, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tripoli, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trollope, Anthony, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Troops, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trotsky, Leo, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trustee, the Public, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Trusts, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tsar, the, <a href="#Page_373">373</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_439">439</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tsardom, the, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">collapse of, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tsars, marriage under the, <a href="#Page_406">406</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tunisia, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Turgot, <a href="#Page_459">459</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Turkey, <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Turnpike roads, <a href="#Page_131">131-2</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Turnpikes, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Twain, Mark, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Twist, Oliver, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_413">413</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Two-headed nightingales, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Typhus epidemics, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Typists, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tyranny, of nature, <a href="#Page_80">80-83</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">pseudo-scientific, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">social, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Tyrants, <a href="#Page_444">444</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Ugly children, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Ulster, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Uncles in Australia, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Undertakers, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unearned incomes, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unemployment, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unemployment insurance, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unemployment insurance officers, <a href="#Page_394">394</a> 395</li> + +<li class="indx">Unhappiness incurable by money, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Union Congresses, the, <a href="#Page_451">451</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Union Jack, the, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_447">447</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Union of Mathematical Instrument Makers, <a href="#Page_417">417</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Union of Soviet Republics, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unionists, the, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unitarian schools, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">United States, the, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_432">432</a>. <i>See</i> America</li> + +<li class="indx">United States Government, the, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Universities, the, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>, + <a href="#Page_417">417</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>. <i>See</i> Oxford and Cambridge</li> + +<li class="indx">University extension lectures, <a href="#Page_456">456</a></li> + +<li class="indx">University professors, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">manners, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">snobs, <a href="#Page_418">418</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">students, <a href="#Page_417">417</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unladylike activities, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unmarried daughter and younger son class, the genteel disendowed, <a href="#Page_415">415</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unmarried daughters, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unpaid magistrates, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unproductive labor, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unsuitable marriages, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Unwillingness to be governed, our, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Upholsterers, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Urdu, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Utopias, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_453">453</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Vaccination, compulsory, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Vaccination officers, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Vaccinia, generalized, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Vacuum cleaners, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Valets, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Value of Greek, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of men and women, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of souls, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Vegetarianism, <a href="#Page_438">438</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Venereal disease, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Vermin, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Vesuvius, <a href="#Page_302">302</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Victoria, Queen, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>, + <a href="#Page_304">304</a>, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Victorian employers, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">ladies, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">parents, <a href="#Page_428">428</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">point of view, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">women, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Village blacksmiths, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">carpenters, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">schools, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Villagers, <a href="#Page_421">421</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Villages, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">American, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Virgil, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Virtue, female, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Vivisectors, <a href="#Page_460">460</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Voice of Nature, the, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Voluntary work, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Volunteer armies, <a href="#Page_428">428</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Voltaire, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>, <a href="#Page_431">431</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Voter, the female, <a href="#Page_453">453</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Votes for everybody, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Votes for women, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_452">452</a>, <a href="#Page_454">454</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Wage workers, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, + <a href="#Page_221">221</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wages, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">standard, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">of sin, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">wives’, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">time and piecework, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wages Boards, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wagner, Richard, <a href="#Page_414">414</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Waiters, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Waitresses, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403</a>, <a href="#Page_448">448</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wall Street, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wallas, Graham, <a href="#Page_468">468</a></li> + +<li class="indx">War, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">modern, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the late (1914-1918), <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, + <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, + <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_402">402</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the South African, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">General Strike against, <a href="#Page_449">449</a>, <a href="#Page_450">450</a></li> + +<li class="indx">War Debt, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">to America, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">domestic, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> + +<li class="indx">War Loan, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li> + +<li class="indx">War Loan interest, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> + +<li class="indx">War Loan register, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> + +<li class="indx">War Loan Stock, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a></li> + +<li class="indx">War Office, the, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">War taxation, <a href="#Page_114">114-15</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wardresses, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Warehousemen, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Warwick, Countess of, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Washerwomen, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Washing, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Washington, George, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Waste of time, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Watch committees, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Water power, wasted, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Water wagon, the, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Watts, G. F., <a href="#Page_233">233</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Weary Willies, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_440">440</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Weavers, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Weaving mills, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Weaving sheds, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354</a>, <a href="#Page_467">467</a>, <a href="#Page_468">468</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Sidney, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">Beatrice, <a href="#Page_467">467</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wedding presents, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Weeding the world, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Week ends, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wellington, the Duke of, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_419">419</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">his horse, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wells, H. G., <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_469">469</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wembley, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wesley, John, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Western women, extravagances of, <a href="#Page_427">427</a></li> + +<li class="indx">West Indian plantations, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Westminster, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Westminster Abbey, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Westminster Confession, the, <a href="#Page_425">425</a></li> + +<li class="indx">What we should buy first, <a href="#Page_49">49-52</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Whigs, the, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">and Tories, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Whips, the, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Whist drives, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Whiteley’s, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wholesale trade formerly more respectable than retail, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wholesalers, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Why confiscation has succeeded hitherto, <a href="#Page_284">284-8</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Widows’ pensions, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wife and mother, the occupation of, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wight, Isle of, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> + +<li class="indx">William the Conqueror, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> + +<li class="indx">William III, King, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a>, <a href="#Page_426">426</a></li> + +<li class="indx">William IV, King, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Windfalls, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wireless concerts, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wireless sets, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Witchcraft, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wives and mothers, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wives’ wages, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Woman, <a href="#Page_361">361</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">The Scarlet, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Woman question, the, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Woman’s natural monopoly, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Women, changeable, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">clever, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">stupid, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">married, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">rich, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">in the labor market, <a href="#Page_196">196-204</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Woodcutters, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Woodman, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Woolbrokers, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Woolwich Arsenal, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Work, an author’s, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">craze for, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">creative, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">routine, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">first-rate, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">second-rate, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_398">398</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Workers, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">equal leisure for, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">open-air, <a href="#Page_401">401</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">scientific, <a href="#Page_386">386</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">snobbery among, <a href="#Page_400">400</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Workhouse, the, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_456">456</a>;</li> +<li class="isub1">the general, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Workmen, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> + +<li class="indx">World War, <a href="#Page_457">457</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Wrecking, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Yahoos, <a href="#Page_458">458</a></li> + +<li class="indx">Younger son and unmarried daughter class, <a href="#Page_415">415</a></li> + + +<li class="ifrst">Zanzibar, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> +</ul> + +<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="transnote"> + +<p class="c">Transcriber’s Notes:</p> + +<p>Variations in spelling and hyphenation are retained.</p> + +<p>Perceived typographical errors have been changed.</p> + +</div> + + +<div style='text-align:center'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75859 ***</div> +</body> +</html> + diff --git a/75859-h/images/cover.jpg b/75859-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..dea21a1 --- /dev/null +++ b/75859-h/images/cover.jpg diff --git a/75859-h/images/fig1.jpg b/75859-h/images/fig1.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..b9e98c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/75859-h/images/fig1.jpg diff --git a/75859-h/images/fig2.jpg b/75859-h/images/fig2.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..70491c4 --- /dev/null +++ b/75859-h/images/fig2.jpg |
