The Greek philosopher Aristotle believed that chattel-slavery would exist eternally.
Such a belief was natural at the time Aristotle lived, for on all sides were slaves and slave-owners. More important still, it must be remembered that the means of wealth production were then at a low stage of development: they could provide comfort and luxury for a few people only if the masses were in a state of absolute slavery. Consequently, Aristotle could not foresee that, as a method of piling up wealth for a ruling class, chattel-slavery would at some future date become inadequate and be superseded by more efficient forms of human exploitation.
To-day, we have much more information to hand than had Aristotle. We have, for instance, access to historical data which, for obvious reasons, were beyond the ken of anyone living in Ancient Greece.
By a study of history the working class can learn many useful lessons, one of which is this : society and human relationships are constantly changing: ideas and morals are not permanent, but are subject to change as are the methods of producing the material things needed by man.
However, notwithstanding the teachings of history, one meets many people, including those with a university education, who can conceive of improvement ONLY within the present system of society. They are unable to visualise society without capital, wages, empires, trade and all the other paraphernalia of Capitalism.
Yet, sooner or later, Capitalism will give place to another form of society. Just as older forms of society—Primitive Communism, Chattel-Slavery and Feudalism—were in turn superseded, so will Capitalism itself be superseded some day. From the worker’s point of view, the sooner Capitalism gives place to Socialism the better it will be; it is for this reason that we, Socialists and members of the working class, propagate Socialism.
What Makes Change Inevitable ?
It would, however, be a serious mistake to imagine that the voice of the Socialist is the sole agent in bringing about the change. The Socialist has an ally which is, so to speak, pushing on ahead all the time in order to prepare the road and make easier his task. This ally is ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, which caused man to abandon the earlier forms of society and which finally will force him to abandon Capitalism.
When chattel-slavery and wage-slavery came into conflict during the last century in America, it was not the kindliness of human nature that caused the former to be replaced by the latter. Chattel-slavery was not ended because man revolted to see his brother degraded and suffering. In fact, most of the supporters of the Anti-Slavery Movement were blind and callous when confronted with the deplorable conditions in which wage-workers toiled and eked out their existence.
Chattel-slavery in America passed away because the manufacturing interests became the predominating interests in the country and wage-labour was more economical for factory work.
Northern capital needed workers it could employ and discard at will—in short, it needed “free” wage-labour.
The following extract taken from the “London Economist”—at that time (1853) the leading organ of British free trade Capitalism—gives point to our statement that the economic factor was decisive in shaping the opposition to chattel-slavery :
“Slaves,” this paper says, “are costly instruments of production. … A slave population hampers its owners in more ways than one. . . . The responsibility of the employer of free labour is at an end when he has paid the covenanted wages; and his advantages in dealing with the general market are exemplified in that THERE ARE MORE FORTUNES MADE BY THE EMPLOYERS OF FREE LABOUR THAN BY SLAVE OWNERS. The Astors, the Girards and the Longwofthys are the millionaires of the States, as the Rothschilds, the Lloyds and the Barings are the millionaires of the old world—not the slave owners, however wealthy, of Carolina, Cuba or Brazil.” (See Simons' “Class Struggles in America.”)
The feudal system in Europe, too, broke down and passed away, when it became a fetter on production. With the discovery and colonisation of new lands in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, there arose an ever-increasing demand for goods. This demand could not be satisfied by a Europe which remained for the most part feudal. The guilds imposed restrictions which were a brake on production. New methods in the producing of goods were, for example, strictly forbidden by the guilds; also a master craftsman was restricted in the number of journeymen he could employ and in the quantity he could turn out. Individuals, therefore, began to break with the guilds and, to avoid public opprobrium, set up their workshops on the outskirts of towns, in country districts or in new towns on the coasts, where the rate of production could develop apace and without hindrance. In time this rising Capitalism began to undermine the guilds, since the goods produced by Capitalist manufacture were cheaper and more plentiful than those produced within the guilds.
Soon the feudal lords, the large landowners, who usually held themselves aloof from industry and trade, found their privileged position challenged. As a class, the old feudal nobility had become superfluous; no longer did it render any service to society. “In the Middle Ages …. the peasant needed the feudal lord, who protected him from violation, relieved him of part of his judicial and administrative duties towards the community, and, above all, freed him from the oppressive burden of military service.” (Kautsky’s “Thomas More and His Utopia.”) With the growth of Capitalism all this was changed. The modern State arose, enforcing internal order. The feudal lord could no longer claim to be the protector of the peasant, nor could he save him from military service. “The army of chivalry was replaced by a paid army, recruited from peasants.” (Kautsky.)
As the child, Capitalism, grew more and more robust, it yelled more and more for the total abolition of those restrictions on trade imposed by feudalism, and which were becoming more and more irksome to the capitalists. Capitalism was in conflict with feudalism. The agents of Capitalism, the capitalist class, fought out a class struggle against the upholders of feudalism, the feudal lords. This class struggle culminated in the gaining of political power by the capitalist class, who, once enthroned with power, began reorganising society so that Capitalism could develop unrestricted.
Thus did the capitalist class gain supremacy on the wave of economic development, thus did Capitalism sweep away feudalism, when feudalism proved inadequate to satisfy new needs.
Socialism Inevitable
The arrival of the capitalist system did not arrest economic development. On the contrary. New methods in industry were introduced with greater rapidity than ever before.
It is precisely this development of Capitalism, this continuous revolutionising of the means of production, which will lead to the end of Capitalism. Socialism will not come because a few thinkers wish it, but because its establishment will become a necessity, felt by the mass of the population, the working class.
Before Capitalism had reached maturity, Socialism was an impossibility. Whenever it happened that some could see the ultimate end of society’s evolution and attempted to hasten its arrival by minority action, they were either crushed by reactionary forces or became disillusioned when confronted by the enormity of their task and by the lack of response from an immature working class. Baboeuf and his followers in France provide us with a classic example of how intellectual idealists, reaching out for a new system of society before conditions had ripened, were stamped out by the armed forces of the capitalist State. And we have all met the old agitator who has given up the struggle as useless because he regards the working class as “a dud egg.”
We, of the Socialist Party of Great Britain, do not consider our class—the working class—as a dud egg.
We do not aim at leading the worker into the promised land; we know, from experience, he cannot be led to Socialism. Socialism will never be established until the workers are willing to cooperate actively in its running, until they have realised that Capitalism is unable to satisfy man’s needs and must go.
Capitalism, as it evolves, with wars and more frequent and prolonged industrial crises, will itself make the workers turn to Socialism.
As time passes, the class struggle, at present waged so blindly by the workers, will take on a new significance. Whereas now, for the average worker, the struggle is waged in order to maintain his standard of living, to gain minor concessions in his working conditions, it will in the future become more and more a struggle against Capitalism as a whole.
The progress of Capitalism over the whole globe is going on apace. Capitalism pushes itself into every nook and corner, thus increasing the number of wage-slaves.
India, once a market for British goods, is itself an exporter of some of the self-same articles. Even China, so often looked upon by the average person as a market for foreign goods, is developing on capitalist lines and producing certain articles in excess of the demands of the home market. In a book, “Empire in the East,” edited by Joseph Barnes, Groves Clark, writing on “Changing Markets,” says:
“This modern cotton industry in China now has reached the point where it is able to supply a large part of the demand in that country for the coarser grades of cloth, and even to furnish considerable amounts of manufactured cotton goods for export . . . But the mills in China, besides having gone far towards closing the Chinese market to foreign manufactured piece goods, also are becoming serious rivals of the mills in Japan in supplying piece goods to the East Indies regions, especially to the large Chinese communities there.” (P. 140.)
The change that has occurred in India and China has either already taken place or is now taking place in many other parts of the world.
The fact is that Capitalism, as it spreads to every corner of the earth, is glutting the markets of the world with goods. Hence it happens, especially in times of economic crisis (as 1929-31), that goods, urgently needed by the workers, are destroyed because no markets for them can be found.
In addition, be it remembered, technique is continuously being improved so that machines become more and more efficient and turn out commodities in ever increasing quantities.
Unfortunately for the life of Capitalism, production always shows a tendency to expand; markets, however, cannot indefinitely be extended to keep pace with this greater and greater production. Production for sale (i.e., profit) becomes, therefore, a fetter, since goods are produced only when they can be sold at a profit.
Thus the point is fast being reached when Capitalism will in most of its industries be permanently unable to produce at full capacity. Indeed, in some industries, this point has already been reached : hence, unemployment.
What of the future, therefore ?
The tendency will be for machines and workmen to stand idle more than ever before. Those in work will be forced to struggle constantly to maintain their standard of living. Big business alone will be able to compete in the restricted and keener markets of the world; the small capitalists, like the workers, will find their position even less secure than previously.
In those days, the power of the capitalist Press will be gone. Promises of improvement will be powerless to soothe a working class already satiated with promises. The working class will become solid against the common enemy : Capitalism. With more and more readiness will workers listen to Socialist propaganda and accept the Socialist position. Socialism will become THE subject of conversation. The workers will see that as long as production for profit prevails, their insecurity and poverty will continue. The issue will become clear cut—SOCIALISM OR CAPITALISM?
And so it is that economic development which caused Chattel-Slavery and Feudalism to pass away, will lead the workers to abolish the capitalist system and its wage-slavery. Modern industry is now producing goods in such quantities that they cannot be consumed in capitalist society, although millions suffer from malnutrition and starvation and are badly clothed. Private ownership of the means of production and the consequent production of goods for profit are preventing the workers from having access to the wealth that they produce, are barring the road to the further progress of the human race. This lesson will be learned by the working class and they will gain political power to introduce Socialism—a society wherein goods will be produced, not to enrich a class consisting of relatively few persons, but by the whole of society for its own enjoyment.
Clifford Allen
Hat tip to ALB for originally scanning this in.
ReplyDeleteMr. Allen was a bit of an optimist.