I am certain, Comrade Editor, that “Cussedness” reigns universal in the human heart. No sooner have I got rid of one difficulty than I stand confronted with another. I answer a question in a manner at once brief, complete, and lucid and lo ! a fresh questioner comes smilingly forward with “Yes, that is all right but arising from that answer how?” Yea, verily, the answering the doubts and difficulties of men is indeed a veritable labour of sisyphus !
o o o
The aforegoing remarks are torn from my agonised soul by the following letter which I have just now received—Dear Econonicus, in your monthly grunt against things that are I see that you write against authority as exercised by experts. Apart from the fact that our ultimate appeal must ever be to the expert, and that the worker displays as much class bias as does the capitalist, is it not the case that any Socialist society must be more strongly under the control of authority—whether of the demagogue or of the pedagogue—that the rights of the minority will be denied them, and that, in a word, Socialism will be a gigantic slavery,
o o o
My correspondent in a short space covers a very wide field. The principles of scientific evidence; the psychology of class bias; the rights of the minority ; and the organisation existing within a Socialist community: these are the matters that engage his attention.
o o o
My correspondent who, by-the-bye, signs himself “Anti-Rant,” must bear with me if I dwell but lightly upon the three foremost of those topics in order that I may examine into the validity of his last statement. Last month I stated my opinion that the authority of the expert was a fallible one and that our ultimate appeal must be to the collective experience of mankind, whether this experience is found in written records, in personal experience, or in those ideas—commonly termed innate—which are the transmitted experience of his progenitors. From this opinion I can see no present reason to depart.
o o o
We shall endeavour with the courtesy of the Editor to deal with the question of class-bias on a future occasion and the question of the rights of minorities is bound up in no small degree with the subject of tyranny.
o o o
This charge of tyranny has often been levelled against the Socialist. Germinating in the mind of some worthy member of The Liberty and Property Defence League it has found an echo in the arguments of those always ready to give utterance to such cries. When we say that property is in its very essence a means of oppression, that it can only continue to exist in its present capitalistic form by virtue of its power of forcing men to work through the hunger of themselves, their wives, and their children, we meet with the retort that under Socialism tyranny will be yet more rampant and that man will then have every detail of his life arranged for him by the State.
o o o
To us this appears as a complete misunderstanding of the most rudimentary principles of Socialism. It is based upon the idea that the transformation of Society from Capitalism to Socialism is to be cataclysmic, instantaneous, and complete. On the contrary we Socialists contend that Socialism must pass through various phases before it reaches the final stage idealised by the Socialist. No matter how sudden may be the downfall of capitalism it will take some little time for Society to be new-builded with beautiful homes and beautiful lives for all mankind.
o o o
Another misconception is the idea that Society under Socialism is to be governed by a bureaucratic State. This idea while quite unwarranted is in some measure justified by the attempts of the Fabian Society, the I.L.P., and other kindred bodies to foist upon the people of these islands a local bureaucratic collectivism.
o o o
The main fact to be remembered in this connection is that society under Socialism is the entire community, and that while it is true that the community as a whole will not come and see that you have your house built in the orthodox way, yet the community as a whole will be the ultimate arbiter in all things relating to the welfare of its members.
o o o
In a society based upon common ownership and control of the means requisite for producing and distributing the things necessary for human consumption, and where all things being thus held in common there are no distinctions of social position, it would be expected of everyone capable of working that he should take his fair share in the work of producing the common wealth. Should any refuse to perform this necessary work the community would have its own method—probably of denying them the right to consume the wealth produced by others—of bringing such recalcitrant persons to book,
o o o
Outside this requirement by the community that no person should be allowed to idly enjoy the fruits of the labours of others it is unlikely that there would be any interference with the lives of men. The self-regarding actions of men would be greatly extended by minimising the amount of work necessary for the securing a subsistence.
o o o
John Stuart Mill said “The principle is that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number is self-protection : that the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community against his will is to prevent harm to others.”
o o o
Under Socialism this principle will be properly observed, whereas to-day mankind is divided into two classes, one of which rules the other—the smaller capitalist class which monopolises all the advantages of our civilisation, constitutes Society, the State. By its owning the country it is enabled to enslave the other class the working class—and to tyrannise over them. Tyranny is the necessary outcome of unequal possessions and can cease only on the cessation of privately owned wealth.
o o o
Socially owned wealth means a society of equals, of men possessing equal rights. Under such a society there will be no place for tyranny. As to-day social organisation will be the reflection of industrial organisation and the industrial organisation based upon equal wealth will be reflected by the organisation of society based upon equal social power. Under such a system of Society—
“Tyrants will fleeLike a dream’s wild imagery,”
and tyranny, after tarrying throughout the centuries of privately owned property will vanish from the world of the future before the incoming Socialism as rapidly as difficulties are removed by the flowing pen of—
Economicus.
I feared that this was the last Doubts and Difficulties column but there's some more in 1906.
ReplyDeleteI'm still convinced that 'Economicus' is Jacomb.