[1] Beginning of April, 1919.
The author in the following pages has deliberately avoided confining himself to the terms in common use in standard treatises on political economy. He knows quite well the places which a technical economist will pick out as being amateurish. But he has selected his mode of expression, partly because he desires to address himself also to persons who are not familiar with the literature of sociology and economics, but chiefly, because it is his opinion, that most of what is peculiarly technical in such writings will be shewn by a new age to be partial and defective, even in the very form of its expression.
It may also be thought, that some reference should have been made by the author to other persons, whose social ideas bear an incidental resemblance to his own. It must however be remembered, that in the whole conception here put forward,—a conception which the author believes he owes to long years of practical experience,—the essential point is not whether a particular thought has taken this or that form, but what one takes as one’s starting-ground, and the road one pursues in giving practical realisation to the impulses which underlie this conception. As may be seen from Chapter IV, the author was already doing what he could to get these ideas practically realised, at a time when ideas that look in some respect similar had as yet attracted no attention. [↑]
THE THREEFOLD COMMONWEALTH
Introductory Preface to the New Edition of 1920
The problems presented by social life for solution in our times can be understood by nobody who approaches them with the thought of any kind of utopia in his mind. One’s views and sentiments may lead one to the belief, that certain institutions, which one has mapped out according to one’s own ideas, must be for the happiness of mankind. This belief may carry all the force of passionate conviction; and yet one may be talking quite wide of the actual social question, when one tries to obtain practical recognition for what one believes.
One will find this assertion hold true at the present day, even when pushed to what may appear an absurd extreme. Suppose, for instance, somebody possessed a perfect theoretical solution of the social question, he might nevertheless be acting on an utterly unpractical conviction, if he tried to press this carefully thought-out solution upon mankind. For we are no longer living in an age, when one is justified in believing that public life can be affected in such a way. Men’s souls are differently constituted; and they could never say about public affairs: Here is somebody who understands the social institutions that are needed; we will take his opinion and act on it. Ideas concerning social life simply cannot be brought home to people after this fashion; and it is a fact that is fully recognised in this book, which is already known to a fairly large public. Those who have set it down as utopian, have totally missed its whole aim and intention. Especially has this been the case with those, who themselves cling to a utopian form of thought:—they attribute to the other person what is essentially their own mental characteristic. A practical thinker to-day recognises as one of the experiences of public life, that nothing can be done with an utopian idea, however convincing it may be in appearance. Nevertheless, many people have some idea of this type, which they feel impelled to bring before their fellow-men, especially in the field of economics. They will be forced to recognise that their words are wasted. Their fellow-men can find no use for what they have to offer.
This should be treated as a piece of practical experience; for it points to a fact of importance in public life: namely, the remoteness of people’s thoughts from real life:—how wide their thoughts are from what reality,—economic reality for instance,—demands.
Can one hope to master the tangled intricacies of public affairs, if one brings to them a mode of thought altogether remote from life? This question is not one likely to find general favour; for it involves the admission that one’s way of thought is remote from life. Yet, until this admission is made, it is not possible to approach the other question—the social one. For the remoteness of thought from life is a question of grave concern for the whole modern civilised world; and only when people treat it as such will they see light as to what is needed for social life.