A history of socialism

by Thomas Kirkup

It will most effectually tend to cultivate the nobler political life in the States that have undertaken it, and we may believe that it will in the course of time train the more backward races in the higher life of self-government, and introduce among them the co-operative organisation of industry which is required by modern conditions. In all this we see a striking contrast to the older empires, in which the domination of race, nation, and class was twice cursed, a curse alike to rulers and ruled, to master and slave, to lord and serf. In these matters generally a reasonable socialism demands the transformation of empire into a free association of free States bound by ties of mutual service. For a fuller treatment of this idea I may refer my readers to the chapter ‘Bonds of Empire’ in my book South Africa Old and New (p. 95).

Referring to questions which were raised in other parts of this book, we believe that recent modifications in the Iron Law of Wages, which have been alleged in confutation of Lassalle’s position, are really symptoms of the decline of capitalism. Such modifications are due to influences which are inconsistent with the continued predominance of capitalism. And here we may say explicitly that socialism has no controversy with the prevalent political economy in so far as it is a correct description and analysis of the prevalent economic system. The aim of socialism is to show why and how that system should and must pass away, and is passing away; and we may believe that this is a much worthier task, from the point of view both of science and the public good, than the microscopic investigation of the conditions of the competitive system, which constitutes so large a portion of the current political economy. Anyhow the practical aim of socialism is to remove and abolish the conditions under which the so-called laws of political economy had their validity. Regarding the assumption so often made by economists that individual self-interest is the solid basis on which science must build, we can only say that it is not science, but a one-sided and erroneous conception of human nature, of human society, and of social evolution, which obviously requires the most serious correction.

With regard to the population question, and the question of the struggle for existence so intimately connected with it, we can no longer ignore the practice of limitation of families, which has now become so prevalent. It cannot be regarded as a satisfactory solution of the population question. In the past it has been one of the surest signs of a stagnant and decadent nation. No race or nation, in which the rights and duties of motherhood or the family moralities are slightly valued, can hope permanently to maintain a high standard of life and worth. We may most surely forecast the future of a class or nation from the manner in which the rights and duties of motherhood are observed by it. To use the language of biology, race suicide is the most unfavourable variation which classes and nations can inflict upon themselves. But we are not in this book concerned with the general question. What we have to note here is that the practice of limiting families, having become so prevalent, will tend to diminish the intensity of the struggle for existence, which it is the aim of socialism to regulate. For this reason we must recognise it as a fact which has an important bearing on our subject.

It was a theory of the Marx school that the bourgeoisie, in the course of the development of capitalism, would be ‘no longer capable of controlling the industrial world.’[^[3]] The recent development of the trust system in America and Germany has shown that the bourgeoisie are only too capable of doing so on the vastest scale. The leaders of the trusts are showing that they can regulate production, wages, prices, and the markets, not for nations only but for the world. Oligarchies showed their capacity in Rome, Carthage, Venice, and Holland for centuries. They came to ruin at last, but the causes of their ruin were wider and deeper than mere want of capacity. With these we are not concerned here. The concern of socialism is that the oligarchy or plutocracy which is foreshadowed in the gigantic trust system should not be allowed to gain a permanent footing, but should be regulated and transformed in the way required by the public good. The trust is a menace alike to labour and to society. With the growth of the trust system free competition really ceases to exist, and the alternative lies between a gigantic system of monopoly and socialism.

We believe also that Marx made a serious mistake in holding that the further development of capitalism will be marked by the growing ‘wretchedness, oppression, slavery, degeneracy, and exploitation’[^[4]] of the working class. Facts and reasonable expectations combine clearly to indicate that the democracy, on which the social evolution of the future depends, is marked by a growing intellectual, moral, and political capacity, and by an increasing freedom and prosperity; and all these things make it only more ardent and capable for further progress and for the great tasks that lie before it. Social progress must in the last resort depend on the character and capacity of the human beings concerned in it. The democracy, the representative and promoter of the new order, shows a growing fitness for its world-historic mission. The claim of socialism to be the dominant form of social organisation in the future must ultimately be its efficiency to fulfil the great ends of social union, and the decisive element in this efficiency must be the fitness of the agents who are to realise it.

This is a point of supreme and far-reaching importance which it will be well for us to ponder. All social problems in the long run resolve themselves into the question of human character. The moral forces control the world and the course of history. It has been the special function of socialism to show that a real and durable freedom can be established only on an economic basis. We should also not forget that such freedom can be attained and secured only by loyalty to reason and especially to moral law. Freedom and social progress, reason and morality, are correlated and organic conceptions which go together and can thrive only in harmony.

Government of State and municipality is only a mechanism, of which the action for good or evil will depend on the spirit by which it is moved. The nationalisation of railways may merely open up a new field of corruption, if there is not integrity to manage them for the public good. Noble ideals are of no avail, if they remain outside of our spiritual framework: they must be assimilated and become part of us. Fine sentiments, unless they are consolidated into character and translated into habitual action, may become an insidious and harmful form of self-indulgence. Let it be understood that in the great struggle for a really free commonwealth against organised wealth, called plutocracy, on which men are now entering, we shall achieve victory only by deserving it. The sacred cause of freedom will not be maintained by mammon-worshippers, parasites, and pedants. No nation or class whose women are slaves of self-indulgence and of fashion can expect to be free. We cannot hope that freedom will thrive among the base and mean, or the hysterical, irresponsible, frivolous, and apathetic.

To use the words of John Milton, it was a ‘strenuous liberty’ which was cherished and maintained by our Puritan forefathers, the fathers and founders of the American Commonwealth. We know with what solemnity and earnestness, with what gravity, deliberation, and foresight they entered on the long struggle against Stuart tyranny. If the Americans and we are to succeed in the coming struggle against plutocracy, an abundant measure of the high and virile qualities which characterised their forefathers and ours will be needed.

Happily signs are not wanting that a spirit and character strenuous and capable of the task of reformation will be forthcoming. In all civilised countries, and especially in America, men have been accomplices in the sin of mammon-worship: success in the struggle for wealth, with its many base and unscrupulous incidents, has been far too highly esteemed. There has been, especially in America, a great moral awakening, which we may expect to have good results among all classes. As regards the working classes, we have seen how long and hard in most countries has been their discipline of privation and sorrow. The representatives of labour have for generations undergone a stern and severe training in prison and exile. In Russia to-day they have been suffering and inflicting horrors which have been far worse.

But as we have repeatedly had occasion to point out in this book, their training in constructive work, in political organisation, in trade unions, and co-operative societies has been vastly more efficacious. Most promising of all; as we have seen, is the co-operative movement, because it best combines the collective use of the means of production and exchange with individual freedom and responsibility. In the vast and ever-widening co-operative movement we can see a new society rising in the midst of the old. Every year it widens and grows, and we hope it will grow and widen till the old, with all its false and base ideals, its unreason, its militarism, its mismanagement, waste, and extravagance has been put away. Hearts have been burning with the sacred fire of noble ideals in the promoting of this grand work. Imaginations have been haunted with beautiful dreams, which have not been vain. But we should prize not less the patient and persevering integrity which, through a multitude of petty and prosaic details, is bearing the movement onward to an ever higher position in the world. At Ghent and other places we may already see both in spirit and material outline the city that is to be, the new society that is rising to make life happy and beautiful for the people who have mourned so long! In the application of the co-operative principle to agriculture we can at last see an ending to the oppression of the tiller of the soil by the usurer and middleman, which has been a stain on civilisation since it began thousands of years ago in the valleys of the Euphrates and the Nile.