Principles of Political Economy, Vol. 1

by Wilhelm Roscher

Section LXXX.

Socialism And Communism. (Continued.)

We thus see, that the attempts made by socialism and communism are, by no means, phenomena unheard of in the past, [pg 242] and peculiar to modern times, as the blind adherents and opponents of them would have us believe. They are rather diseases [pg 243] of the body social, which have affected every highly civilized nation at certain periods of its existence. If the [pg 244] body be too weak to react healthily and curatively (§ [84]), the evil is very apt to lead to the decline of all true freedom and [pg 245] order. The communist, viewing all other things, especially the organization of the state, only as instruments to supply his material and absolute wants, considers the liberal either as a fool who is ever pursuing the phantoms of the brain, or as a knave who covers his own selfishness under the mask of the public welfare.[480] Hence the adherents of communism are satisfied with any form of government which seems to offer them most, and this a ruthless despotism can do, at least, for the moment. And, although they are ever ready for any revolution in the form of government, and easily to be won over to it, they are most readily captivated by a despotic revolution. On the other hand, when communism seriously threatens all that constitutes the wealth of a people, the owners of that wealth are compelled to fly to any refuge which holds out the promise to protect them from it, although by seeking that same refuge they may destroy their own political freedom.[481] The Achean league, which under the leadership of Aratos, the “enemy of tyrants,” had come into existence, promising so much hope, beheld itself later, and mainly through fear of the contagious effects of Spartan socialism under Cleomenes, compelled [pg 246] to unite with the Macedonians, that is, to give themselves up entirely. (§ 204).

Section LXXXI.

Community Of Goods.

We now, for the present, turn our gaze from the frightful revolution, destructive of all civilization, which would necessarily precede the establishment of a community of goods,[482] and inquire what would be the consequences. Among angels (“gods and sons of gods” of Plato) and mere animals, a community of goods might, perhaps, exist without producing injury. And so, too, it might exist among men bound one to the other by the bonds of the truest love. The life of every model family is accompanied by a species of community of goods.[483] But in more extensive social organizations, this love is never found except as an element of the most exalted religious enthusiasm, which, as a rule, is of very short duration; of which the Acts of the Apostles (II, 44 ff, 32 ff, V, I, II) affords us the best known and most beautiful example.[484]

Where this love does not exist, each participant in the community of goods will, as a rule, seek to do the least and enjoy the most possible.[485] In a society of one hundred thousand [pg 248] members, each individual would be interested in the results of its aggregate frugality only indirectly, and only to the extent of a one-hundred thousandth part of the whole; that is, practically, not at all.[486] Individual selfishness would expend itself entirely on the division of what the whole community produced. It would, consequently, and almost always be detrimental to the whole, and to the other individuals of the society; whereas, at present, it does so only in exceptional cases. When Louis Blanc, as Mably had before him, recommended that the point d' honneur should take the place of the interêt personnel, as a spur to production, and a check on consumption, and cited the army as an illustration of its workings, he forgot, among other things, the thirty cases in which the [pg 249] code militaire pronounces sentence of death on the violators of its provisions. And, as a matter of fact, the Münster Anabaptists could not help punishing with death every transgression of their communistic precepts.[487] If, in a community in which the principles of communism were rigorously carried out, all the burthens and enjoyments of life were equal, and equally divided according to the ideas of the crowd, men like Thaer, Arkwright, and others of their class, who now provide bread for hundreds of thousands from their studies and laboratories, would then be able, at most, with a rake and shovel, to provide food for three or four. The division of labor, with its infinite amount of productive force, would, for the most part, cease. Nor would the consequence be that the humbler classes would be freed from work of a coarse, mechanical, unintellectual and severe nature; but that the higher classes would be dragged down to engage in it likewise. And what an increase there would be in the number of consumers at the same time! Every man would, with a light heart, follow the most imperious of human impulses if the whole community were to educate his children. But we have seen that a community of goods is desired most urgently in times of over-population. Hence, here it would make the evil greater yet, by increasing consumption and diminishing production.

Where there are now one thousand wealthy persons, and one hundred thousand proletarians, there would be, after one generation, no one wealthy and two hundred thousand proletarians. Misery and want would be universal.[488] For the purpose [pg 250] of giving the crowd a very agreeable,[489] but rather short-lived period of pleasure, a period simply of transition, almost all that constitutes the wealth of a nation, all the higher goods of life, would have to be cast to the waves, and henceforth all men would have to content themselves with the gratifications afforded by potatoes, brandy and the pleasures of the most sensual of appetites. And then, the equal education of all, demanded by the communists, would have no result but this, that no one would acquire a higher scientific training.[490] But, after all, there lurks concealed in communism much more of envy than is generally supposed.