DISTRIBUTION OF NATIONAL INCOME.—MONEYED ARISTOCRACIES AND PAUPERISM.
The extreme opposite of this, when the middle class disappears and the whole nation falls into a few over-rich men and numberless proletarians, we call the oligarchy of money, with pauperism as the reverse of the medal. Such a social condition has all the hardship of an aristocracy without its palliatives. As it is, as a rule, the offspring of a degenerated democracy,[204-1] it cannot in form depart too widely from the principle of equality. Only get rich, they cry to the famishing poor; the law puts no obstacle in your way, and you shall immediately share our position.[204-2] Here the uniformity and centralization of the state, which are an abomination in the eyes of genuine aristocracy, are carried to the extreme. Capital takes the place of men, and is valued more than men. All life is made to depend on the state, that its masters, the great money-men, may control it as they will. The falling away of all restrictions on trade, and of all uncommercial considerations relating to persons and circumstances, gives full play to capital, and speculators seek to win all that can be won. And, indeed, all colossal fortunes are generally made at the expense of others, either with the assistance of the state-power or by speculation in the fluctuations of values.[204-3] The dependence of proletarians on others is here all the greater, because from a complete absence of capital and land, so far as they are concerned, they are compelled, uninterruptedly, to carry their entire labor-force to market; and also because the supply of labor is made in masses embracing a large number of individuals, while the demand for labor lies in the hands of very few, and may be very readily and systematically concentrated.[204-4] So great and one-sided a dependence is, for men too far removed from one another for real mutual love, doubtless one of the greatest of moral temptations. It is as easy a matter for the hopelessly poor to hate the law, as it is for the over-rich to despise it.[204-5] Under such circumstances, the contagious power of communism, the dangers of which to order and freedom we have treated of in § So, is great. There is a dreadful lesson in the fact of history, that six individuals owned one-half of the province of Africa, when Nero had them put to death![204-6] Externally, a moneyed oligarchy will always be a weak state. The great majority who have nothing to lose take little interest in the perpetuation of its political independence. They rather rejoice at the downfall of their oppressors hitherto, and are cheered by the hope of obtaining a part of the general plunder.[204-7] The rich, too, separated from the neglected and propertyless masses of the nation, and rightly distrustful of them, begin to forget their nationality, and to balance its advantages against the sacrifices necessary to preserve it. But, a merely materialistic calculation leads doubtless to the conclusion, that universal empire is the most rational form of the state. The world-sovereignty of Rome was, by no circumstance more promoted than by the struggles between the rich and the poor, which devastated the orbis terrarum, and in which the Romans generally sided with the property classes.[204-8] [204-9] [204-10] [204-11] However, the worst horrors of the contrast here described can occur only in slave-countries. Compare Roscher, Nationalökonomik des Ackerbaues, § 141.
[204-1] The more the lower classes degenerate into the rabble, and the more the national sovereignty comes into the hands of this rabble, the easier will it become for the rich to buy up the State.
[204-2] In the middle stages of the nation's economy, such as are described in §§ 62, 66, 90, 207, in which even the relative advantages of industry on a large scale over industry on a small scale, are not much developed the making political rights dependent on the possession of a certain amount of property is certainly a means of promoting equality. Hence, therefore, a reconciliation between the differences of class created by birth, may be effected for a long time here.
[204-3] Hermann, Staatsw. Untersuchungen, II, Aufl. 136.
[204-4] Necker, Législation et Commerce des Grains, 1775,1. passim. Compare Bacon, Serm fideles, 15, 29, 34, 39.
[204-5] Schiller's terrible words:
"Etwas muss er sein eigen nennen,
Oder der Mensch wird morden und brennen."
—i. e., "Something must he call his own, or man will murder and burn."
It is one of J. G. Fichte's fundamental thoughts that as all property is based on mutual disclaimer, the person who has nothing of his own, has disclaimed nothing, and therefore reserves his original right to everything. (Geschlossener Handelstaat., Werke, III, 400, 445.)