“Ask me any question you please, Charlie. If I cannot answer them your sister there will,” I replied.
“Charlie and I have already had some correspondence and talks on the subject,” said Caroline. “He does not think the system attractive.”
“I will not say it is not attractive,” returned Charlie, shaking his head. “I simply say it is not attractive as I understand it. Now, take, for instance, the feature which makes the Association own everything. That is very distasteful to me. Nobody can ever own his own home, even.”
“Well, Charlie,” said I, “that is the way you have been educated. If you had been taught to believe that personal ownership of property was a burden, and had a tendency to diminish your personal security, you would view the case in a different light. Think a minute. Take a Mongolian when an infant, transfer him to London, rear him as a Christian and an Englishman and he will despise the system and religion of China. But take an English baby and let him be reared in Pekin as a Chinaman and he will doubtless hold London and Christianity in abhorrence.
“We talk of the peculiarities of the Chinese mind, and doubtless there are many which have been formed by the education and environments of centuries of time; but the Chinese education is more responsible for the Chinese mind than nature is.
“You have been taught that it is desirable to have property stand in your name. In the competitive system to own property makes you the object of attack. It is dangerous. You are always fearful that somebody will rob you. If you own none, in the competitive system, you are despised, no matter what your personal merits may be.
“Yet you can only use what you own and you can do no more with what you borrow.
“Why should you wish to own it, then, if you only get the use of it in any event? In the co-operative system it has been found convenient to have individuals own certain things. They own their own furniture, their clothes, wall pictures and small ornaments. In short, they own whatever in the house is severable from it, including tools which they employ for private use and what they can lightly carry about their person.
“They do not own house or grounds. They simply have the use of them. But they are entitled to the use of house, grounds and all the conveniences connected with them as long as they wish. Their children after them are entitled to that use. In the competitive system you cannot get more. Co-operation also assumes the cares of the Co-operators as far as material things are concerned. You do not have to worry about the ownership of that which has no other than use value. In competition you have to own your property, care for it personally, protect it and pay taxes. This diverts your mind from thought and fills it with worry, and in addition to that people overlook your merit and inquire, not what you are, but what you have, and woe betide you, whatever your merit, if you have nothing.”
“But does not common ownership and the inability of the occupant to own his home render him careless and wasteful? Does he take such an interest in his home as he would if he could call it his?”