INTRODUCTION,

I. ·

THE object of this book is in the first place to give an account of contemporary Socialism, its forms and aims, its origins, and the causes of its appearance and spread; secondly, to examine how far, taking the most reasonable form of it, it is desirable or practicable; thirdly, to set forth certain measures of a socialistic character that would seem both beneficial and necessary as supplements to the present system, to adopt which there is a spontaneous tendency on the part of the State, and to which the course of the industrial and social evolution seems to point.

I have devoted a certain space to the history of Socialism, in order not only to explain the particular forms it now assumes, but also to show that in its essence it is no new thing; that it has frequently appeared before, and has always been produced by like causes; that in its most frequent and recurrent form of communism the universal human experience has rejected it as unsuited to average human nature, though in primitive times groups of kindred in village communities were general; that where any species of Socialism has been found practicable and advan

tageous, it has been rather what we should now call State-Socialism, by which, as in the Jewish polity, institutions like the Jubilee were interwoven with the fundamental laws of the State; a species of Socialism that aimed not at abolishing private property, but at universalizing it, and, by interposing obstacles to its too-easy alienation, mostly by limiting the field of freedom of contract by express commands, at preventing great inequality from arising.

I have outlined the successive schemes of the chief social system-makers, and have dwelt at some length on the views of the three writers who have been most influential as respects the development of Socialism, namely Rousseau, St. Simon, and Karl Marx; the first, the founder of modern Democracy and of StateSocialism; the second, of a kind of aristocratic Socialism based on natural inequality of capacity; the third, of the new Socialism, which has gained favour with the working classes in all civilized countries, and which agrees with the first in being democratic, and with the second in aiming at collective ownership.

It is with the third of these, commonly called Collectivism, that we shall be concerned in the second part of the book (Chaps. IV.-VIII.). And with respect to it, we must first observe that the historical summary which condemns communism in general as impracticable does not apply to it, in so far as it allows to some extent private property and inheritance; it would only apply to it in so far as it approaches to communism. But the Socialists hold further, that a historical condemnation of past systems

does not apply to their system, because the industrial and social circumstances are different to-day, because their system, they say, is adapted to the new circumstances, and because the social and industrial evolution still going on is spontaneously leading up to their ideal, and must inevitably issue in it, spite of argument or of effort to the contrary. And there is in this so much of truth, together with unproved or doubtful assumption, that the system must be examined separately on its own merits, apart from the judgment of history on past systems.

I take the form of Socialism called Collectivism, which postulates the collective ownership of land and capital, with production under State direction, to be Socialism. I do so because most Socialists, as a matter of fact, are collectivists, and because the collectivists regard themselves as the true church, though, as will be seen hereafter, there are differences within its bosom as to the way of attaining the goal, the further and ultimate aims when the goal is reached, and even as to the time of its realization; there being some who look for the coming of the Socialist kingdom within a generation or two, whilst others postpone the event indefinitely, but still expect it to

come.

In giving an exposition of Collectivism, there is a difficulty from a certain reserve on the part of authoritative writers as regards their positive programmes. Neither Karl Marx nor Lassalle submit any beyond the vaguest outline, as M. Leroy-Beaulieu complains; but this want of definite programme, as

Dr. Schæffle says, in his criticism of the new Socialism, is perfectly natural, as well as prudent on their part; and after all it is just as well that they do not submit detailed programmes; the refutation of which, however much the refuter might plume himself on it, would be little to the purpose. It is best that our attention should be directed to the main topics and larger issues round which the battle must turn. And the main topics, with which the principal issues are connected, are the chief economic categories: the production of wealth; its distribution amongst the different kinds of labourers, productive and unproductive; money and exchange, with their proposed suppression under Socialism; the theory of value; these, together with the position of the liberal professions, of literature, art, science, and the nature of the Socialist Government; -with reference to all of which I have considered the views of the new Socialism in Chaps. V. to VIII.; while the argument of Karl Marx, on which the moral case of Socialism rests, is examined in Chap. IV.

In the expository part I have confined myself in the main to general considerations; where details are entered into they are such as are either generally agreed upon by Socialists, or are the strictly logical consequences of their general principle-consequences which can be seen necessarily to follow by placing oneself at the central point of view. Where the Socialists themselves have not come to unanimity on a capital point, such as whether there is to be equality or inequality of remuneration, both views are

considered, as well as the general tendency of the system to one or other.

As the result, partly of the historical review, which shows what things the universal human experience has decided against in the past, as well as what has stood the test of time, partly of the criticism which shows how much of the present system must be retained, and how much of the Socialist system must be given up, but chiefly from the consideration of powerful present facts and tendencies,—what is practicable in the general Socialist direction, as well as what is in the sequence of these tendencies, is ascertained and stated in the last four chapters. It is in this way only that the course of the social movement in the line of least resistance can be roughly discovered. I believe that the path of the possible for statesmen and social reformers lies in the direction and within the limits there indicated, though the category of time has to be considered, and public opinion may not be ripe or not equally ripe for all the measures indicated.

II.

I HAVE aimed as far as possible at scientific treatment throughout, that is, I have tried to consider the subject from the point of view of the economical, moral, and political sciences, as being the only mode of treatment that goes to the heart of the subject. Moreover, the new Socialism calls itself scientific, and appeals to political economy, and to historical science including the new doctrine of evolution as exemplified