The Press Saturday, July 26, 1924. Socialism Arraigned.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18135, 26 July 1924, Page 12

The Press Saturday, July 26, 1924. Socialism Arraigned.

| The current issue of "The Bound "Table" is, not unnaturally, largely devoted to the various activities of Mr Ramsay Mac Donald's Labour Government. But its attitude, if critical, is none the less kindly. It does not, howaver, forget, or allow its roaders to forget, that the whole situation is more than a little unreal. A Labour Government without a Labour majority is compelled to be opportunist. The pro- ! gramme it advances is conditioned not so much by its own aims and wishes and hopes, as by what the Liberal Party, by whose permission and support it holds office, iB ready to accept and to endorse. Once freed from this restraint, it is highly improbable that Labour would remain bo moderate in" action, and the Government might easily be hurried by the impatient zeal of its more visionary supporters into very dangerous courses. Quite recently the I.L.P. held a conference at York and adopted 3 report embodying a comprehensive Socialist agricultural policy. The Prime Minister addressed this conference, but though he asserted that "ho could not assure them that the "Labour Government would always do "what they wanted it to do," he did not repudiate the description of that Government as a Socialist one. "Mr "Clifford Allen, the chairman of the "conference, in his opening address, '•♦ supported on the platform by several "members of the Government, was more "explicit. The I.L.P was, be said, or-; "ganised for propaganda, the Governf'ment for government, but they were ?< two instruments in one 'movement'; "he urged the Party to 'give our (jo"'vernment opportunities to work out " *4, he detailed application. of our pro- " 'gramme.' It Was, 1 moreover, made "clear at the conference that the policy "embocjied in the report would ba used /'ivs political propaganda in the agricultural constituencies. In the absence "of contradiction it must be concluded "that it represents the policy which "a Labour Government in possession ( ?of tin .ibsoluto majority would at"tejnpt to carry out, and points the '' direction in which the present Govern"ment is expected to move." In view of these facts and tendencies lit is peculiarly judicious of "The "Round Table" to devote "a closely- | reasoned article to Socialism and its [ effects and implications, an article I described by "The Times" as "tho "most penetrating and original criti"cism*' of Socialist economics "which "we have recently met with.'' Tho writer freely admits that there is much that is both helpful and hopeful in the Socialist outlook. We do need to lay much more stress on nation-building services, education, housing, townplanning, and the like. We do need to secure a progressively rising standard of living for a people whoße minds are being more and more awakened to the rich possibilities that life offers. But it is one thing to have high aspirations, another thing to know how to translate them into practical, everyday facts. A higher, standard of living implies a "higher earning power. A higher earning power implies, ability to meet the varying demands of purchasers, and the capacity to supply in competitive world markets goods : that can defy competition, In this, world progress is only possible as the reward of hard work wisely directed to constantly varying ends that imply incessant vigilance on ,the part of tho directors, Not to advance is to go back. There is no standing still. Products that sufficed for tho needs of the day before yesterday are simply valueless to*day. Noiy, the Socialist is a confirmed dreamer of dreams. Instead of malting the best of things as they are li'ere and now, and so preparing, tho way for better things, he setß his eyes on the far-off mirage, and broods on ways and means by which he may evade the harsher rules of the game of life, and vet reap the full reward. The result is that, as in the last century the principal evils of industrialism arose from the laissez •faire doctrines of the - Manchester School, the principal evils of industrialism to-day arise from the dominance of Socialistic, doctrine, more especially in its : Marxian form. In its analysis -of industrial problems this body of doctrine concentrates on the division of the rewards earned by industry. It ignores the disconcerting faet that those rewards depend absolutely on whether or no industry caters for public demand* Those who deliver the goods required reap the reward. Those who do not deliver the goods required miss the reward- Yet ,"a great part of the "energies of the leaders of Labour to"day are dlrected not towards m&kf'ing the industrial machinery of the "nation function more efficiently, or "finding a solution for its admitted de- < 'fecta, but to increasing' the impedi"ments toefficiency, in order to dis"credit it, and thereby persuade the "community that the individualist "system is a failure and that they had "better substitute some Socialist sys"tern in its place." , Bnt if we inay suppose for the sake- of- argument" that such- tac,tks «aceeoded» the Socialistic^ A

system were ia the saddle for a given community, economic law would remain, unless, of course, the principle of competition were eliminated from life. This somewhat obvious truth has been grasped by two thinkers eo unlike as Ghandi and Lenin, and each has proposed methods by which, as he supposes, it can be met. Ghandi's way is the way of abstinence. Contract your desires, find your contentment in the life of the mind and the spirit, and industrialism and all the fierce activity that it implies will die a natural death. The simple life ought to suffice a reasonable human being. Possibly Ghandi is right, but as a matter of fact the simple life daes not suffice a modern reasonable human being even in India. There is another way, the way of Lenin. Place all the means of production, transport, and supply in the hands of the State. Make the State the solo arbiter of what men can have, and so control and render uniform their varying demands. The present condition of Russia is a luminous comment on such a line of action. And if, by way of contrast, wc turn to,the United States, where individualism obtainß and the capitalist and the captain of industry are looked upon as good citizens, we And abundance of work and the highest rate of progress, wages so high that they are attracting labour from all over tho world, and not least from Russia.

There is plenty of room for improvement in the organisation of life. There are many problems yet to be solved before social and industrial friction is reduced to a minimum. But reforms must be worked from within and in the ordinary course of evolution. In any Socialistic system hitherto devised tyranny is implicit. Hard work wisely directed to well-chosen ends, and team work by all sections of society, are the conditions precedent to attaining that fuller, freer, and more satisfying life after which we all so naturally yearn. "The trouble is that the delusions of "Socialism are perfectly honestly held. "That is their power. Yet history will "probably record that it was .the exponents of Socialist economics, and "the rank and file Labourites who "blindly accept their teachings, who "were principally responsible for tho "distress and unemployment of our "times, and that in complete "sincerity of conviction and honesty of (( purpose, they caused far more actual "misery to the working population of "their country after the war than all "tho capitalists i» the British Isles."