WHY HE IS A SOCIALIST

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 81, Issue 7273, 6 November 1950, Page 6

WHY HE IS A SOCIALIST

EINSTEIN TELLS THE WORLD VIEWS OF WORLD-FAMED MATHEMATICIAN Professor Albert Einstein, worldfamous mathematician and physicist, has told the world why he is a Socialist. He explained his ’views when United States senators accused him of pro-Soviet propaganda when he warned that man might soon completely destroy himself and the world. Einstein said he was convinced that the only way to eliminate the evils of capitalist society was by establishing a Socialist economy. He said: “I recently discussed with an intelligent and well-disposed man the threat of another war which, in my opinion, would seriously endanger the existence of mankind, and I remarked that only a super-national organisation would offer protection from that danger, Thereupon my visitor calmly said to me: “Why are you so deeply opposed to the of the human race?” I am sure that as little as a century ago no one would have so lightly made a statement of this kind.

It is easy to raise such questions, but difficult to answer them with any degree of assurance. Man is, at one and the same thing, a solitary being and a social being. Difficult As a solitary being he attempts to protect his own existence and that oi those who are closest to him, to satisfy his personal desires and tc develop his innate abilities. As a social being he seeks to gain the recognition and affection of his fellow human beings, to share in their pleasures, and to comfort them in their sorrows, and to improve their conditions of life.

Only the existence of these varied, frequently conflicting strivings accounts for the special character of a man, and their specific combination determines the extent to which an individual can achieve an inner equilibrium and contribute to the well-being of society. But the personality that finally emerges is largely formed by the environment during development, by the structure of the society in which he grows up, by the the .tradition of that society and by its appraisal of particular types of behaviour.

It is evident, therefore, that the dependence of the individual upon society is a fact of nature which cannot be abolished—just as in the case of ants and bees. Variable

However, while the whole life precess of ants and bees are fixed down to the smallest detail by rigid hereditary instincts the social pattern and inter-relationships of human beings are variable and susceptible to chance. Memory, the capacity to make new combinations, the gift of oral communication have made possible developments among human beings which are not dictated by biological necessities.

Such developments manifest themselves in traditions and organisations; in literature, in scientific and engineering accomplishments, in works of art.

I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the very essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society.

The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society.

But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organis tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights cr even to his evonomic existence. Accentuated Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives ci his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which arc by nature weaker, progressivley deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their egotism, they feel insecure, lonely and deprived of the simple and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists to-day is in by opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers, the members of which §,re unceasingly striving to their collective labour—not by force deprive each other of the fruits of hut, cn the whole, in faithful compliance with legally established rules. The means of production are for the most part the private property of individuals.

Private capital tends to become concentrated in a few hands.

The results of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital, the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organised political

society. Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be able to find employment—an army of unemployed almost always exists. Depressions The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilisation of capital, which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labour and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before. This crippling of individuals I* consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole ■ education system suffered from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the* student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely, through the establishment of a socialist economy accompanied by an educational system which would be orientated towards social goals. In such an economy the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilised in a planned fashion. Planned Economy A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, wftuld distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman and child. Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet Socialism. A planned economy as such may be .accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of Socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems; how is it possible, in view of the farreaching centralisation of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured ?