THE SOCIALIST SLOGAN

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 17773, 8 October 1927, Page 6

THE SOCIALIST SLOGAN

“DOWN WITH THE CAPITALISTS.” WHAT DOES IT MEAN? “.Down -with the Capitalists. Away with Capitalism.” These are tho slogans of socialists and communists everywhere. To understand what this doctrine rightly is, it is necessary to have clear ideas on three cquostionswhat is capital? Who are the capitalists? Wiiat is capitalism? Let us examine the first of these. WHAT IS CAPITAL? Many people think money and capital mean the same. , That is not correct. Money is but a medium for exchanging services and commodities. Capifal is a means of production, which is quite another matter than mere exchanging of what is produced. In the early period of man’s existence there were but two factors towards supplying; his wants —the earth and the human person. The stores which first constituted man’s meagre wealth were derived from land and labour. In tho course of time a third factor was created, the rude tools or instruments which enabled him to increase his storo and secure its preservation. That third factor is what we mean by “capital.” The first savage who invented a rough tool by which tho earth’s fertility was increased created capital. By wealth is understood all tiling useful in supplying human wants. Capital is that form of wealth winch can be used to produce more wealth. What distinguishes anything as capital thou, 'is its power ol production. The socialist postulate that “labour produces all wealth” has little meaning if the factors haul and "capital are ignored. Alan, without capital,, could live merely as an animal, rt is capital which makes his labour elVective, the. earth more fruitful and enables the race to develop its humanity and establish social order. Capital is thus seen to be the prime necessity lor mans existence and evolution in human society.

WHO ARE THE CAPITALISTS? This question requires must carol id consideration because around the word “capitalist” lias grown up so many illusions, false ideas and political, superstitions that it lias come to mean in various quarters simply a term ior attack and deleave. .'-nine are discs.-.oil with such prejudiced ideas as to imagine that when they call any person or order capitalist .they have utterly condemned the individual or institution. _ . . 'I lie opinion widely current is that tho word “capitalists” defines those who possess much wealth and. this, whether the wealth is being used as in' squandered in selfish indulgence. The capitalists are visualised as the very limited number of people who own largo estates, or largo industrial and commercial concerns." Why if the ownership of capital constitutes tho capitalist Jr should not apply to those who own small capital as well as those who own much we have never seen explained, [strictly speaking all who own and use capital are capitalists in the degree to which tliev exercise such power of ownership. If that is not so at least the limit oi' ownership which would constitute tho right application, of the title has never even been suggested. In the broad i ease capitalist means those who own and control capital. This of course takes the word out of its class setting.

In England, Ah' Waiter Kunciinim, Heating of this side of the question stated that on official returns collected by Three Government ’Departments 150 Dili),Uoo small investors own no less than .t 777.530,000 of gilt edged securities. From stteli returns wo gather that the mass ot the people are small capitalists. The people in general are interested in preserving capital because they share in its ownership. When the test comes the people reply to the question “who arc the capitalists?” with “we are in degreo and we do not wish to have our savings lost in industrial strife.” It is because the mass are capitalists Unit short of revolution tho erv of “down with the capitalists,” is generally regarded as futile and absurd. WIIAT IS CARITALTSM ? As capital is essential and capitalists, ol mi l ' aim! or aiiottier imi-l continue, wiiat, we may ask, is the capitalism which the socialists say they wish to abolish? It is commonly referred to no a system lull, indeed, the ownership and ice of capital is licit a system. It is but the common practice human beings Have tumid necessary to meet, their wants. This ownership is manifested in various systems from the simplest forms of personal ownership up to those ot .Vuionat anu i mvi-,,a i .on,, I umir.i!. Of no one of these systems can it be said—-this i.-> capita ism ami the nllici's are not.

Ii is surely nearer the truth to define capitalism as “a body of doctrine relating to the ownership and control of capital.” In tnis sense it is maintained that capital is individually created, that personal interest in its possession is of the utmost value in maintaining and increasing its supply ami Hi ,i tin- basis oi private property in this means of production is the soundest ground of human economy. 11l calling for the abolition of capitalism the socialists mean something more than a better division of wealth. Tlie.'r demand is not for reform or readjustment but is es.seniially revolutionary. The abolition of capitalism means doing: away with all private property in the menus of production. This is a direct attack nil the general principle of personal ownership. For the individual Interest the colled ivists (socialists and communists) would substitute the impersonal power of the State. Tho slogan of the socialists is a challenge to till personal possession and should bo strenuously cornbaled lor Ihe reason that man's progress individually depends on increasing his personal possession as the best moans el' enriching human life. (Contributed by the Now Zealand Welfare League).