A SILENT REVOLUTION

Waipa Post, Volume 51, Issue 3645, 19 July 1935, Page 9

A SILENT REVOLUTION

. “ Two days were devoted by the House of Lords to the problem of capitalism and socialism, and the time was well spent,” observes The Times (London). “ Once more the Second Chamber showed its unrivalled advantages for the debate of general principles. The Lords shewed themselves at their best by their deep knowledge of all aspects of the question, their freedom from acrimony, and their saving grace of humour. Lor,d Sanderson won the sympathy of the House by his mellifluous presentation of the case behind his motion in favour of the public ownership and democratic control of the instruments of production and distribution. Lord Allen, who had placed on the' paper a carefully reasoned amendment asking for the transformation of the present industrial and social order by a rapid extension of the policy of collective organisation which has been increasingly adopted by every Government in modern times, and which now needs to be expressed in many varieties of public ownership and democratic control rather than in any one rigid formula, eloquently pleaded the merits of goodwill and intelligence against class hatred. In studiously avoiding the barren controversies of the past Lord Lothian set a good example, and he put in some needed Words on behalf of liberty. Lord Snell greatly moved the House by his personal experiences of the industrial system as it was in Vicltorian days; and there was hardly a peer who spoke but had something useful to contribute to the discussion.

“ The debate as a whole must have deepened the impression that Western society is in a. period of transition no less profound than that by which the Feudal System passed into the Individualist and Capitalist System. To say that the transition is one from Capitalism to socialism, and still more so to link it up with political parties in the State, is to darken counsel. The great transition through which society is passing is one which proceeds apace, whatever Government may be in power, and its final form will doubtless be very different from what even the most discerning prophet anticipates. How great is the “ silent revolution ” already effected may be seen by reflecting that the capitalist, in the old sense, has virtually disappeared already. The men Who by their personal wealth were able to give direct employment to tens or hundreds cf thousands of Workmen no longer dominate the industrial scenes. For decades there has been an increasing concentration of capital and output, and the movement is gathering momentum. In consequence the capitalist, in the old sense, has lost his importance, and the men who matter in the economy of to-day are net those who own, but those who control, capital.

“ Competition has disappeared over

a large portion of the industrial field. Moreover, the motive of profit, the mainspring of the capitalist system, has a decreasing importance. It has long been recognised that there are certain essential services, both local and national, which the motive of profit will never supply, or supply efficently: Lord Allen mentioned a calculation made a few years ago that practically two-thirds of the large-scale economic organisation of this country had already passed out of the sphere of unregulated private profit-making control. Even more significant was the statement quoted from a leader of one great industrial combine —and it seems to be borne out in fact—that the combine’s activities were directed to service rather than profit. That wfill undoubtedly be the keynote of the age into which we are passing. This suggests that the age now opening before us may in some ways be a synthesis of the two preceding ages. In the mediaeval world economic considerations were, in theory at least, subordinate to ethics. The age which followed saw a complete, divorce between economics and ethics', and its motto was “ Business is business.” The right of money to bear interest was recognised and approved. As a result the productive energies of the world were Wonderfully stimulated. But tlie divorce between economics and ethics was nOt one which could.be tolerated indefinitely, and for many generations now the harsh effects of the system of pure laissez-faire have been mitigated by State action. The task before us now is to ensure once more the supremacy of ethics over economics while preserving all the immense advantages won for us by the capitalist system. It is a task calling for the highest statesmanship, and One in which England may be expected, once more to lead the world, as she did in the transition from Feudalism and again in the Industrial Revolution.