SPIRITUAL ASPECTS OF "NEW ECONOMICS”

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 200, 27 August 1935, Page 10

SPIRITUAL ASPECTS OF "NEW ECONOMICS”

Mental Values Recognised

r |MII< St.PPL'i I” meet lhe tiomami i’ii the field ol oi ihioiiiic thinking is • 111ai;11 <• 1 i 1 1” ilself in a varmty of ways, although it mnj not be said to have arrived in the lullesl sum-e. A Go n ul lhe v,<l<-i euijiiomivs in relation . lu ciirreiil problems is al leusl an open , duur lo I rush types 0 insight. In In- I illuminating book on ‘‘Wealth, Viilualj Wealth and Debt I‘i<.»lessor I'redero-k >oddv, of Oxford, presents a cnapu.i on ‘‘The Fallacies ol Ortlioilox Luuno ' mists’’ during lhe course ol which hu puinls his theme by a quotation irom Muj'hen Leacock in whom he finds u liappx cuinbiuatiou u| professional humorist aud professional economist. “When J sit and warm my hands, as best 1 may, at the little heap of ein tiers that once wan political economy,’’ lhe quotation runs, “I cannot but contrast its dying glow with the vainglorious and triumphant science that oncu il was.’’ But Professor Smldy does not devolc himself to the passing of the old. He is an outstanding figure in recent excursions iulo the new. Here one of his most stimulating contributions is his discrimination between mental and physical factors in the economic problem—a distinction which may bo carried into its fuller implications. llus recognition oi mental values is characteristic of the new economists as contrasted with their predecessors, whose theories were more firmly tethered to the materialistic and even tangible. These earth-bound doctrines came fare to face with their own fatal limitation'; when confronting the rise and soaring advance of the bank credit system. Especially with its collapse the general public as well as the economist has been forcel to realise that the financial system as a whole is highly mental—not even basically attached throughout to material or tangible values. Its amplifications have come to be repeatedly described as “astronomical” and even “metaphysical ’. New thought-processes, a new outlook, arc in demand, and they have been forthcoming, at least in tentative form. Outstanding Feature This new outlook has carried with il as a second outstanding feature a recognition of the existence of abundance—either actually or potentially: enough for all. While the spiritually minded have been steadfastly proclaiming the fact of plenty, the conception has now become a popularly accepted one, thanks to the new approach—even with the bread line at its longest. A ringing declaration of plenty assails the car and becomes a matter of conviction. It colours all intelligent current economic writing. It is supported by official statistics and converts itself into such popular fervours as Technocracy and other utopian schemes. HI considered though many ol these may be, they yet involve in mosJt cases the inspiring assurance that life is good, not bad, with a goodness that only eludes lor want of adequate apprehension. In fact, tho “economy of scarcity” is shelved with the outmoded textbook. A third characteristic of the new economists is their agreement that man is not doomed to earn his living by the sweat of his brow. Hard labour under hard conditions is returned to its original Biblical classification as a “curse.” The man who is given dominion over the whole earth is seen as possible of realisation. Machinery is accepted as the very modus opcrandi of his liberation, provided it is lit ted out of its traditional position and set in a new social philosophy. In short, we are not in the presence of a culainity named unemployment. It has become almost a platitude to recognise in this very unemployment the forerunner of a mighty blessing which lias simply dislocated society by its arrival, And il is not. a future blessing but a present one. All the elements ol well-being are acknowledged to be right here, only waiting to bo appropriated through a vision equal to the hour. Related to this situation is the contention on the part of the new economist. that all men and not only a few are essentially entitled to live by dividends as well as by work. Not some of us but all of us are envisaged as heirs of a social heritage of economic value through tho mere fact of birth into a society of enormoiLs assets. No man is born poor. Each enters at the point of birth into n community ol vast resources the benefits of which must accrue in pari t<» him. I’oxcrty max’ be eliminated. It, is not seen as a necessary condition of a helpful discipline but a* a ma huljust menl which .should and can be abolished. Moreover it is evident that poverty cannot bo experienced by one man alone. It destroys the very consumer upon 'whom the producer must depend to prosper. The relation between the two itself to coopt ration. In brief, it becomes economically iiuce>>nrv to love one’s neigh hour as oneself. I These old considerations in connec-

tion with new phases demand careful and simplify ing analysis if we arc to giasp the problem as such, by way ot a preliminary step to solution. Recalling the distinction between “physical wealth” and “psychological debt” uf Professor tSoddy, let us proceed by some \ rev homelv illustrations to attempt a clarillvalioii of the issue. The basic situation may be illustrated l.v a small boy in front of a fruit stand. He observes a basket uf apples (wealth) seeing that it is beautiful and desirable. If however, he takes one of these apples and begins to cat it he discovers that there is something to be noted about the apple beyond its red cheek and its desirability: it is owned by someone. It was a “possession.” In short, the apple was attached to tho master of the fruit, stand by’ an invisible thread. The apple was governed by a social, moral and mental idea which gave it status in the economic scheme. Elemental Distinction 'this somewhat ingenuous example aw applied to the august subject of economies is excusable because it serves to emphasise an elemental distinction frequently lost sight of in the discussion of economics. Without complicated thinking let us place in the class of the apples such obvious wealth as land, oil wells, mines, factories, farm products, manufactured products— clothing, houses, food—“physical” wealth, using the term in its most obvious sense; at the same time expanding it to include such mental values as patents, copy rights, franchises, services—everything subject to exchange; all that the eye and mind behold, regardless of the consideration of ownership or control. Lot us now visualise a scheme superimposed upon this which shall show forth all the threads connecting each unit with its owner. Attached to each thing is a claim of ownership—possession or control. Individually, collectively, nationally, it may be said by one or more persons with reference to every’ element or object, “This is mine” or “This is ours.” Each element of wealth thus has a second, a moral and social status, as a result of which wealth is turned into possessions. Wealtliffls possessions now undergoes a continual change of place and rating—this is the zone of debt, sale, gift, thet* and so on, with their incalculable subdi visions. It immediately becomes apparent that we are hurled just here into considerations of control, of politics, law, g<»v* eminent; tho tradition and social contract in conflormity with which a people may I>c found carrying on the business ) of daily life, And it is only from this viewpoint that we shall be able to look into the probem as its masters rather than its victims. Those who have too strictly departmentalised the subject of economics are caught within its confines. There is a vicious circle within which the solution cannot be found. In modern industrial society’ we have a new wealth but an old network of claims upon it; a sense not yet regenerated of the relation of man to man. The new economics is in error when it considers that the pressing issue is one of “distribution.” This distribution is just one more process properly associated with the wealth itself, the machinery that produces it, the credit that sustains the enterprise. Victorious Progress It is true that this wealth-category rings with victorious progress; that it is bursting with real and potential plenty—largely the product of machinerv and its dizzying correlative, the bank credit system —the two a giant icehniual apparatus serving as the medium for an industrial expansion which has first created and then threatened to destroy our modern civilisation. But it is certainly not here among these elements, obvious or complicated, that wo arc lo find tho key to the economic lock. And by the same token the < I nest cannot be undertaken in purely •‘scientific” terms, lu fact we are confronted at the present hour not only by a breakdown of the industrial system operating for private profit. We are con fronted as conspicuously by the collapse of a system of idolatry; the exultation of material science to the >tatus of a god. Not immoral but unmoral in its very nature, a morally indifferent process, science has supplied the world with illimitable technique. With thu control of this technique it cannot supply it. When it is turned to fur this function it is found to have feel of clay. It is inspiriting to discover in the new economies a partial escape from the materia] tether through its cognisance of mental values, its searching exposure of outworn traditions, its urge in the Hiicutiun of a more highly’ collecti'f though unregimented lite. But square!v confronted by the lower impulses which beset mankind—greed, hist, domination—this new economics stands sorely in need of a commanding spiritual idea’ able to unite the human race on th« basis of a higher purpose. Tho plans the schemes, however admirable, re quire tho revivifying power of som* thing above aud beyond themselves.