code militaire pronounces sentence of death on the violators of its provisions. And, as a matter of fact, the Münster Anabaptists could not help punishing with death every transgression of their communistic precepts. If, in a community in which the principles of communism were rigorously carried out, all the burthens and enjoyments of life were equal, and equally divided according to the ideas of the crowd, men like Thaer, Arkwright, and others of their class, who now provide bread for hundreds of thousands from their studies and laboratories, would then be able, at most, with a rake and shovel, to provide food for three or four. The division of labor, with its infinite amount of productive force, would, for the most part, cease. Nor would the consequence be that the humbler classes would be freed from work of a coarse, mechanical, unintellectual and severe nature; but that the higher classes would be dragged down to engage in it likewise. And what an increase there would be in the number of consumers at the same time! Every man would, with a light heart, follow the most imperious of human impulses if the whole community were to educate his children. But we have seen that a community of goods is desired most urgently in times of over-population. Hence, here it would make the evil greater yet, by increasing consumption and diminishing production. Where there are now one thousand wealthy persons, and one hundred thousand proletarians, there would be, after one generation, no one wealthy and two hundred thousand proletarians. Misery and want would be universal. For the purpose It would not be entirely fair to take a partisan view of the ateliers nationcux of 1848, and claim them as a practical refutation of socialistic utopias, since no serious experiment was made with them. Compare E. Thomas, Histoire des Ateliers nationaux considérés sous le double Point de Vue politique et social, 1848. 'Socialists generally overlook the fact, that the greater number of enjoyments from which the poorer classes are excluded, by the right of property, would not exist at all were it not for that very right. (Spittler, Politik, 356 ff.) This remark may also be made of Hugo's ingenious objections. (Naturrecht, § 208 ff.) One of the most effective pieces of socialistic declamation is of giving the crowd a very agreeable, but rather short-lived period of pleasure, a period simply of transition, almost all that constitutes the wealth of a nation, all the higher goods of life, would have to be cast to the waves, and henceforth all men would have to content themselves with the gratifications afforded by potatoes, brandy and the pleasures of the most sensual of appetites. And then, the equal education of all, demanded by the communists, would have no result but this, that no one would acquire a higher scientific training. But, after all, there lurks concealed in communism much more of envy than is generally supposed. that the lower classes have a much shorter average of life than the upper. Hence the institution of private property is charged with being a species of spoliation of the poor of so many years of life, and the entire "present society" condemned on that account. Here again it is not borne in mind, that a few centuries ago the general average of life was probably still smaller; and that it was precisely the growth and development of "present society" that lengthened the days of the poorer classes even, although it may have lengthened those of the rich in a still greater proportion. See § 246. 8 But a community of goods would not, by a great deal, accomplish as much as is generally supposed. In Prussia, for instance, in 1867, only about three per cent. of the entire number of families in the community had a yearly income of 1,000 thalers; only nine per cent. had 500 thalers or more, and only 6,465 returned an income of more than 4,000 thalers, while only 590 returned one of 16,000 thalers. (Preuss statist. Ztschr., 1868, 83. Held, Die Einkommensteuer, 197 ff.) How little, therefore, could the poor here gain by the spoliation of the rich! Besides, the purely personal consumption of the rich is, after all, not so great; and if all luxury were abandoned, an innumerable number of men would lose their gains. (Compare Ad. Smith, Wealth of Nations, I, ch. 11, 2.) It would be to kill the hen that had hitherto laid the golden egg in order to divide its flesh a little more equally. Babeuf declared all arts and sciences to be evils. He would have no one learn anything but Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, and a little of the Geography of France; and have the strictest censorship enforced to keep every one within these limits. Compare the able criticism of Proudhon, Contradictions, ch. 12. 2 SECTION LXXXII. THE ORGANIZATION OF LABOR. Most theoretical adherents of the doctrine of a community. of goods, feeling1 more or less the weight of the above objections, have supplemented it with the idea of an organization of labor or the centralized superintendence of all production and consumption, either by the government already existing, or by one to be created anew. Such a government would be, of course, a despotism such as the world has scarcely yet seen, a Cæsaro-Papacy, usurping both the place and power of Father of the universal Family. But the evils mentioned above would be entailed none the less. Every incentive which now 3 According to Umpfenbach, Nationalökonomie, 201, where a community of goods obtains, there can be but the alternative, viz.: whether each person or each family shall receive just the same amount. (The former would be more in harmony with principle, but what an over-population would be the consequence!) Precisely so, too, if each person were to come and take his own portion (anarchy !), or if it were parcelled out to each by a board of distributors (despotism!). 2 This expression came into vogue, principally, through L. Blanc, Organization du Travail (1841), the leading ideas in which work are the following: The suppression of competition by the establishment of state industries; equality of remuneration for labor; equality and legislative determination of the rate of interest; the choice of superintendents by the workmen. With many modern socialists, the shibboleth is not so much liberté as solidarité. Besides, Fichte's Naturrecht (1796), and his geschlossener Handelsstaat, are, without doubt, among the most remarkable works favoring an "organization of labor." They aim at the destruction of the present social system, which, at most, needs only to be reformed and rejuvenated; and to galvanize the deaď body into a new and different life (Medea's magic cauldron!). Compare Corvaja, Bancocrazia o il gran Libro sociale, 1840. 3 Cabet's Icarian colony in America numbered 298 adults and only 107 children. Yet spite of this condition, so favorable to production, it did but a very sorry business. Its government was very similar to that of a house of correction or a penitentiary. Even in religious matters, spite of all pretended toleration, those members who did not agree with Cabet were described in the official weekly paper as des infames ou des aveugles. (D. Vierteljahrsschrift, 1855, October, 205 ff. moves man to industry or frugality would disappear, and nothing remain but universal philanthrophy; or, if you will, but patriotism, virtues which are not wanting even now. Even guardianship of the government newly created would be carried on in a very loose manner; for it would be exercised without any feeling of personal interest, even in the most favorable case supposable. It is well known and easily understood, that state industries are never engaged in, in the long run, with the same zeal, nor crowned with the same same success, as competing private industries. It is well known, too, how intimate the connection is between the political freedom of a people and their economic production; that, for instance, England's greater wealth, as compared with that of Turkey, depends, most largely, on the freedom that obtains in the former country and the servitude that prevails in the latter. And we may inquire just here, what the result would be, if the despotism of government should go ten times farther that it has ever gone in Turkey, when, moreover, the despot who led the state, was not an individual with his few officials, but the whole crowd, with its million eyes and million hands. It would, practically, be to give every producer an escort of a policeman and a revenue agent, as if he were a prisoner. And where would be the gain? A division of wealth which would seem unjust to many would exist now as well as before, because the idle and the unskillful would receive the same reward as the most industrious and skillful.5 The opposition of one class of society to another, so much complained 4 An eastern sage says, that land possesses the ideal of legal security through which a beautiful woman, decked with pearls, might travel without danger. What would such a sage say of a European country, in which even orphan children have their property not only preserved to them, but find it increased from having been placed at interest, as soon as they reach their majority? (Barrow.) 5 "The equality of communism is the worst species of inequality, because it guaranties to one for two hours of poor labor as much as it does to an other for four hours of good work." (Bastiat, Harmonies économiques, ch. 8.) of, would continue. The only difference would be, that whereas, it now comes from the weak, it would then come from the strong. Compulsory association is certainly more prolific in strife and crime than is a state of society in which everybody manages his own affairs. A journey on foot, in company with others, is allowed, on all hands, to be a very good test of friendship. But, a community of goods would, in the strictest sense of the word, be a journey on foot through the whole of life with numberless "friends." Here, every one would believe himself entitled to possess whatever pleased him. And, who would decide; since so many communists preach the dissolution and extinction of all government, and the reign of anarchy? Besides, there can be no doubt, that the difference of human talents and human wants, would soon, spite of every law, lead to a difference in property again. Hence, that first revolution would have to be repeated from time to time-a real Sisyphus labor! No sooner have the bees produced anything, than the drones come, and divide anew! SECTION LXXXIII. THE ORGANIZATION OF LABOR. [CONTINUED.] Experience, however, teaches us, that, in all the lower stages of civilization, a community of goods exists to a greater or lesser extent. The institution of private property has been more fully evolved out of this condition of things, only in proportion as well-being and culture have been developed as cause and effect of such well-being. Thus, among most nations of hunters and fishermen, the idea of private property was un * Proudhon, Qu'est-ce que la Propriété, 283, says, very justly, that “a community of goods is the spoliation of the strong by the weak." 1 Called a negative community of goods, by Zacchariä, Vierzig Bücher vom Staate, IV, 146, in contradistinction to the positive and universal community of gain, as desired by the communists. |