details of the change which it involves and that, in consequence, there will be chaos the morrow after the first Socialist sun sets; that no one has produced a scheme for securing a supply of bottlewashers, navvies, newspaper editors, poets, and that therefore Socialism will break down for lack of variety in social functionaries—all these objections fail because they do not touch reality. The Socialist method avoids such disasters. The approach to Socialism is by the parliamentary method. Step by step we shall go experiencing every incident on the way and deciding stage by stage where the next day's journey leads, and whether the inducements and expectations point our way. The problems will be solved as they arise.
The characteristics of the method can best be understood by an examination of one of the conundrums put to us regarding the working of some of the details of the perfect Socialist state. The criticism proceeds in this way: Your Socialism assumes this and that (very often, be it noted, it does nothing of the kind), but men will never tolerate such a this and that, therefore your Socialism is impossible. Let us take as an example the question as to whether under Socialism there will be equal pay for all work. As a question of practical importance, nothing is more certain than that a Socialist state can yield a vast amount of benefit to its citizens whilst unequal incomes are paid to service givers. But there are some Socialist critics who insist upon imparting to Socialism a moral symmetry
