tion is inconsistent with the principles of Socialism and, in the light of history, is a palpable absurdity.
I am, however, unwilling to part with it at that, because I am again anxious to face the real problems of Socialist administration so far as reason and experience have as yet thrown light upon them, and this objection leads to some important considerations. There will be parties in the Socialist state; there will be governments and oppositions—majorities and minorities. Truth and progress will be then, as they have always been, hammered out by rival tongues and opposing brains.
In discussing Socialist administration, the critics of Socialism have always overlooked the large part that voluntary organisations are to play inside the state. For instance, the family will probably enjoy an influence which it could not acquire under commercialism, for under commercialism it has been steadily decaying.[1] The relation between parents and children will be closer, and be continued for longer periods than is now possible, and, consequently, the home will resume its lost religious significance. It will be altar fires that will burn on its hearths, and sacramental
- ↑ It is an amusing commentary upon the charge against Socialism that it seeks to abolish marriage, that so soon as there was a Socialist municipal control at Lille it abolished fees for getting married in order that difficulties in regulating family connections might be removed. Many people who would not, or could not, pay the old high fees at once presented themselves to be married, and literally blessed "the enemies of the family" for their moral action.
