English working-men in labour politics "gradually diminished," and there was "comparative peace in the industrial world."
But, with the new century, things began to alter. As a prominent trade unionist has recently stated, though perhaps too absolutely, "It was not until after the year 1900 that anything of a party nature was to be found in any trade union rules … it was into this united family that the socialists threw the apple of discord when they formed the Labour Party." In other words, trade unionism proper began to alter its course.
In order to mark this change precisely, a word or two is needed. Trade unionism seeks to utilise private ownership, in order to obtain good wages, short hours, and favourable conditions for the men; socialism would withdraw capital from individuals. The socialists would regulate the whole State; the trade unionists would only look after their own people. Socialism is universal collectivism; trade unionism is corporate individualism. For instance, a great trade union declares, "The object of this Society shall be to improve the condition and protect the interests of its members." But when, at the Hull Conference of 1908, the Labour Party had already become socialist, it resolved that, "The Labour Party should have, as a definite object, the socialisation of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, to be controlled by a Democratic State in the interest of the entire community." These two purposes are opposites.
