Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 18.djvu/341

SOCIALISM. 287 SOCIALISM. which are used in producing those things which are consumed and enjoyed. Enjovmcnt goods are those which yiekl immediate satisfaction, such as ordinary articles of consumption, dwelling houses, paintings, and books. Vo have also a further distinction between accumulated wealth and income wealth, the annual product of toil, which may be used up each year. Now, as un- derstood to-day, socialism means that the instru- ments of production shall in the main be public or collective property. While the most conserva- tive socialists do not insist upon public owner- ship of all land and capital, they consider it es- sential that the chief kinds of capital and the greater part of the land should be collective prop- erty. Socialists formerly held that all land sliould be owned by society, but lately the most conservative socialists have been inclined to make concessions to small landowners who cultivate their property and to concede to them private ownership so long as they find it desirable. On the other hand, modern socialism has em- phasized strongly private property in income. It is on this account that socialists frequently deny most strenuously that they are opposed to pri- vate property, and claim that they wish to ex- tend private property. They refer ahvaj's to in- come. They wish each one to have his income, and to have that under his control. The first constituent element of socialism may, therefore, be stated to be a substitution of col- lective property in the great material instruments of production in the place of private property to such an extent that jniblie property shall domi- nate the world's work. The second constituent element is private property in income and pri- vate property in those goods which are used for the sake of enjoyment and not for the acquisi- tion of an income by rent or hire to others. Modern socialists desire to disturb existing ar- rangements as little as possible in attaining the main end of socialism: the abolition of the pri- vate receipt of rent and interest, the incomes from private propei-ty. Rent from land and in- terest from capital are the result of private o^^l- ership of these instruments of production. With collective ownership the income yielded by land and capital must also become collective. The pur[)ose is the common enjoyment of the advan- tages yielded by land and capital, in order that there may be no income apart from personal ef- fort, and that the income yielded by personal ef- fort may be increased. The most advanced forms of capitalistic production are approved, and the extension of agricultui-al machinery and farming on a large scale are viewed with favor. The change which is advocated is a change in prop- erty, in order thereby to accomplish the great end which has just been described. The social- ists desire to abolish what they call unearned income, meaning thereby personally unearned in- come, for the income which individuals receive from property they conceive to be luiearned. and a deduction from the earnings due to personal effort. Socialists generally attempt to justify this view theoretically by the doctrine that all value is to be attributed to labor. The cruder forms of socialism have so emphasized maniial labor as to imply an underestimation of intellec- tual services. With the rise of a higher class of socialistic thinkers, however, this crude view has lost its prominence. Socialists now generally fully understand that intellectual service is as important as manual labor, and they find a place for both in their plans for a future society. Socialists and economists are alike agreed that production has become largely a social process, and that the socialization of production increases day by day. What the socialists com]dain of is that, while production is a social process, the control of production is in the hands of private owners. They discover an antithesis between so- cial production and individual control, and de- mand accordingly that the socialization of pro- duction shall be accompanied by social or col- lective management. Modern socialism demands collective management of each industry, and it demands that all the industries should be asso- ciated together, in order thereby to secure perfect system, harmony, and unity of effort. Because individual producers do not act together, but act each one for himself, the socialists reproach pres- ent society with planlessness, which they say gives us industrial crises and stagnation — an argument less frequently advanced than formerly, owing to the formation of combinations and trusts which seem to overcome this weakness in the ex- isting industrial order. Finally, socialism means the distribution of income by some conunon authority. If organ- ized society owns the instruments of production, and conducts production, necessarily the product of industry in the first instance falls to society, as it does now to the individual owners and man- agers. Society must then in some way divide up the income which results from our collective economic efforts, giviijg to each one his due share. Under socialism the great mass of men would be salaried functionaries of societj', and the aim would be in one way or another so to adjust their salaries that in the aggregate they should equal the total wealth produced for con- sumption. Formerly there was a greater inclination on the part of socialists than there is now to ac- complish their ends by measures of compulsion. It was proposed that every one should be forced into the system of collective production and in return receive a subsistence. Modern socialism does not propose directly to force any one into the socialistic scheme. If any one is able to gain a livelihood by his private efforts, socialism is quite content that he should do so. He will not be able to gain an income from ownership of the chief instruments of production, as these will be public projicrty. He may, however, own tools which he can use in production, if he can induce men to purchase his product. Socialism contemplates a public provision for education as at the present time, but it does not propose to throw any obstacles in the way of a man wlio de- sires to organize private schools. A ]iublic or- ganization of medicine is contemplated by social- ism, but the modern socialist does not see any reason why a physician who desires to engage in private practice should not do so, if he can find those who prefer his services to those of the pub- lic physicians. The modern socialist holds that most men will find it to their advantage to en- gage in public production, but iloes not insist upon absolute uniformity in this, or in other par- ticulars. Modern socialism is international and cosmo- politan. With the growth of the business unit