第41章

however，toucheswiderandwidercirclesofthepopulation，andtouchestheminanincreasinglyintimateandcoercivemanner。Inthenatureofthecase，therefore，theresistanceopposedtothisculturaltrendgivenbythemachinedisciplineongroundsofreceivedconventionsweakenswiththepassageoftime。Thespreadofmaterialistic，matter-of-factpreconceptionstakesplaceatacumulativelyacceleratingrate，exceptinsofarassomeotherculturalfactor，alientothemachinediscipline，comesintoinhibititsspreadandkeepitsdisintegratinginfluencewithinbounds。 Theperfectedsystemofbusinessprinciplesrestsonthehistoricalbasisoffreeinstitutions，andsopresumesaprotractedhistoricalgrowthoftheseinstitutions；butahighlyefficient，thoughlessperfect，businesssystemwasworkedoutinarelativelyshorttimebytheSouthandCentralEuropeanpeoplesinearlymoderntimesonthebasisofalessconsummatesystemofrights-Cf。Ehrenberg，ZeitalterderFugger；Sombart，Kapitalismus，vol。 Cf。Keane，Man，PastandPresent，ch。XIV；W。Z。Ripley，RacesofEurope；Lapouge，L’Aryen；Montelius，LestempsprehistoriquesenBubde，etc。；AndreasHansen，MenneskesloegtensAelde。 If，e。g。，hetakestomythmakingandpersonifiesthemachineortheprocessandimputesandbenevolencetothemechanicalapplications，afterthemannerofcurrentnurserytalesandpulpitoratory，heissuretogowrong。 Suchexpressionsas“goodandill，““meritanddemerit，““lawandorder，“whenappliedtotechnologicalfactsortotheoutcomeofmaterialseience，areevidentlyonlymetaphoricalexpressions，borrowedfromolderusageandserviceableonlyasfiguresofspeech。 Tarde，PsychologicEconomique，vol。I。pp。122-131，offersacharacterizationofthepsychologyofmodernwork，contrasting，amongotherthings，theworkofthemachineworkmanwiththatofthehandicraftsmaninrespectofitspsychologicalrequirementsandeffects。Itmaybetakenasatemperateformulationofthecentcommonplacesonthistopic，andseemstobefairlywideofthemark。 Forsomethingmorethanahundredyearspastthischangeinthehabitsofthoughtoftheworkmanhasbeencommonlyspokenofasadeteriorationornumbingofhisintelligence。Butthatseemstoosweepingacharacterizationofthechangebroughtonbyhabituationtomachinework。Itissafetosaythatsuchhabituationbringsachangeintheworkman’shabitsofthought，- inthedirection，method，andcontentofhisthinking，- heighteninghisintelligenceforsomepurposesandloweringitforcertainothers。Nodoubt，onthewhole，themachine’sdisciplinelowerstheintelligenceoftheworkmanforsuchpurposesaswereratedhighasmarksofintelligencebeforethecomingofthemachine，butitappearslikewisetoheightenhisintelligenceforsuchpurposesashavebeenbroughttothefrontbythemachine。Ifheisbynaturescantilyendowedwiththeaptitudesthatwouldmakehimthinkeffectivelyintermsofthemachineprocess，ifhehasintellectualcapacityforotherthingsandnotforthis，thentheminingofthemachinemayfairlybesaidtolowerhisintelligence，sinceithidersthefulldevelopmentoftheonlycapacitiesofwhichheispossessed。Theresultingdifferenceinintellectualtrainingisadifferenceinkindanddirection，notnecessarilyindegree。Cf。Schmoller，GrundrissderVolkswirtschaftslehre，vol。I。secs。 Hobson，EvolutionofModernCapitalism，ch。IX。secs。4and5； CookeTaylor，ModernFactorySystem，pp。434-435；SidneyandBeatriceWebb，IndustrialDemocrocy，e。g。pp。327etseq。；K。Th。 Reinhold，ArbeitundWerkzeug，ch。X。(particularlyp andch。XI(particularlypp。221-240)。 Cf。J。C。Sutherland，“TheEngineeringMind“PopularScienceMonthly，January Cf。“IndustrialandPecuniaryEmployments“especiallypp。 AsG。F。Steffenhasdescribedit:“Thosewhohireouttheirlaborpowerortheircapitalortheirlandtotheentrepreneursareasarulenotabsolutelypassiveasseenfromthepointofviewofbusinessenterprise。Theyarenotsimplyinanimateimplementsinthehandsoftheentrepreneurs。Theyare，enterprisingimplements，(foretagaadeverktyg)whosurrendertheirundertakingfunctionsonlytotheextentdesignatedinthecontractwiththeentrepreneur。“-EkonomiskTidskrift，vol。 Cf。，ontheotherhand，Reinhold，ArbeitundWerkzeug，ch。 andXIV，wheredoubledealingisconfusedwithworkmanship，verymuchafterthemannerfamiliartoreadersofexpositionsofthe“wagesofsuperintendence，“butmorebroadlyandingeniouslythanusual。 Individualexceptionsare，ofcourse，tobefoundinallclasses，butthereis，afterall，amoreorlessconsistent，prevalentclassattitude。Asiswellknown，clergymen，lawyers，soldiers，civilservants，andthelike，arepopularlyheldtobeofaconservative，ifnotreactionarytemper。Thisvulgarapprehensionmaybefaultyindetail，andespeciallyitmaybetoosweepinginitsgeneralizations；butthereare，afterall，fewpersonsnotbelongingtotheseclasseswhowillnotimmediatelyrecognizethatthisvulgarappraisementofthemrestsonsubstantialgrounds，eventhoughtheappraisementmayneedqualification。So，also，aconservativeanimusisseentopervadeallclassesmoregenerallyinearliertimesoronmorearchaiclevelsofculturethanourown。Atthesametime，inthoseearlydaysandinthemorearchaicculturalregions，thestructureofconventionallyacceptedtruthsandthebodyofaccreditedspiritualorextra-materialfactsaremorecomprehensiveandrigid，andthethinkingonalltopicsismoreconsistentlyheldtotestsofauthenticityascontrastedwithtestsofsenseperception。Onthewhole，thenumberandvarietyofthingsthatarefundamentallyandeternallytrueandgoodincreaseasonegoesoutwardfromthemodernWest-Europeanculturalcentresintotheearlierbarbarianpastorintotheremoterbarbarianpresent。 Seeabove。 Cf。TheoryoftheLeisureClass，especiallych。 As，e。g。，MrW。G。S。AdamscogentlypointsoutinarecentnumberoftheJournalofPoliticalEcomnomy(December。 AsMr。Webbshows(IndustrialDemocracy， ThehistoricalexplanationofthisHouseofLordsreversaloftrade-unionpracticeisprobablytobefoundintheconservative，orratherreactionary，trendgiventoBritishsentimentbytheimperialistpolicyofthelasttwoorthreedecades，accentuatedbytheexperiencesoftheBoerWar。TheBoerWarseemstomarkaturning-pointinthegrowthofsentimentandinstitutions。Sincetheseventiestheimperialistinterest，thatistosay，thedynasticinterest，hasbeencomingintotheforegroundamongtheintereststhatengagetheattentionoftheBritishcommunity。Itseemsnowtohavedefinitivelygainedthefirstplace，andmaybeexpectedintheimmediatefuturetodominateBritishpolicybothathomeandabroad。Concomitantly，itmayberemarked，theBritishcommunityhasbeenslowingdown，ifnotlosingground，inindustrialanimus，technologicalefficiency，andscientificspirit。Cf。Hobson，Imperialism，partIIch。IandIII。 Allthisappliestoanarchismaswellastosocialism； similarlytoseveralminorcategoriesofdissentients。Intheirnegativeproposalsthesocialistsandanarchistsarefairlyagreed。Itisinthemetaphysicalpostulatesoftheirprotestandintheirconstructiveaimsthattheypartcompany。Ofthetwo，thesocialistsaremorewidelyoutoftouchwiththeestablishedorder。Theyarealsomorehopelesslynegativeanddestructiveintheirideals，asseenfromthestandpointoftheestablishedorder。Thisappliestothelatersocialistsratherthantotheearlier，anditapplies，ofcourse，onlytothelower-class，“democratic“socialists，nottotheso-calledstateandChristiansocialists。 Anarchismproceedsonnatural-rightsground，andisaccordinglyintouchwiththepostulatesoftheexistingpropertyarrangementstothatextent。Itisamoreunmitigatedworkingoutofthesamepostulates。Itisasystemof“naturalliberty“ unqualifiedtotheextentevenofnotadmittingprescriptiveownership。Itsbasisisa(divinelyinstituted)orderofnature，thekeynoteofwhichisaninalienablefreedomandequalityoftheindividual，quiteintheeighteenth-centuryspirit。ItisinthissenseanoffshootoftheRomanticschoolofthought。 Anarchismisadejureseheme，whichtakesnoaccountofmechanicalexigenciesbutrestsitscasealtogetheronanthropomorphicpostulatesofnaturalrights。Itis，fromthenatural-rightsstandpoint，substantiallysound，thoughsenselesslyextreme。 Whatmaybecalledthenormalsocialism，socialismofthelater，moredangerous，andmoreperplexing，kind，doesnotbuildonthereceivedmetaphysicalbasisofthe“naturalorder。“Itdemandsareconstructionofthesocialfabric，butitdoesnotknowonwhatlinesthereconstructionistobecarriedout。Thenaturalrightsoftheindividualarenotacceptedasthestandard(exceptbycertainlargebodiesofneophytes，especiallyruralAmerican，whoarecarryingundersocialistmottoestheburdenofanimositiesandpreconceptionsthatoncemadepopulism)，butnothingdefiniteisputintheplaceofthisoutwornstandard。 Thesocialistsoftheline，insofarasthereisanyconsensusamongthem，professthatthemechanicalexigenciesoftheindustrialsystemmustdecidewhatthesocialstructureistobe，butbeyondthisvaguegeneralitytheyhavelittletooffer。Andthismechanicalstandardizationcanmanifestlyaffordnobasisforlegislationoncivilrights。Indeed，itisdifficulttoseehowanysehemeofcivilrights，muchorlittle，canfindaplaceinasociallsticreorganization。 19。The“scientificsocialism“ofMarxandEngelsaspromulgatedduringthethirdquarterofthenineteenthcenturywasnotofthisnegativecharacter。ItwasaproductofHegelianismblendedwiththeconceptionsofnaturalrights，itschiefcountbeingthe“claimtothefullproductoflabor。“ThissocialismnevermadeseriousinroadsamongtheworkingclassesoutsideofGermany- thehomeofHegelianism。EveninthatcountrythemostvigorousgrowthofsocialisticsentimentcameafterHegelianismhadbeguntoyieldtoDarwinianmethodsofthought，andthislatergrowthhasbeenprogressivelylessMarxianandlesspositive。Marxismisnowlittlemorethanaproformaconfessionoffaith。Avowedsocialismispracticallytakingonthecharacterdescribedabove，exceptsofarasithasgrownopportunistandhassoughtaffiliationwiththeliberaldemocraticmovementandthereformers。 Wheremembersofthewell-to-doclassesavowsocialisticsentimentsandidealsitcommonlyturnsouttobeamerelyhumanitarianaspirationforamore“equitable“redistributionofwealth，areadjustmentofthesehemeofownershipwithsomeimprovedsafeguardingofthe“reasonable“propertyclaimsofallmembersofthecommunity。What“socialist“reformcommonlymeanstothiscontingentofwell-to-doirregularsissomesehemeofequalrightsofownershipforall。Whereastosocialistsofthelineequalrightsofownershipisasidleapropositionasanequalrightofcitizenstoselltheirvotes。Insteadofareformofownershipthesocialistscontemplatethetracelessdisappearanceofownership。 Unlessitbeinthelatestextremesofconservatism，suchasisshownintherecentofdynasticpoliticsinGermany，TorypolicyinEngland，andpredatorypoliticalidealsinAmerica。 22。SocialisticnotionsareapprentlymakingsomeinroadsamongtheruralpopulationoftheAmericanprairieregion，whereamechanicallyorganizedandstandardizedmethodoffarmingprevails，withalargeuseofmechanicalappliances。 SostrikinghasbeenthefailureoftheGermansocialists，forinstance，intheirattemptsupontheintegrityofthefarmingcommunity，thattheyhavelatterlychangedtheirtactics，andinsteadofattemptingtoconvertthepeasantstoafullsocialisticprogramme，theyhaveturnedtomeasuresofcompromise，inwhichthecharacteristicandrevolutionaryfeaturesofthesocialisticprogrammearesoftenedbeyondrecognition，ifnotsuppressed。Thehabitsoflife，andthereforethehabitsofthought，ofthepeasantfarmersmoveontheancientleveisofhandicraft，pecuniarymanagement，personalconsequence，andpreseriptivecustom。 Ifthisaccountoftheclasslimitationofthesocialistbiasisaccepted，ithasanimmediatebearinguponaquestionwhichislatterlyengagingtheattentionoftheadvocatesofsocialism。 Thequestionisastothepartplayedbypropertylessofficeemployeesandbythebusinessmenwhomthemodernconsolidationsofbusinessreducetothepositionofsalariedmanagersandsuperintendents。Withafaithpromptedbytheirownhopesratherthanbyobservedfactsorbythelogicofevents，thespokesmenforsocialismarestronglyinclinedtoclaimthis“businessproletariat“asacontingentwhichthecourseofeconomicdevelopmentisboundtothrowintothesocialistcamp。Thefactsdonotinanyappreciabledegreecountenancesuchanexpectation。