State socialism after the war. A retrospect of reconstruction after the war, embracing a greater democracy, and founded on the teachings of Christ

Front matter

STME SOCIALISM

AFTER THE WAR

THOMAS J. HUGHES i^

Foreword

^ Since the beginning of the great world

5 war in 1914, the opinion has been fre-

$ quently expressed in the public prints and

otherwise that this greatest of wars marks the beginning of a new era in the history of the world. There is to be seen in some of the leading papers and magazines of the day such expressions as, *' vast changes pending throughout the world,*' ** the greatest turning point in human history during the last twenty centuries," " the end of the age," and other similar expressions.

One writer speaks of it as "a crises of world evolution ushering in a better world for posterity," another as ** marking the end of the old and the beginning of a new era." An English statesman says that at the end there will be a new Europe. A German- American writer thinks that some of the present European dynasties will be shorn

6 FOREWORD of their power and that the common people will rise to their own. A well-known American statesman says that it means the greatest impulse for Socialism that history records, while the German Socialists announce that they will renew their efforts with increased energy and determination at its close. For a number of years there has been an increasing agitation and dissatisfaction concerning social and economic conditions in the principal countries of the world, not only upon the part of Socialists, but of others who do not so class themselves. For two or more years preceding the war David Lloyd George was proposing in England the idea of government ownership of many public utilities, even of the coal mines. These suggestions have already borne fruit in what is known as ''The Commandeering Bill," a very drastic and highly socialistic measure, passed by Parliament in March, 1915, upon the insistence of Lloyd George. This law, as one writer puts it, gives the government absolute power to take over and conduct the

FOREWORD whole or any part of the industry of Great Britain.

The newspapers were swift to see the profound change which this law wrought in British conditions. The Daily Express asserted that the new bill was State Socialism, while an American gentleman, who had resided in England five years and was a close observer of conditions, said that, as one of the results of the war, England was sure to enter into a definite movement toward government ownership and State Socialism. It will thus be seen that the entering wedge of a new order has already been inserted in the old system. What the new order is to be is a matter of conjecture. But inasmuch as England is a Christian nation whose spiritual life has been deeply quickened by the experiences of this war, it may be expected that she will look to the principles of Christianity, if it possesses any applicable to the subject, in her program of government ownership and State Socialism.

In this connection it is interesting to note

8 FOREWORD that students of prophecy are claiming that certain well-known prophecies are being fulfilled. And there certainly is some basis for the contention that the prophetic words of Christ, of nation rising against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, with famines and earthquakes in divers places, have come true.

A great world war of nation against nation was to be characteristic of the approaching end of the world, or, as others translate, the end of the age. A new age, or era, was then to begin ; or rather, to become fully developed and established, for all the elements of the new era are now present, but only partially established and developed. What this new era is to be is fully and completely described by Jesus in his description of what he designated as ** the kingdom of heaven.'* This was his way of speaking of a higher and superior civilization, a new age, era, or regime, which was to be established upon earth following a great world war which now appears to have taken place.

While the new age, according to the

FOREWORD biblical description, is to be one of high moral and spiritual attainment, there is also to be a great social and economic advancement. There is to be a better system of property tenure, a different basis of distributing the means of subsistence between the rich and the poor, and a different system of wages. It is with the social and economic side of the new era, exclusively, that this work has to do, and whatever is herein set forth, it is maintained, has a sound scriptural basis.

There are three fundamental principles underlying the economic side of the new era as found in the teachings of Christ and the Apostles^ example. These principles are : — a system of property tenure according to ability, or as ability is proved by earning capacity, according to earnings ; a distribution of the means of subsistence according to needs ; and the same or an equal wage. In the following pages the reader will find a description of a new economic system based upon these principles. We have, then, in the

10 FOREWORD teachings of Jesus, the foundation principles of a new and more beneficent economic order, and which in modern parlance is nothing more or less than State Socialism. It might be interesting at the present time to examine this new order, which is already beginning in the moral, spiritual, and economic changes that are now taking place in the different countries at war.

Many Christians have but little comprehension of the social scheme of Jesus as a whole, though the words by which it is set forth are almost as familiar as those of the Lord's prayer. Others have heretofore regarded it as visionary, impracticable, unsuited to our complex and diversified modern life, and something to take place in the distant future. But it is our complex modern life, especially the wonderful development in recent years of what is known as modern business methods, that has made this scheme possible and practicable, and brought it near.

The most natural and easy method of presenting the subject has been first to give a

FOREWORD 11 complete description of the new economic order, and then the scriptural passages upon which it is based. Hence, in chapters one to nineteen, the reader will find a new system of land tenure described, a new compulsory occupational law, a system of awards to take the place of inheritance, and a new system of wages. In order to give an adequate description of the new order and to show its adaptability to various phases of diversified modern life, it is necessary to enter into considerable detail, such as Repairs and Maintenance of Properties, Cost to the Citizen and to the State, Provisions for Widows and Orphans, Retirement Privileges, Public and Private Improvements, etc., which it is hoped the reader will not find too lengthy. In the nineteenth and twentieth chapters the scriptural foundation of the new order is stated and explained, and in the concluding chapters a description is given of modern business methods, showing their growth, expansion and adaptability to the new social order. July, 1916. T. J. H.

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

I. The New Eea and the European

War 15

Chapter I The New Eea And The Eueopean Wae

The movement demanding the curtailment of the immense armament expenditures of the leading European nations made but little progress when the great European war of 1914 broke forth. Bursting suddenly upon the world, and apparently without justifiable cause, it seemed that this greatest of all wars could have been easily avoided. Many reasons and excuses have been given as to its causes, such as commercial jealousy, race antipathies, and territorial ambitions. But the deep, underlying cause was the spirit of militarism, the attempt to maintain the balance of power and rule the world by force of arms, which is contrary to the divine plan and the higher order of civilization which is to be established upon the earth. And it now seems that this stupendous conflict, with all its horror and destruction, was inevitable and apparently necessary in order to exhaust and destroy the spirit of militarism, and thereby bring about an era of universal and lasting peace.

Though this most desirable of all objectives was not contemplated at the beginning, it was but the natural result of this, as it has been of other great wars. There is no doubt but that the experience of the Civil War, which was the greatest the world had known up to that time, is largely accountable for the pacific tendency in America. One of the most successful Union generals said, '' War is hell." If to the victor war is hell, to the defeated it must be worse than hell. In order to destroy militarism and the desire for war, only let there be enough of it. And the longer the war and the more nations engaged, the more complete its destruction and greater the assurance of universal and lasting peace. At least at its close, the prospect of this seemed to be the one good result of the great European war.

A cessation of hostilities was finally brought about by the Allies with the assistance of America. It was then that the great question, After the War, What? loomed large upon the horizon. The war had resulted in a great unrest among the people of all European countries. There was an undercurrent of sentiment that a new era was dawning, and that vast changes were pending throughout the world. In fact, the war had not proceeded a month when thinking men of different countries, taking a philosophical view of the matter, began to feel and to realize that this greatest of wars was not merely a war, but a great climax in the history of the world ; that it marked the end of the old order of things, and would be the turning point for a new and grander dispensation for the human race.

Among the many opinions expressed was that of Lord Roseberry who said that old Europe was disappearing, never to reappear again in its present shape ; of Viscount Haldane, then Lord Chancellor of Great

Britain, who said that a great democratic and moral advance would result from the war. Also that of Woodrow Wilson, then President of the United States, who declared that great spiritual forces would assert themselves at the end of the war to enlighten the judgment and steady the spirit of mankind. That great moral and spiritual changes were taking place was conceded by all careful observers. The advanced position taken by the different governments regarding the use of intoxicants, and the deep religious waves which swept over the various nations during the war, was evidence of this. And in other respects, it was felt that this, the greatest of all wars, could not be without great and far-reaching results. Other wars had not been without great results, — results unforeseen and unanticipated at the beginning of hostilities. The American Revolution had no other object at first than the resistance of what was considered an unjust tax. It resulted in the independence of the Colonies and a new era of political freedom and democracy. Likewise, it was generally realized that this war was the beginning of a new era of social and democratic advance in which all the people would be lifted to a higher plane.

Furthermore, it was a serious question with biblical students as to whether this war was to be identified with that described in the gospels, which was to indicate the approaching end of what is known as the present or apostolic age, and the beginning of a higher and more beneficent dispensation. Bursting suddenly upon the nations and spreading like a mighty conflagration until, including the European countries actually engaged together with their colonies and dependencies, it held within its grasp the larger part of the world, the scriptural prophecy seemed to be fulfilled : " And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars : see that ye be not troubled : for these things must needs come to pass : but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom : and there shall be famines and earthquakes in divers places.'^ These were the words of Christ Himself. And if there ever has been a time since the utterance of this prophecy in which nation rose against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, with famines and earthquakes in divers places, that time seemed to be during the great war just closed.

While the Lord Chancellor of Great Britain and the President of the United States were taking these long sighted, philosophical views of the outcome, and students of prophecy were highly expectant as to the dawning of a new era, conditions in England and other countries at war indicated that vast changes were actually beginning to take place. The ukase of the Czar of Russia prohibiting the use of intoxicants was as great a moral revolution, the result of a single act, as the world had ever witnessed. That this great reform was to be continued after the war was amply evidenced by the strong public opinion in its favor on the part of the Russian people. There was also evidence of a political reformation taking place in Russia during the war. There were indications that greater political rights and privileges would be granted the people, with the prospect of local self-government in a " United States of Russia," promised by the Czar.

In Germany, the strict censorship prevented the outside world from obtaining knowledge as to any internal changes. But it can be assured that, in the midst of their many victories, a large part of the people grew tired of the war, and a deep though silent peace sentiment developed which was bound to mean much to the rest of the world in future years. France and Belgium were too deeply afflicted by the presence of hostile armies upon their soil to look much to the future. France, especially, was greatly sobered and made serious. Her religious life was greatly quickened, thus preparing her for the higher and more beneficent order which was to arise out of her affliction.

But it was in England that many indications of vast changes taking place were to be found. In contrast to the solidarity and contentmeiit with economic conditions in Germany and France toward the close of the first year of the war, there was much discontent with economic conditions and much strife and bitter animosity in the labor and industrial situation across the Channel. '' Popular discontent," said ex-Senator Albert J. Beverage, who made a careful investigation of conditions in England at this time, " raised its many headed visage in multitudes of places throughout the United Kingdom. The workers on the Clyde had struck. The dock laborers at Liverpool had either stopped work or threatened to do so. Here, there and yonder, the protest of the toiler against conditions flamed up like a fire creeping beneath forest leaves and refusing to be extinguished. Bitter animosity arose.

'' In an acrimonious article in the London Times, the Clyde men were dubbed ' Shipyard Shirkers ' : ' the shame of Sunderland is its large body of shirkers. . . . It is a common thing for men to be away three days each week. . . . Absenteeism is not wholly or indeed largely due to intemperance. The shirkers who parade the streets are a remarkably sober-looking body of men/^'i

The laboring men were accused by the government of intoxication and by the Times and other London papers of idleness, intoxication, and inefficiency. On the other hand the British workingmen, of whom it was claimed the majority were sober and industrious, bitterly resented these attacks. " The Labor Journals saw in these assaults upon the workingman an effort to break down the whole trade-union system and exploitation of labor by the capitalistic classes. * This,* declared Justice, an organ of the Social Democracy, ' is the reason why Cabinet Ministers, shareholders and capitalistic pressmen have commenced this campaign of calumny against a body of men who, but a short time before, they were united in praising. First

* The above and following facts and quotations are taken from an article by Albert J. Beverage published in the American Beview of Reviews, July, 1915.

it was the docker who was lazy, now it is the engineer — whose turn will be next ? Not the shareholder, who calmly pockets his enhanced dividends, and then proceeds to abuse the men who made the dividends.'

" Another signed article in this labor paper concerning the strike of the engineers on the Clyde said: 'We find the engineering shops seething with discontent, and it is difficult to say what may yet be the outcome.'

" So grave did the economic strife in Great Britain finally become, and so acutely was the government embarrassed in conducting the war because of shortage of material and equipment, that toward the middle of March the most drastic and autocratic law ever passed by any legislative body in British history was enacted. Broadly speaking, this law, 'The Commandeering Bill,' gave the government absolute power to take over and conduct the whole or any part of the industry of Great Britain.

'' The newspapers were swift to see and frank to state the profound change which this law wrought in British conditions, and justified it only on the ground of deadly emergency. The Daily Mail said that the law established * a sort of industrial dictatorship/ The Daily Express asserted that * The new bill is, of course. State Socialism. That must be accepted.'

" At a large labor meeting personally attended, following the first debate in Parliament upon the Commandeering Bill, bitter denunciations of the government were heard. The manufacturers, the shipowners, the dealers in life's necessities were, declared the speakers, using the war to squeeze bloodmoney from the people by an unconscionable raising of prices.

" At this particular labor meeting not one warm word was uttered in support of the war. But all demanded that the principles of the Commandeering Bill should be applied to food and fuel in order to relieve the distress of the people. ' If the government,' said they, * is to take over factories and docks, and compel labor to toil immeasurably in order that munitions of war shall be furnished, let the government also take over foodstuffs and compel dealers and carriers to sell reasonably for provisioning the poor.'

" Leaflets and pamphlets were distributed, filled with astounding figures showing the rise of prices and demanding government intervention.

'' ' Oh ! they amount to nothing,* said one of the most powerful men in England when told of this labor meeting. On the contrary : * But you noticed that the chairman was a member of Parliament, that the representative of the British cooperative stores was one of the speakers, and that all of them were trusted representatives of the working classes,' remarked a studious observer when told of this estimate of the insignificance of this labor demonstration.

'^ Compared with the contentment with economic conditions found in Germany and France, what was seen, heard, and read of the labor and industrial situation across the Channel startled and surprised . . ."

Another American, Mr. Reginald Wright Kauffman, who has resided in England five years, who has studied the national life, and who has the advantage of an acquaintance more or less intimate of each of the three social grades, in speaking of the effects of the Commandeering Bill, said :

'* This means just one thing; it means that the cause of the labor unions, once stronger in England than anywhere else in the world, had been put back a quarter of a century. And it may mean more ; two years ago, Lloyd George was playing with the idea of the government ownership of many public utilities, even the coal mines — the tendency may well end in wide-spread government ownership ; it may well end in State Socialism/'

In a very interesting and highly illuminating article published in the Christian Herald, entitled, " England — Afterwards," and in which he asserts that he will confine himself to such matters only as are already evident, Mr. Kauffman says further :

'' One more change can be prophesied with certainty, and that a great one ; the women will be given the ballot. What they could not gain by violence, by years of propaganda, by peaceful politics, they have gained by their conduct in this war. There can be no doubt upon the subject. I have talked with Englishmen of influence among constituents of every shade of political belief, and the verdict is everywhere the same.

" These things then are relatively certain, whoever wins the war or loses it, for England has awakened to her own internal condition. There will be new legislation upon the subject of illegitimacy ; there will be sweeping changes in class distinctions ; there will be a larger standing army, — perhaps even militarism ; there will be a strong tendency toward prohibition ; there will be at least a temporary decline of the powers of the trade unions and a definite movement toward State Socialism ; there will be admission of woman to the use of the ballot.

" How much of this is good and how much bad, I am not here trying to determine ; but I have shown, I think, that so much as is sure to occur inside of England is of considerably more importance to her, and perhaps inferentially to the world at large, than any changes of the map of Europe."

Englishmen, too, were equally awake to the coming changes. A few months later, after the Commandeering Bill had been put into operation, Lord Northcliffe, at the head of the greatest news gathering force in England, and in a position to sense the trend of affairs, said that by the end of the war England would have State Socialism. " Before the beginning of next year," said he, " my income tax will be $2.50 on every $5.00 of income. In my opinion this tax will never be less even after the war. On the other hand, the working classes are receiving higher wages than they have ever received before. In my opinion these wages will never be lower. The rich are going to be poorer and the poor richer, and by the end of the war England will have a species of

State Socialism. We are reconciled to and have accepted these conditions."

He was of the opinion that there would also be a social revolution in the United States. ^' America will have its conflicts also," said he. ** It will be an internal reflex action of the great changes taking place here."

But a complete system of State Socialism would, for the time being only, require an income tax of 50% from men of wealth. For the higher wages already being received by the working classes would lessen its cost and the tremendous war debts would revert to the State, the same as all other kinds of property, and if not subject to award would in time disappear. The entire income tax could then be devoted to the purposes of State Socialism which would not require an income tax of more than 20% or 25% at the utmost, which would be all the taxes for all purposes.

Chapter II The Geeater Democracy

The industrial situation in England became still more acute during July, 1915, when more than 150,000 miners went on a strike in the South Wales coal fields. And by strikes and other means, the laboring man seized every opportunity during the first years of the war to enter his solemn protest against economic conditions, to make known his long existing dissatisfaction with his economic status, brought to an acute stage by war conditions.

The above and other strikes were settled by the government persuading employers to grant an increase of wages, and by strong, appeals to the patriotism of labor. A strict adherence upon the part of the government to enforce the provisions of the Commandeering Bill as regarded the owners of Industry, was also necessary. That these provisions were strictly enforced was asserted by Lloyd George in a speech before the Trades Union Congress at Bristol.

" I have seen resolutions from time to time," said he, " at trade union congresses about nationalizing the industries of the country. We have done it. The whole of the engineering industry of this country . . . is now state controlled, and the profits they make out of the war are annexed for state purposes. That is better than any resolution you have ever carried and when the experiment is made why not acclaim it? If you won't accept a great leap along the path you want to go, you will never get there." It was true. A great leap forward had been taken, and one that could never be retraced.

As the war progressed, great and important advances were also made in other countries. There was little or no dissatisfaction over economic conditions in Germany, as compared with England, at the beginning of the war, due to certain well-developed socialistic laws for the benefit of the laborer in that country. Possessing a well-developed, though only partial system of State Socialism before the war, Germany made further important advances during the conflict. Nearly all the industries and food supplies were taken over by the government, and the eating and drinking of the citizen were regulated and controlled.

There was also great progress made in different countries, notably the United States, toward Prohibition, which is a state socialistic measure. The use of intoxicants is a great national waste, impairs, and often obliterates the earning capacity of the citizen, and greatly affects the economic welfare of his wife and children. All this is contrary to the principles of State Socialism which seeks the highest economic good of every citizen, including each individual man, woman, and child. In addition, the savings derived from Prohibition would, within the course of a few generations, pay the war debts and indemnities of all countries.

During the third year of the war, a new compulsory labor law was put into effect in Germany. This was another important advance in State Socialism, which has no place for the idler and which insists that every able citizen shall engage in a useful work or occupation of some kind. Several American states, New York, Maryland, West Virginia, New Jersey and others, also passed compulsory labor laws, requiring all able-bodied citizens, rich as well as poor, to engage in useful and lawful occupations, if not already so engaged, while the national government, under the draft law, enforced the '' work or fight '^ rule with every man within the draft age. The principle that the government require all able-bodied citizens to work, has its natural complement in another state socialistic principle that in case the citizen is not able to find employment for himself, the government should find it for him. Hence, the national employment bureaus throughout the United States during the war which found employment for thousands of citizens. After the war the United States government undertook to find employment for all returned soldiers who could not find places for themselves, while in England, a wage, called the unemployment wage, was paid soldiers until they could find positions. In the above laws and regulations are three state socialistic principles, which, blended into a harmonious whole and working in conjunction with each other, are applicable and beneficial to all citizens as well as soldiers.

While the above and other countries thus progressed toward economic democracy, Russia made a great leap toward political democracy. During the third year of the war, the dissatisfaction of the people with the old regime reached a crisis in Russia over the bad handling of food supplies and the economic situation generally, resulting in a revolution which completely overthrew the Romanoff rule and the old order of things. The provisional government fell into the hands of liberal-minded men who promised a free democracy patterned after the United States of America, while the Soviet went still farther and demanded a new and complete social, as well as a new political, democracy.

It was about this time the United States entered the war, its object and purpose being the greater democracy of the world, and the preservation of those principles of freedom which obtain in democratic countries. Thus, the greater democracy of the world became one of the principal objects of the war, though it was not the purpose for which any of the countries entered the conflict, except the United States. Those countries not before democratic, like Russia and Germany, first sought political democracy, while those countries already democratic, as England and France, sought a still higher ideal in economic democracy. As indicative of this, Henry Herbert Asquith, while premier of England, announced that a new social order would be put into effect in England after the war. The conditions of the poorer classes would be greatly improved, poverty eliminated, and the British workingman paid the highest wages in the world. At a later date, Premier Lloyd George said that the industrial system of England would be recast after the war, and in so important a work, woman would be given the ballot and have a voice.

The inauguration of a new regime, then, became assured, so far as Russia and England were concerned. Though having no special design toward economic democracy^ the United States was compelled, as had been all other belligerents, to adopt the state socialistic measures of Germany in order to successfully prosecute its part of the war. The Food-Control, Ship-Building, Commandeering, Railroad-Control and other laws were passed and put into effect, — ^laws more drastic and far-reaching than those of Germany, England, or France. These were war measures, it is true, some of them suitable for war times only, and autocratic in character. Nevertheless, they were a definite and positive movement toward a greater democracy, for a higher and greater democracy could not be maintained even under a government alread}^ democratic without adding to it a certain centralization of power, both local and general in character, necessary for its effective operation. In these war measures there was that centralization of power, which the nation learned to use, and without which the social order could not be democratized. To a country already democratic, complete State Socialism would be but a fuller and greater democracy, for though it would make a more strongly empowered and restrictive government, to equality of political rights it would add equality of economic opportunity for all.