The present tendency of economical development in the world is--we
have seen--to induce more and more every nation, or rather every
region, taken in its geographical sense, to rely chiefly upon a home
production of all the chief necessaries of life. Not to reduce, I
mean, the world-exchange: it may still grow in bulk; but to limit it
to the exchange of what really _must_ be exchanged, and, at the same
time, immensely to increase the exchange of novelties, produce of
local or national art, new discoveries and inventions, knowledge and
ideas. Such being the tendency of present development, there is not
the slightest ground to be alarmed by it. There is not one nation in
the world which, being armed with the present powers of agriculture,
could not grow on its cultivable area all the food and most of the
raw materials derived from agriculture which are required for its
population, even if the requirements of that population were rapidly
increased as they certainly ought to be. Taking the powers of man
over the land and over the forces of nature--_such as they are at
the present day_--we can maintain that two to three inhabitants to
each cultivable acre of land would not yet be too much. But neither
in this densely populated country nor in Belgium are we yet in such
numbers. In this country we have, roughly speaking, one acre of the
cultivable area per inhabitant.
Supposing, then, that each inhabitant of Great Britain were compelled
to live on the produce of his own land, all he would have to do
would be, first, to consider the land of this country as a common
inheritance, which must be disposed of to the best advantage of each
and all--this is, evidently, an absolutely necessary condition. And
next, he would have to cultivate his soil, not in some extravagant
way, but no better than land is already cultivated upon thousands
and thousands of acres in Europe and America. He would not be bound
to invent some new methods, but could simply generalise and widely
apply those which have stood the test of experience. He can do it;
and in so doing he would save an immense quantity of the work which
is now given for buying his food abroad, and for paying all the
intermediaries who live upon this trade. Under a rational culture,
those necessaries and those luxuries which must be obtained from
the soil, undoubtedly _can_ be obtained with much less work than is
required now for buying these commodities. I have made elsewhere (in
_The Conquest of Bread_) approximate calculations to that effect, but
with the data given in this book everyone can himself easily test the
truth of this assertion. If we take, indeed, the masses of produce
which are obtained under rational culture, and compare them with
the amount of labour which must be spent for obtaining them under
an irrational culture, for collecting them abroad, for transporting
them, and for keeping armies of middlemen, we see at once how few
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account