Economic development -- Social aspects; Social evolution; Social problems; Work
The improvement of a human being is not in his own hands, but in the
hands of other human beings. Our line of racial advance is in serving
one another, like any other group of organs. This common profit in a
common product leads us to wish to improve that product. The product of
human beings is improved by supplying the needed energy, stimulus,
direction; by _putting into the individual_ in order that we may get out
of him the pay first, the work afterwards.
This reverses the whole proposition. It is no longer a matter of the
individual workman seeking to satisfy his wants _à la_ Bear. It is
Society seeking to raise the productive value of its integers by
carefully supplying those forces which produce more and better work.
Quite without knowing it Society does this to a considerable extent,
hence the working value of a member of an advanced society is greater
than that of a member of a low society; but because we have not known
the real laws of human production, we have continued to interpret the
whole field of social activity in terms of individual competition.
The supply of a man’s needs we have tried to limit strictly to his
earning power, refusing to observe that there was no ratio whatever
between what a man needs and what he can do—unless, indeed, an inverse
one. The fact that a man, well started in lines of work suited to him,
will produce continuously long after all his needs are supplied we have
tried to account for by assuming new needs as the necessary incentives.
Nothing could be clearer—to our view. If a man works only in order to
supply his needs, then a given man who does work worth a thousand times
as much as another man’s must of course need a thousand times as much.
He _must_, because there is no other reason for his working. And if the
working power of the average man shows large and general increase, it is
only to be accounted for by shining ranks of hitherto undreamed-of
needs, which were evolved to lead him on!
So the missionary, acting on this theory, tries to rouse the contented
savage to want things, holding that attitude to be a productive one; and
the economist, satisfied with his theory, never looks to see if there is
any observable connection between want and work, in race, class, or
individual. In _reductio ad absurdum_ the Want theory comes to this. Man
works to supply wants. As the act of working does not supply wants, this
involves another clause; man works to get wealth to supply wants. And
this, if a real law of nature, involves some inevitable connection
between the clauses: work must produce wealth and wealth must supply
want. Also, if a real law, there must be some proportion between these
clauses, the less the want the less the work, the greater the want the
greater the work, with the same proportion in the “wealth” which is the
intermediate factor understood.
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