Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economicsMacassey, Lynden Livingston
History
Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economics
Macassey, Lynden Livingston
Industrial policy -- Great Britain; Labor economics -- Great Britain; Labour Party (Great Britain)
To capitalism, it is customary, and, indeed, necessary for his argument,
for the Socialist to attribute all the ills from which industry
suffers and most evils to which the community is heir. With the exit
of capitalism the Socialist says that unemployment would disappear
and adequate maintenance be secured for sickness, old age and other
incapacity, equality of opportunity afforded to all, full scope provided
for individual expression and development, and a universal millennium
inaugurated. In the minds of some Socialists there seems no limit
whatsoever to the mephitic influence of capitalism. Dr. Shadwell, in his
discerning articles in _The Times_[2] on “The Revolutionary Movement in
Great Britain,” mentions that the _Daily Herald_ of February 2, 1921,
found the cause of influenza in capitalism, and argued that unless the
latter is destroyed it will destroy mankind; conversely Dr. Shadwell
logically suggested we may assume that if capitalism is abolished
influenza will disappear!
We are now in a position to distinguish the principal schools of
Socialism that exist to-day. One will not find them formulating their
principles as crisply as I set them out. My object is merely to indicate
the main outlines.
State Socialism
First we have the State Socialist who advocates that the State should
acquire, as he generally says, the means of production, distribution and
exchange, or, to reduce it to practical terms, land and the national
industries. Taking, for example, a concrete case—the railway industry—the
State would take over all the railway undertakings in the country from
the various companies of shareholders who now own them and, under most
schemes of State Socialism, would compensate the shareholders by paying
them, in State securities, something approaching the capital value of
the net maintainable revenue of the undertakings. Under this system the
State steps into the shoes of the original owners of the railways and
acts as the employer controlling the industry and employing the workmen
just as the private owners previously did. The industry would be run by
a Government Department in Whitehall and, the State Socialist says, will
be run in the interests of the community and not for private profit,
inasmuch as the Government Department is, through its ministerial head,
responsible to Parliament, which represents the community.
Syndicalism
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account