Until now has been reserved the inquiry into how it happens that these critics of industrialism fall into their fatal errors. That inquiry will not long detain us. Professor Veblen naïvely gives himself and his fellow-critics away. He confesses why he hates the régime of the business man, what he means when he calls the machine industry “materialistic, unmoral, undevout.” “Business life,” he says, “does not further the growth of manners and breeding, pride of caste, punctilios of honor or even religious fervor.” And he finds his hope for the future in militarism and imperialism--which he, by the way, unjustly charges to the business men instead of to the politicians pandering to the still lively passions of man’s inheritance from the past when all the world was militaristic and imperialistic. “There can be no serious question,” says he, “but that a consistent return to the ancient virtues of allegiance, piety, servility, graded dignity, class prerogatives, and prescriptive authority would greatly conduce to popular content and to the facile management of affairs.” Nor does he conceal under the ponderous sarcasm lurking in that statement the truth of his own fixed belief in at least a measure of those “ancient virtues.” For his whole book, and the speeches and writings of practically all the critics of industrialism, show that these critics abhor the new virtues as “materialistic.” The motive in the mind of each critic is a little different from that of his fellow-critics. One wishes college professors and the like to be in control; another is for the supremacy of birth; another for the supremacy of culture, whatever that may mean. Another wants the preacher back at the helm, with mankind an open-mouthed, uncritical congregation. Each wants the particular class or condition to which he himself has the good fortune to belong, to have the chief say in affairs. But all agree in denouncing the business man who is actually in control--and will remain there. They profess to despise money, yet they hate him for his profits. They profess to prefer the intellectual and moral dividends which their own intellectual and moral enterprises declare; yet their dainty fingers twitch for the material dividends which his material enterprises naturally declare. They would deny him the gains which are the only--and, as they loudly profess, the poor enough--rewards for wasting his life upon the gross and sordid things.