Tom Watson's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 4, June 1905Various
General
Tom Watson's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 4, June 1905
Various
United States -- Politics and government -- Periodicals
How comes it that a power in its unimpeded operations beneficent—namely,
the force or forces of combination or co-operation—becomes under certain
conditions so injurious to modern industry? Why is a union of two
factories or many factories, of two companies or many companies, a signal
to the community of anticipated extortion? And why should the development
of natural laws—those of combination and co-operation—provoke a public
demand for regulation, and those who avail themselves of these operations
be deemed amenable to punishment?
We may grant that a perfected combination which should succeed in
forestalling any given commodity would be criminal. The law from its very
beginnings has so regarded all such attempts. It is conceivable that,
under certain conditions, a mere agreement between individuals might
perfect a combination clearly within the provision of the law compelling
its forcible dissolution. But this is not conceivable under modern
conditions where wide distribution of capital and free labor exists. Law,
indeed, may create such monopolies, which it may by popular demand be
called upon to destroy, undoing with one hand what it has done with the
other. State-created monopolies have existed often in history—as notably
in the reign of Queen Elizabeth—but because these have been created
by direct act they have been exceedingly unpopular. So, in periods of
greater public intelligence, and where the people exercise larger powers
of government, it became necessary to accomplish the same result by
indirect means, by putting into operation some general law under which
monopoly could find a shelter, and the secret sources of which could not
be so easily traced.
For, contrary to the almost universal opinion, monopoly is weak. It
demands protection. And from what does it demand protection? From the
all-powerful natural law of competition. The curious Socialist notion
that competition leads to monopoly is true only in the sense that
monopoly, seeing how powerless it is when threatened by the forces of
competition, seeks the protection of such laws as it can secure, or which
already exist, for the suppression of competition. And this brings us to
the conclusion which is unavoidable that there are no monopolies save
law-created monopolies.[1]
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