The Inhumanity of Socialism Part 3

PHAEDO--That is true, for the G.o.ds live in the heavens and in the nether world, and not upon the earth.

SOCRATES--And the plants do not use the earth, or enjoy it, although they live upon it, but they are themselves used and enjoyed by man and beasts.

PHAEDO--Certainly the earth was not made for the plants.

SOCRATES--And surely as between man and the lower animals, the earth was intended for man.

PHAEDO--Certainly, that is what we think, but I do not know what the lion and the horse and the ox might say, for they certainly use the earth and enjoy it.

SOCRATES--But man is superior to the lower animals, and the superior cannot be subordinate to the inferior.

PHAEDO--I do not know how we can tell which is superior. The primordial cell in differentiating out of h.o.m.ogeneity into heterogeneity developed different qualities in different beings, and of the organs integrated from the heterogeneous elements each has its use and many are essential to life. In man the brain is more powerful than in the ox, but in the ox the stomach is more powerful than the brain, and while both stomach and brain are necessary, yet is one with a weak brain and strong stomach doubtless happier than one with a weak stomach and strong brain. Is it not, then, true that the stomach is n.o.bler than the brain, and if so, then the pig and the lion and the goat, which have strong stomachs, n.o.bler than man, whose stomach could in nowise digest carrion, or alfalfa, or tin cans, and therefore may it not be that the earth was made for the lower animals, who can use more of its products than man?

SOCRATES--That is a deep thought, O Phaedo, which shows that you are well up in your Spencer, although shy in your surgery, for it is true that the stomach has been removed from a man who lived happy ever after, while neither man nor beast ever lived a minute after his brains were knocked out; but, is it not true that it is by the function of the brain that man makes his powers more effective than those of animals stronger than he, so that he is able to bear rule over all the lower animals and either exterminate them from the earth or make them to serve him?

PHAEDO--Yes, that is true.

SOCRATES--And we cannot say that the earth was made for beasts which themselves are made to serve the purpose of man, for as plants are consumed by beasts, so beasts are consumed by man who acquires for his own use and enjoyment whatever power is generated by the organs of all other living things.

PHAEDO--That is true, and I can now see that the earth was not made by the G.o.ds for themselves, or for plants or beasts.

SOCRATES--Therefore, it appears to me that it must have been made for man.

PHAEDO--That is true, and I now agree that the earth was made for man.

SOCRATES--Then, since we have found a common starting point, we may go on with our conversation. We have proved that the earth was made for man, because man, by powers inherent in himself, can overcome all other living things on the earth and subject them to his uses.

PHAEDO--Yes, we have proved that.

SOCRATES--And the real source of his kingship is power.

PHAEDO--That must be true.

SOCRATES--And force is power applied to some object, so that power and force may be spoken of as the same thing.

PHAEDO--Certainly.

SOCRATES--And where power lies, there and there only is sovereignty, and where power ends sovereignty finds its limit. So that, for example, if the lion could subdue man and the other animals, the earth would be for the use of the lion.

PHAEDO--That is plain.

SOCRATES--And if a company of men should find an island and go and live upon it and be strong enough to subdue the wild animals and keep out other men, that island would be for their use.

PHAEDO--That follows, because sovereignty goes with power exercised in force.

SOCRATES--And so if one man should find a vacant s.p.a.ce and take possession, it would be his.

PHAEDO--That is true.

SOCRATES--And what belongs to man, man may dispose of as he will.

PHAEDO--All men agree to that.

SOCRATES--And, therefore, since Hippocrates has found a vacant s.p.a.ce on the earth and taken possession thereof, and no man disputes his possession, it is his and he may sell it.

PHAEDO--That is certainly true, and I do not doubt that Hipparchus will now pay down his talent of silver and take over the vale in the Olympian forest.

SOCRATES--And if instead of finding an island the company of men had found an entire continent it would be theirs if they were strong enough to keep it.

PHAEDO--Surely that is so, for power is but concentrated ability to enjoy, and where most power lies, there lies most ability to enjoy, and therefore the highest possible aggregate of human happiness, in the attainment of which the will of the G.o.ds shall be done.

SOCRATES--And if a company can take part of a continent, but not the whole, whatever they are able to take is theirs.

PHAEDO--Undoubtedly.

SOCRATES--And what is theirs is not the property of others.

PHAEDO--By no means.

SOCRATES--And if it does not belong to others, others may not lawfully use it.

PHAEDO--Surely not.

SOCRATES--And they who do own it may prevent others from entering it.

PHAEDO--Surely, for hath not the poet said:

"That they shall take who have the power, And they may keep who can."

SOCRATES--Therefore it is plain that the United States may keep Chinamen out of America.

PHAEDO--There can be no doubt of it whatever.

SOCRATES--And Chinese may keep Americans out of China.

PHAEDO--That is another story. One must never let his logic get the better of him.

And so we might play with these great subjects forever, with reasoning as leaky as a sieve, but good enough to catch the careless or the untrained.

One of the most interesting lectures which I ever listened to was one before the Economic League of San Francisco on the "Dialectics of Socialism." The lecturer was a very acute man, who would not for one moment be deceived by the sophistry of my Socrates and Phaedo, but, who, himself, made willing captives of his hearers by similar methods. I was unable to hear all his address, but when I reluctantly left, it appeared to me that he was expecting to prove that Socialism must be sound philosophy because it was contradictory to all human observation, experience, judgment and the dictates of sound common sense--and his large audience was plainly enough with him.

The dialectics of the schoolmen or their equivalent are useless in Social discussion. Social phenomena do not lend themselves to the rigorous formulas of mathematics and logic, for the human intellect is unable to discern and grasp all the factors of these problems. My travesty of Plato was intended to ill.u.s.trate the difficulty of close reasoning on such topics.

Neither, on the other hand, are we to blindly follow the impulses of emotion which lead us to jump at a conclusion, support it with what reason we can, but reach it in any event. Emotion is the source of Social power, but power unrestrained and undirected is dangerous. Energy created by the sight of distress must be controlled by reason or it will not relieve distress. And by reason I do not mean Social syllogisms, of whose premises we are always uncertain, but conclusions half unconsciously formed in the mind as the result of human experience operating on human feeling--the practical wisdom which we call common sense. Human conduct, individual and aggregate, must be regulated and determined by the consensus of the judgment of the wisest made effective through its gradual acceptance as the judgment of the majority. Private ownership of land, with its accompanying rent, is justified, not by an imaginary inherent right in the individual, which has no real existence and so cannot be conveyed, but because the interests of Society require the stimulus to effort which private ownership and private ownership only can give. And here I shall leave this point without the further ill.u.s.tration and elaboration with which I could torment you longer than you could keep awake. And with the other two points I will confine myself to the most condensed forms of statement.

Interest--Socialists and non-Socialists agree that what a man makes is his. Socialists and I agree that every man is ent.i.tled to his just share of the Social dividend. I believe, and in this I suppose the Socialists would agree with me, that when a man gets his annual dividend he may use it, or keep it for future use. If, while he does not use his dividend, or the product of his labor, he permits others to use it to their profit, it seems to me that he is ent.i.tled to some satisfaction in compensation for his sacrifice. I believe it to the interest of Society that he have it. By individual thrift Society acc.u.mulates, and it is wise to encourage thrift.

If I build a mill and, falling sick, cannot use it, it is fair that he who does use it shall pay me for my sacrifice in building it. If I forego possible satisfactions of any kind, those whom I permit to enjoy them should recompense me. And that is interest. Its foundation as a right rests not only on those natural sentiments of justice with which the normal man everywhere is endowed and behind which we cannot go, but on the interest of Society to encourage the creation of savings funds to be employed for the benefit of Society.