TWO BOOKS ON GUILD SOCIALISM.*
THERE has been a good deal of talk lately about Guild Socialism' and one therefore turns with special interest to two books recently published which profess to deal with the subject. Unfortunately neither of them conveys very precise information. The first to bo referred to is called Old Worlds for New,' and is written by Mr. Arthur J. Penty, who had previously written a book called The Restoration of the Guild System. As far as can be made out from the present volume, Mr. Panty's views are mainly derived from Ruskin and William Morris. He revolts against the ugliness of modem industry, and expresses his revolt in sufficiently emphatic language. In particular, he finds himself at cross-purposes with the Fabians, and among them notably with their leader, Mr. Sidney Webb. Indeed, it may be said without unfairness that perhaps the most attractive part of Mr. Parity's book is the vigour with which he attacks the Webb movement and the Fabian Society. For example, after dealing critically with the scientific organization of industry and the " speeding up " which results, he expresses his disgust that Mr. Webb and the Fabians should have advocated this system of industrial development :— " Of course," he goes on, " it is easy to understand why Fabianisis should have degenerated in this way. In its anxiety to find az: immediate remedy for the problems of poverty it ignored the claims of art and philosophy, not understanding that every practical problem has a metaphysical problem behind it, and that the needs of art in Industry are identical with the needs of human nature. Further, it is to some extent to be explained by the artificial lives which members of the Fabian Society lead. Mr. Webb is typical. At first as a Civil servant, and then as a man of private means, ho has lived a sheltered life far removed from the storm and stress of things, while his legal training was the very worst imaginable for intensifying in him sympathies which were never too strong. And so with respect to the Fabian Society as a whole ; it is far too intellectual and too little human ever to get at grips with the realities of life, while the occupations of its members are for the most part of too artificial a nature to give them a fund of first-hand experience. To be candid, the Fabians are tho last people in this world to find a remedy for the evils which afflict society. They are too much a part of the same disease."
This quotation gives a fairly good idea of Mr. Penty's general view. He adopts similar language in attacking Collectivism, which he describes as " an economic system divorced from morals." He further points out, as any mere commonplace Individualist might do, that the Collectivists make the fundamental error of thinking that the State can be better than the citizens who compose it, and he denounces the " unwieldy and impersonal machinery " through which the State has to work. He is equally contemptuous of Parliament, and argues that most of the issues with which Parlia- ment is concerned are not real issues. As he is a Ruskinian, it is not surprising that Mr. Penty should attack machinery. He is not, however, quite consistent in his attack. In a footnote to one page he admits that there are certain kinds of large machines which may be tolerated ; for example, machinery for pumping or lifting. All other machinery he denounces because the work of tending it is monotonous and deadening. But even a pumping engine has to be tended, and it is not obvious to people who have had experience of machinery in what respect the tending of a pumping engine is less deadening than the tending of a pin-making machine or a cotton loom. With Mr. Penty's general ideal of decentralization of industry, so that more people may live in the country, and his demand for a better distribution of population, so that more English folk may live in the Colonies, there will be general agreement.
Mr. Orage's book, which he calls An Alphabet of Economics,' is much more irritating than Mr. Panty's book, because it is written with an aggressive note of intellectual superiority. It takes the form of a number of words like " Capitalist," " Charity," " Com- petition," " Conciliation," arranged in alphabetical order, and accompanied by definitions which are generally arbitrary, followed by comments which are always biassed. As an example of the loose thinking which disfigures a large portion of the book let us take what Mr. Orage writes under the heading of " Risk." His purpose apparently is to prove that capitalists are entitled to no compensation for the risk of losing their capital, and this is how he
proves it :- " A risk, after all, is a carefully calculated gamble ; it differs from a pure gamble in containing many calculable elements ; it is,
(1) Old Worlds for Yew. By Arthur 3. Penty. London : Allen and linwhi. [38. ed. net.1—(2) An Alphabet of Economies. By A. It. Orme. London : T. , Fisher Unwin. [4e. ed. net.1
therefore, less of a gamble than a gamble proper. If, then, men 4. not expect to be compensated for losing in a pure gamble, thei title to compensation in the case of a risk which is less than a gamble is loss than nothing."
The answer, of course, is that the gambler's compensation for the risk of losing is the chance of gaining, and that is exactly all that the capitalist asks for. If there were no risks in business, all investors would be content with lower profits, because they would not need to make high profits on some ventures in order to wipe off losses on others. Take again, under the heading of " Competition," the following statement : Competition is thus all in favour of non-perishablo commodities (Capital in particular) ; but it is all against perishable commodities, and Labour in particular." This is a quite unfounded distinction. For example, a cargo of fruit is a perishable commodity belonging to some capitalist; but if labour is scarce in the docks he is at the mercy of the dockers whom he must employ to unload the cargo. Even where the goods are not materially perishable, as is the case with many commodities, the element of time may be equally against the capitalist. Keeping to the steamer illustration, we can say that the steamer, whatever be her cargo, must be unloaded in a given number of days or her owners will have to pay heavy demurrage. The same consideration applies to a manufacturer who has made a contract to deliver goods on a par- ticular date. The greater part of Mr. Orage's book is taken up with this kind of confused and biassed definition. It is only from a few pages that one can gather any conception of what ho means by the National Guild liestem which he appears to advocate. He contrasts this systole with Syndicalism, and after stating that Syndicalism eavisagts the community as composed wholly of workers or producers grouped in their several industries ; and conceives of no function outside industry for a State to perform," he goes on to add that the National Guild system " postulates the continued existence and active partnership of the State in Industry, and supplements the Syndicalism ' of every Industrial Union (or Guild) by the common factor of the State representing the nation." The meaning of this contrast is clear enough, but it does not seem to carry us very far towards obtaining a picture of what National Guild Socialism would actually be. One suspects, indeed, that Mr. Orage himself has no very clear purpose in view in writing his book except to relieve his feelings by stringing together a number of acid epigrams—or attempted epigrams.
Previous page
