CAPITALISM

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 304, 12 September 1918, Page 8

CAPITALISM

WEALTH AND THE WORKER

ECONOMIC' THEORY DISCUSSED

Mr. B. E. Mi/rphy, M.A., 8.C0m., lectured before the members of tho Accountant Students' Society last night on the subject of "Capitalism, an Economic Theory Considered Historically. The lecturer followed an earlier address dii tho business aspects of political economy. Members of the Chambers of Commerce, Trades and Labour Council, and the Workers' Educational Association were liresent at the invitation of tho society.' Mr. E. W. Hunt was in the chair. , Mr. Murphy said that he intended to deal with elementary aspccts of capitalism. Wealth was anything xiiat men wanted to the astent of being ready to olfer a price for it. Whisky might be wealth and a .Bible might be wealth. Thero was often a, conflict between wealth and welfare. Things that once were wealth might ccaso to be. For example, thero bad been an age when the relics of saints wero wealth, because people believed these relics were specifics for various ills. The relics were not worth money to-day, their place had been taken by patent medicines, which wero now wealth because people had faith in them. Conversely, things that once were worthless were now wealth. Wasto products might be quoted in illustration. Wealth was whatever men believed they could use. Capital was set apart for future Capitalism was not a peculiar kind of wealth. It was a- peculiar way or rsing capital. It was scarcely 150 years old, and it was based on the private ownership of the means of jiroduction. Capitalism was fundamental in the present social organisation, and it was not' easv to prove that its removal was either easy or desirable. His own view was that the evils of capitalism could be removed without changing its principles. Capitalism was a thing of recent growth. It was only during the last 150 years that tho accumulation of liquid wealth had been possible. Commercial security had bean established, and at tho same time tho development of machinery had made possible industry on the grand scale. The investment of money in plant and machinery had become attractive. Machines were not wealth without labour. 13ut the labour had been provided by the enclosure of tho common lands and the movement of the workers of England into tho towns. Other factors had given England tho control of vast foreign markets during the lato eighteenth and nineteenth century, and the outcome had been -unregulated capitalism, with production for profit' unrestrained by any moral consideration. Tho record of capitalism under these conditions had been shocking in tho extreme. But the evil things that had been dono were not inherent in capitalism, and there were signs already that better tilings were coining. The idea, of production for use rather than for profit was entering tho capitalistic world. There was no reason why this idea should not bo developed. Mr. Murphy proceeded to say that capitalism was not a product of any natural law. It was a system of production that had been adopted by something like mutual consent. The community <could have hud regulation of capitalistic production from the start if it had chosen to do so. It had elected to leave the control of production in the hands of individuals, and this system had brought the ablest men, who were not necessarily the best men, to the front. The record ov capitalism under theso conditions had been a. dirty one. The criticism of the Socialists was largely true. But the critics must ask themselves whether any other system would have given better results. The recent record of Russia suggested that another system might have given very much worse results. Capitalism was Responsible for the shocking maladministration of wealth', and unless this evil were removed capitalism would have to go. The system had churned out parasites at the top and paupers at the bottom. It had not done that in New Zealand because the country had interfered with the system. JJut it was responsible for the fautly distribution of wealth. The capitalistic system had produced in each of the great industrial countries a small group of millionaires and an army of paupers. Careful'investigation had shown that in England andAmerica very largQ sections of the people were not paid enough to provide the bare necessaries of life. But that was going to be remedied. Tho State was stepping in to tilt tho balance in favour of Labour, and there was no need to move in revolutionary directions in order to sccure the necessary reforms. History showed very clearly that revolution was always dangerous. Its results could not be foreseen, and it often brought disaster to the very people who had expected the most »ood from it. _ Tho workers had no need of revolution. The labour forces of any country were so great that if the workers organised they had only to stretch out their hands in order to get yhat they wanted. The trouble at present was that Labour's bargaining power was weak. If Labour wanted its share of surplus products, it was>Labour's duty not slack and go slow, but to build up the national surplus and then tako as much of the surplus as it could grasp. 'That would be fair business. Labour could take a big share of tho surplus, not by expropriation, which would wreck the whole system, but by collective bargaining. If the worker!! chose to "go", slow," they simply reduced the sur-. plus, cut down wages, and slackened the demand for labour.' It was not true that capital- was being gathered into fewer hands. Capital was.diffusing oiving to tho operation of the joini-stock companies, and there, was no sound ground for believing that the concentration of capital irould reach a point of absurdity, wliero Labour could step in and expropriate' a few nililti-niillionajres. If a struggle came, Capital would win. Hut the workers could get whatever they were entitled to by other methods. Mr. Murphy 'said he regarded' Marxian Socialism as entirely unsound, 'l'ho future of capitalism did not depend on theories and so-called "natural laws." It depended on what ordinary men wanted. The weakness of tho Labour movement at tho present tune was thai the workers did not • know what tliey wanted. They had not formulated "any practical scheme of reform and reconstruction. If instead of working badly and talking disloyally they would get a clear notion of what they wanted, the (obstacles in their way would soon disappear. In conclusion, Mr. Murphy touched upon the humanist view of social reform. Ho believed that the problems of tho day could be solved by teaching pcoplo to think in terms of social service, to want better things mm make better! things, and to put. the common wel-! fare bel'oro private gain. Heform along those lines was not revolutionary ; it could use existing machinery, and it was within the nation's reach. , Mr. Murphy answered several questions, and was accorded a hearty vote of thanks for his address.

SPANISH INFLUENZA. Incipient Influenza bacilli are promptly dispelled by taking a little/'Fhenzol" daily. Firmly refuse imitations.—Advt.