THE CLASS WAR FALLACY.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3025, 20 April 1926, Page 4

THE CLASS WAR FALLACY.

ALLIANCE OP LABOUR The men at the head of the “Alliance of Labour” are first, last and always what is known as “class conscious.” They fail to see humanity because of the divisions which compose it. That they are classes in human society everybody recognises, but it is possible to let our minds so dwell upon the distinctions which define class as to lose sight of the interdependence of the various sections and the homogenity of our communities, States Nations and humanity in general. In the columns of the “New Zealand Worker” the Alliance contributes an article headed “The Class War.” The readers are told that “representatives of capitalism, whether Governors, Prime Ministers or plain politicians, attack the class struggle and the people who talk about' it.” That is very loose writing. The truth is that not only those named but many others protest against the foments of class bitterness and hatred and condemn those who make it their business to carry on such stupid warfare. They do not attack a class struggle for that is nonsense. The Alliance seeks to justify class warfare by thus explaining what it means by the term used: — “The fact of the matter is that the class struggle or class war, as it is called, has an economic cause, namely that a small minority of the community buys labour power while the great majority of the community are compelled to sell their labour power. It is to the business interests of the buyer of labour that he should purchase that, labour power as cheaply as possible, and it is equally to the business interests of the seller of labour that lie should receive tor that labour power as high a rate as possible. This is the fundamental cause of the class struggle and as it does exist nobody should be afraid to own up to it. Now, it can be admitted that the conditions here described exist to a "renter or lesser degree. Between buyer and seller of labour power, as such, the interests are divided. This division, however, does not constitute a ground of warfare because .it is also a fact that whilst the buyer and seller have distinct interests they have interests in common in that neither can 0 without the other. It is not correct to say that only a small minority of the community buys labour power. In point of fact, all are buyers of labour power and the same peisons, in large numbers, are both buyers and sellers. To postulate this economic condition of employment as the cause or justification of social warfare is a fallacy. There' are undoubtedly struggles between buyers and sellers whether of labour power or other commodities, yet, it is wrong to regard such contest of interests as either economic class war or the ground for such. The Alliance socialists say “let the capitalists cease exploiting the wage workers and the class war will end.

It is a specious pica that is hero presented, for when asked to explain more fully the socialists make it clear that the war is to end by one of the classes going out of existence, either voluntarily or by force of attack from the other class. As a defence of their advocacy of class warfare they plead that they only refer to the economic struggles in Society and there is nothing wrong in saying the class struggle exists. By such sophistry many are blinded to the truth that what really constitutes the class warr is not that men and women are buyers and sellers, employers and employed, but the teaching that it is the historical mission of the proletariat to take command and drive all other classes out of existence.

This class warfare the socialists not merely recognise though they often so pretend, but do all in their power to advocate foster and advance. It is the promulgation of the ideal of working class dictatorship, with its incitements to envy, hatred and destructive attacks which constitute the class ,war of to-day. The cause of it is political rather than economic and it is kept alive by the o’er-weening ambition of men who seek power and authority without the pains and trials of patient constructive work.

Distinct from the class war fantasy we find this descripiton of what America is doing by the interdependence of classes. Mr. John O’Leary, President of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States writing on American prosperity says:—

“A striking accompaniment of these giant strides lias been the diffusion of capital and the extension of partnership in our industries. Since the beginnir of the century the number of stockholders in our industries has doubled,, and now numbers, it is estimated, 15,000,000. A capitalist and a car for every family seems to be our goal. One consequence of this has been the line of demarcation between capital and labour has been obliterated. It exists now only in a few fevered minds. There ha*s come the realisation that the interests of the worker and his employer are identical, and that they mustjirqsper or languish together. We are all. it may fairly be said, capitalists as well as labourers, consumers as well as producers. This realisation has contributed in a large measure to the change in public

opinion of which we spoke at the outset. The old outcry against business as predatory merely because it was busines is no longer heard in the land. The trust-buster is a figure of our past. We no longer call our financial centres “the enemy country.” The class war cry does not go down “in the States.” Our people will do well also to leave it alone. It cannot help the workers. Only the ambitious agitator benefits by it whilst the community is the sufferer. (Contributed by the New Zealand Welfare League).