WHAT IS SOCIALISM

Shannon News, 11 May 1923, Page 2

WHAT IS SOCIALISM

A PRINCIPLE OR A STATE. (Contributed.) Social ism and Socialist are words t'he mteaning whereof cannot be precisely -djetermfined!. Socialists are themselves at variance. Thus Lenin thinks the- dictatorship of the proletariat. necessary for the inauguration of true socialism, while Kaufsky disagrees with this. Neither in respect of normal nor exceptional methods are the Socialists agreed, nor even as to their aims, unless these be stated in a very broad and general way. Thus, stated in broadest outline, the aim may be called “Socialisation.” Countries and nations differ in nothing so much as the degree and the directions in which fife has been socialised. England., beyond doubt, id tlie best socialised of European na.tions. Yet nowhere liaMe Socialism and Socialists contributed less to the socialising process. Here for centuries, past, harmony has steadily broadened and deepened. Goodwill, forbearance, a genial practicality, the instincts of order and moderation, have slowly taught the nation humane wavs and ’made it one. These things have made good institutions possible, and good institutions, in their turn, have confirmed the good dispositions of mind which created them. Socialisation is an end to- the realisation of which many personal and social factors contribute! and must together contribute. The rule of a humane nnrl informed social spirit is file, summit of man’s development. To that far summit no royal road leads. No mechanism can shorten the climb. Nothing can save the climbers from the need to use all their forces and faculties and every aid of circumstance. There ore no short cuts: fi there were, coercion would not be one of them. The most, specious panacea of Socialism is the idea that only the assumption by the State of all management functions in industry will right, the world. The Socialists’ belief in the State, its force and its wisdom is ais strong and as amazing as their disbelief in human nature. If human nature were as weak or as wicked as they think, not even the übiquitous and tyrannic State notion which tlic'crave for could help. For the old vices would infect and ruin their niew system. The true method is to practice friendliheiSK and helpfulness in the various relationships of life and t<> seek to make this spirit five in the. framework of- society. The good 1 lasts iV there, . and the right principles—the basis often narrow and the, principles restricted in application. Let the good that is iliere already he furthered in the trustful spirit of optimism. Many socialists refuse to be optimistic till they have first worked on society in a spirit of ferocious pessimism. They would dispossess and destroy remorselessly before thiey will consent to re found and rebuild. They misjudge becauke they seek the civil in men and things. Hut it is only on the good in either that reformers can tmi Id safely. Some socialists think that mankind fives in a desperate emergency: and they are ready with drastic remedies. In the excitement of au emergency

men lake hurried and narrow measures, not having the time, perhaps, lor patience or scrupulousness. But excitement i? not strength. Emergencies ansi not, in themselves* desirable things. Emergency behaviour is a had model in exact proportion as it diverges from common sense and social sense.

It is a fashion of the present day, and monel than a fashion of the Socialist, to pile burdens and functions on the State. This fashion will pass. The. onset of any new fashion tempts its votaries to predict for it a. eomnlcle and annihilating triumph. Time tells another tale, Human nature is changeful and various. If the socialised life be indeed Nature’s goal, there, will he use and ne'eid for every means and help thereto. The end is a life and not a. scheme of institutions. The end must be based, on moral elements. Institutions are subsidiary only. To suppose that one subsidiary device, namely, organisation under the State, and that stock device made universal throughout human activity will bring in the Millennium is to feed on huisks of paradox and illusion. The spirit bloweth where it listeth, and not only and not strongest in the haunts of State bureaucracies.

Many Socialists of to-day think to get, a wav front State bureaucracy by adding the very questionable plan of clasc. control and direction. Always, however, is the idea of machine control. Tt, is ever the conception of a State that is projected ns Socialism. Title wider vision indicates that the higher social advancement rests not, I upon any state but in a living spiritual principle drawing men together in social unity not, on grounds of class hut on those of humanity. A mechanical socialism, with its dead-weights of political rules, must give place to the spirit which can best be defined by the wordi humanism—the law which over-rules all party considerations and restg only on the essential nature of U?en.