The Alleged Inevitability of Socialism

            Many people believe that the coming of totalitarianism is inevitable. The “wave of the future,” they say, “carries mankind inexorably towards a system under which all human affairs are managed by omnipotent dictators. It is useless to fight against the unfathomable decrees of history.”

            The truth is that most people lack the intellectual ability and courage to resist a popular movement, however pernicious and ill-considered. Bismarck once deplored the lack of what he called civilian courage, i.e., bravery in dealing with civic affairs, on the part of his countrymen. But neither did the citizens of other nations display more courage and judiciousness when faced with the menace of communist dictatorship. They either yielded silently, or timidly raised some trifling objections.

            One does not fight socialism by criticizing only some accidental features of its schemes. In attacking many socialists’ stand on divorce and birth control, or their ideas about art and literature, one does not refute socialism. It is not enough to disapprove of the Marxian assertions that the theory of relativity or the philosophy of Bergson or psycho-analysis is “bourgeois” moonshine. Those who find fault with Bolshevism and Nazism only for their anti-Christian leanings implicitly endorse all the rest of these bloody schemes.

            On the other hand, it is sheer stupidity to praise the totalitarian regimes for alleged achievements which have no reference whatever to their political and economic principles. It is questionable whether the observations that in Fascist Italy the railway trains ran on schedule and the bug population of second-rate hotel beds was decreasing, were correct or not; but it is in any case of no importance for the problem of Fascism. The fellow-travellers are enraptured by Russian films, Russian music and Russian caviar. But there lived greater musicians in other countries and under other social systems; good pictures were produced in other countries too; and it is certainly not a merit of Generalissimo Stalin that the taste of caviar is delicious. Neither does the prettiness of Russian ballet dancers or the construction of a great power station on the Dnieper expiate for the mass slaughter of the Kulaks.

            The readers of picture magazines and the movie-fans long for the picturesque. The operatic pageants of the Fascists and the Nazis and the parading of the girl-battalions of the Red army are after their heart. It is more fun to listen to the radio speeches of a dictator than to study economic treatises. The entrepreneurs and technologists who pave the way for economic improvement work in seclusion; their work is not suitable to be visualized on the screen. But the dictators, intent upon spreading death and destruction, are spectacularly in sight of the public. Dressed in military garb they eclipse in the eyes of the movie-goers the colourless bourgeois in plain clothes.

            The problems of society’s economic organization are not suitable for light talk at fashionable cocktail parties. Neither can they be dealt with adequately by demagogues haranguing mass assemblies. They are serious things. They require painstaking study. They must not be taken lightly.

            The socialist propaganda never encountered any decided opposition. The devastating critique by which the economists exploded the futility and impracticability of the socialist schemes and doctrines did not reach the moulders of public opinion. The universities were mostly dominated by socialist or interventionist pedants not only in continental Europe, where they were owned and operated by the governments, but even in the Anglo-Saxon countries. The politicians and the statesmen, anxious not to lose popularity, were lukewarm in their defence of freedom. The policy of appeasement, so much criticized when applied in the case of the Nazis and the Fascists, was practised universally for many decades with regard to all other brands of socialism. It was this defeatism that made the rising generation believe that the victory of socialism is inevitable.

            It is not true that the masses are vehemently asking for socialism and that there is no means to resist them. The masses favour socialism because they trust the socialist propaganda of the intellectuals. The intellectuals, not the populace, are moulding public opinion. It is a lame excuse of the intellectuals that they must yield to the masses. They themselves have generated the socialist ideas and indoctrinated the masses with them. No proletarian or son of a proletarian has contributed to the elaboration of the interventionist and socialist programmes. Their authors were all of bourgeois background. The esoteric writings of dialectical materialism, of Hegel, the father both of Marxism and of German aggressive nationalism, the books of Georges Sorel, of Gentile and of Spengler were not read by the average man; they did not move the masses directly. It was the intellectuals who popularized them.

            The intellectual leaders of the peoples have produced and propagated the fallacies which are on the point of destroying liberty and Western civilization. The intellectuals alone are responsible for the mass slaughters which are the characteristic mark of our century. They alone can reverse the trend and pave the way for a resurrection of freedom.

            Not mythical “material productive forces,” but reason and ideas determine the course of human affairs. What is needed to stop the trend towards socialism and despotism is common sense and moral courage.

            [1] Sidney Webb in Fabian Essays in Socialism, first published in 1889 (American edition, New York, 1891, p. 4).

            [2] Cf. G. M. Trevelyan, A Shortened History of England (London, 1942), p. 510.

            [3] Elmer Roberts, Monarchical Socialism in Germany (New York, 1913).

            [4] Zwang means compulsion, Wirtschaft means economy. The English language equivalent for Zwangswirtschaft is something like compulsory economy.

            [5] Wesley C. Mitchell, “The Social Sciences and National Planning” in Planned Society, ed. Findlay Mackenzie (New York, 1937), p. 112.

            [6] Laski, Democracy in Crisis (Chapel Hill, 1933), pp. 87–88.

            [7] Sidney and Beatrice Webb, Soviet Communism: A New Civilization? (New York, 1936), Vol. II, pp. 1038–39.

            [8] T. G. Crowther, Social Relations of Science (London, 1941), p. 333.

            [9] The collection of these conventions, published by The International Labour Office under the title Intergovernmental Commodity Control Agreements (Montreal, 1943).

            [10] Marx, Das Kapital 7th ed. (Hamburg, 1914), Vol. I, p. 728. Publisher’s Note: In English edition, p. 836.

            [11] Marx, Zur Kritik der politischen Ökonomie, ed. Kautsky (Stuttgart, 1897), p. xi. Publisher’s Note: In English edition by Kerr, pp. 11–12; by Eastman, p. 10.

            [12] Ibid., p. xii. Publisher’s Note: In English edition by Kerr, p. 12; by Eastman, p. 11.

            [13] Marx, Der Bürgerkrieg in Frankreich, ed. Pfemfert (Berlin 1919), passim. Publisher’s Note: In English, “The Civil War in France.” Reprinted in Eastman anthology, pp. 367–429.

            [14] Marx, Value, Price and Profit, ed. Eleanor Marx Aveling (New York 1901), pp. 72–74.

            [15] Blueprint for World Conquest as Outlined by the Communist International, Human Events (Washington and Chicago, 1946), pp. 181–82.

            [16] David J. Dallin, The Real Soviet Russia (Yale University Press, 1944), pp. 88–95.

            [17] Pius XII (pope, 1939–1958) (Pub.).

            [18] Christmas Eve broadcast, New York Times, December 25, 1941.

            [19] The annexation of Carpatho-Russia utterly explodes their hypocritical indignation about the Munich agreements of 1938.

            [20] The Hölz riot was a communist uprising in Germany (March 1921 in Mansfeldischen), led by World War I veteran Max Hölz (1889–1933). Hölz was sentenced to life imprisonment as a result, granted amnesty in 1928, and then left Germany for the Soviet Union (Pub.)

            [21] Mises, Bureaucracy (Yale University Press, 1944).

            [22] Benda, La trahison des clercs (Paris, 1927). Publisher’s Note: In English, The Treason of the Intellectuals (New York: William Morrow, 1928) and The Betrayal of the Intellectuals (Boston: Beacon Press, 1955).

            [23] Stahlhelm was an association of German World War veterans, established 1918. Cagoulards were members of a secret French extreme rightist, terrorist organization, the Cagoule. It was responsible for several assassinations of socialists and Italian anti-fascists and it collaborated with the Nazis and the French Vichy government during WWII (Pub.).

            [24] This programme is reprinted in English in Count Carlo Sforza’s book, Contemporary Italy, translated by Drake and Denise de Kay (New York, 1944), pp. 295–96.

            [25] For instance Mario Palmieri, The Philosophy of Fascism (Chicago, 1936), p. 248.

            [26] Sombart, Das Lebenswerk von Karl Marx (Jena, 1909), p. 3.

            [27] Sombart, A New Social Philosophy, trans. and ed. K. F. Geiser (Princeton University Press, 1937), p. 194.

            [28] The devastating critique of eugenics by H. S. Jennings, The Biological Basis of Human Nature (New York, 1930), pp. 223–52.

            [29] Marx, Der Bürgerkrieg in Frankreich, ed. Pfemfert (Berlin, 1919), p. 54. Publisher’s Note: In English, “The Civil War in France,” p. 408.

            [30] Hayek, Individualism and the Economic Order (Chicago University Press, 1948), pp. 89–91.

            [31] Quoted by Hayek, The Road to Serfdom (1944), Chapter IX, p. 119.

Advertisements