profit. The spirit of competition is to the socialist simply warfare. In every business establishment a good part of the most highly paid labor is devoted, not to the production of goods, but to finding a market. Ability to fight one's competitor is quite as essential in business as is the ability to turn out good products.

The Weakness of Socialism. — 1. Strong as may be the foregoing indictment of the existing industrial system, it is not sufficient to indicate that socialism is to be the necessary or the desirable outcome. The modern machine age is little more than a century old, and some of its most important phases are very recent. The dire predictions made by Karl Marx and his followers on the strength of some of the earliest phenomena of the factory system have not been borne out, and similarly the evils of today may possibly be very largely eliminated without departing from our fundamental institutions. In short, the first weak point in the socialist's position is that he attempts to predict the course of economic evolution too far in advance. That we shall have a juster distribution of wealth in the future, and that we shall eliminate many of the present wastes of production seems probable, but whether this will be accomplished by a socialistic organization it would be very hazardous to predict. It is desirable to have ideals to work toward, but we should not pin our faith now to a future method for attaining them, for no one can say that the collective ownership of all of the important means of production presents a question that needs to be decided now.

2. The socialist underestimates the efficiency of the present system. In particular he fails to see the significance of the great and (in many respects) smoothly-working system of economic coöperation that has resulted from giving opportunity to free individual enterprise. To-day there is a premium on energy and thrift. Much may be wasted, but much is also produced. That socialism would result in a larger sum total of goods for consumption has never been proved. But, on the other hand, we can say that the present régime is continually offering more and more to the mass of the people. Their standard of life is continually rising. Our economic world is a bettering world.

3. The socialist is also in other respects too pessimistic with respect to the present. He sees all of the starvation, misery, luxury, and extravagance, but he passes by the millions of happy homes scattered throughout the land. He does not see that the world is full of opportunity for the rising generation, that even if the chance for the ownership of an independent business for the ordinary man is smaller, the things which he can enjoy, if he is of average intelligence and energy, are much greater than ever before in the world's history.

4. The socialist underestimates the importance of individual responsibility. Today a man is confronted by the stern necessity of making his own way, and this must have some good effect upon character. On the whole, the lazy and incompetent are sifted out. Bad heredity and a lack of proper training are the cause of a good part of economic misfortune. It is well to distinguish the criticism here made from the common error of supposing that socialism would necessarily crush individuality and that all would be compelled to dress and eat alike.

5. The socialist underestimates the importance of free enterprise in industry. If a man now believes that he can develop a certain industry that will satisfy important wants of the people in the future, he does not need to secure the consent of some government official to make the experiment. The possibilities of a free and spontaneous development should be safeguarded from governmental routine to every possible extent.

6. Perhaps the most frequently mentioned objection to socialism is the danger to liberty. Under socialism there would be simply the public sphere of employment, and there is reason to fear that the inability to escape from the public sphere would compel the submission to onerous and tyrannical conditions imposed by the administrative heads of the business in which one might be engaged. The socialists, it is true, have a rejoinder in the fact that this objection refers to liberty in the negative sense of freedom from interference rather than in the positive sense of the power to have and to enjoy goods, and yet there are many persons who fear the tyranny of the majority. Those in whose hands political and economic control centered

would have tremendous power, however they might be selected or appointed. As in the religious sphere in the past, so in the economic sphere in the future, we may find that compulsory coöperation is incompatible with human nature.

7. The Marxian socialists may be criticized for the importance which they attach to the economic interpretation of history, for the validity of that proposition does not establish the validity of the socialist contention. Even if it be true that our social life is a reflex of our economic activity, it still does not necessarily follow that our economic development is going to be such as will land us in socialism. Their doctrine of the class struggle also does not give an accurate account of existing conditions. We have a laboring class and a capitalist class, it is true, but there is also a considerable class, perhaps large enough to hold the balance of power between the other two, which does not sympathize exclusively with either laborers or capitalists. Moreover, we have yet other social classes, divided from one another by lines that cut across those separating the capitalists and the laborers. Race is, for example, the basis of a social classification that lessens the unity and cohesiveness of the laboring class.

Social Reform. There are those who recognize the strength of the socialist's criticism of the existing economic and social order, but who believe it wise to attack the various problems confronting us one at a time. Social reform seems likely to accomplish more valuable results than socialism. We have a monopoly problem before us now. Its solution may involve a considerable extension of government enterprise. Why not concentrate our efforts upon that problem instead of making up our minds now whether some day the greater proportion of the industrial field must be collectively owned and managed?

The Socialist Movement. In every country of importance at the present time there is an organized socialist movement. In Germany the Social-democratic party is the largest political party of the empire, having polled over one third of the total votes cast in 1812, although it has less than 28 per cent of the seats in the Reichstag. The growth in votes and representation is shown in the following table:

Although the official platform of the party adheres strictly to the orthodox Marxian faith, the party itself has worked for many reforms tending to favor the lower classes, and a large element of the party (the "revisionist "wing) is in favor of putting the doctrine of the class struggle and complete collectivism in the background, and laying main emphasis for the present upon social reform. In France there are a number of socialist factions of various degrees of radicalism, nominally united in one party, the factional strife being one of the prominent characteristics of the movement in that country. Their combined representation in the Chamber of Deputies is about one sixth of the total membership. A member of the moderate group, Millerand, was made Minister of Commerce (1899) in the Waldeck-Rousseau cabinet. Since that time other socialists have accepted cabinet portfolios, but as individuals and not as representatives of the socialist party. In a number of French municipalities the government is almost completely socialistic in personnel. The result in these cases has been an increased public activity in behalf of workingmen, the poor, and the unfortunate.

In Belgium the success of the socialist party in promoting the coöperative movement has been striking. In England no one socialist party has attained the prominence of those in Germany

The total number of seats in the Reichstag is 397.

and France. Some of the socialist organizations have joined with the trade unions in forming a Labor Party, which in 1914 had 39 representatives in Parliament. In the United States there are two rival parties, the Socialist party and the Socialist Labor party (of minor importance), both having platforms based upon the Marxian philosophy. The list of socialist officials in the United States in 1913 included 21 members of State legislatures, 34 mayors, and 612 municipal, county, and school officers. In 1912 a socialist was elected to Congress from Wisconsin. The elections of 1914 also resulted in the choice of one socialist member of Congress (from New York). In 1912 the presidential candidates of the two socialist parties polled 6.3 per cent of the total vote, the total socialist vote at four recent presidential elections being: 1900, 130,336; 1904, 441,776; 1908, 438,509; 1912, 931,406.

Socialists have rendered good service by calling attention to social problems, by forcing us to reflect on the condition of the less fortunate classes, by quickening our consciences; also by helping us to form the habit, acquired by few as yet, of looking at all questions from the standpoint of the public welfare and not merely of individual gain; finally, by calling our attention to the nature of the industrial functions of government and helping us to separate rationally the private industrial sphere from the public industrial sphere. A number of questions having no connection with socialism have been, even by socialists, not infrequently associated with it. Atheism and free love may be mentioned. Socialists generally, however, regard religion and marriage as changing institutions.

Anarchism. In contrast with the socialist, the anarchist holds that the ideal social arrangement is that men should freely and spontaneously form coöperative groups. The anarchists attack government and deny the right of one man to exercise authority over another. Freedom, independence, self-reliance, non-compulsion, are what appeal to them. Such an ideal contains nothing reprehensible, but its complete attainment is impossible. Some governmental compulsion seems necessary with human nature as it is or is ever likely to be. The anarchist is