excellence of the work in every respect,—­an excellence which can best be achieved by the absorbing and exclusive pursuit of that alone.  A man’s individuality is projected into his work.  He does not stop when he has earned enough money, and he does not cease his improvements when they cease to bring in an immediate return.  He is identified with his job, and by means of that identification his individuality becomes constructive.  His achievement, just because of its excellence, has an inevitable and an unequivocal social value.  The quality of a man’s work reunites him with his fellows.  He may have been in appearance just as selfish as a man who spends most of his time in making money, but if his work has been thoroughly well done, he will, in making himself an individual, have made an essential contribution to national fulfillment.

Of course, a great deal of very excellent work is accomplished under the existing economic system; and by means of such work many a man becomes more or less of an individual.  But in so far as such is the case, it is the work which individualizes and not the unrestricted competitive pursuit of money.  In so far as the economic motive prevails, individuality is not developed; it is stifled.  The man whose motive is that of money-making will not make the work any more excellent than is demanded by the largest possible returns; and frequently the largest possible returns are to be obtained by indifferent work or by work which has absolutely no social value.  The ordinary mercenary purpose always compels a man to stop at a certain point, and consider something else than the excellence of his achievement.  It does not make the individual independent, except in so far as independence is merely a matter of cash in the bank; and for every individual on whom it bestows excessive pecuniary independence, there are many more who are by that very circumstance denied any sort of liberation.  Even pecuniary independence is usually purchased at the price of moral and intellectual bondage.  Such genuine individuality as can be detected in the existing social system is achieved not because of the prevailing money-making motive, but in spite thereof.

The ordinary answer to such criticisms is that while the existing system may have many faults, it certainly has proved an efficient means of releasing individual energy; whereas the exercise of a positive national responsibility for the wholesome distribution of wealth would tend to deprive the individual of any sufficient initiative.  The claim is that the money-making motive is the only one which will really arouse the great majority of men, and to weaken it would be to rob the whole economic system of its momentum.  Just what validity this claim may have cannot, with our present experience, be definitely settled.  That to deprive individuals suddenly of the opportunities they have so long enjoyed would be disastrous may be fully admitted.  It may also be admitted that