Estimate of the results which would arise in the latter case. The state, as representing the average opinion of the masses, brought to bear on scientific industrial enterprise. Illustrations.
The
state as sole printer and publisher. State capitalism
would
destroy
the machinery of industrial progress just as it would
destroy
the machinery by which thought and knowledge develop.
But behind the question of whether socialism could provide ability with the conditions or the machinery requisite for its exercise is the question of whether it could provide it with any adequate stimulus.
CHAPTER VIII
Theultimate difficulty.
Speculative
attempts to minimise it
Mr.
Sidney Webb, and most modern socialists of the higher
kind,
recognise
that this problem of motive underlies all others.
They
approach it indirectly by sociological arguments borrowed
from
other philosophers, and directly by a psychology peculiar
to
themselves.
The
sociological arguments by which socialists seek to
minimise
the
claims of the able man.
These founded on a specific confusion of thought, which vitiated the evolutionary sociology of that second half of the nineteenth century. Illustrations from Herbert Spencer, Macaulay, Mr. Kidd, and recent socialists.
The
confusion in question a confusion between speculative
truth
and
practical.
The individual importance of the able man, untouched by the speculative conclusions of the sociological evolutionists, as may be seen by the examples adduced in a contrary sense by Herbert Spencer. This is partially perceived by Spencer himself. Illustrations from his works.
Ludicrous
attempts, on the part of socialistic writers, to apply
the
speculative generalisations of sociology to the practical
position
of individual men.
The climax of absurdity reached by Mr. Sidney Webb.
CHAPTER IX
Theultimate difficulty, continued.
Ability
and individual motive
The
individual motives of the able man as dealt with directly
by
modern
socialists.
They abandon their sociological ineptitudes altogether, and betake themselves to a psychology which they declare to be scientific, but which is based on no analysis of facts, and consists really of loose assumptions and false analogies.
Their
treatment of the motives of the artist, the thinker,
the
religious
enthusiast, and the soldier.
Their
unscientific treatment of the soldier’s motive,
and their
fantastic
proposal based on it to transfer this motive from the
domain
of war to that of industry.