[5] The writer of this leaflet, Mr. Wilshire, has subsequently declared in his published criticisms of myself, that I impute to socialists what no socialists really say, and contends that, when he thus speaks of “working-men” and “labourers,” he includes all men who contribute anything to the productive forces of a country—­inventors like Mr. Edison, and millionaire captains of industry, in so far as they are active agents, and not mere recipients of interest.  But that such is not the meaning which he conveys, or desires to convey, to those to whom his leaflet addresses itself, is plainly shown by his statistics, if by nothing else; for the share of the national income, which goes, as he asserts, to “labour,” is avowedly the amount which, according to his estimate, is paid to-day in America, as weekly wages to the mass of manual labourers.  To say that labour in its more extended sense is the producer of all wealth, is a mere meaningless platitude.  It is to say that there would be no wealth without effort of some kind.  Does Mr. Wilshire seriously wish us to believe that he is telling Mr. Edison that “if he will only cast his ballot intelligently” he will be able to treble his income at the expense of richer men?

[6] This applies to England no less than to America.  Whenever any one of the more educated amongst the socialistic agitators is taxed with maintaining the popular doctrines of socialism with regard to labour, he at once repudiates them, and accuses his opponents of imputing to him and his fellows childish fallacies which no one in his senses would maintain; but the propagation of these fallacies amongst the more ignorant sections of the population continues just the same.

[7] According to Mr. Hillquit, Dickens, for example, made his whole fortune by robbing his compositors.

CHAPTER VI

REPUDIATION OF MARX BY MODERN SOCIALISTS, CONTINUED. THEIR RECOGNITION OF CAPITAL AS THE IMPLEMENT OF DIRECTIVE ABILITY.  THEIR NEW POSITION, AND THEIR NEW THEORETICAL DIFFICULTIES

The reader will remember how, having first elucidated the part which exceptional mental faculties, concentrated on the direction of labour, and here called ability, play in modern production, I proceeded to the question of the means by which this direction is accomplished, and showed that these were supplied by the possession of wage-capital—­capitalism thus representing no mere passive monopoly, but a system of reins which are attached to innumerable horses, and are useless except as vehicles of the skill with which the coachmen handle them.  We shall find that by implication, if not always by direct admission, the intellectual socialists of to-day are in virtual but unacknowledged agreement with this further portion of the present argument also.