按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
line of thought would be banned； unless by influence or corruption the
thinker could crawl into the good graces of the pundits。 These results are
not foreseen by Socialists； because they imagine that the Socialist State
will be governed by men like those who now advocate it。 This is； of course；
a delusion。 The rulers of the State then will bear as little resemblance to
the pres… ent Socialists as the dignitaries of the Church after the time of
Constantine bore to the Apostles。 The men who advocate an unpopular
reform are exceptional in disinterestedness and zeal for the public good；
but those who hold power after the reform has been carried out are likely
to belong； in the main； to the ambitious executive type which has in all
ages possessed itself of the government of nations。 And this type has never
shown itself tolerant of opposition or friendly to freedom。
＇45＇ ‘‘While holding this synthetic view on production； the
Anarchists cannot consider； like the Collectivists； that a remuneration
which would be proportionate to the hours of labor spent by each person
in the production of riches may be an ideal； or even an approach to an
ideal； society。'' Kropotkin； ‘‘Anarchist Communism；'' p。 20。
It would seem； then； that if the Anarchist plan has its dangers； the
Socialist plan has at least equal dangers。 It is true that the evils we have
been foreseeing under Socialism exist at present； but the purpose of
Socialists is to cure the evils of the world as it is； they cannot be content
74
… Page 75…
PROPOSED ROADS TO FREEDOM
with the argument that they would make things no worse。
Anarchism has the advantage as regards liberty； Socialism as regards
the inducements to work。 Can we not find a method of combining these
two advantages？ It seems to me that we can。
We saw that； provided most people work in moderation； and their
work is rendered as productive as science and organization can make it；
there is no good reason why the necessaries of life should not be supplied
freely to all。 Our only serious doubt was as to whether； in an Anarchist
regime； the motives for work would be sufficiently powerful to prevent a
dan… gerously large amount of idleness。 But it would be easy to decree that；
though necessaries should be free to all； whatever went beyond
necessaries should only be given to those who were willing to worknot；
as is usual at present； only to those in work at any moment； but also to all
those who； when they happened not to be working； were idle through no
fault of their own。 We find at present that a man who has a small income
from investments； just sufficient to keep him from actual want； almost
always prefers to find some paid work in order to be able to afford
luxuries。 So it would be； presumably； in such a community as we are
imagining。 At the same time； the man who felt a vocation for some
unrecognized work of art or science or thought would be free to follow his
desire； provided he were willing to ‘‘scorn delights and live laborious
days。'' And the comparatively small number of men with an invincible
horror of workthe sort of men who now become tramps might lead a
harmless existence； without any grave danger of their becoming
sufficiently numerous to be a serious burden upon the more industrious。 In
this ways the claims of freedom could be combined with the need of some
economic stimulus to work。 Such a system； it seems to me； would have a
far greater chance of success than either pure Anarchism or pure orthodox
Socialism。
Stated in more familiar terms； the plan we are advocating amounts
essentially to this： that a certain small income； sufficient for necessaries；
should be secured to all； whether they work or not； and that a larger
income； as much larger as might be warranted by the total amount of
commodities produced； should be given to those who are willing to engage
75
… Page 76…
PROPOSED ROADS TO FREEDOM
in some work which the community recognizes as useful。 On this basis we
may build further。 I do not think it is always necessary to pay more highly
work which is more skilled or regarded as socially more useful； since such
work is more interesting and more respected than ordinary work； and will
therefore often be preferred by those who are able to do it。 But we might；
for instance； give an intermediate income to those who are only willing to
work half the usual number of hours； and an income above that of most
workers to those who choose a specially disagreeable trade。 Such a system
is perfectly compatible with Socialism； though perhaps hardly with
Anarchism。 Of its advantages we shall have more to say at a later stage。
For the present I am content to urge that it combines freedom with justice；
and avoids those dangers to the community which we have found to lurk
both in the proposals of the Anarchists and in those of orthodox Socialists。
CHAPTER V
GOVERNMENT AND LAW
GOVERNMENT and Law； in their very essence； consist of
restrictions on freedom； and freedom is the greatest of political goods。＇46＇
A hasty reasoner might conclude without further ado that Law and
government are evils which must be abolished if freedom is our goal。 But
this consequence； true or false； cannot be proved so simply。 In this chapter
we shall examine the arguments of Anarchists against law and the State。
We shall proceed on the assumption that freedom is the supreme aim of a
good social system； but on this very basis we shall find the Anarchist
contentions very questionable。
＇46＇ I do not say freedom is the greatest of ALL goods： the best
things come from withinthey are such things as creative art； and love；
and thought。 Such things can be helped or hindered by political conditions；
but not actually produced by them； and freedom is； both in itself and in its
relation to these other goods the best thing that political and economic
conditions can secure。
Respect for the liberty of others is not a natural impulse with most
men： envy and love of power lead ordinary human nature to find pleasure
76
… Page 77…
PROPOSED ROADS TO FREEDOM
in interferences with the lives of others。 If all men's actions were wholly
unchecked by external authority； we should not obtain a world in which all
men would be free。 The strong would oppress the weak； or the majority
would oppress the minority； or the lovers of violence would oppress the
more peaceable people。 I fear it cannot be said that these bad impulses are
WHOLLY due to a bad social system； though it must be conceded that the
present competitive organization of society does a great deal to foster the
worst elements in human nature。 The love of power is an impulse which；
though innate in very ambitious men； is chiefly promoted as a rule by the
actual experience of power。 In a world where none could acquire much
power； the desire to tyrannize would be much less strong than it is at
present。 Nevertheless； I cannot think that it would be wholly absent； and
those in whom it would exist would often be men of unusual energy and
executive capacity。 Such men； if they are not restrained by the organized
will of the community； may either succeed in establishing a despotism； or；
at any rate； make such a vigorous attempt as can only be defeated through
a period of prolonged disturbance。 And apart from the love or political
power； there is the love of power over individuals。 If threats and terrorism
were not prevented by law； it can hardly be doubted that cruelty would be
rife in the relations of men and women； and of parents and children。 It is
true that the habits of a community can make such cruelty rare； but these
habits； I fear； are only to be produced through the prolonged reign of law。
Experience of backwoods communities；