§ II. Socialism Essentially International

If socialism is at all practicable, it is so only on an international basis. Already from what we have said on the division of labor forces (p. 274 sqq.) it may be concluded that a socialist organization is possible at most if it is international, if it is introduced simultaneously in all the great industrial states of Europe, America, Australia. To feel the full force of our contention it will suffice to consider how a densely settled socialist state could possibly provide sustenance for its numerous charges. Even at present densely populated districts can produce no more than a small fraction of their requirements. The rest is to be provided by importation on a large scale. To these imports there must naturally correspond exports on an equally grand scale and consequently a sufficient and reliable market. Industrial states, therefore, depend in great measure on international commerce. Now we assert a socially organized state cannot maintain its ground in competition with non-socialist states.

To prove our assertion we may refer to the testimony of socialists themselves. We have called attention in an earlier chapter (p. 302) to some co-operative companies (printing establishments, bakeries, etc.) established by socialists. Whenever socialists are confronted by the fact that in these co-operative associations wages are not higher, working facilities not better, working hours not shorter than in private establishments, they answer quite correctly that in the midst of private capitalist undertakings a perfectly socialist institution is impossible. The bankruptcy of some of these socialist companies proves indeed that the vaunted spirit of brotherly love, the cheerful desire to work, and the devotion and public zeal, the stock-in-trade of socialist agitators, are but empty vaporings. But thence we cannot prove that socialism is economically impossible, because in these co-operative concerns the prerequisite conditions of collectivist organization are wanting.

The reason why a socialist organization cannot subsist in non-socialist surroundings is not difficult to grasp. The avowed aim of socialism is the betterment of workingmen. Its programme calls for the highest possible wages, the shortest hours of work, the most comfortable and healthful shop arrangements, etc. A community organized on these principles is unable to produce merchandise as cheaply and quickly and in the same quantities as other concerns whose endeavor is to manufacture on a large scale and with the least cost. The socialist organization cannot stand the competition; either it must reduce wages or lengthen the working-hours, or else it will be bankrupt.

What we have said so far concerning small undertakings and co-operative companies applies equally to the relative position of different states. The socialist commonwealth could not compete even for one day with non-socialist countries in supplying the world’s markets—much less than smaller co-operative companies. For the larger the socialist organization the clumsier also and slower is its administrative machinery.

To these difficulties would be added a host of others. The socialist state having non-socialist neighbors would have to determine for every product a twofold value based on essentially different principles. Within the country the products would be valued and divided according to the socially necessary labor contained in them; but in international commerce, prices would be regulated by supply and demand; in foreign commerce there would be required money, also negotiable papers, besides large warehouses for exports and imports. Would these immense amounts of public money and merchandise not prove occasion of colossal frauds and embezzlements?

But what if the socialist commonwealth were forced to wage war against non-socialist states? The entire system of production would shortly be thrown into complete disorder or would even be brought to a standstill, thus exposing the whole community to famine and destitution. The very fact that suddenly thousands of able-bodied men would be removed from productive labor would imply great disturbances in the administrative and productive machinery, disturbances frustrating the nicest calculations. Nay, more, if the enemy were to make an inroad into the country and sever the connection with the central bureaus, how could there still be question of systematic regulation ? Under present conditions the baneful effects of war are less noticeable on account of the greater decentralization and independence of private manufactories. Again, let us suppose the socialist state takes the offensive. According to what principles shall the troops be recruited so as not infringe on the perfect equality of all? Of course Bebel tells us that then there will be no more wars; that we shall be in a period of bliss and harmony undisturbed. We submit, however, to his consideration that the making of war will depend as much on the non-socialist neighbors as on the collectivist commonwealth. Or will socialists good-naturedly bear every slight, affront, and injustice inflicted by other nations?

These are a few of the difficulties confronting a socialist commonwealth surrounded by non-socialist states.

Therefore we do not hesitate to say: If socialism can at all be realized, it must needs be introduced simultaneously in at least all the important civilized countries. But of such an international introduction of socialism there cannot be the least thought. To abstract from other reasons, an insurmountable obstacle will be offered by the national antipathies and jealousies, which in our times instead of diminishing are steadily growing. So-called jingoism was never as strong as it is at present. Consider, finally, the tremendous difficulties to be met in organizing production and distribution throughout the vast extent covered by the modern industrial states, difficulties that will be forever increasing in number, weight, and extent!