Загрузка...
The Unsolved Riddle of Social Justice — обложка книги

Описание

Книга исследует социальную тревогу и экономическую неравномерность в поствоенный период, анализирует классическую экономическую теорию и её ограничения, рассматривает механизмы рынка и монополий, критикует социализм и предлагает постепенные реформы для улучшения условий жизни.

Главный конфликт / проблема

Социальная тревога и неравномерность в условиях промышленного роста и монополий

Ключевые идеи

  • Война и её последствия создают цикл инфляции, недовольства и неравенства.
  • Параллельный рост производства и бедности демонстрирует парадокс индустриальной эпохи.
  • Необходимость пересмотра социальной организации, а не простого перехода к социализму.
  • Классическая экономика основана на идее естественной свободы и индивидуализма.
  • Свободный рынок, по мнению классиков, приводит к социальной справедливости.
  • Механизмы цен, заработной платы, прибыли и аренды рассматриваются как естественные и регулируемые законами.
  • Фундаментальное уравнение стоимости производства и цены является логическим кругом и не объясняет реальное распределение богатства.
  • Необходимость пересмотра принципов естественной свободы в современном обществе.
  • Цены и зарплаты формируются экономической силой, а не справедливостью.
  • Монопольный рынок демонстрирует парадокс стоимости: увеличение объёма снижает цену.
  • Зарплаты зависят от соотношения спроса и предложения труда.
  • Конкурентная индустрия создаёт нестабильное равновесие между работодателями, работниками и потребителями.

Вывод

Книга призывает к глубокому пересмотру социальной организации и постепенным реформам, отвергая радикальные решения

Кому полезна

  • Экономисты
  • Социологи
  • Политологи
  • Студенты
  • Общественные деятели

Главные темы

  • Экономический кризис и социальная неравномерность
  • Классическая экономическая теория и её ограничения
  • Механизмы рынка и монополий
  • Критика социализма и пути реформ

Персонажи

  • Том Джефферсон — Ссылается на его слова о неотъемлемом праве на жизнь, свободу и поиск счастья, которые служат отправной точкой для обсуждения естественной свободы.
  • Адам Смит — Представлен как основатель теории естественной свободы и системы свободного рынка, влияющей на экономические принципы.
  • Джон Стюарт Милль — Упоминается как критик собственности в земле и сторонник более гибкого подхода к собственности, влияя на экономическую мысль.
  • Болшевик — Ведёт волну революции в России, угрожая стабильности и усиливая страх перед революцией.
  • Капиталист — Обвиняет рабочих в «большевизме», а рабочих в «профитизме», представляя противоположную точку зрения.
  • Герой — Он символизирует переход от старого к новому обществу, служит носителем идей социализма в романе Беллмейя.
  • Доктор Лит — Представляет рациональный подход к новому обществу и помогает герою адаптироваться к изменениям.
  • Cincinnatus — Символизирует отказ от честного труда и рост недовольства среди рабочих.
  • Artisan — Сравнивается с фабричным рабочим, чья работа становится рутинной и лишённой смысла.
  • Автор критики — Анализирует роман Беллмейя, обобщает выводы о социализме и демократии, предлагая постепенные реформы.

Цитаты

  • «Всё, что было, было, и всё, что будет, будет, но в этом мире всё равно остаётся бедность».
  • «Если способность производить товары к удовлетворению человеческих нужд умножилась, то мир в целом должен быть гораздо лучше, но он не стал».
  • "ALL men," wrote Thomas Jefferson in framing the Declaration of Independence, "have an inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
  • "Under perfectly free competition the value or selling price of everything equals, or is perpetually tending to equal, the cost of its production."
  • WAGES and prices, then, if the argument recited in the preceding chapter of this series holds good, do not under free competition tend towards social justice.
  • The enormous increase in the productivity of industrial effort would never of itself have elevated by one inch the lot of the working class.
  • The reading public is as wayward and as fickle as a bee among the flowers.
  • Socialism, in other words, is slavery.

Читать онлайн

Страница 20 из 22

I lay stress upon this problem of the increase of population because, to my thinking, it is in this connection that the main work and the best hope of social reform can be found. The children of the race should be the very blossom of its fondest hopes. Under the present order and with the present gloomy preconceptions they have been the least of its collective cares. Yet here—and here more than anywhere—is the point towards which social effort and social legislation may be directed immediately and successfully. The moment that we get away from the idea that the child is a mere appendage of the parent, bound to share good fortune and ill, wealth and starvation, according to the parent's lot, the moment we regard the child as itself a member of society—clothed in social rights—a burden for the moment but an asset for the future—we turn over a new leaf in the book of human development, we pass a new milestone on the upward path of progress.

It should be recognized in the coming order of society, that every child of the nation has the right to be clothed and fed and trained irrespective of its parents' lot. Our feeble beginnings in the direction of housing, sanitation, child welfare and education, should be expanded at whatever cost into something truly national and all embracing. The ancient grudging selfishness that would not feed other people's children should be cast out. In the war time the wealthy bachelor and the spinster of advancing years took it for granted that other people's children should fight for them. The obligation must apply both ways.

No society is properly organized until every child that is born into it shall have an opportunity in life. Success in life and capacity to live we cannot give. But opportunity we can. We can at least see that the gifts that are laid in the child's cradle by nature are not obliterated by the cruel fortune of the accident of birth: that its brain and body are not stunted by lack of food and air and by the heavy burden of premature toil. The playtime of childhood should be held sacred by the nation.

This, as I see it, should be the first and the greatest effort of social reform. For the adult generation of to-day many things are no longer possible. The time has passed. We are, as viewed with a comprehensive eye, a damaged race. Few of us in mind or body are what we might be; and millions of us, the vast majority of industrial mankind known as the working class, are distorted beyond repair from what they might have been. In older societies this was taken for granted: the poor and the humble and the lowly reproduced from generation to generation, as they grew to adult life, the starved brains and stunted outlook of their forbears,—starved and stunted only by lack of opportunity. For nature knows of no such differences in original capacity between the children of the fortunate and the unfortunate. Yet on this inequality, made by circumstance, was based the whole system of caste, the stratification of the gentle and the simple on which society rested. In the past it may have been necessary. It is not so now. If, with all our vast apparatus of machinery and power, we cannot so arrange society that each child has an opportunity in life, it would be better to break the machinery in pieces and return to the woods from which we came.

Put into the plainest of prose, then, we are saying that the government of every country ought to supply work and pay for the unemployed, maintenance for the infirm and aged, and education and opportunity for the children. These are vast tasks. And they involve, of course, a financial burden not dreamed of before the war. But here again the war has taught us many things. It would have seemed inconceivable before, that a man of great wealth should give one-half of his income to the state. The financial burden of the war, as the full measure of it dawned upon our minds, seemed to betoken a universal bankruptcy. But the sequel is going to show that the finance of the war will prove to be a lesson in the finance of peace. The new burden has come to stay. No modern state can hope to survive unless it meets the kind of social claims on the part of the unemployed, the destitute and the children that have been described above. And it cannot do this unless it continues to use the terrific engine of taxation already fashioned in the war. Undoubtedly the progressive income tax and the tax on profits and taxation of inheritance must be maintained to an extent never dreamed of before.

But the peace finance and the war finance will differ in one most important respect. The war finance was purely destructive. From it came national security and the triumph of right over wrong. No one would belittle the worth of the sacrifice. But in the narrower sense of production, of bread winning, there came nothing; or nothing except a new power of organization, a new technical skill and a new aspiration towards better things. But the burden of peace finance directed towards social efforts will bring a direct return. Every cent that is spent upon the betterment of the population will come back, sooner or later, as two.

But all of this deals as yet only with the field of industry and conduct in which the state rules supreme. Governmental care of the unemployed, the infant and the infirm, sounds like a chapter in socialism. If the same régime were extended over the whole area of production, we should have socialism itself and a mere soap-bubble bursting into fragments. There is no need, however, to extend the régime of compulsion over the whole field. The vast mass of human industrial effort must still lie outside of the immediate control of the government. Every man will still earn his own living and that of his family as best he can, relying first and foremost upon his own efforts.

One naturally asks, then, To what extent can social reform penetrate into the ordinary operation of industry itself? Granted that it is impossible for the state to take over the whole industry of the nation, does that mean that the present inequalities must continue? The framework in which our industrial life is set cannot be readily broken asunder. But we can to a great extent ease the rigidity of its outlines. A legislative code that starts from sounder principles than those which have obtained hitherto can do a great deal towards progressive betterment. Each decade can be an improvement upon the last. Hitherto we have been hampered at every turn by the supposed obstacle of immutable economic laws. The theory of "natural" wages and prices of a supposed economic order that could not be disturbed, set up a sort of legislative paralysis. The first thing needed is to get away entirely from all such preconceptions, to recognize that the "natural" order of society, based on the "natural" liberty, does not correspond with real justice and real liberty at all, but works injustice at every turn. And at every turn intrusive social legislation must seek to prevent such injustice.

Страница 20 из 22

Вам также может понравиться