Britain for the British. Robert Blatchford

      I was once opposed to Socialism myself; but it was before I understood it.

      When you understand it you will, I feel sure, agree with me that it is perfectly logical, and just, and practical; and you will, I hope, yourself become a Socialist, and will help to abolish poverty and wrong by securing Britain for the British.

CHAPTER I THE UNEQUAL DIVISION OF WEALTH

       Table of Contents

      Section A: the Rich

      Non-socialists say that self-interest is the strongest motive in human nature.

      Let us take them at their word.

      Self-interest being the universal ruling motive, it behoves you, Mr. Smith, to do the best you can for yourself and family.

      Self-interest being the universal ruling motive, it is evident that the rich man will look out for his own advantage, and not for yours.

      Therefore as a selfish man, alive to your own interests, it is clear that you will not trust the rich man, nor believe in the unselfishness of his motives.

      As a selfish man you will look out first for yourself. If you can get more wages for the work you do, if you can get the same pay for fewer hours and lighter work, self-interest tells you that you would be a fool to go on as you are. If you can get cheaper houses, cheaper clothes, food, travelling, and amusement than you now get, self-interest tells you that you would be a fool to go on paying present prices.

      Your landlord, your employer, your tradesman will not take less work or money from you if he can get more.

      Self-interest counsels you not to pay a high price if you can get what you want at a lower price.

      Your employer will not employ you unless you are useful to him, nor will he employ you if he can get another man as useful to him as you at a lower wage.

      Such persons as landlords, capitalists, employers, and contractors will tell you that they are useful, and even necessary, to the working class, of which class you are one.

      Self-interest will counsel you, firstly, that if these persons are really useful or necessary to you, it is to your interest to secure their services at the lowest possible price; and, secondly, that if you can replace them by other persons more useful or less costly, you will be justified in dispensing with their services.

      Now, the Socialist claims that it is cheaper and better for the people to manage their own affairs than to pay landlords, capitalists, employers, and contractors to manage their affairs for them.

      That is to say, that as it is cheaper and better for a city to make its own gas, or to provide its own water, or to lay its own roads, so it would be cheaper and better for the nation to own its own land, its own mines, its own railways, houses, factories, ships, and workshops, and to manage them as the corporation tramways, gasworks, and waterworks are now owned and managed.

      Your "betters," Mr. Smith, will tell you that you might be worse off than you are now. That is not the question. The question is, Might you be better off than you are now?

      They will tell you that the working man is better off now than he was a hundred years ago. That is not the question. The question is, Are the workers as well off now as they ought to be and might be?

      They will tell you that the British workers are better off than the workers of any other nation. That is not the question. The question is, Are the British workers as well off as they ought to be and might be?

      They will tell you that Socialists are discontented agitators, and that they exaggerate the evils of the present time. That is not the question. The question is, Do evils exist at all to-day, and if so, is no remedy available?

      Your "betters" have admitted, and do admit, as I will show you presently, that evils do exist; but they have no remedy to propose.

      The Socialist tells you that your "betters" are deceived or are deceiving you, and that Socialism is a remedy, and the only one possible.

      Self-interest will counsel you to secure the best conditions you can for yourself, and will warn you not to expect unselfish service from selfish men.

      Ask yourself, then, whether, since self-interest is the universal motive, it would not be wise for you to make some inquiry as to whether the persons intrusted by you with the management of your affairs are managing your affairs to your advantage or to their own.

      As a selfish man, is it sensible to elect selfish men, or to accept selfish men, to govern you, to make your laws, to manage your business, and to affix your taxes, prices, and wages?

      The mild Hindoo has a proverb which you might well remember in this connection. It is this—

      The wise man is united in this life with that with which it is proper he should be united. I am bread; thou art the eater: how can harmony exist between us?

      Appealing, then, entirely to your self-interest, I ask you to consider whether the workers of Britain to-day are making the best bargain possible with the other classes of society. Do the workers receive their full due? Do evils exist in this country to-day? and if so, is there a remedy? and if there is a remedy, what is it?

      The first charge brought by Socialists against the present system is the charge of the unjust distribution of wealth.

      The rich obtain wealth beyond their need, and beyond their deserving; the workers are, for the most part, condemned to lead laborious, anxious, and penurious lives. Nearly all the wealth of the nation is produced by the workers; most of it is consumed by the rich, who squander it in useless or harmful luxury, leaving the majority of those who produced it, not enough for human comfort, decency, and health.

      If you wish for a plain and clear statement of the unequal distribution of wealth in this country, get Fabian Tract No. 5, price one penny, and study it well.

      According to that tract, the total value of the wealth produced in this country is £1,700,000,000. Of this total £275,000,000 is paid in rent, £340,000,000 is paid in interest, £435,000,000 is paid in profits and salaries. That makes a total of £1,050,000,000 in rent, interest, profits, and salaries, nearly the whole of which goes to about 5,000,000 of people comprising the middle and upper classes.

      The balance of £650,000,000 is paid in wages to the remaining 35,000,000 of people comprising the working classes. Roughly, then, two-thirds of the national wealth goes to 5,000,000 of persons, quite half of whom are idle, and one-third is shared by seven times as many people, nearly half of whom are workers.

      These figures have been before the public for many years, and so far as I know have never been questioned.

      There are, say the Fabian tracts, more than 2,000,000 of men, women, and children living without any kind of occupation: that is, they live without working.

      Ten-elevenths of all the land in the British Islands belong to 176,520 persons. The rest of the 40,000,000 own the other eleventh. Or, dividing Britain into eleven parts, you may say that one two-hundredth part of the population owns ten-elevenths of Britain, while the other one hundred and ninety-nine two-hundredths of the population own one-eleventh of Britain. That is as though a cake were divided amongst 200 persons by giving to one person ten slices, and dividing one slice amongst 199 persons. I told you just now that Britain does not belong to the British, but only to a few of the British.

      In Fabian Tract No. 7 I read—

      One-half of the wealth of the kingdom is held by persons who leave at death at least £20,000, exclusive of land and houses. These persons form a class somewhat over 25,000 in number.

      Half the wealth of Britain, then, is held by one fifteen-hundredth part of the population. It is as if a cake were cut in half, one half being given to one man and the other half being divided amongst 1499 men.

      How