COMMUNISM. Although aiming at the abolition of private -property, communism must not be understood as including at all times an equal division of all property. In its limited application it may mean the common manage ment of industry and the sharing of the fruits of some of these in common. Socialism is not communism, though some socialistic schools are communistic, that of Edward Bellamy's 'Looking Backward' being purely so.
Communism, or the sharing of things in common, is, in a limited form, practised by every civilized community. There is to-day common management of parks, schools and other utilities, and practical communism in water, which is supplied free to the poorest inhabitant of our cities. In the case of com modities which are plentiful and cheap, as, for example, matches, there is a kind of commun ism prevailing among individuals. But perfect communism as a social theory finds few ad herents, and practical experiments in the past in such directions have been, save for limited periods, unsuccessful. Even where the cord inunism of certain societies or settlements has succeeded temporarily it 'has done so largely by their trading with or manufacturing for the greater world of capital and labor that touches them from without. Few of such communities that have remained entirely isolated have at tained even a measurable degree of success.
Communism in the Christian It is not too much to say that in primitive times property was in common, and that indi vidual ownership arose as a natural ment out of communism. The Cretans and the Spartans possessed communistic societies, and there seems to be little doubt that communism as a supernatural ideal was practised among the early Christians. That it was successful for a time in the primitive state of society then prevailing among the disciples of Jesus also seems highly probable. The communistic so cieties that have since been formed have been successful in the measure of religious devotion that inspired sacrifice, and have declined as this religious ardor subsided or became cor rupted by other elements. But whatever their temporary success may have been among the early Christians, the experiments were soon utterly abandoned, and the principle of indi vidual ownership of property finally and fully asserted itself. That even the early Christians adopted without qualification the theory of communism may be doubted. Certainly authori ties are disagreed, so that even here we are without the necessary data to conclude thitill perfect communism was temporarily successful. During the Middle Ages many of the religious orders, notably those that strove to preserve the apostolic simplicity of the early Church, the Franciscans, the Brothers of the Common Lot and others, taught and practised com munism.
Communism in the United States. Fourierism.—The communities that have been formed in the United States, mostly in New England and the West, have nearly all died out, or exist in a moribund condition. We need not speculate upon the reasons, though it would seem that the desire of individual ownership, with the incentive to action which such ownership inspires, is indestructible and therefore fatal to perfect communism. The most famous of all American communistic or semi-communistic societies that arose as a re sult of the teachings of Charles Fourier (q.v.), was that of Brook Farm (q.v.) because of the intellectual and literary eminence of its founders. Horace Greeley (q.v.) was a warm friend of the Fourierite movement from the first, advo cated it powerfully in the New York Tribune and was vice-president of the North American Phalanx, in Monmouth County, N. J., one of the most successful of the Fourierite com munities, for it lasted over 12 years, dying in 1856. It was intended as the model of its Icind, and at the beginning it prospered. Perhaps no similar movement has ever received anything like the influential support accorded to Fourier ism. The teachings of this rernarkable man, the insight and value of much that he wrote, as well as the warmth that suffused his prophecies, enlisted the enthusiasm and aid•of sotne of the most eminent men of the time. But feuds and disharmony set in, and slowly the movement began to disintegrate. The noble dreams of Fourierism were either founded upon mistaken generalizations, or were too early anticipations of the industrial and social development of mankind. It was only at a lare period of its career that Brook Farm came to be modeled on the Fourier plan, and its simple life became perhaps too systematized. Work was in common, and at the most menial occupations men who became the glory of American letters, and women of the highest New England culture, cheerfully took their turns. But with the ebbing of the tide of Fourierism the Brook Fartn experiment came to an end. The North American Phalanx out lived it for a short period; but with the death of that settlement a movement which embodied one of the most pretentious and sweeping phi losophies of social regeneration perished from the American continent. Fourierism, which in France had died for lack of funds, had re ceived in America as fair and adequate a trial as was ever accorded to any mooted social re form. For years its disciples had taught and experimented, only to end with failure. \Alen the New York Tribune abandoned its advocacy it ceased even to be a topic of general discus sion, and in 1856 came its final collapse.