The first constituent element of socialism may, therefore, be stated to be a substitution of col lective property in the great material instruments of production in the place of private property to such an extent that public property shall domi nate the world's work. The second constituent element is private property in income and pri vate property in those goods which are used for the sake of enjoyment and not for the acquisi tion of an income by rent o• hire to others.
Modern socialists desire to disturb existing ar rangements as little as possible in attaining the main end of socialism: the abolition of the pri vate receipt of rent and interest, the incomes from private property. Rent from land and in terest from capital are the result of private own ership of these instruments of production. With collective ownership the income yielded by land and capital must also become collective. The purpose is the common enjoyment of the advan tages yielded by laud and capital, in order that there may be no income apart from personal ef fort, and that the income yielded by personal ef fort may be increased. The most advanced forms of capitalistic production are approved, and the extension of agricultural machinery and farming on a large scale are viewed with favor. The change which is advocated is a change in prop erty, in order thereby to accomplish the great end which has just been described. The social ists desire to abolish what they call nnearned income, meaning thereby personally unearned in come, for the income which individuals receive from property they conceive to he unearned. and a deduction from the earnings due to personal effort. Socialists generally attempt to justify this view theoretically by the doctrine that all value is to be attributed to labor. The crude• forms of socialism have so emphasized manual labor as to imply an underestimation of intellec tual services. With the rise of a higher class of socialistic thinkers, however, this crude view has lost its prominence. Socialists now generally fully understand that intellectual service is as important as manual labor, and they find a place for both in their plans for a future society.
Socialists and economists are alike agreed that production has become largely a social process, and that the socialization of production increases day by day. What the socialists complain of is that, while production is a social process, the control of production is in the bands of private owners. They discover an antithesis between so cial production and individual control, and de manil accordingly that the socialization of pro duction shall lie accompanied by social or col lective management. Modern socialism demands
collective management of each industry, and it demands that all the industries should be asso ciated together, in order thereby to secure perfect system, harmony, and unity of effort. individual producers do not act together, but act each one for himself, the socialists reproach pres ent society with planlessness, which they say gives us industrial crises and stagnation—an argument less frequently advanced than formerly, owing to the formation of combinations and trusts which seem to overcome this weakness in the ex isting industrial order.
Finally, socialism means the distribution of income by some common authority. If organ ized society owns the instruments of production, and conducts production, necessarily the product of industry in the first instance falls to society, as it does now to the individual owners and man agers. Society must then in some way divide up the income which results from our collective economic efforts, giving to each one his due share. Tinder socialisih the great mass of men would be salaried functionaries of society, and the aim would be in one way or another so to adjust their salaries that in the aggregate they should equal the total wealth produced for con sumption.
Formerly there was a greater inclination on the part of socialists than there is now to ac complish their ends by measures of compulsion. It was proposed that every one should be forced into the system of collective production and in return receive a subsistence. Alodern socialism does not propose directly to force any one into the socialistic scheme. If any one is able to gain a livelihood by his private efforts, socialism is quite content that he should do so. lle will not be able to gain an income from ownership of the chief instruments of production, as these will be public property. fie may, however, own tools which he can use in production, if he can induce men to purchase his product. Socialism conteanplates a public provision for education as at the present time, but it does not propose to throw any obstacles in the way of a man who de sires to organize private schools. public ganization of medicine is contemplated by social ism, but the modern socialist does not see any reason why a physician who desires to engage in private practice should not do so, if he can find those who prefer his services to those of the pub lic physicians. The modern socialist holds that most men will find it to their advantage to en gage in public production, lint does not insist upon absolute uniformity in this. or in other par ticulars.