COOPERATION, COERCION, COMPETITION. 531 



and time again in the past; but as colonies and inventions are imme- 

 diately monopolized nowadays we need not expect much further ob- 

 struction from these factors. It is high time, therefore, that we faced 

 the problem. Instead of trying to stimulate the competitive system, 

 which is really moribund, we should accept the situation as it is and 

 ask what the new coercive system signifies, how long it will last and 

 what system will probably succeed it. 



It is a fact beyond dispute, I believe — though I confess with the 

 short space at my disposal I have not been able to present more than 

 passing proof of the fact — that to the extent that the sources of the 

 surplus are monopolized, to just such extent can the monopolizers 

 coerce those shut out of such monopoly. During the middle ages the 

 coercive system was established, as we have seen, through the monop- 

 olization of the sources of the agricultural surplus by powerful feudal 

 lords. Being dependent upon the feudal lords for their land, the 

 peasants were deprived of free access to the agricultural surplus source, 

 and could consequently be coerced. In our day the coercive system is 

 being reestablished through the monopolization of the sources of the 

 industrial surplus by the great capitalists. Becoming dependent upon 

 these capitalists for their jobs, wage-earners and salaried men generally 

 are being deprived of free access to the industrial surplus sources and 

 to this extent they too are being coerced. As throughout the middle 

 ages a few free peasant communities remained, so in modern times 

 independent producers persist in some industries. Still as most of the 

 land was feudalized in medieval times, the free peasants existed more 

 by sufferance than by right ; and as the main lines of industry are now- 

 adays controlled by great capitalists, the existing independence of the 

 small producer is nominal rather than real. 



But freemen have never submitted to coercion with good grace if 

 there was any way to throw off the yoke. For this reason coercion has 

 never proved itself in the end a productive system of association; it 

 runs faster, so to speak, toward the law of diminishing returns than 

 any other system thus far devised. These facts are fundamental and 

 serve to suggest the probable outcome of the existing situation. Let 

 us therefore regard present conditions from this point of view. 



As soon as the wage-earners recognized that despite their saving 

 they could not become capitalists, they began at once to present an 

 organized front to coercion. Up to this time the forces of labor had been 

 associated for the purpose of increasing the profits of capital. Hence- 

 forth the laborers themselves began to organize their own forces with a 

 view to raising the wages of labor. Trade unionism was the result. 

 It was then that the shield was reversed and the other side exposed to 

 view. It had become evident enough in the past that labor could not 

 develop the industrial surplus source without capital; recently it has 



