PROCEEDINGS OF SECTION G (l.). 629 



How far short of complete ownership of all capital the State will 

 stop one can but guess. But there are good reasons for believing 

 that several industries are not likely to be included ; and there will 

 probably be other cases where the State and the individual will work 

 together in friendly rivalry. Agriculture may be cited as an example 

 of this class of industry. I apprehend that not only fruit and poultry 

 but also general farming will be carried on as at present by small culti- 

 vators, either on their own lands or on holdings leased from the State. 

 Alluvial gold digging, opal mining, &c., illustrate other industries 

 that would probably be left entirely to the individual. It must be 

 distinctly understood that I am not setting limits to the sphere in 

 which the State may operate, but only stating what I conceive will 

 be the practical limits of the sphere in which the State will operate. 



And here one point must be emphasized. As all State interfe- 

 rence has, and can have, but one justification, the end of collectivism — 

 whether applied to all industries or only some — must be the promotion 

 of individual happiness. It is very necessary that this point should 

 be made perfectly clear. The end of and justification of State inter- 

 ference is not, as some who confuse the means with the end imagine, 

 the creation of the " Co-operative Commonwealth," but the happiness 

 of the individual citizen ; and he should be allowed to be happy in his 

 own way : as to the best way — subject to the qualifications laid down — 

 the State should leave that to his judgment. To help him to judge 

 rightly the State should rightly educate him. If his happiness can 

 be secured more effectively and more easily in any other way, then 

 that other way will and ought to be preferred to collectivism. 



One thing is certain : Socialism will never be adopted because 

 of its theoretical superiority over individualism. Nations do not 

 discard old systems for new ones from intellectual conviction. Society 

 is an organism, and adapts itself to a changing environment as readily 

 and completely as possible. To a violent change of environment it 

 cannot, and will not, attempt to adapt itself. 



This is not to say that intellectual conviction counts for nothing 

 in the adjustment of society to its new surroundings. Much suffering 

 to individuals may be avoided if misconceptions as to the cause of 

 poverty and distress and the exact nature and effects of State inter- 

 ference can be dispelled. Apart from this, every step in the direction 

 of State ownership must be justified by some improvement in the con- 

 dition of the people. Collectivism has an ethical basis, but it must 

 also rest upon practical and business methods. 



And now a word upon the effects of substituting State for individual 

 ownership of capital upon individual and national character. 



During the recent elections a great deal was spoken and written 

 upon this question. Some of this was merely undiluted nonsense, 

 and may be passed over without comment. 



References more or less erudite to Aristotle, Plato, and Sir Thomas 

 More, to Ancient Peru and New Harmony, do not call for any special 

 notice. Modern collectivism is not a scheme — heaven-born or other- 

 wise — it is merely an adjustment of the organism to a rapidly changing 



