Review of Reiieics, 1/7100. 



Tlnti'Socialists on Socialism. 



Total No. 

 State. of 



Members. 



New South Wales 26 



Victoria 23 



Queensland 9 



South Australia 7 



West Australia 5 



Tasmania 5 



The Gridiron Map— The House of Representatives 



Showing the strength ot Socialism in the Federal Parliament. The black bars show the area of land in the 



different States represented by Socialists, 



[C'jpyriijht hi/ the Australian Pregs-Cuttings' Agency.'] 



monopolies, until tli- Government officials and em- 

 ployes become .sufficiently numerous to outvote, and 

 rule in their own interests, the remainder of the 

 community. 



Melbourne, March 20th, 1906. 



Mr. A. McLean, M.H.R.. gives as his definition of 

 Socialism, under dat« March 20th: — 



" Socialism is the economic creed of the weaklings, 

 the indolent and incapable sections of humanity, of all 

 those who estimate their own capacity to earn a liveli- 

 hood below the average capacity of the whole com- 

 munity, and who prefer, therefore, to lean upon others 

 for support rather than rely on their own resources. 

 The means by which they propose to effect their object 

 are : The absolute extinction of private property; the 

 acquisition and control, by the State, of all private 

 lands, and all the other in.'itruments of production, 

 distribution and exchange : State ownership and con- 

 trol of all industries, and equal distribution of the 

 product of capital and labour amongst the whole 



people. Some (professed) Socialists are compelled to 

 recognise that the equal distribution of the national 

 income amongst the whole people, without regard to 

 the value of the services rendered, must inevitably ex- 

 tinguish all ambition and destroy all incentive to ener- 

 getic action, and ultimately degrade and impoverish 

 the whole nation. They persist, nevertheless, in ad- 

 vocating the nationalisation of all land and industries, 

 but declare that they would pay to each individual 

 the fair equivalent of his or her services. Putting 

 aside the many fatal objections that could be urged, 

 including the enormous cost of supervision that would 

 be necessai-y to appraise the value of the services of 

 each individual, especially the services of the vast 

 army of supervisors that would be required to do the 

 work, and assuming that all would be fairly compen- 

 sated in proportion to the value of their services, 

 tlie advocates of this phase of Socialism seem to over- 

 look the important fact that their system would not 

 in any way benefit those who, under existing condi- 

 tions, become submerged in the competition of indus- 



