A B C of modern socialism

13 to the community as a whole. Thus, when we speak of functional value or utility, we do not mean the value of any act to the man himself, but how it fits in and harmonises with the general scheme of things. It follows that any act which brings discord, diverts or frustrates the functional flow in industry, may be adjudged either anti-functional, misplaced function, or non-functional. Keep steadily in mind that the test is not the act in itself, however efficient it may be, but its relation to the body politic. Banking, for example, is admittedly highly efficient ; but does it help, divert or frustrate function?

Now, hitherto the Socialist movement has been unconscious of the implications of function, either in its theory or propaganda. Following Adam Smith, who died in 1790, Socialism has accepted economic values as founded in law and practice. It has assumed universal nationalisation of capital values, without regard to their functional utility. Thus formal Socialism has demanded the nationalisation of banks, at their market valuation, without the least inquiry into the possibilities of a functionally self-governed industry, creating its own credit and generally evolving a banking system of its own. And, for all I know, the same policy might be applied to the stock exchange, totalisators, Tacecourses, ‘bookie’ establishments, slums and brothels. I would not be surprised if these various activities (being all 7pso facto anti-social, and therefore non-functional) were to be declared illegal, that Socialism would protest, on the ground that unemployment would increase.