Functional socialism

130 FUNCTIONAL SOCIALISM

There is, however, a vital difference between Sismondi and Marx. The former recognized an equitable division of his “increment value” between labour and capital; Marx, of course, argued that labour alone created value, and that profit and interest must accordingly constitute theft. Sismondi, in the way Liberals always do, thought the differences could be bridged by reason; Marx saw only an “inevitable revolution”.

It is not then in his economic theories or dicta that we find the true Marx. As an economist he is not original, save only that he adopts the classical economy and turns it, with amazing power and skill, to his own great purpose. Philosophically he stands or falls on the materialist interpretation of history and on the inevitablity of the class war, with its ensuing revolution. A revolution, be it noted, not necessarily accomplished by physical force but unquestionably catastrophic in its nature. We must not confuse inevitability with will power; there is always the moral appeal. The political franchise in England may even peacefully effect the revolution. But whatever the social or political conditions, please let us have no nonsense about “reforms”. Every step taken must be a conscious effort to speed the revolution. The one sure thing is that Capitalism contains within itself the germs of its own destruction. In the words of the Communist Manifesto: ““What the dourgeoisie produces above all, therefore, are its own gravediggers”. This is the true Marxian appeal.

In regard to the materialist, or economic, inter-