Help via Ko-Fi

The Case Against Socialism
Purchase Availability:
For Kindle or Kindle App:

For Nook/Sony/Kobe/iBooks:

Purchase Physical Copy:

Share with your Friends:
Socialism is very difficult to define, because the Socialists themselves are by no means unanimous. To quote the words of the late Lord Salisbury, "Where they are precise, they are not agreed, and where they are agreed, they are not precise."

[T]he Socialist displays a total ignorance of human nature. Think what a vast and complex machine the Socialist State would be. It would be necessary in order to ensure smooth working that every man should behave exactly as the State officials had calculated that he would behave. Any irregularity would upset their plans and cause confusion.

Many people have an idea that Socialism means an equal division of the wealth of the nation amongst the people of the nation; that at some given time we should all make a fresh start possessed of the same amount of money.
But, whatever else Socialism may mean, it certainly does not mean that, but something very different.
If an equal division of the wealth of the country were made today, it would be very unequally divided by tomorrow.

Socialism is the "purple pill" of politics, warranted by those who prescribe it to be a sure and certain cure for the manifold social evils which civilization has brought in its train.

Under a competitive system, if I do not get satisfied by one shopkeeper, I transfer my custom to his rival. The shopkeeper knows this, and endeavours to meet my wishes. But when the State is the only shopkeeper, we shall have to be content with the commodities supplied by the State, or be satisfied by the pleasing alternative, we can do without. Certainly! And under Socialism we should often have to.

...it is not reasonable to suppose that those who possess exceptional business abilities would exercise them to the same extent on behalf of the State as they do now for their own private profit.

The industrious workman will not put forth his best efforts when the man who works by his side does far less work, and yet receives the same rate of pay.

Robert Owen organized a Socialist community at Yellow Springs, U.S.A., and the majority of its members belonged to a superior class, but even Owen's enthusiasm and genius could not avert failure.

Robert Owen organized a Socialist community at Yellow Springs, U.S.A., and the majority of its members belonged to a superior class, but even Owen's enthusiasm and genius could not avert failure.
...
"The industrious, the skillful, the strong saw the products of their labor enjoyed by the indolent, the unskilled and the improvident, and self-love rose against benevolence. A band of musicians insisted that their brassy harmony was as necessary to the common happiness as bread or meat, and declined to enter the harvest-field or the workshop. A lecturer on natural science insisted upon talking whilst others worked. Mechanics whose day's labour brought two dollars into the common stock insisted that they should in justice only work half as long as the agriculturist whose day's work brought only one."

"The very first conception of the Socialistic State is such a relation of the sexes as shall prevent men and women from falling into selfish family groups. Family life is eternally at war with Socialistic life. When you have a private household you must have private property to feed it, hence a community of goods; the first idea of a Socialistic State has been found in every case to imply a community of children and to promote a community of wives."
--Mr. W. H. Dixon

Christianity aims at the regeneration of society through the individual, which is practical, although it may be slow. Socialism aims at the regeneration of the individual through society, which is impracticable and ridiculous.

Man cannot be made moral, industrious, sober, and unselfish by Act of Parliament or because the majority in a Socialist State has decreed that he must be so. But he may be all these if he have faith and courage.

But you cannot have true Christianity without the greatest fear of choice on the part of the individual. No man can be truly moral unless he has the chance to be immoral. No man can be unselfish, unless he has the opportunity to be wholly selfish. No man can be good unless he deliberately and of his own free will rejects evil.

Socialists are the friends of every country but their own. The endeavour to be cosmopolitan and broad-minded, but only success in being parochial and weak-kneed.

If the Socialist party obtained a majority in Parliament we could not trust them to maintain the honour and integrity of the Empire. They would be too busily engaged in robbing the thrifty and industrious in order to satisfy the cupidity of the mob. Our glourious Empire would appear to them but a barren thing and a useless heritage.