Capitalist Ethics--Tough or Soft?

Abstract

FEw world outlooks have been responsible for greater social mischief than the ideology or social philosophy which might be called socialism-the cluster of ideas centering upon a contrast between the evil capitalist ethic and its supposedly superior socialist counterpart. Sentimental socialists maintain, for one thing, that, since the system of private enterprise for profit rewards pursuit of self-interest, it cannot serve the general interest. Consequently, a system banning selfish private enterprise for profit is bound to encourage economic activity in the public interest in the place of the proscribed private interest. What is sentimental here is the belief that a change in social organization is all that is required to abolish human selfishness. As Mr. Dooley said, A man that'd expect to train lobsters to fly in a year is called a lunatic; but a man that thinks men can be turned into angels by an election is called a reformer and remains at large. Among sentimental socialists are such disparate modern thinkers as Albert Einstein, Jawaharlal Nehru, and R. H. Tawney. Sentimental or socialism has an extraordinary appeal to gentle physicists, non-materialistic statesmen, Unitarian ministers, and social workers-to mention just a few vulnerable categories. The appalling experience of this century with an actual socialist system in Russia has shaken this set of beliefs, to the limited extent by which mere evidence can sway opinion, but even so the world-wide influence of the ideology of soft socialism is an incalculable asset to the system of organized terror now ruling most of the Eurasian continent.