Chapter X. The Guild Programme

CHAPTER X THE GUILD PROGRAMME WHEN we turn to the National Guilds ; au. Enquiry £1'zto the T¥age System, and the. Way Out, by A. R.Orage, or by S. G. Hobson, edited by A. R. Orage, we find very much the same point of view as Mr. Cole's) but a different method of approach. I t deals with the problem of reforming our economic system with the jovial cheerfulness of a Newfoundland puppy worrying a door-mat. I t starts with the assumption which we have found to be common to so many of the people who want to turn society upside down, that labour at present produces everything that is produced and is robbed of a large part of its product by buccaneers who exploit it, and that it is therefore labour's duty to deal with the robbers as robbers should be dealt with. Here is an exanlple both of the style of this book and of the methods which it advocates (page 5): "IJabour must realize that its emancipa~ioncan· only become. possible when it has absorbed every shilling of surplus value. The way to do this is by tireless and 21 3 214 THE CASE FOR CAPITALISM unrelenting inroads upon rent and interest.

The daily and weekly Socialist bulletins should tell,not of some trivial success at a municipal election, or of some unusually flowery flow of poppy-cock in Parliament, but of wages so raised that rent-tnongers and profiteers find their incomespt·o tanto reduced. And there is no other way. Profits are in substance nothing' but rent. Rent, whatever. its form, reduced to its elements, is nothing more and nothing less than the 'economic power which one man exer cises more or 'lessoppressivelyover another manor body of men. Destroy the power to exact rent and ipso facto rent is ,destroyed. This is the only way of salvation, of emancipa tion-.. the only possible release froIll·bondage." Here we find the assumption that surplus value is produced by labour and absorbed by some body else. In fact, as we have seen in our analysis of the previous chapters, labour pro duces surplus value with the assistance of management, materials and tools, which are supplied to it by other people, and takes a large pa.,rtof' that surplus value for itself, since its own product, if it ,had .not this assistance, would be nothing but what .it could gather in the woods or, scrape 'out of the ground with its 'finger-nails.

THE ·GUILD PROGRAMME 215 In their contempt for the State Socialists, the present writers are just as earnest as Mr. Cole, and express themselves still more vigorously: "Is it any wonder," they ask (page 16), "that politics now stink in the workman's nostrils and that· he has turned firmly to 'direct action J ? Had a living Socialist Party found itself in .. Parliament, instead of the present inert Labour Party, led by· charlatans and sup ported. by Tadpoles and Tapers, the energies of Labour might possibly for a slightly longer period have been fruitfully employed in the political sphere." And on page 20 We find that "the Independent Labour Party exempli~ fiesthese good and bad qualities .... Not an idea of the slightest vitality bas sprung from it, its literature is the most appalling nonsense, its nlembers, live. on .. Dead· Sea fruit. The joyous fellowship which was its early stock~in-trade has long since been dissipated;·· the party is now being bled· to death by internal bickerings, dissensions and jealousies. It is the happy hunting-ground of cheap and nasty party.hacks and organizers, who have contrived to make it, not an instrument for the triulnph of Socialism, but a vested interest to procure a political career for voluble inefficients."

Such is the spirit in which the Gui1dcham~ 216 THE CASE FOR CAPITALISM pions deal with the work of those who have gone before them in the effort to improve the lot of· the wage-earner. Does it promise well for harmony and team-work on the part of the Guilds, if they should be established? ljke Mr. Cole, the writers attach great im portance to .the.distinction between wages and pay. It is really very difficult for the unin structed .outsider to understand this fine meta physical distinction. It would seem at first sight that as long as a man receives money, to be exchanged into goods and services, for work which he renders to the community, no very far-reaching. revolution can be achieved .by calling it pay instead of wages. ~owever, there evidently. is some really essential distinc tionsince the high-priests of the National Guilds lay so much stress upon the matter. Let us quote these writers again (page 80) :H The bulwark which protects surplus value from the wage-earner, which secures it to the entrepreneur, is the wage system. That is why itmustObe abolished. Now let us suppose that the work of the London docks were done, not by nloreor less casual ~age slaves, but by a properly organized and· regimented labour army, penetrated by a military spirit attuned to industry."

THE GUILD PROGRAMME 217 It may be observed by the way that after Mr. Cole's vigorous protest against the "regi mentation" involved by State Socialism, it is rather sad to find these authorities on National Guilds. striving after a properly organized and regimOentedLabour army. "Do soldiers receive wages?" they continue (page 81) : "No, they receive pay. 'But,' cries the practical man (and possibly even Mr. Sidney W ebb), 'vlhat earthly difference is there between wages and pay? ' Let us see. The soldier receives pay whether he is busy or idle, whether in peace or war. No employer pays him. A sunl of money is voted annually ° by Parlianlent to maintain the Army, and the amount is paid in such gradations as filay be agreed upon. Every soldier, officer or private, becomes a living integral part of that ArIny. He is pro tected ° by nlilitary law and regulations. He cannot be casualized, nor can his work, such as it is, be capitalized. The spirit that pervades the Army is, in consequence, different from the spirit that dominates wage slavery."

Here then we firid the real difference between wages and pay. ~rhe pay is voted by Parlia '111ent and granted to the worker, whether he is busy or idle. This is the same view as was expressed by Mr. Cole when he spoke of 218 THE CASE FOR CAPITALISM "recognition and payment as a human being, and not merely as the mortal tenenlent of so much labour power for which an efficient demand exists." Once more we have to ask, would such a system of payment produce good work? I once heard this question raised before an audience that knows n10re than anybody else about the ans,ver. It was when I was lecturing at the back of the front in Belgium in March 1918. My subject was National Finance, but in the discussion which followed, this point about wages and pay was introduced by a private who appeared to be a disciple of the Guildsmen. Why, he ask'ed in effect, can not wage-earners be paid just as soldiers are paid? I answered that it w.as,not quite evident that in ordinary life we should get good work by this system. " Everybody knows," I said, H how you soldiers work when you are fighting, but when"you go out to do fatigue work "-and a roar of laughter from the rest of the audience made the roof of the big hut ring" and left no more for me to say_ As it happened I had been reading,Mr.

Orage at home not long before, and had pointed out' his remarks about the spirit of the Army to, 'an officer just back fronl the front; he 'observed that anybody who had seen soldiers THE GUILD PROGRAMME 219 doing any fatigue job would know that at least three times as much work would be done by wage-earners under civiliancqnditions. If then the workers worked with the fatigue spirit of the Army instead of the battle spirit, there would be:anawkward dwindling in the funds out of which their pay could be annually voted by Parlian1ent. Parlian1ent tnight vote the money, but unless goods and .services were turned out, thatnloney would be worth· only scraps of paper. Moreover, .the soldier is not only "protected by military law and regulations," he .is also bound by them and ·liable to very severe penalties if he breaks them. Is in dustrial l11ilitarism really the ideal of l\1essrs. Hobson and Orage?

They go into more detail than Mr. Cole in reference to the arrangements under which the ,yorkers would .. be paid. On page 146 ",·e find that "once a Inemberof his Guild, no man need again fear the rigours ofunenlploy ment or the slow starvation of· a competitive wage. Thus every transport worker, providing he honestly completes the task assigned hinl, \viB be entitled to maitenance-a maintenance equal to his .present wage,plus thean10unt now lost. by unemplo ment, plus a proportion of .existing surplus alue-,-that is, plus his 220 TI-IE CASE FOR CAPITALJSM present individual· contribution to rent and interest; and, finally, plus whatever savings are effected by more efficient organization. He will not, therefore, receive wages (as we now know them), because he "vill receive something ,much greater-possibly three times greater than the existing \vage standard." Here we find two difficulties. "Once a menlber of his Guild "--one is brought up by the question, how will membership of these Guilds be arranged? At present people do have more or less choice of the kind of occupa tion in which they will spend the working part of their lives. I n the case of most. of us, it is true, economic fate or hazard marks out some course for us, and in most cases the choice, such as it .is, is made long be[()re we can ,be said to have minds to rnake up on the subject, and still longer before we have sufficient experience and knowledge to exercise the choice well. .Nevertheless, some choice there is, and it is possible and does happen, that people who have made a wrong choice, or think so, can 'later in life change from one occupation to another. But how much freedom would these organized and regimented Guilds allow to any aspiring youth ,,,ho· wanted to become a 111enlber, and by \vhat methods and THE GUILD PROGRAMME 221 by whose decision would the difficult question be solved as to the entry of the young workers into the different lines of occupation?

These questions clearly involve endless pos sibilities of frIction. They are faced in a book called The Mean£ng' o oj' JYa:liollal-CuzZds by C.E. Bechhofer and M. B. I{eckitt who show more capacity than other Guild chanlpions for ,seeing pra.ctical details and trying to deal with them. On page 310 they say that' 'each man will be free to choose his Guild, and actual entrance will depend on the den1and for Labour. In fact the principle will be that of first come, first served. In the event of there being no vacancy, i.t will be open for the applicant either to apply for entrance to another Guild, or during his period of waiting to take up some occupation of a temporary character. _. .. Labour 'in 'dirty industries '-scavenging, etc. -will-probably be in the main of a temporary character, and will be undertaken by those who are 0 for the time unable to obtain an entry elsewhere." This is all very sensible and practical, but it is not a very comfortable prospect for the aspiring Guildsman. If he has to wait till he is wanted, where is his freedom to choose .his Guild? He will be no better off in this 222 THE CASE FOR CAPITALISM respect than he is no\v under capitalist tyranny, and will find himself in the meantin1e relegated to a drain-cleaning job. Moreover, the same authorities tell him that in extreme circum stances, a Guildsman will be liable to expulsion.

And what will become of him after that? Again we find that. according to Messrs. Hobson and Orage every worker would be entitled to n1aintenance, "providing he honestly completes the task assigned to him." Who is to .decide concerning the honesty of the completion of the task? Presumably thedeci sion will be, arrived at •by the Guild. officers elected by the workers.' And here ·again we see the possibility' that those Guild foren1en will be most popular, and therefore most likely to be elected, who will take the most lenient views concerning the honesty of the work done by the Guildsmen. Whether this system will be conducive to brisk production can only be very seriously doubted, and we are left wonder ing 'whatis going to happen to the unfortunate worker, who justly or unjustly. is condemned as not having honestly completed the task . assigned to him. Apparently·. in this case he win not be entitled to maintenance. If so, what becomes of that most attractive arrange ment under which the National Guilds are THE GUILDPROGRAl\IME 223 to assure to the worker recognition and pay ment as a human being, and not merely as the mortal tenenlent of so nluch labour power for which an effective demand exists? Such, combined with the right "to ll1ake well or ill/' was Mr. Cole's ideal, but l\!Iessrs. Hobson Orage are only going to assure the worker paynlent, not even as the tenement of labour power,but as an honest and efficient producer of it. But they go on to strike a loftier note and to say that (page 147) "after aU main tenance is not the only consideration in life."

This is very true, but without a certain amount of it life is impossible. In fact they seem to expect that, under the Guild systenl, hard times may have to be faced and that nobody will mind. On page I I Iwe read: "Nobody doubts that the majority of wage-earners would be willing, anyone of them at any monlent, to exchange their position as wage-earners for the position of economic .independence, even if this latter involved a permanent reduction of financiaI inconle; H and on page I 13: H We may find ourselves,. in fact, if we abolish wage slavery, worse off than we are now." If the wage-earners got real freedonl, probably many of them luight be willing to be worse off. But it has been shown that 224 THE CASE FOR CAPITAIJISM under the Guilds their freedom would still be qualified by the limits that are imposed on that of all of us who work for others, who work for us. And if.a lower standard all round is to be the result of the Guild system, it clearly will not lead us t.o the better wodd that can only be won by hard and efficient work, and a greater au tput of nlaterial goods, giving us a chance of winning goods that are more important.

Moreover, from page 136 of the same book : " Even if the process of wageapproximation goes much· further than we now foresee, it j's never theless inevitable that graduations of position and pay' will be found necessary to efficient Guild administration. 'Ve do· not shrink from graduated pay; we are not certain that it is not desirable. l'here will be no inequitable distri bution of Guild resources, we may rest assured; democratically controlled organizations seldom err on the side of generosity. But experience will speedily teach the Guilds that they must encourage technical skill by freely offering whatever inducements ulay at the time most powerfully attract competent men. There are many ways by which invention, organizing capacjty, statistical aptitude or what not may b~ suitably rewarded. It is certain, that rewarded THE GUILD PROGRAMME 225 these qualities must be." So that even under the Guilds there are to be considerable differ ences in the rates of the reward given to various kinds of workers. This admission is of course entirely sensible and encouraging for the future efficiency of· the Guilds if ever they come into being. At the same time it opens the door to a good deal of possible friction and jealousy, seeing that the rates of pay will have to be decided by officers elected by those who are going to receive the payment. And further, is .it not an abandonnlentofthewhole ideal under which the labourer is supposed to receive the whole of \vhat he produces? If" organization, invention, statistical aptitude or what not" are to be suitably rewarded, are not the Guilds, as private capitalists are alleged to do now, going to compel the worker to produce surplus value, which he will not be allowed to consume?

Ho\vever, such is the robust belief of these writers in the perfection of the natures of every body who belongs to a Guild, that they remark on page· 148: " Nor need we shrink from the further conclusion that the appointment of a hierarchy. involves a suitable form ofgraduated pay. . . . In this connection, we pin our faith to the democratic idea without reserve. We believe the workman is the shrewdest judge of p 226 THE CASE FOR, CAPITALISM good work' and of the competent manager. U ndistracted by irrelevant political notions, his mind centred upon the practical affairs of his trade, the workman may be trusted to elect to higher grades the best men' available. In the appointment of their check-weighmen, for example, the miners almost never' make, a mis take. Doubtless injustices will, from time to . time be perpetrated; but they will be few com pared with the million inj ustices done to-day to capable men who are habitually ignored in the . interests of capitalist" cadets." This pleasant trusting faith, which imagines that because workmen, can elect capable check-weighmen, they will also be able, wi;hout any further education or experience, to choose the right people to manage the whole organization of industry, isa pleasing spectacle in these cynical, sceptical days, and one would be sorry to disturb it. But itm'ust be observed that the' higher rates of pay to 'be granted to this "hierarchy,"

and also to " inventive organizing 'capacity, statistical aptitude, or what not" will make a big hole in the whole of the produce. I~, as quoted above,.labour's emancipation can only become possible\vhen it has absorbed every shilling of surplus value, its emancipation will still be remote, when all· these highly paid THE GUILD PROGRAMME 227 statisticians and hierarchs. are exacting what win look very much like rent, as defined· by our authors in the same passage. If the capi talistic manager's salary is only to be replaced hy the Guild hierarch's higher pay, will the difference be really essential? Everyone who has read Dumas remembers how Chicot the Jester induced Frere Gorenflot to eat a fowl on Friday .by making him chris~en it a carp. But Gorenflot wanted to eat the fowl and was quite ready to be humbugged. Will that very shrewd person, the Bt;itish wage-earner, be equally ready to be duped by a change of name, when he is asked to hand over U surplus value"

to hierarchs· instead of managers? Messrs. Hobson-Orage admit frankly the likelihood of strife between the various Guilds. "We may expect," they say (page 228), "dis satisfaction among the weaker Guilds when the stronger from time to time impose their wills, that is, in the last resort, exercise their 'pull.' In what direction, then, .. can we reasonably anticipate dissatisfaction, followed bystrenu ous agitation for rectification? Primarily, we imagine in the value each Guild sets upon its own labour, which may be disputed by the other Guilds. In our chapter, 'The Finance of the Guilds,· we remarked that in the earlier 228 THE CASE FOR CAPITALISM stages the more highly-skilled industries would insist upon ahigher:value being attached to their labour than to the labour of the so-called 'unskilled' groups .... This struggle, too, will be waged inside the several Guilds as, for example, between the fitter and his labourer, both members of the same Guild, or th.e mason and his labourer, also melnbersof another Guild. But the domestic arrangements of the Guild do not concern us here; it is when the Guilds, as such, come to grips with other Guilds to establish the general value of their respective work and functions. that the main battle will be joined. Thus, agriculture is no\vpoorly paid.

.' . . But the agricultural Guild It [as arranged by the writers in the inlaginarygroup of Guilds which they have produced] "is numerically the strongest of them all. May we not then expect strong action by that Guild for a revaluation of agricultural wor~ and products ? ••• Will the claim fora higher. valuation of agricultute, both in its actual products and as. a .supremelyitn portant element in our national life, bernet by the other Guilds in a.niggling or in a generous spirit? In this connection it is well to re: member that even .during· the past .. · decade: extremely acrimonious disputes have arisen between existing trade unions, notably as to THE GUILD PROGRAMME 229 delimitation of work, and if such large questions were to be settled in the same spirit, it would prove of ill-omen to the future .greatness of the Guilds. But the Guilds, as we have pictured them, are not the. existing unions, but the unions plus the practical intellectuals, the labour and ·brains of each Guild naturally evolving a hierarchy to which large issues of industrial policy might with confidence be referred."

If the practical intellectuals are to include such exponents of Guild doctrine as Messrs._ Cole and .Hobson-Grage, .the specimens which have already been quoted of their dialectical methods and their controversial geniality seem to promise that the world of theN ational Guilds will have a pleasant resemblance to Donny brook Fair. Messrs. Reckitt and Bechhofer in their book already referred to dealt with the question of inter-Guild strife as follows (page 325). "i\ query often brought to cQnfound National Guildsmen is this: What would hap pen to a' National Guild that began to work wholly according to· its own pleasure, withoutre gard to the other Guilds and the rest of the com munity? We may reply, first, that this spirit ,vould be as unnatural among the Guilds as it is natural nowadays with the present anti communal· capitalist system of industry;" [but 230 'fHECASE FOR CAPITALISM it may be observed that any anti-communal capitalist who nowadays worked wholly accord ing to his pleasure without regard to the rest of the community would very soon .be bankrupt, because .the. rest of· the community would not buy his goods]. " Secondly, if it did arise in any Guild, this contempt for the rest of the community would -be met by the concerted action of the other Guilds. . . .A Guild, how ever, that thought itself illused by its fellows would be able to signify its displeasure by the -threat of a strike; but it is to be hoped that there will be sufficient machinery for the suc cessful settlement of inter-Guild. dealings that occasion for this would seldom arise."

But a still more serious source of inter-Guild - friction is suggested-by the latest book onthe subject,. The Guild State by G. R. Stirling Taylor, which appeared in the autumn of 1919 This writer· actually suggests ·competition be tween the Guilds. This seems to be quite contrary to the doctrines offhe earlier champions who, unless I have' altogether misunderstood them, .intended the Guilds to cover thewho'le of the industry· concerned. "The Guild," said - Messrs. Hobson-Orage on page 132," means the regimentation into a single fello\vship of all those who are employed in any given in\dustry."

THE GUILD PROGRAMME 231 Mr. (~ole told us (page 132)that" only an Indus trial U niall, embracing the whole· personnel of an industry, can assume control over. that industry." This seems to be an essential part of the whole scheme. But now comes Mr. Stirling Taylor and observes (page 95) that: " Surely there \\Till be many advantages, if just a·· healthy competition-·and not more than healthy, remember-can be maintained in a to\vn between, for example, a reasonable number of competing bakers' Guilds." There certainlywill.be many advantages to . the consumer, but this new element in the Guild State seems to upset the whole struc ture that has been built up by its former advocates.. What becomes of· the .control of production and its product that Mr. Cole believes .to be necessary to the worker if he is to be set free from his "degraded status," if the Guilds have to compete for the custom of the consumer by producing what. he wants illcompetition? What becomes of the workers' right of choosing "whether they. will make well or ill " ? Under competition the consumer prefers things that are made well, if he is able to distinguish them. Once more we are left wondering what it .all means.

Finally let us see how the Guildsmen pro232 '[HE CASE FOR CAPITALISl\f pose to deal with the capitalist, the man who owns the plant and takes the risk of pro ductive failure. He is just to be relieved of his property, and Messrs. Hobson-Drage call attention to the great advantage of this plan over that of the State Socialists, whom they credit with the intention of buying him out. On page 179 of their book they set. out the advantage in the forrn of an equation as follows :"Cost of production under State Socialism = raw material + standing charges + rent + interest + profits + increased wages. Cost of production under Guild Socialism = raw material + standing charges + pay." And on page 240 they develop Mr. Cole's suggestion of "catastrophic action or general strike" in detail in the form of a dialogue between a Guild deputation and the Chairman and General Manager of a large industrial enter prise that divides £100,000 a year amongst its shareholders. The deputation admits that the ~ompany pays standard rates of wages, but says it has decided that the men shall no longer work on a wage basis. In the first place, the men now on the pay-rolls must con tinue there whether there is work for them or not. The Guild is going to "assume partnerTHE GUILD PROGRAMME 233 ship" in the business, supplying the labour and taking half the profits. In five years' time, it intends to take another slice of the profits. It asks whether the shareholders would rather have £50,000 or nothing? When the General l\lanager raises the question of the future supply of capital, the deputation airily observes: ,c Come to us and we will arrange it. You will find us as partners, always glad to co-operate,"

and ends the discussion, which goes on for some pages, by saying: "By all means call together your shareholders, but you, of course, under stand that we are quite indifferent. what they say or do. Unless our proposals are accepted in a month, we shall close down your works." At the end of. thiS passage the writers .re mark, with perhaps pardonable pride, that "Samuel Johnson always' gave the Whig dogs the worst of it,' and perhaps in this discussion we have given the exploiters the worst of it." By the exploiters they presumably mea'n the Chairman and General Manager representing the owners of the factory. What the deputa tion practically says is that they mean to take from the owners. of the factory the interest and profit to which they are entitled in return for its use in production. One wonders what would happen if the Chairman and General Manager 234 THE CASE FOR CAPIT ALISl\,! were to answer, as they most probably would: c, Very well, y.ou ar'e going to make, terms ,on , which it is ,impossible for our shareholders to receive any interest or dividends on their undertaking;, we cannot accept these terms, and we will dispense with the "services of those whom, you ,represent until they are ready to work at the union rates whic,h we have always paid." Would the capitalist be .altogether help less? It might not be safe to be quite certain that he would. On a later page (282) the writers ask: "Falling back upon their undoubted legal rightsto the instruments of 'production and distribution, what could they{the, profiteers) do ?"

But with astonishing inconsistency ,they suggest that: "J n exchange for their present posses sion of lan~ and machinery, the State might give thein, as rough-and-ready justice, an equitable income either for a fixed period of years or for two generations." Then what becomes of that beautiful" equation'" showing the advantage of Guild over State Socialism? And in any case, when the existing capitalist has bee~dealtwith, the Guilds will have to provide fresh capital, and will.have to pay for it. The capital goods-machinery, etc.-~eeded by the Guilds will' have to, be ,made by some body who >willhave to be supported and sup· THE GUILD PROGRAMME 235 plied "with material out of "surplus value." And, \if there' is to be any progress, risks will have,"lto be taken with experiments, and some one will have to pay for failures. Capital, as always, will have to be paid its wage-or receive its pay.

Such is the tissue of' inconsistencies and . difficulties that is involved by the system .of National Guilds, as so far expounded. The evident sincerity and earnestness of itsadyo cates cannot blind ,', us to the fact that their scheme has not yet been ' thought out in. a workable shape, 'and that", as they" themselves acknowledge, it nlight lead to a lowering of ~he workers' standard of comfort, while it is hard to see that they would gain any real increase of freedom. That it might"also result in serious disputes and disagreelnents, both within and between the Guilds., is admitted by its .advQcates; and the temper in which they flout 'the work, and" efforts of the older Socialists "and others ,who are trying to im ~ prove the lot of the wage-earners by ,other methods makes one doubt whether they have it in them to put forward a great and sound reform. Such work is not often done in such a spirit.