The Alternative to Competition; E. W. Dykes

THE AL TERNATIVE TO COMPETITION t';j G. W. ::D';jtej FROM time to time we are told that competition is an evil thing. Few among us will deny that it certainly produces its trying moments. There are, in fact, some persons who will argue that the harm from competition far exceeds any possible good which may result. For example, they suggest that the student who does not get good grades suffers damage to his ego and may react in a most unsociable manner. I am sure there have been cases of persons who have failed in business and who have become bitter and despondent-perhaps even to the point of suicide. Some will say that these persons were victims of the urge to make a profita compulsion even worse than ordinary competition. "Cooperation," they say, "-not competition-is what is needed for the good society." To equate competition with "the law of the jungle" is to leave little doubt in one's mind of its im plied nature.

These ideas of the harmful effects of competition re ceive considerable support from various sources. Many school systems have eliminated grading on a competitive Mr. Dykes is an architect from Canton, Ohio. 60 THE ALTERNATIVE TO COMPETITION 61 basis. Labor unions have undertaken to remove competi tion for jobs and to remove competition between indi vidual workers on specific jobs by setting standard rates for a standard output which the least productive worker can meet. Some businessmen press for "fair trade" laws which will eliminate price competition on certain items. They may urge tariff barriers to protect them from the rigors of foreign competition. Farmers vote for sub sidies and acreage controls to escape the vagaries of the free market. And so on and on, countless examples might be written, all of which show how we try to escape competition. I suspect that most people believe competition to be neither generally good nor generally bad, but that a "middle-of-the-road" process will most likely produce a healthy society. They are all for competition in a horse race or in the American League or even among the sup pliers of the things they have to buy, while going to no end of trouble to eliminate it, by law if necessary, in their own field as sellers.

Regarding competition, per se, they have no definite convictions. But persons· with definite convictions about anything appear to be in rather short supply. Strong beliefs are developed by intimate knowledge of the true nature of the subject. If this be true, then it follows that we need to find the true nature of competition and then judge its merits. It is useful, at times, to examine the extreme point of view to show the probable effectso£ a particular policy or action and to indicate the direction most likely to pro62 E. W. DYKES duce desirable results. My study convinces me that there is but one "alternative" to competition. If I can show what the "alternative" actually is, that may help the part-time competitors in making a clear-cut choice. A Noncompeting Society? Let us assume that we abandon competition in our so ciety as of tomorrow. At once there would be a mad rush of people from their present jobs to more glamorous or more highly paid jobs. Thousands decide to be big league ball players. Hundreds of thousands decide to be movie stars. Those ready to become bank presidents are in over supply. No one hauls garbage. No one waits on tables or digs coal. And since price competition is eliminated, no one knows how much to charge or how much to pay for a particular product. As a matter of fact, the disloca tion would be so complete that the economy would come to a standstill. Clearly, competition cannot be eliminated overnight. A great deal of advance work would be needed if such a move were not to result in total confusion.

So let's go at it another way. Assume a society in which competition is to play no part from the very beginning. Our first problem is to decide who will do what. For in stance, who will be the doctors? Who will write music? Sell shoes? Make shoes? What will determine prices and wages? Who decides all these things? Certainly not one person because he would be a dictator. A committee, per haps, but who shall choose the committee? It's difficult, indeed.

THE ALTERNATIVE TO COMPETITION 63 It looks as though weJll have to have some competition -at least enough to select a committee. And so we have to select nominees, take a vote, and of course, accept a decision arrived at competitively. We will select those with the most votes. Now, perhaps, can't we do away with all competition? Then the committee is faced with the questions: Who shall be doctors and who shall write music and so on. Before they face up to that one, an infinitely more diffi cult problem faces them. How many shall be doctors? Will specialization be allowed or shall that become a sub· problem after deciding how many doctors? And what about fees, prices, and wages? How will they be deter mined? Will any persons be appointed to act as in ventors? Will anyone be set apart to occasionally don an asbestos suit and step into a flaming oil or gas well out of control? Who will become the lawmakers? This last may give a clue as to where the committee will locate itself.

Endless Planning I t is not necessary to labor the point further to show that the committee has its hands full. But let us assume that a formula has been worked out by the committee. An extremely large catalog of possible occupations has been set up which takes account of the innumerable dif· ferences in jobs and which describes each in sufficient detail to render selection a little easier. Now we are ready to select the actual people to man these occupations.

64 E. W. DYKES "Everybody stand up and count off. The first 2,000 are doctors, the next 1,000,000 go to the factory suboffice and get divided up there." And so on. Ridiculous, isn't it? Of course, that couldn't be the way. "We'll give tests-apti tude tests, of course." And so a long series of aptitude tests are evolved with thousands of subtests and grada tions in order to match as easily as possible the many variations in a particular job category. Now, shall the "best" jobs be given to those with the highest grades? Or is that too competitive? Finally, we decide that we must introduce that much additional competition. Where shall people live? Obviously, all the doctors can't be in one town or state and all the blacksmiths in another. The formula must be applied and all the jobs filled in the right proportion. The committee, of course, must decide who lives in what towns, too. Well drillers can be easily placed, you see, because it's well known where oil can be found-isn't it? And this brings up an interesting point. Who decides precisely where the bit shall bite? And how shall a test be devised to find that man? On the inventors' list, what shall we decide to have invented? And if something amazing comes out of it, what will that do to the formula? Dizzy? Then don't get elected to the committee.

And I shouldn't want to sit on the subcommittee which sets prices and wages either. That committee would have to bring wages and prices into balance so that every thing produced could be bought. How to decide how much of even one single item should be produced almost defies comprehension. For instance, how many radios will THE ALTERNATIVE TO COMPETITION 65 be sold next month? How would we decide how much a doctor would be paid in contrast with a day laborer-or would they both get the same? The committee must de cide. There is no other way-the law has been passed. It should be clear from the foregoing that all matters which are not decided by competition must be decided by decree. In other words, if wages, prices, production, jobs, and successful inventions are not··set or selected by competition, then an authority has to rule on them step by step. In other words, the "alternative" to competition can only· be the planned society. Every successful attempt to rule out competition in any area is but a step nearer the socialized state. We have taken far too many such steps already. The more we do without competition the more planned is the society. Admitting for one reason or another that some persons of high potential are occasion ally and temporarily by-passed in the free, competitive society, it should appear clearly that the way to find the best of anything is to allow competition to decide. Just as the best ball players are competitively selected, so it is for surgeons, professionals, bank presidents, and play wrights.

The market place operates constantly with millions no, billions-of decisions each day to elevate the best to the. top, and each of us may aspire to reach the top. 'Con sumers, in their market decisions, actually decide who or what shall succeed or fail. Good products are selected by each of us, voting in the market place with pennies and dollars as votes. High living standards are the direct 66 E. W. DYKES result of competition. Competition, far from being the evil thing it is often represented to be, is the guarantee of the best for the least ... the most often. Now let us recall the 'brief reference, early in the dis cussion, to the suggested need for cooperation rather than for competition. To search for a clear insight to this problem, ask yourself, "With whom shall I cooperate?" The anticompetition adherents will say, "With everyone, of course." It is a pleasant idea, one with which few will argue. It just happens to be impossible. For example, if you purchase a Ford, the sellers of other makes would hardly decide that you have cooperated with them. When a maiden selects her spouse, her other suitors must neces sarily have been rejected. Competition, you see, serves to select the persons with whom you would most like to cooperate-and it leaves you free to decide for yourself who they shall be. But this is a subject which, of itself, might be deserving of an essay. Suffice to say that coop eration and competition, diverse though they may seem to be, go hand in hand in the free society. The planned society, as it eliminates competition, eliminates the basis for voluntary cooperation and substitutes "planned co operation," whatever that is.

In planned societies the committee is always replaced by the strong man-the dictator. Competition and a planned society are incompatible. Freedom and a planned society are impossible. Free people and competi tion are inseparable. The "alternative" to competition is to give up your freedom.