Page 6

War_Has_Lost_Its_Pockets

511 THE SATURDAY EVENING POST January 15,1940 Underwood Deviled Ham on tiny crackers and you're ready for the cocktail crowd ! For extra - good sandwiches, spread it thick on buttered bread. Or just surround a table jar with crackers, and let the gang spread their own ! FREE: "FINE FOODS,- colorful new booklet, brings you mighty useful recipes.... If your grocer does not carry Underwood Deviled Ham, write us and we will see that you are supplied. Wm. Underwood Co., 41 Walnut Street, Watertown, Massachusetts. Also made IN CANADA, sold at the same price. UNDERTWOOD IN TABLE JARS OR IN TINS NEW ADVERTISING CLOCK IF YOU DO NOT MAKE $100 OR MORE THE FIRST WEEK return your Sample Outfit for full refund. Writ. now for full information. Experience unnecessary. KINETIC AD CLOCK DIVISION, 557 Jackson St., Chicago DON'T BE TIRED! Fagged out night after night? Quick lifts only pick you up to let you down harder. The sure way to fight fatigue is to increase your endurance! Do it by this new method that works on women as well as men. First, build up your endurance by taking 4 envelopes of Knox Gelatine daily for 2 weeks. Then, take 2 envelopes daily for 2 more weeks. After that, take whenever you feel a slump. Results in building endurance have been proved in colleges and hundreds of controlled test-cases. Write for Bulletin E. Knox Gelatine, Johnstown, N. Y. Dept. 69. Knox, the pure plain gelatine in the familiar grocery store package, is the only gelatine which has actually proved this endurance-building property. HOW TO TAKE: Empty 1 envelope ( % package) Knox Gelatine in glass % full tap water or fruit juice, or lh water, 1/4 fruit juice. Let liquid absorb gelatine. Stir briskly, drink rapidly or it will thicken. sense than to morals. The weakness of pillage was that it could not be made feasible as a continuous business. Once you had taken what people had, you were obliged to wait until they created more of what you wanted, besides having discouraged them from doing it. But if you could swap glass beads for gold and ivory, that was in every way much better, since it entailed no risk, did not dry up the source, and saved you the cost of a fighting force with which you would have to share the loot. Long after international trade had become highly civilized, very complex, and inseparable from the well-being of the world, it still retained more or less of that character. It was implicit in the mercantile doctrine of England down to the time of Adam Smith— the doctrine that in order to profit by foreign trade, a nation must sell more than it buys and accumulate the difference in gold, which is another way of saying that what you take must be worth more than what you give in exchange. And since then, even until now, it has been implicit in the scheme of economic empire, colonies and colonial markets. That principle of trade would work for a while. It worked best for England when she was the one great industrial nation in the world. There might be two or three great industrial nations, exchanging the products of their machines and their high-caste labor for the food and raw materials produced by drudge and peasant labor in faraway places, and still it would work and there would be profit in it. But the machine was uncontrollable. It got loose and went migrating all over the earth. And when it was—as I have heard a British lord say—that many countries had come to have industries who were not entitled to have them, each one wanting to have a favorable balance of trade, the old principle was bound to break down. Everybody could not have a favorable balance of trade, for where would it come from? It is the machine again. Not only did it go migrating, taking with it everywhere, like a tag, the primer of economics; it became more and more versatile. Industry had invented it for its own benefit and for a long time confined it, leaving food and raw materials to be produced by manual labor. The Birth of Surplus Not until the machine began to act upon the production of food and raw materials, too, did that change take place in the state of the world which has been called the change from an economy of scarcity to an economy of plenty. This was the incomparable event in the life of the race, since the Expulsion and Curse, and our intelligence has not yet been able to assimilate it. The word "surplus" appeared, not to mean blessing, but, in absurd contradiction of common sense, to mean economic disaster, panic and unemployment. The further absurdity is that with some glimpse of the right way, people all with one voice cry, " Trade, more trade !" and at the same time put up barriers against one another's trade and each nation goes on trying to sell more than it buys. Which means only that a theory of trade that might hold and be profitable in a world where never before had there been enough of anything becomes utterly bankrupt in a world where there is a surplus of all things—of food, of raw materials, goods and labor. There was a phrase above: "Mass production as a means and mass con- sumption as the end." The key is there. A problem that had been always the first economic anxiety of man has disappeared— how to produce enough. A problem hitherto unknown presents itself —how to consume what we are able to produce. Suppose it were possible to dispense with the man as a producer, letting the machine do everything. All the more is the man indispensable as a consumer, else what will you do with the products of the machine? That is to say, whereas formerly it was consumption that could be taken for granted, because never was there enough to satisfy bare human wants, now it is production that may be so taken for granted, and the problem is how to make goods so much more available and so much cheaper that the consumption of them may be enormously increased. That seems a simple statement. But what are its implications? It means that it no longer pays to exploit your customer, your market or your colony for all the immediate profit it will yield, for if you do, you limit the power of consumption, whereas how to increase it is your real problem; and if you do not increase it, your profit, too, will be limited and may altogether fail. It means that the motive to possess customers, markets and colonies, in order to exploit them, is unsound economically and will in the end defeat itself. And it means that economic empire, founded upon the ancient right of the strong to exploit the labor of the weak, has more past than future. Within a country, or, as we say, in a domestic economy, it means that the cost of human satisfactions must tend to fall and the wages of labor must tend to rise, in order that the standard of common living may rise, for unless it does, the fruits of mass production cannot be consumed. What is true of a domestic economy is true also of a world economy. The great object of trade, therefore, must be to raise the standard of living in the whole world, not to enrich a few nations. Always trade has had that effect, whether intending it or not; never has it been rationally conscious of that object, as now it must begin to be in order to save itself. Beyond the thought of markets and colonies of their own to be exploited, those nations called the "have-nots," Germany foremost, keep saying they must possess their own sources of raw material in order to compete with the "haves,;' meaning especially Great Britain. They make an outcry of it, and it is specious. For metals, fibers, rubber, fuel and all basic commodities, there is a world market and there is a world price; in time of peace, raw materials flow freely to meet any demand as by gravity of price. Moreover, those who produce them are more anxious to sell them than any industrial nation is to buy them, and generally those who produce raw materials have a standard of living below that of the industrial life. Formerly, in the pioneer time of development, when the supply, if left to itself, was inconstant or inadequate, then it was well for an industrial nation to invest its capital in sources of raw material. But there is no longer any advantage in it; on the contrary, there are conditions under which it entails additional risk. Only in time of war is it important for a nation to possess its own raw materials, and then, of course, it may be vital, since a nation at war will be unable to buy them at any price if its enemy controls the highways by land and sea. But by that fact the argument is turned upside down. A nation does not go to war to acquire raw materials of its own for purposes of trade, seeing that in time of peace it is cheaper to buy them than to produce them. It is the other way. It wants control of raw materials in order to go to war. But go on with it. Suppose Germany by force should get possession at the source of all the raw materials her industry needs. What will she do with them? She will convert them, of course, into manufactured goods. Then where will she sell the goods? What customers will she have that she did not have before? If the answer is that she must go on to conquer new markets for German goods, that means she must take them from her rivals, from England perhaps. But she cannot do that without hurting the economic position of England, and she cannot hurt the economic position of England without hurting her own, because in time of peace England had been her best customer. Therefore, what she will gain on the one hand she will partly or wholly lose upon the other, for the web of trade now is such that rivals are one another's customers. .R National Will=o'•the•Wisp Twenty-five years ago, Germany was saying this same thing. She had come all to the feast and the world was ail taken up. She had no place in the sun, nowhere to trade, no room at all. She was squeezed in an iron band, and was obliged to break it by force. Such was her propaganda. Now turn to the figures of her foreign trade. In the twelve years preceding the World War, her exports had more than doubled. In the year 1913, the last before the World War, she stood second only to Great Britain. Her share of the total foreign trade of the world was 14 per cent; Great Britain's share was 19 per cent. For ten years, Germany's share had been rising; Great Britain's had been falling. And in the year 1913 Germany's best customer was Great Britain, buying twice as much from Germany as Germany bought from her. With no economic empire, and notwithstanding the fact that she was buying both raw materials and foodstuffs, Germany was already the most powerful industrial nation in Europe, and on the way to becoming the foremost nation of the world in trade. She was ahead of the United States and was overtaking England. Her exertions in foreign trade were prodigious; she sacrificed her domestic economy for the sake of it. Yet she was not thinking of foreign trade as a way of increasing the wealth of the world, nor of her own primarily. The motive was political. She regarded foreign trade as a means to Weltmacht, or world power. That was what she wanted most. Going to war for it, she lost it, and together with it, her eminence in world trade. So also with Japan, only in her case it is Asiatic power. A balance sheet on her career of conquest would be a strange and sorry thing to look at. What does she want in China? Trade, she says, and raw materials. The cost of taking the raw materials by force, over what it would have cost her to buy them, has already devoured the profits of fifty years' trade; besides that in doing it she has wrecked the economic life of China and killed her own customers by hundreds of thousands. How much buying power have these dead Chinese for Japanese goods


War_Has_Lost_Its_Pockets
To see the actual publication please follow the link above