Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Socialism

Harvard. Methods of Social Reform. Course description, enrollment, final exam. Carver, 1910-1911

In this post you find the final exam, course description, and enrollment figures for the eighth iteration of Thomas Nixon Carver’s course that dealt with schemes of social reform, socialism/communism/single-tax. The economics of socialism was offered in some form or other throughout the first half of the twentieth century. 1910-11 was still a long-way from the great debates about the desirability/feasibility of central planning. 

Links to earlier and selected later versions of the course.

Brief bibliography by Carver for serious students on the economics of socialism (1910)

_______________________

Course Announcement and Description
1910-11

14b 2hf. Methods of Social Reform. — Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., at 1.30. Professor Carver.

A study of those plans of social amelioration which involve either a reorganization of society, or a considerable extension of the functions of the state. The course begins with a critical examination of the theories of the leading socialistic writers, with a view to getting a clear understanding of the reasoning which lies back of socialistic movements, and of the economic conditions which tend to make this reasoning acceptable. A similar study will be made of the Single Tax Movement, of State Socialism and the public ownership of monopolistic enterprises, and of Christian Socialism, so called.

This course is open only to those who have passed satisfactorily in Course 14a.

Source: History and Political Science, Comprising the Departments of History and Government, and Economics, 1910-11. Published in the Official Register of Harvard University. Vol. VII No. 23 (June 21, 1910), pp. 53-54.

_______________________

Course Enrollment
1910-11

Economics 14b 2hf. Professor Carver. — Methods of Social Reform. Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.

Total 73: 6 Graduates, 20 Seniors, 32 Juniors, 7 Sophomore, 1 Freshman, 7 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1910-1911, p. 49.

 _______________________

ECONOMICS 14b
Year-End Examination, 1910-11

Give as full and complete answers
as possible in the time allowed.
Allow about thirty minutes to each question.
  1. In what respects are socialism and anarchism alike and in what respects are they unlike?
  2. Comment briefly upon the leading points in the creed of “orthodox socialism.”
  3. Compare the views of the socialist and the economist as to the source of interest.
  4. Compare economic competition with political competition as a means of selecting men to manage the productive resources of a country.
  5. Discuss the question: Is it better that the income derived from the rent of land should go to private individuals to be expended by them, or that it should go into the public treasury to be expended by public officials?
  6. Discuss the question: Would the single tax eliminate poverty?

SourcePapers set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics, …, Landscape Architecture, Music in Harvard College. June 1911, p. 44. In Harvard University Archives, Examination papers, 1873-1915 (HUC 7000.25). Box 9. Examination Papers, 1910-11, p. 51.

__________________________

Earlier Course Materials

Pre-Carver
Carver’s courses
Post-Carver:

 

Image Source:  Udo J. Keppler, “The Seeds of Socialism” from Puck (12 February 1908). Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.

A gigantic boar wearing a crown with “$” and a shawl labeled “Plutocratic Greed” and holding the U.S. Capitol dome labeled “Special Privilege”, inverted to form a bucket from which it is sowing seeds labeled “Abuse of Power, Arrogance, [and] Contempt of Law”onto a field sprouting “Socialist votes”. It is stepping on an American flag and a Liberty cap.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Social Work Socialism

Harvard. Description, enrollment and exam for Social Ethics. Peabody, 1909-1910

Themes of social policy were covered in the intersection of philosophy (ethics) and economics by Francis Greenwood Peabody and his staff at Harvard around the turn of the 20th century.

A brief biography of Francis Greenwood Peabody

________________________

Social Ethics à la Peabody

Francis Greenwood Peabody. The Approach to the Social Question. New York: Macmillan, 1912. “The substance of this volume was given as the Earle Lectures at the Pacific Theological Seminary in 1907.”

Peabody’s own short bibliography on the Ethics of Social Questions was published in 1910.

Another post provides the history of Harvard’s Department of Social Ethics up through 1920.

________________________

Material from earlier years

Exam questions for late 19th century versions of this course have been transcribed and posted:

1888-18891889-18901890-18911892-18931893-18941894-18951895-1896.

1902-03. Listed as Philosophy 5. Taught by Peabody and Ireland.

1904-05. Listed as Philosophy 5 and Ethics 1. Taught by Peabody and Rogers.

1906-07. Taught by Peabody and Rogers.

1907-08. Taught by Peabody and Rogers

1908-09. Taught by Peabody, assisted by Dr. McConnell and Messrs. Ford and Foerster.

________________________

Course Enrollment
1909-10

Social Ethics 1. Professor Peabody, assisted by Dr. McConnell, Dr. Ford, and Dr. Foerster. —The Problems of Poor-Relief, the Family, Temperance, and various phases of the Labor Question, in the light of ethical theory.

Total 80: 7 Graduates, 16 Seniors, 29 Juniors, 12 Sophomores, 3 Freshman, 13 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1909-1910, p. 45.

________________________

Course Description
1909-10

  1. Social Ethics. — The problems of Poor-Relief, the Family, Temperance, and various phases of the Labor Question, in the light of ethical theory. Lectures, special researches, and prescribed reading. Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Professor Peabody Dr. McConnell, Mr. Ford, and Mr. Foerster.

            This course is an application of ethical theory to the social problems of the present day. It is to be distinguished from economic courses dealing with similar subjects by the emphasis laid on the moral aspects of the Social Question and on the philosophy of society involved. Its introduction discusses various theories of Ethics and the nature and relations of the Moral Ideal [required reading from Dewey and Tufts’ Ethics]. The course then considers the ethics of the family [required reading from Bosanquet’s The Family]; the ethics of poor-relief [required reading from Warner’s American Charities]; the ethics of the labor question [required reading from Adams and Sumner’s, Labor Problems]; and the ethics of the drink question [required reading from The Liquor Problem; a Summary of Investigations]. In addition to lectures and required reading two special and detailed reports are made by each student, based as far as possible on personal research and observation of scientific methods in poor-relief and industrial reform. These researches are arranged in consultation with the instructor or his assistant; and an important feature of the course is the suggestion and direction of such personal investigation, and the provision to each student of special literature or opportunities for observation.

            Rooms are expressly assigned for the convenience of students of Social Ethics, on the second floor of Emerson Hall, including a large lecture room, a seminary-room, a conference-room, a library, and two rooms occupied by the Social Museum. The Library of 1800 volumes is a special collection for the use of students of Social Ethics, with conveniences for study and research. The Social Museum is a collection of graphical material, illustrating by photographs, models, diagrams, and charts, many movements of social welfare and industrial progress.

Source: Announcement of the Divinity School of Harvard University, 1909-10, pp. 24-25.

________________________

SOCIAL ETHICS 1
Year-end Examination 1909-10

This paper should be considered as a whole. The time should not be exhausted in answering a few questions, but such limits should be given to each answer as will permit the answering of all the questions in the time assigned. 

  1. Consider briefly : —

(a) The social conditions necessary to produce a class-conscious conflict.

(b) Economic determinism as a working faith.

  1. The development of the English and American law on labor combinations, from 1824. (Adams & Sumner, Labor Problems, pp. 464 ff.)
  2. The history and lessons of Employer’s Liability Acts in the United States. (Adams & Sumner, pp. 478 ff.)
  3. How do the principles of compensation for accidents in England under the Workingmen’s Compensation Act of 1906 differ from those of the period before 1880? (Dr. Foerster’s lectures.)
  4. The likenesses and differences between the organizations of workmen and those of the employers. (Dr. Brooks’s lectures.)
  5. How might the assignment of laborers to tasks be accomplished in the Socialist State? Discuss three possibilities. (Dr. McConnell’s lectures.)
  6. The French system of arbitration, as applied, first, to local disputes and, secondly, to collective bargains.
  7. “Eventually it will be seen that industrial divisions should be perpendicular and not horizontal.” Explain and illustrate this citation.
  8. Contrast the methods of the British (Rochdale) and Belgian (Socialist) coöperators as to distribution of the profits of coöperative business. (Dr. Ford’s lectures.)
  9. Industrial peace, as promoted by :—

(a) The Maison Leclaire;

(b) The Pennsylvania R.R.;

(c) Lever Brothers.

  1. Economic forces working for and against the consumption of liquor. (The Liquor Problem, a Summary of Investigations, pp. 127 ff.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 9, Bound vol. Examination Papers 1910-11; Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics,…,Music in Harvard College (June, 1910), p. 73.

Image Sources: Radcliffe Yearbook 1914 (for Peabody), Radcliffe Yearbook 1915 for Ford and Foerster.

Categories
Comparative Economic Systems Exam Questions Harvard Socialism Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Readings and Final Exam for Comparative Economic Systems. Bergson, 1968

Who among us has not tried to sneak a little wit into the formulation of a final exam question? Abram Bergson was a very serious scholar who, the record has shown, was not endowed with a funny bone in his body. Still, he was capable of calling a theoretical market socialist community, “Shangri-Lange” in the exam for his course on comparative economic systems. At least he gave it a try.  

___________________________

Miscellaneous Bergsonia

A photo of Abram Bergson when he was a teen-aged undergraduate at Johns Hopkins University.

1946-47 biographical note on Bergson who was a fellow of the Social Science Research Council.

Bergson’s reading assignments for his Columbia course Structure of the Soviet Economy in 1954-55.

Bergson’s reading lists and exams for “Normative Aspects of Economic Policy” at Harvard.   Spring term 1959; Spring term 1960.

Bergson’s Harvard reading list for Economics of Socialism, Spring term 1977.

Paul Samuelson’s memorial biography of Abram Bergson for the National Academy of Sciences in 2004.

For Bergson’s work in Soviet Economic Studies see John Hardt, “Abram Bergson’s Legacy: 1914-2003”.

___________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Economics 131
Comparative Economic Systems
Spring Term, 1967-68

Part I
INTRODUCTION

  1. Background
  2. The Theory of Socialist Economics

Paul A. Samuelson, Economics, 6th ed pp. 17-24. 620-631.

Robert Dorfman, The Price System. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 1964, Ch. 6.

O. Lange, “On the Economic Theory of Socialism,” in B. Lippincott, ed., On the Economic Theory of Socialism, Minneapolis, 1938.

F. A. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order, London, 1948, Ch. IX.

A. Bergson, Essays in Normative Economics, Cambridge, Mass., 1966, pp. 216-236.

Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, International Publishers ed., New York, 1938, pp. 3-23.

W. N. Loucks, Comparative Economic Systems, 7th ed., New York, 1965, pp. 108-120 (5th ed., pp. 98-110; 6thed., pp. 93-105.

Part II
SOCIALIST PLANNING IN THE USSR

  1. Economics of the Industrial Enterprise

J. Berliner, “The Informal Organization of the Soviet Firm.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1952; reprinted in F. Holzman, Readings on the Soviet Economy, Chicago, 1962.

A. Bergson, The Economics of Soviet Planning, New Haven, Conn., 1964, Ch. 5, and pp. 287-297.

  1. General Planning

R. W. Campbell, Soviet Economic Power, 1st ed., Cambridge, Mass., 1960, ch. 5.

A. Bergson, Economics of Soviet Planning, Chs. 1, 3, 7, 8, 13.

G. Grossman, “Scarce Capital and Soviet Doctrine,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1953, reprinted in Holzman, Readings.

M. Bornstein, “The Soviet Price System,” The American Economic Review, March 1962; reprinted in M. Bornstein and D. Fusfeld. The Soviet Economy, Homewood, Ill., 1962.

A. Nove, The Soviet Economy, New York, 1961, ch. 3.

L. Smolinski, “What Next in Soviet Planning,” Foreign Affairs, July 1954

R. W. Campbell, “Marx, Kantorovich, and Novozhilov,” in Slavic Review, October 1961; reprinted in H. Shaffer, The Soviet Economy, New York, 1963.

M. Goldman, “Economic Controversy in the Soviet Union,” Foreign Affairs, April 1963; reprinted in M. Goldman, Comparative Economic Systems, New York, 1964.

A. Bergson. “The Current Soviet Planning Reforms,” in A. Balinky et al., Planning and the Market in the USSR, Rutgers, 1967.

Part III
EASTERN EUROPEAN VARIANTS

  1. Economic Reform in Poland and Czechoslovakia

S. Wellisz, The Economics of the Soviet Bloc, New York 1964. Chs. 2 and 6.

L. Smolinski, “Reforms in Poland,” Problems of Communism, July-August 1966.

J. M. Montias, “Economic Reform in Perspective,” Survey, April 1966.

  1. Market Socialism in Yugoslavia

J. M. Fleming and V. R. Sertic, “The Yugoslav Alternative,” International Monetary Fund Staff Papers, July 1962; reprinted in Goldman, Comparative Economic Systems.

E. Neuberger, “The Yugoslav Investment Auctions,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1959.

A. Waterston, Planning in Yugoslavia, Baltimore, Md., 1962, pp. 50-82.

B. Ward, “The Nationalized Firm in Yugoslavia,” and comments on this by G. Macesich and H. G. Grubel, American Economic Review, May 1965, No. 2.

J. Vanek and J. M. Montias, “Planning in Yugoslavia,” in National Bureau of Economic Research, National Economic Planning, New York, 1967, pp. 379-381, 394-407.

Part IV
VARIETIES OF CAPITALIST EXPERIENCE

  1. The Laissez-Faire Ideal

Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago, 1962, omitting Ch. IV.

  1. The British Nationalized Enterprise

C. A. R. Crosland, “The Private and Public Corporation in Great Britain,” in E. S. Mason, The Corporation in Modern Society, Cambridge, Mass., 1959.

F. Cassell, “The Pricing Policies of the Nationalized Industries,” Lloyd’s Bank Review, October 1965; reprinted in A. H. Hanson, Nationalization: A Book of Readings, London, 1963.

  1. French Planning

Pierre Massé, “French Methods of Planning,” Journal of Industrial Economics, November 1962; reprinted in M. Bornstein, Comparative Economic Systems, Homewood. Ill., 1965.

Vera Lutz, French Planning, American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C., May 1965.

A. Schonfield, Modern Capitalism, New York, 1965, Ch. VIII.

  1. The Swedish Alternative

Alan G. Gruchy, Comparative Economic Systems, Boston 1966, pp. 357-375, 385-393, 395-416, 423-437.

Part V
COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE

  1. Inequality

A. Bergson, Essays in Normative Economics, Ch. 8.

A. Bergson, The Economics of Soviet Planning, Ch. 6.

  1. Comparative Growth

A. Bergson, “Reliability and Usability of Soviet Statistics: A Summary Appraisal,” American Statistician, June-July 1953; reprinted in Holzman, Readings.

R. W. Campbell, Soviet Economic Power, 2nd ed., Boston, Mass., 1966, Ch. 6.

A. Maddison, “Soviet Economic Performance,” Banca Nazionale del Laboro Quarterly Review, March 1965.

M. Ernst, “Overstatement of Industrial Growth in Poland,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1965.

Y. Vanek, “Yugoslav Economic Growth and Its Conditions,” and connents by N. Spulber, American Economic Review, May 1963, No. 2.

A. Bergson, “The Great Economic Race: USSR v. USA,” Challenge, March 1963, reprinted in Goldman, Comparative Economic Systems.

Janet Chapman, Real Wages in Soviet Russia Since 1928, Cambridge, Mass.,1963, Chs, IX and X.

  1. Economic Merit

A. Nove, The Soviet Economy, New York, 1961, Ch. 12.

A. Bergson, The Economics of Soviet Planning, Ch. 14.

O. Hoeffding, “State Planning and Forced Industrialization,” Problems of Communism, November-December 1959; re-printed in Holzman, Readings.

Jan Tinbergen, “Do Communist and Free Economies Show a Converging Pattern,” Soviet Studies, April 1961.

Peter Wiles, “Convergence: Possibility and Probability,” in Balinky et al., Planning and the Market in the USSR.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 9; Folder: “Economics, 1967-68”.

___________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Economics 131: Professor Bergson
Final Examination
June 3, 1968

Part I (counts 25%)

Answer one and only one of two.

  1. In Marxiana, a socialist community, the economy is organized in accord with the Competitive Solution except in one particular: the Central Planning Board (CPB) seeks to apply the labor theory of value rather than western marginal theory. What operating rules might the CPB be expected to establish for the manager of an industrial enterprise? How might the managers’ behavior then differ from that under the unmodified Competitive Solution? What is implied for economic efficiency?
  2. In the socialist community of Shangri-Lange, the Competitive Solution is applied without qualification. Discuss the possible economic consequences of a government decision to increase defense spending. Consider in particular the consequences for each of the following:
    1. The government budget;
    2. The rate of interest;
    3. The general level of consumers’ goods prices;
    4. Economic efficiency.

Part II (counts 50%)

Answer two and only two of four.

  1. “As the Soviet experience shows, an interest rate is really not needed for investment project appraisal. So long as one selects the project that minimizes the cost of producing the desired output, there can be no economic waste, and this the Soviet project designers have sought to do from the very beginning of the Five Year Plans.” Discuss.
  2. “That Soviet planning is highly inefficient becomes self-evident when we consider one simple fact: the gross national product per employed worker in the USSR in 1960 was but 24-40 per cent of that in the United States in the same year.” Do you agree? Explain your answer carefully.
  3. “However much or little socialism and capitalism have converged generally, there can be no question that the Yugoslavs have by now practically reverted in all but name to a form of capitalism.” Discuss with special reference to Yugoslav enterprise management.
  4. “French planning surely has been an unqualified success. The record of French post-war growth is itself sufficient evidence of this.” Discuss.

Part III (counts 25%)

  1. Explain briefly four and only four out of seven items:
    1. “Safety factor”; “simulation”
    2. Indicative planning
    3. Milton Friedman on government policy toward “technical (natural) monopolies”
    4. “Occupational wage scale” in determination of Soviet wage differentials
    5. Dynamic versus static efficiency
    6. Average versus marginal cost pricing for coal under the British National Coal Board
    7. “Horizontal” and “Vertical” Modernization Commissions in French Planning.

NOTE: Please indicate on outside cover of your first bluebook the numbers of the questions that you answer

Source: Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, Government, Economics, … ,Aerospace Studies, June 1968.

Categories
Columbia Development Economic History Economists International Economics Socialism

Columbia. Memo of Musings Regarding Institutional Economics, Area Studies, and Economic History. Hart, 1973

A memorandum written in 1973 by 64-year old Albert G. Hart shares his laments concerning the path taken by the Columbia University department of economics to what he saw to be a grievous neglect of instruction and research into the institutional nuts-and-bolts, historical trajectories, and granular area studies of economics. A copy of the memorandum was found in the files of his colleague, historian of economics, Joseph Dorfman.

Chicago-style economics was explicitly disdained by Hart who actually wished good riddance to Gary Becker (“…he played dog-in-the-manger too much…” with a note of scorn for Milton Friedman (“… [he] ignores the risk that what passes for ‘general economic law’ may turn out to be a series of adhockeries concocted to be plausible for a very special and perhaps transitory state of society…”).

The memo closes with a question of what to do with the theoretical Wunderkinder of economics departments whose peak years have past with still another quarter century of tenure left in their respective academic life-cycles. Fortunately he stops considerably short of recommending senicide.

__________________________

Previously posted content related to Albert G. Hart

University of Chicago

Exams for Introduction to Money and Banking at Chicago, A. G. Hart, 1932-35

Course Outline for Introduction to Money and Banking at Chicago. A. G. Hart, 1933

Columbia University

Hiring Albert Gailord Hart as visiting professor, 1946

Core Economic Theory. Hart, 1946-47

First semester graduate economic analysis. First weeks’ notes. Hart, 1955

Reading list for Economic Analysis (less advanced level). Hart and Wonnacott, 1959

Hart Memo, Economics Faculty Salaries for 15 U.S. universities. April 1961

Personal Narrative of the Columbia Crisis. A.G. Hart, May 1968

__________________________

AGH 11 July 1973

RESPONSIBILITIES AND RESOURCES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

Response, addressed to:

Professor Donald Dewey, Chairman,
Professor Ronald Findlay, Director of Graduate Studies
Continuing and Incoming members of the Department

Dean George S. FRANKEL, Graduate School
Dean Harvey PICKER, School of International Affairs

Interested bystanders

to report of Committee of Instruction on the Department of Economics,
by Albert G. Hart, Professor of Economies.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Preliminary generalities

The COI [Committee of Instruction] report is one of those papers which an informed reader finds simultaneously to be almost-excellent and almost-horrible. I can endorse with only minor reservations its conclusions that recent senior-staff recruiting has been of excellent calibre; that the intensification of workshop-patterns is very healthy; that much stress should be placed on catching good men before their qualifications known to us have become so generally know as to create a bull market; that the graduate students are only moderately happy, and that to build on the quantitative theoretical work of Lancaster, Phelps, and now Dhrymes is a promising way to rebuild morale as well as to establish Columbia again as a major professional focus.

Yet the report is so lop-sided that its net effect is likely not to be constructive. It overlooks entirely two major sides of economics in which Columbia has been, is, and ought to be prominent, and which are of major concern to students. And its lack of historical perspective and of a realistic view of the professional life-cycle may seriously distort its proposals and the reaction to the Department of the central leadership of the University. So I do not see how I can silently let this report stand as expressing real wisdom about the Department and its futures hence this “reaction”.

Some historical correctives

To clear the ground, let me disabuse the reader of the notion that the Department is only now beginning to work on the problems central to the COI report. In the first place, the fact that the workshop pattern of faculty-student interaction (taking in professional visitors) is central to the learning process in economics has been well understood for a long time. At the moment when I became chairman (in 1958), the Department was granted $250,000 by the Ford Foundation specifically to make a major shift toward workshop groupings. The deservedly-praised labor workshop (which non-accidentally had a Becker/Mincer leadership with experience in workshop endeavors at the University of Chicago) was one; we launched also an “Industrial Countries Workshop” (led by Carter Goodrich and Goran Ohlin) which developed a very useful line of publications, a Public Finance Workshop led by Carl Shoup and W. S. Vickrey, and an Expectational Economics workshop under my leadership which was clearly the least successful of the cluster, for reasons I won’t bother the reader with, but for all that far from useless). Presently we had a very lively and constructive International Economics workshop (led by Peter Kenen), which continued under Ronald Findlay; and for a number of years we have had a good-if-not-superlative Monetary Economics workshop (managed by Philip Cagan with partnership of Hart and Barger). In 1972/73 we tried a “Development/Regional” shop, which has been floundering somewhat — partly because it is hard to find a real focus with so many students not in the habit of working together, partly because of its natural leaders, Findlay had to put his main energy into the international field and Wellisz was absent on leave.

What is new in the workshop situation is in the first place the effort (led by Findlay, with enthusiastic support of most of the rest of the Department) to make it work for virtually everybody in the Department, faculty or student — and in the second place serious recognition by the Administration that this is an appropriate-if-expensive way to work, deserving serious backing even if no more Ford funds can be had.

A second consequential historical point (hinted at but not spelled out in the COI report) is that the Department has been working for years at the kind of staffing the COI report now indicates as appropriate. When I was chairman, for example, we had a deal arranged to recruit Svi [sic] Griliches —  which was frustrated by what I am bound to call sabotage at the ad hoc committee stage. In Carl Shoup’s chairmanship, we successfully recruited at the assistant professor level two key men who beautifully exemplify the application of quantitative theory and econometric research techniques to economics —  Peter Kenen and Gary Becker, both of whom were full professors very young, and were regarded as stars in the profession. In my chairmanship and afterwards, much of the work of the chairman went into nursing these two men’s careers and working conditions. Kenen contributed among other things a distinguished job as departmental leader — first Informally leading a curricular reform, then taking over as chairman for a term-and-a-fraction; had the 1968 not disrupted his strategy, he’d have brought us out as one of the two or three leading departments of economics. Becker, with all his virtues, was unlivable and not available as Departmental leader — being too much centered in his own work, too much inclined to insist that the only desirable recruits were quasi-Beckers, too narrow in his views of the profession’s responsibilities (despite his astounding record of success in applying his own apparently-narrow approach to an unexpectedly wide range of problems). Frankly, I felt it unburdened the Department when he moved to Chicago, because much as we must regret the loss of his lively influence on campus, he played dog-in-the-manger too much and helped foster the impression that economics was devoted to “apologetics for the system” rather than to a search for ways to guide constructive social policies.

Agreeing with the COI that we should recruit young and staff the tenure levels largely from local people, I would point out that we have been working at this with a remarkable lack of effective cooperation from outside the Department. As I just mentioned we did acquire Kenen and Becker as assistant professors; but we had no luck in persuading the Administration and ad hoc committees to let us repeat this success. In my time as chairman, we caught a star by converting Albert Hirschman (who accidentally was here without tenure as one-year replacement for Nurkse, on leave), and who was not at the time widely-enough appreciated in the profession. We were unable to hold David Landes on economic history. Two people who in the end proved to be very highly valued outside though when we acquired them they were rank outsiders are Alexander Erlich and Charles Issawi (both of whom were given tenure in my time as chairman). We should remember also that Vickrey (and earlier Barger and Shoup) started at Columbia in Junior ranks. Dewey, Hart, Cagan, Mincer (who however had filled in earlier), Lancaster, Findlay, Phelps, and now Dhrymes, represent recruiting-with-tenure.

What lends poignancy to the question of recruiting-young is that we now have a very distinguished collection of assistant professors — I think the best we’ve had simultaneously in my time at Columbia. But our uniform lack of success with ad hoc committees on promotions of such men (I think Nakamura has been our only promotion to tenure at all recently) creates a situation where we must tell them frankly that we have little hope of keeping them. Such anomalies as two successive years of leave for young Heckman (with serious problems of continuity for students, and loss of the experiential value of a disastrous first-try at reforming the econometrics curriculum) is an extreme example of the kind of handicap for the Department created by the fact that we are morally bound to help our assistant professors make the kind of showing that will get them goods jobs elsewhere — Columbia being unwilling to back us in getting deserved promotions.

Major areas disregarded

Two major areas of professional responsibility in which Columbia has had and must maintain great distinction are simply not mentioned in the COI report. These are the areas of “institutional economics” and of international/regional/developmental economics.

Traditionally, economics in the United States was split into two main camps —those of theoretical and those of “institutionalist” orientation — which maintained an uneasy partnership in the American Economic Association and in many departments. While the titular headquarters of institutionalism was at Wisconsin, its leading center was actually Columbia; and before the sudden recruitment at the end of World War II of a cluster of theoretically-oriented men (Vickrey, Stigler and myself) there was almost a vacuum in Columbia research and instruction on the theoretical side. J. M. Clark (a most distinguished mind whose personals shyness prevented him from being a major influence in face-to-face contact) was a distinguished theoretical thinker, but regarded himself as an institutionalist and had little curricular influence. Hotelling, who was just leaving at the time I came in 1946, was the nearest thing to an active theorist.

A merger of the theoretical and institutionalist schools began to shape up during the 1930’s and was to a considerable extent accomplished during and just after World War II. The terms of merger were much like those for the two meetings of Quakers in New York City, who obviated what might have been an awkward problem of merging properties by having each member of one meeting become a member also of the other! In the 1940’s and 1950’s, it began to look as if nobody could make a career as theorist without also doubling in some other area, and nobody could make a career as institutionalist without also paying serious attention to the theoretical aspects of his problem. But in the end the merger turned out to be slanted in favor of the theorists: it is again possible to make a career by pursuing problems that are trivial variations on theoretical themes; and large elements of the institutional side of economics are allowed to die out. Students doing quantitative work with data have no tradition of asking what their numbers mean in the context of wider social processes and problems.

At Columbia, the tradition that study of law-cases is one important way to understand the economic subject-matter is preserved chiefly by the fortunate fact that we have Dewey teaching “industrial organization”. Economic history was allowed to die out; and while at present we have in assistant professors Edelstein and Passell two excellent specimens of economic historians who are also competent theorists and econometricians, we have no assurances that economic history will not again be blanked out. Some institutional aspects of “economics of human resources” are very much alive in the labor workshop; but large parts of that tradition (including the tradition of trying to understand trade unions and more generally economic organizations other than business firms) seem to have evaporated. History of thought as an approach to economics is now represented almost entirely by Alexander Erlich (who is also our only member who is expert in Marxist economics and in the functioning of European communist economies). While in terms of professional fashions the lack of “institutionalist” instruction will not cause us to lose face in the profession, we should ask whether in bringing up a new generation of economists we should be willing to see the positive aspects of the institutionalist tradition simply evaporate.

The other major aspect of economics which is disregarded in the COI report — though in fact it absorbs much of our staff manpower and is of fundamental importance for many of our students, especially from overseas — is concern with the world outside the United States. We are seriously understaffed in the pivotal area of formal economics of international-trade-and-finance, where Ronald Findlay is saddled with both the responsibilities handled by Kenen and those which were handled by Hirschman. The problems of economic development (or its lack) in the world’s poor countries need and get a lot of attention. [Incidentally, since USA is rapidly evolving “backwards” into a state of underdevelopment, the insights one gets in studying Latin America or Asia become disconcertingly applicable at home!]

The presence at Columbia of a cluster of “regional institutes” has had an important impact on our work in economics. On the whole, the Department has resisted successfully pressures to recruit people who were expert on some “region” but lacked general professional competence. [Before Riskin fortunately turned up, we were under pressure to recruit an economist who combined Chinese language and willingness to function largely as librarian a combination of qualifications which didn’t seem to coexist with all-round professional competence. Bergson, who for years was our “Soviet specialist” was also a distinguished welfare-theorist. Erlich was originally recruited on “soft money” to be an East-Central-Europe specialist; when Bergson left, there was a closing-of-ranks operation which gave him the Russian field —  and it has turned out that his knowledge of Marxist economics and of economic thought, and the fact that he is regularly sought out by East European visitors in USA make him a major factor of general departmental strength. At present the nearest equivalents of “mere” area specialists are Issawi (who also handles general instruction in economics in the School of International Affairs, and a good deal of development-and-history work at the dissertation stage), Nakamura and Riskin — all men of great general usefulness. The roles of European and Latin American “regional specialists” are filled by two of our senior general economists —  Barger and myself.

While one could imagine a budgetary situation such that one must recommend reducing to a token scale a University’s involvement in this area (except for basic international-trade-and-finance courses), it is hard to believe that Columbia specifically should withdraw from this kind of work. Surely the economic profession in USA has as part of its responsibility an understanding of the economic processes of other countries. [True, I have heard Milton Friedman say that to have a different economics for Brazil as against USA makes no more sense than to have a different science of chemistry; but he simply disregards the ethnocentric character of the economics which inward-looking economists develop for USA, and ignores the risk that what passes for “general economic law” may turn out to be a series of adhockeries concocted to be plausible for a very special and perhaps transitory state of society.] This responsibility surely comes home to Columbia. For one thing, New York is the natural focus of such work, what with its outward-looking tradition and the presence of the UN. Besides, we incur a special responsibility because we have so many overseas students. I would add that to educate overseas students too exclusively in economics-for-USA is dysfunctional: one of the major handicaps of development has been the attempt of US-trained economists overseas to apply Keynesian remedies to unemployment problems of non-Keynesian type, for example.

Economics and the SIA [School of International Affairs]

If the University were very strong financially, it seems to me plain that one would recommend developing the Economics Department in a way that would greatly strengthen the general work on international relations and on the understanding of societies outside USA which is represented by the School of International Affairs. The SIA could advantageously be much more of a research body and center of workshop activity.

I would not recommend developing an economics department within the SIA (even if SIA eventually develops a distinct and separately-recruited faculty, which I don’t think I would recommend either). To set up standards of recruiting, teaching and publication for “SIA economists” that will pass muster with the general profession is an essential safeguard, and the generally low standards of economic thinking in the UN and in overseas universities outside Europe, Japan and Australasia should be a warning that a separate international economics might not be a genuine “discipline”. But it will be a major defeat if Columbia cannot maintain and improve its standard of keeping a stable of economists for whom understanding of outside economies (and especially of the economies of poor countries) is a major concern.

A question which interacts with this, of course, is whether the SIA can develop its own sources of financing, as seemed so probable a few years ago. If not, the general financial debility of the University will mean that we must stop far short of optimum in the whole area represented by SIA, and hence also on its economic side. Specifically, it may make a great difference whether or not SIA can finance workshop activity in this area, and make a role for research posts for young economists (for example, teaching two-thirds time in the Department and working one-third-time-plus-summer in a research branch of SIA).

If the University’s policy toward economics is primarily to develop its mathematical-economics core, the contribution the Department can make on the SIA side may suffer. And reciprocally, failure to develop strength on this side may be a handicap to SIA in its efforts to get backing for a really strong program.

A postscript on professional life-cycles

One of the most valuable pieces of education I picked up in my earlier years at Columbia was a comment by Isador Rabi at a University Seminar about the problems of a field like physics where the most impressive men “peak” very young and the work regarded as important by the profession is done largely by youngsters. It would be a tremendous waste to throw men on the scrap-heap after their “peak” years, or to regard them as living on the benefits of tenure, as non-producers, for most of their profession lifetimes. The solution, Rabl indicated, was surely to be found in an appropriate division of labor between colleagues at different stages of life-cycle, working out what economists call an area of comparative advantage for the older men.

The COI report seems to me to ignore this problem, and to frame problems as if we could hope to recruit good men between age 25 and age 30 and have them conveniently remove themselves (suicide recommended?) along about age 40 — significant activities being described as those appropriate to men aged 25-40. In good part, I think the “problem” of life-cycle (once recognized) and the “problems” of maintaining strength in institutional economics and in the development/regional areas exist largely because we don’t integrate our approaches to different aspects of economics work. To a considerable degree, the natural life-cycle of the economist is to be obsessed with very abstract problems in youth, and mature into a person more concerned with and more knowledgeable about the real world. To a very large degree, the staffing of the institutional fields and of the SIA-type activities should then be handled by shifting over of people who have graduated from being pure theorists. If we don’t do this, the channels of recruiting and promotion for the continuation of the supposedly -central mathematical-economics core are apt to get clogged. It is very tricky to suppose that giving tenure to a theoretically creative young man is to acquire forty years of theoretically creative activity. Most of the relevant people have their key ideas very young, and develop them as fully as is profitable by age 40. If they continue to preempt the key teaching roles in these fields, they will keep the young from advancing and will impair the freshness of the curriculum offered to graduate and undergraduate students. [It was because of this view that I allowed myself to be pushed out of micro-teaching by Becker and Co. in the early 1960’s.] But to suck the tenured men out of these lines and make room for their successors, a Department needs a lot of roles for the maturing older man. Unless we can do well with the institutional and SIA aspects of the field, I conclude, we can’t do well in the long run with the “core” aspects.

Source: Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Joseph Dorfman Collection, Box 13 (Columbia University-teaching, etc.); Folder “Economic H…P…”

Image Source:  Obituary in The Columbia Spectator, October 3, 1997.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Radical Socialism Suggested Reading

Harvard. Methods of Social Reform. Readings, final exam. Carver, 1909-1910

The Economics in the Rear-view Mirror collection of artifacts in the form of course readings, syllabi, and exams is increased with this post that provides material from the economics course Methods of Social Reform — Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax taught by Thomas Nixon Carver during the second term of the academic year 1909-10 at Harvard.

At the risk of being unfair to an academic scribbler of a few years back who may be pronounced not guilty in the illiberal mania of our own times, I believe Harvard Professor Thomas Nixon Carver (1865-1961) could easily have been the sort of professor Turning Point USA would have embraced and promoted. 

Professor Carver’s own words about his course on Methods of Social Reform are fair game to quote (Prove me wrong):

The half course on methods of social reform attracted every kind of radical which the student body could furnish. They came armed with all the stock arguments against the existing economic system. Its defects were patent enough, while their untried schemes had not revealed to the naked eye their own defects. By listening patiently to their indictments, maintaining a reasonable attitude, and adopting the Socratic method of free discussion, I was able to steer the course, not to the satisfaction of the extreme radicals, but to that of the majority of the successive classes.

Source: Thomas Nixon Carver. Recollections of an Unplanned Life. Los Angeles: The Ward Ritchie Press, 1949. Page 172.

__________________________

Previously posted

Pre-Carver:
Carver’s courses

Post-Carver:

________________________

Course Announcement and Description
1909-10

14b 2hf. Methods of Social Reform. — Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., at 1.30. Professor Carver.

A study of those plans of social amelioration which involve either a reorganization of society, or a considerable extension of the functions of the state. The course begins with a critical examination of the theories of the leading socialistic writers, with a view to getting a clear understanding of the reasoning which lies back of socialistic movements, and of the economic conditions which tend to make this reasoning acceptable. A similar study will be made of the Single Tax Movement, of State Socialism and the public ownership of monopolistic enterprises, and of Christian Socialism, so called.

This course is open only to those who have passed satisfactorily in Course 14a.

Source: Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. VI, No. 29 (23 July 1909). History and Political Science Comprising the Departments of History and Government, and Economics, 1909-10, pp. 53-54.

________________________

ECONOMICS 14b
TOPICS AND REFERENCES

Starred references are prescribed.
Double starred references will be used as a basis for class-room discussion.

COMMUNISM
A
UTOPIAS
  1. Plato’s Republic.
  2. *Sir Thomas More. Utopia.
  3. *Francis Bacon. New Atlantis.
  4. *Tommaso Campanella. The City of the Sun. (Numbers 2, 3, and 4 may be found in convenient form in Morley’s Ideal Commonwealths.)
  5. Etienne Cabot. Voyage en Icarie.
  6. William Morris. News from Nowhere.
  7. Edward Bellamy. Looking Backward.
  8. Laurence Gronlund. The Coöperative Commonwealth.
  9. H. G. Wells. A Modern Utopia.
B
COMMUNISTIC EXPERIMENTS
  1. Charles Nordhoff. The Communistic Societies of the United States.
  2. Karl Kautsky. Communism in Central Europe in the Time of the Reformation.
  3. *W. A. Hinds. American Communities.
  4. J. H. Noyes. History of American Socialisms.
  5. J. T. Codman. Brook Farm Memoirs.
  6. Albert Shaw. Icaria.
  7. G. B. Landis. The Separatists of Zoar.
  8. E. O. Randall. History of the Zoar Society.
SOCIALISM
A
HISTORICAL
  1. *R. T. Ely. French and German Socialism.
  2. Bertrand Russell. German Social Democracy.
  3. John Rae. Contemporary Socialism.
  4. Thomas Kirkup. A History of Socialism.
  5. W. D. P. Bliss. A Handbook of Socialism
  6. William Graham. Socialism, New and Old.
  7. Peixotto. The French Revolution and Modern French Socialism.
  8. Wm. B. Guthrie. Socialism before the French Revolution.
  9. M. Hillquit. History of Socialism in the United States.
B
EXPOSITORY AND CRITICAL
  1. **J. E. Le Rossignol. Orthodox Socialism.
  2. *Albert Schaeffle. The Quintessence of Socialism.
  3. Albert Schaeffle. The Impossibility of Social Democracy.
  4. **Karl Marx. Capital.
  5. *Karl Marx and Frederic Engels. The Manifest of the Communist Party.
  6. Frederic Engels. Socialism, Utopian and Scientific.
  7. E. C. K. Gonner. The Socialist Philosophy of Rodbertus.
  8. E. C. K. Gonner. The Socialist State.
  9. Bernard Shaw and others. The Fabian Essays in Socialism.
  10. The Fabian Tracts.
  11. R. T. Ely. Socialism: an Examination of its Nature, Strength and Weakness.
  12. Edward Bernstein. Ferdinand Lassalle.
  13. Henry M. Hyndman. The Economics of Socialism.
  14. Sidney and Beatrice Web. Problems of Modern Industry.
  15. Gustave Simonson. A Plain Examination of Socialism.
  16. Werner Sombart. Socialism and the Social Movement in the Nineteenth Century.
  17. Émile Vandervelde. Collectivism.
  18. R. Flint. Socialism.
  19. A. Labriola. Essays on the Materialistic Conception of History.
  20. E. de Laveleye. The Socialism of Today.
  21. P. J. Proudhon. What is Property?
  22. W. D. P. Bliss. A Handbook of Socialism
  23. John Spargo. Socialism
ANARCHISM
  1. Max Stirner (pseudonym for Kaspar Schmidt). Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum.
  2. *Leo Tolstoi. The Slavery of Our Times.
  3. William Godwin. Political Justice.
  4. P. Kropotkin. The Scientific Basis of Anarchy. Nineteenth Century, 21: 238.
  5. P. Kropotkin. The Coming Anarchy. Nineteenth Century, 22: 149.
  6. Elisée Reclus. Anarchy. Contemporary Review, 14: 627.
  7. E. V. Zenker. Anarchism, a Criticism and History.
RELIGIOUS AND ALTRUISTIC SOCIALISM
  1. Lamennais. Les Paroles d’un Croyant.
  2. Charles Kingsley. Alton Locke.
  3. *Kaufman. Lamennais and Kingsley. Contemporary Review, April, 1882.
  4. Washington Gladden. Tools and the Man.
  5. Josiah Strong. Our Country.
  6. Josiah Strong. The New Era
  7. William Morris, Poet, Artist, Socialist. Edited by Francis Watts Lee. A collection of the socialistic writings of Morris.
  8. Ruskin, the Communism of John Ruskin. Edited by W. D. P. Bliss. Selected chapters from Unto this Last, The Crown of Wild Olive, and Fors Clavigera.
  9. Carlyle, The Socialism and Unsocialism of Thomas Carlyle. Edited by W. D. P. Bliss. Selected chapters from Carlyle’s various works.
THE SINGLE TAX
  1. **Henry George. Progress and Poverty.
  2. Henry George. Our Land and Land Policy.
  3. Alfred Russell Wallace. Land Nationalization.
  4. Thomas G. Shearman. Natural Taxation.
  5. Louis F. Post. The Single Tax.
STATE SOCIALISM

An indefinite term, usually made to include all movements for the extension of government control and ownership, especially over means of communication and transportation, also street lighting, etc.

  1. R. T. Ely. Problems of To-day. Chs. 17-23.
  2. J. A. Hobson. The Social Problem.
WORKS DISCUSSING THE SPHERE OF THE STATE IN SOCIAL REFORM
  1. Henry C. Adams. The Relation of the State to Industrial Action.
  2. *D. G. Ritchie. Principles of State Interference.
  3. D. G. Ritchie. Darwinism and Politics.
  4. *Herbert Spencer. The Coming Slavery.
  5. W. W. Willoughby. Social Justice.

Source: Harvard University Archives. HUC 8522.2.1. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 1. Folder: 1909-1910.

_______________________

Course Enrollment
1909-10

Economics 14b 2hf. Professor Carver. — Methods of Social Reform. Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.

Total 59: 14 Graduates, 16 Seniors, 18 Juniors, 5 Sophomore, 6 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1909-1910, p. 44.

 _______________________

ECONOMICS 14b
Year-End Examination, 1909-10

  1. State and discuss the doctrine of “Evolution through class struggle.”
  2. What does Mackaye mean by “conditional compensation,” and how does he propose that it shall be put into practice?
  3. Give a brief account of the origin of the Social Democratic party in Germany.
  4. What is the difference between Utopian and “scientifie” Socialism?
  5. What problem did Henry George attempt to solve in his Progress and Poverty? Did he solve it? Explain your answer.
  6. Is the single tax a step in the direction of Socialism? Explain your answer.
  7. Why does Fillebrown think that the single tax would improve the conditions on Cornhill Street, Boston? Is he justified in his belief?
  8. Discuss the question: Would the single tax be confiscation?

 Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 9, Bound vol. Examination Papers 1910-11; Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics,…,Music in Harvard College (June, 1910), pp. 48-49.

Image Source: “Men may come, and men may go; but the work of reform shall go on forever” by J. Keppler in Puck (5 November 1884). Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Socialism

Harvard. Socialism, Communism, etc. Course Description and Final Exam. Carver, 1908-1909

“Plans of social amelioration” were considered important enough to include in the economics curriculum at Harvard from early on. In the hands of the conservative professor Thomas Nixon Carver the doctrines of socialism, communism, and Georgeism were introduced to Harvard students in order for them to see the errors of critics of free-enterprise market economies, a.k.a. capitalism.

__________________________

Previously posted

Pre-Carver:
Carver’s courses

Post-Carver:

________________________

Course Enrollment
1908-09

Economics 14b 2hf. Professor Carver. — Methods of Social Reform. Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.

Total 44: 7 Graduates, 12 Seniors, 14 Juniors, 7 Sophomore, 1 Freshman, 3 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1908-1909, p. 67.

________________________

Course Announcement
1908-09

Economics 14b 2hf. Methods of Social Reform. — Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., at 1.30. Professor Carver.

A study of those plans of social amelioration which involve either a reorganization of society, or a considerable extension of the functions of the state. The course begins with a critical examination of the theories of the leading socialistic writers, with & view to getting & clear understanding of the reasoning which lies back of socialistic movements, and of the economic conditions which tend to make this reasoning acceptable. A similar study will be made of the Single Tax Movement, of State Socialism and the public ownership of monopolistic enterprises, and of Christian Socialism, so called.
This course is open only to those who have passed satisfactorily in Course 14a. [The Distribution of Wealth]

Source: Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. V, No. 19
(1 June 1908). History and Political Science Comprising the Departments of History and Government, and Economics, 1908-09, pp. 49-50.

________________________

ECONOMICS 14b
Year-end Examination, 1908-09

  1. How would you distinguish Socialism from Communism, from Anarchism, and from the single tax?
  2. Upon what grounds do the Marxian Socialists base their belief that Socialism is inevitable?
  3. Compare the socialistic theory of commercial crises with that of Henry George.
  4. Compare the views of Karl Marx and of Henry George upon the source of interest, or the income of the capitalist.
  5. Discuss the question: Is interest earned?
  6. Discuss the question: Is rent earned?
  7. Which of the communistic experiments in the United States seems to you most interesting? Why?
  8. Outline, briefly, Tolstoi’s theory of “passive resistance.”

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 8, Bound vol. Examination Papers 1908-09; Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics,…,Music in Harvard College (June, 1909), p. 45.

Image Source: Andy Piascik, “Remembering the 1912 Lawrence Textile Strike,” September 8, 2018. From The Africanist Press website.

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Socialism

Harvard. Exam questions for Social Reform, Socialism, Communism. Carver, 1907-1908

Harvard’s Thomas Nixon Carver, individualist to a fault, played less a devil’s advocate in his courses on social economic reform than he engaged with the theories behind the social movements of his time to disabuse his students’ of the economic schemes of reformers and revolutionaries that attracted them like moths to a flame. 

While  Bakunin, Marx and George are seen in the Rear-view Mirror of today, they were still objects seen in the side-view mirrors of Carver’s time — objects he probably believed to be closer than they appeared. In any case, objects to avoid for safety’s sake.

__________________________

Previously posted

Pre-Carver:
Carver’s courses

Post-Carver:

________________________

Course Enrollment
1907-08

Economics 14b 2hf. Professor Carver. — Methods of Social Reform. Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.

Total 20: 5 Graduates, 7 Seniors, 7 Juniors, 1 Sophomore.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1907-1908, p. 67.

________________________

ECONOMICS 14b
Mid-year Examination, 1907-08

  1. In what particulars does the socialist movement resemble a religious rather than a rationalistic movement?
  2. What are the leading doctrines of “Orthodox Socialism”?
  3. In what particulars are socialism and anarchism alike, and in what particulars are they unlike?
  4. State and comment upon Karl Marx’s theory as to the origin of capital and of interest.
  5. Compare the single tax movement and the socialist movement.
  6. Have you any clearly defined conclusion as to the proper, or logical, limits of state enterprise? If so, explain. If not, state the difficulty in the way of arriving at such a conclusion.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 8, Bound vol. Examination Papers 1908-09 (HUC 7000.25), p. 38.

Images: Mikhail Bakunin, Karl Marx, Henry George from the Manuscripts and Archives Division, The New York Public Library.  New York Public Library Digital Collections.

 

 

Categories
Columbia Industrial Organization Labor Socialism Syllabus Undergraduate

Columbia. Excerpt from Contemporary Civilization Syllabus. Industrial Problems, 1921

Columbia College’s freshman course on Contemporary Civilization, a.k.a. “CC”, has been a core element in the undergraduate experience for over a century. This is the second post providing an excerpt of the third edition of the course syllabus (1921) that should be of particular interest for economists. Topics include: industrial organization, regulation, organized labor, and alternate systems of economic control. As in the earlier post, links to all the items referenced have been added.

_________________________

Another Post from the Syllabus

Book III, Sections 1-5. Historical background of contemporary civilization, 1400-1870.

_________________________

BOOK VIII. INDUSTRIAL PROBLEMS

1. A survey of the prominent features of the modern industrial system.

  1. Private property.
    *Seligman, Principles of Economics, 125-138; *Hamilton, Current Economic Problems, 762-775; R.T. Ely, Property and Contract in their Relation to the Distribution of Wealth, Vol. I, 165-190.
    1. The meaning of the right of private property: the exclusive control over valuable things by private persons.
    2. Theories concerning the basis of property rights
      1. Occupation, or seizure.
      2. Natural rights.
      3. Labor.
      4. Legal theory
      5. Social utility.
    3. Property rights — rights vested in the owner of private property.
      1. Right of gift.
      2. Right of disposition by contract.
      3. Right of use.
      4. Right of bequest.
      5. Right of unlimited acquisition.
      6. Right to exclude.
    4. Limitations on property rights: social considerations limit the extent of private property rights.
      1. Right of use limited by principle of “eminent domain.”
      2. Right of use restricted by laws against “nuisances,” etc.
      3. Right of bequest limited by inheritance tax laws.
      4. Proposed limitations on the right of unlimited acquisition; the modern attitude toward great fortunes.
    5. Property and social authority. In the modern economic system private property is the chief basis of social authority and power.
  1. Competition as an economic principle. (See 3.A. below)

The doctrines of individualism and laissez faire are still regarded by modern business and industry as the basis for economic operation. It is felt that competition stimulates producers and protects both producers and consumers.

  1. The use of machinery and artificial power.
    *Marshall and Lyon, Our Economic Organization, 207-227; *Clay, H., Economics for the General Reader, 21-27; Marshall, Wright & Field, Materials for the Study of Elementary Economics, 158-160, 198-199.
    1. The standardization and mechanization of industrial processes and of industrial labor.
    2. Resulting tendency toward an elaborate technical division of labor, and toward a reduction of human effort to the simple repetition of a single operation. This mechanical character is typical of modern productive processes even where machinery is not employed.
    3. Limitations to the use of machinery.
      1. Unadapted to processes incapable of reduction to routine.
      2. Not applicable where tastes of individual consumers must be considered; the demand for quality and distinction.
  1. The factory system. (See above, p. 29.)
    *Hamilton, 112-113.
  2. The wage system.
    *Hamilton, 121-122; 617-619.
    1. The elaboration of the means of production has rendered ownership of the productive equipment by the laborers impossible under the present system.
    2. Modern industrial workers are thus in large part detached from direct personal control and responsible interest in the production and sale of commodities; dependent for livelihood upon employment as wage-workers by the owners of the means of production. The wage connection (“cash nexus”) the primary bond between the worker and his work. The proletariat.
    3. The mobility of labor under the wage system.
  1. The extensive use of capital and credit in promoting and conducting business and industrial undertakings.
    *Ely, Outlines of Economics, 212-230; *Hamilton, 110-112, 185-195, 206-208, 211-215; Clay, 97-104.
    1. Distinction between business and industrial units.
      1. The business unit: the unit of promotion and management. Types of business units.
        1. The individual business enterpriser.
        2. The partnership. (See (c) below.)
        3. The corporation. (See (c) below.)
      2. The industrial unit: the unit of production; the store, workshop, and factory.
    2. The necessity of capital and credit in industry today.
      1. The use of extensive plants and complicated machinery.
      2. The interval between production and sale may be long. Stock must be carried, workers must be paid, and other business and industrial expenses met in the meantime.
    3. Means of securing capital and credit.
      1. Individual and partnership enterprises.
        1. Use of capital of individual owners of the business.
        2. The use of bank credit.
          1. Banks as depositories of idle capital.
          2. Banks as agencies of credit.
      2. The corporation.
        1. Capital secured by sale of stock.
          1. Types of stock — common and preferred.
          2. The function and rights of stockholders.
        2. Capital secured by borrowing; the issuance of bonds.
          1. Types of bonds.
          2. The function and rights of bondholders.
      3. The use of bank credit.
    4. The relation of the business enterpriser (entrepreneur) to the owners of capital.
      1. The function of the promoter or organizer of a large corporation.
        1. The work of promotion.
        2. The relation of the promoter to the investors.
        3. The rewards of the promoter.
      2. The function of the executive officials of a corporation.
        1. The powers of the board of directors.
        2. The theoretical and actual relation of the directors to the investors and creditors.
      3. The possibility of misuse of power by the business representatives of owners of capital.
    1. The social importance of the separation of the actual ownership of property from direct control of that property.
      1. Corporate type of organization is breaking the direct relation of ownership between men and goods.
      2. Resulting change in the nature of the institution of private property.
  1. The dominance of large-scale enterprise in certain lines of industry.
    *Taussig, Principles of Economics, Vol. I, 49-66; Clay, 123-127. (Note — This section treats only the “legitimate” aspects of large scale production. Monopolies, combinations and “trusts” are treated under 3.B below).
    1. Marked increase in the size of the industrial unit within recent years.
    2. Reasons for the development of large-scale enterprises.
      1. Industrial reasons.
        1. Tendency toward increasing returns in industry.
        2. Advantages of standardization of product.
        3. Utilization of by-products.
        4. Economy of power.
        5. Greater division of labor possible.
        6. Scientific and technical research possible.
      2. Business reasons.
        1. Elimination of cost of competition.
        2. Selling advantages.
        3. Buying advantages.
        4. The stimulus of promoter’s profits.
    3. Restriction of the tendency toward large-scale production to certain industrial fields.
    4. Large scale enterprise and wide markets. As local specialization develops and the size of the productive unit increases, the entrepreneurs are driven to more distant markets to sell their produce. Large-scale enterprise is therefore dependent upon good means of transportation.
      1. Requirements for effective means of transportation.
        1. Speed: the importance of the time element in transportation, especially in the case of perishable goods. Refrigeration cars. Interest on invested capital while goods are in transit.
        2. Regularity: e.g. the milk supply of New York City. Commutation.
        3. Safety: passenger traffic, fragile goods.
        4. Cheapness: high rates reduce the size of the market. “Discriminating rates” in U. S.
          *Marshall, Wright & Field, 259-266.
        5. Elasticity: ability of the transportation systems to meet
          1. the peak-load requirements; e.g., coal in U. S. The after-the-harvest situation.
          2. the needs of the localities off the main lines of communication. The great increase in motor-truck transportation in the U. S.
      2. [Can the economic and social demands for means of transport be met by private companies? See 5.B.f below]
  1. The interdependence of all parts of the industrial structure.
    *Hamilton, 113-115, 204-205, 208-211; L. Alston, How It All Fits Together, 14-49.
    1. Industrial and geographical division of labor; resulting interdependence of different industries and regions. The whole industrial system thus constitutes what is in effect a single productive machine.
    2. The credit structure knits all modern business and industry together. The credit basis typical of modern business.
    3. Modern monetary and banking systems international in their scope.
    4. Manifestations of this interdependence: financial panics and industrial depressions. (Business cycles.) Railway strikes.

2. The organization of production: problems arising from the conflicting interests of certain of the agents of production.

  1. The agents of production.
    *Ely, Outlines of Economics, 116-130; *Clay, 46-63, 92-94; Seligman, Principles of Economics, 283-287; Seager, Principles of Economics (Second Edition), 122-169; Marshall, Wright & Field, Materials, 58-61, 106-108, 204-206.
    1. Natural agents: the basis of all production; the source of raw materials.
      1. Types of natural agents.
        1. Agricultural land.
        2. Urban land, furnishing sites for dwellings, stores, office-buildings, factories, etc.
        3. Forests.
        4. Mines and quarries.
        5. Waterways and harbors.
        6. Sources of natural power: wind, waterfalls, etc.
      2. Certain characteristics of natural agents.
        1. Incapable of material increase in amount.
        2. Different units may vary in productivity.
        3. Varying locations make different units more or less accessible.
    2. Labor: physical and intellectual activities conducing to production.
      1. Labor and natural agents are the two primary factors in production.
      2. The gain in efficiency secured by division of labor. (See above, p. 30.)
      3. Different individuals possess varying degrees of productive ability.
    3. Capital.
      1. Technical meaning of the term “capital”: goods produced by man and used by man to assist him in further production.
      2. The money value of capital goods not to be confused with the concrete capital goods.
      3. The function of capital in production.
        1. Increases the efficiency of man’s labor by enabling labor to be more effectively applied.
        2. Enables labor to be supported during the process of production.
    4. Business enterprise, or organization.
      1. The necessity of an organizer in modern production. In the modern highly complex industrial system natural agents, labor and capital have to be brought together and suitable arrangements made for their cooperation in the production of any desired commodity. The task has become especially important under modern industrial conditions, for the productive factors are in general separately owned.
      2. The function of the business enterpriser in production.
        1. To organize the factors in production.
        2. To evaluate the services rendered by each factor to his undertaking.
        3. To assume, in part, the business risks involved in the enterprise.
      3. The relation of the enterpriser to production under the corporate form of organization. (See above.)
      4. The work of the business enterpriser may involve labor of management, which is separately remunerated. The business enterpriser may invest his own capital, for which service he is also separately remunerated.
  1. The relation of the business enterpriser to labor; conditions underlying the labor problem; the conflict of interests.
    *Hamilton, 615-619, 628-635.
    1. The business interests of the employer.
      1. Maximum profits : ordinarily secured by
        1. Efficient and well-disciplined labor force.
        2. Low labor costs.
        3. Production on basis of market conditions. The process of production is normally subordinated to that of sale, for advantage must be taken of changing market conditions, (e.g., coal.) This may result in irregular production.
        4. Limitation of expenditures on plant to those which will increase profits.
      2. Complete control of his own business and of his working force.
    2. The interests of the laboring force.
      1. High wages.
      2. Short hours.
      3. Protection against industrial accident and disease by elimination of dangerous and insanitary working conditions.
      4. Regular employment.
      5. Participation as responsible agents in the industrial process.
    3. These competing interests, together with the necessity of cooperation in production, give rise to the labor problem.
  1. The machinery of agreement; methods of adjusting the conflict of interests.
    1. Individual versus collective bargaining.
      *Hamilton, 32-37, 636-640. M.R. Beard, A Short History of the American Labor Movement, 19-21; L.C. Marshall, Readings in Industrial Society, 560-569.

      1. The system of individual bargaining.
        1. The meaning of individual bargaining. Separate agreements made between employer and each of his employees as to wages and general conditions of employment; both parties to the contract free and equal agents; laborers free to work for any employer and to leave at will; employers free to employ any one they choose, and to terminate that employment at will.
        2. The assumptions underlying the system of individual bargaining.
          1. Laissez faire; the interests of the whole are advanced by allowing complete freedom to each individual. (See above: Competition, p. 71, and also below, p. 88.)
          2. Bargaining equality of employer and employee.
          3. The rôle of the employer in this concept of the industrial relation: a private individual engaged in a private enterprise, employing private property and subject to no control, except that furnished by business competition.
        3. Advantages claimed for the system of individual bargaining.
          1. Costs kept down and production increased by allowing full liberty to the employer.
          2. A mobile, elastic labor supply is thus secured. The employer is free to increase force when business is good, and to decrease force when business conditions call for limited production. The free and independent laborer, following his own interests will be found where he is wanted and when his labor is needed. Supply and demand given free play.
          3. Domination by organizations of laborers prevented when each man is free to bargain individually with the employer.
          4. Each individual worker secure in the superior advantage of his own efficiency.
        4. Defects charged to the system of individual bargaining.
          1. Fallacies in the assumption of complete equality between the parties to the bargain.
            1. The stakes at issue are not the same: for the employer it is a question of one employee more or less in any individual case; for the worker it is a question of the means of livelihood for himself and his family. He is thus forced to accept employer’s terms, and is not free to bargain in regard to them.
            2. The employee may be a minor, in which case there can be no equality of bargaining power.
          2. The system has resulted in the exploitation of minors and of many classes of male and female workers.
          3. The right of the employer to take on and discharge at will, depending upon business conditions, leads to irregularity of employment and consequent suffering on part of workers.
      2. The system of collective bargaining.
        Different interpretations of “collective bargaining.”

        1. The right of wage-earners within a given industrial unit (e.g., a factory or mine) to organize and to bargain with their employer through representatives elected from their own number.
        2. “The right of wage-earners to organize without discrimination, to bargain collectively, to be represented by representatives of their own choosing in negotiations and adjustments with their employers in respect to wages, hours of labor and conditions of employment.” (Resolution presented to Industrial Conference at Washington, October 22, 1910, by Labor Group.)
        3. The concept of full collective bargaining: bargaining between representatives of organized employees and of organized employers in a given industry. (e.g., New York Garment Workers; English Industrial Conference program.)

(The use of the system of collective bargaining, and its advantages and defects, will be considered in connection with the discussion of labor organizations below.)

    1. Collective bargaining further considered ; the combination movement in labor.
      1. Causes of the movement toward combination.
        *Hamilton, 619-622.
        1. Development of large-scale industry with increased use of capital after the Industrial Revolution led to a sharp differentiation between employers and workers, creating a class of industrial wage-workers divorced from the land. (See III.4.F)
        2. Weakness of the individual employee under a system of individual bargaining.
        3. Desire of workers to escape labor competition in regard to hours, wages, and conditions of employment. “The union organization attempts to cover the industrial field within which there is labor competition with respect to hours, wages, and conditions of employment.” Hoxie.
        4. Development of class consciousness among the permanent wage-workers. (The Communist Manifesto.)
      1. Main types of labor combinations. Labor unionism is complex, many-sided, and opportunistic.
        *Hoxie, Trade Unionism in the United States, 31-53.

        1. Structural division of labor combinations.
          1. The craft or trade union: an organization of wage-workers engaged in a single craft.
          2. The federation of craft unions.
            1. The local trades council.
            2. The state or district federation.
            3. National or international federation. In a federation the constituent organizations retain a large part of their individual independence.
          3. The industrial union: an organization of wage-workers employed in a given industry; attempts to unite skilled and unskilled in a single group. Industrial unions may be plant, local, district, national, or international, (e.g., the I.W.W.; the French syndicates.)
          4. The labor union: an organization of all workers in a given district regardless of craft or industry (e.g., The Knights of Labor).
          5. The “inside union” (employers’ union).
        2. Functional classification of unionism. (Hoxie.)
          1. Business unionism.
            1. Characteristics: trade conscious, conservative, aiming at immediate results, “more.”
            2. Methods: collective bargaining, trade agreements, strikes and boycotts as last resort, (e.g., R.R. brotherhoods.)
          2. Friendly or uplift unionism.
            1. Characteristics: conservative, law-abiding, idealistic.
            2. Methods: collective bargaining, mutual insurance, profit-sharing and cooperation, (e.g., Knights of Labor.)
          3. Revolutionary unionism.
            1. Characteristics: class conscious, radical in view-point and action, repudiating existing institutional order, and refusing to be bound by prevailing morals and laws.
            2. Methods: direct action, sabotage, strikes. Collective bargaining and mutual insurance regarded as conservative. (e.g., the I.W.W.)
          4. Predatory unionism.
            1. Characteristics: opportunistic, selfish and ruthless.
            2. Methods: may be those of open bargaining combined with secret bribery and violence (e.g., those of certain building trades organizations) or a secret “guerilla” warfare (e.g., that carried on by Bridge and Structural Iron Workers a few years ago).
      1. Labor combinations in the United States.
        Hoxie, Trade Unionism in the United States, 89-98, *103-135; Brissenden, The I.W.W.; C. H. Parker, The I.W.W., Atlantic Monthly, November, 1917; Marshall, Wright & Field, Materials for the Study of Elementary Economics, 668-694, 700-704.

        1. The early character of labor combination in both England and U. S. was idealistic, friendly, and altruistic. The members favored political action, cooperation and education. The Knights of Labor in the U. S. is an illustration.
        2. The American Federation of Labor.
          1. General characteristics.
            1. A loose federation of virtually independent unions. Because of the elastic character of the organization room has been found within the A.F. of L. for many diverse types of unions. Originally a federation of craft unions. Recently several industrial unions have been admitted to membership (e.g., United Mine Workers of America).
            2. Non-theoretical and opportunistic. Immediate results sought.
          2. Types of subordinate organizations.
            1. National and international unions.
            2. Local unions.
            3. Local and district councils: organizations of local craft unions in the same or allied industries to govern interrelations and deal with employers.
            4. City central labor unions: composed of delegates from the local unions of the A.F. of L. in a given city.
            5. State federation: organization of A.F. of L. union bodies within a given state.
            6. The departments: federations of allied national and international unions.
          3. Organic character of the A.F. of L.
            1. The annual convention, the sovereign power.
            2. The permanent executive council, to carry out the will of the convention.
          4. General functions of the A.F. of L.
            1. Administration of intercraft union affairs; settling jurisdictional disputes.
            2. Advancing labor’s interests by labor legislation.
            3. Maintenance of a labor press.
            4. Promoting the organization of wage-workers.
            5. Promoting the use of the union label.
            6. Mediation between unions and employers.
            7. Giving financial and moral assistance to unions on strike.
            8. Education and publicity.
          5. Weaknesses charged to the A.F. of L.
            1. Limited membership: less than 10% of workers.
            2. Lacks adherence of several strong unions, (e.g., R.R. brotherhoods.)
            3. Inability to organize laborers in great trust-controlled industries.
            4. Failure to organize and help unskilled labor.
            5. Jurisdictional disputes within A.F. of L.
            6. Tendency to pursue immediate results; opportunistic policy said to have limited its accomplishments.
            7. Craft form of organization not adapted to progressive specialization found in scientifically managed industries.
        3. The Railroad brotherhoods.
          1. General characteristics.
            1. Models of pure craft unions.
            2. Highly centralized control, disciplined membership.
            3. Skilled, specialized and highly paid membership.
            4. Conservative type business union.
            5. Recent tendency to change policy because of problem of government ownership of railroads — The Plumb Plan.
          2. Methods:
            1. Collective bargaining, trade agreements. Avoidance of strikes except as last resort.
            2. Legislation.
            3. Mutual insurance.
            4. Recent movement for Plumb Plan.
        4. The unions in the clothing industry.
          Budish and Soule, The New Unionism, 27-45, 256-273, 191-204.

          1. The nature of the clothing industry.
            1. Seasonal demand and seasonal unemployment.
            2. Highly competitive system and “contracting out” in small producing units.
            3. Prevalence of immigrant labor, large percentage of women.
          2. Union organization of the industry.
            1. Early prevalence of the sweat shop with low wages and bad sanitary conditions.
            2. Early failures to correct these evils by legislation and union organization.
            3. Rapid growth of unionism after 1914.
            4. The establishment of trade agreements and joint boards with impartial chairmen.
          3. Policies of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers as a type.
            1. Belief in industrial unionism.
            2. Ultimate aim to establish self-government and control in industry.
            3. Encouragement of collective bargaining, shop committees and “industrial government.”
            4. Opposition to sabotage as a hindrance to the training of the workers in self-government.
            5. Promotion of workers’ education and cooperative enterprises.
            6. Anti-restrictionist attitude toward immigration.
            7. Promotion of separate political action.
        5. Revolutionary Unionism.
          The types of labor combinations given above stand for the modification and improvement of the status of the laborer under the existing systems of government. Revolutionary unionism is opposed to the existing political as well as economic organization. It believes that no real improvement of the position of labor can take place under the present political regime. It is organized therefore with the expressed purpose of over-throwing the governments as they are, and reorganizing society so that labor will receive its proper share of the national dividend. The Industrial Workers of the World is the most prominent example of this form of labor combination in the U.S. (See 5.B.h.iv below. American Syndicalism: the I.W.W.)
      2. Labor combinations in Great Britain.
        S. & B. Webb, Industrial Democracy; G.D.H. Cole, An Introduction to Trade Unions; G.D.H. Cole, The World of Labor.
        British industry is rather thoroughly organized into unions of many varieties and types. Craft unions, industrial unions and general labor unions are found side by side, often competing for members in the same industry. Since these unions have grown up haphazardly, without control or direction, no common principle of organization is found. In England, as in the United States, there are two rival types at present contending for supremacy: craft unionism and industrial unionism.

        1. The growth in strength of organized labor in Great Britain.
          1. 1892: total population, United Kingdom, 40,000,000; membership of unions, 1,500,000; 4% of population organized; 20% of male manual workers organized; 3% of women workers organized.
          2. 1915: total population, 46,000,000; membership of unions, 4,127,000; 9% of population organized; 45% of male manual workers organized; 10% of women workers organized.
          3. In 1917 the total membership in the unions was 5,287,522.
        2. Types of labor organizations in Great Britain.
          1. The Miners’ Federation of Great Britain: a strong industrial federation.
            S. & B. Webb, Industrial Democracy, 51, 57, 146.
          2. The National Union of Railwaymen: an industrial union.
          3. Transport Workers’ Federation: a federation of unions among dock and vehicle workers.
            Webb, History of Trade Unionism, 499-502.
          4. Cotton, engineering (steel-working), and ship-building industries organized into a great many separate craft unions, of which the Amalgamated Society of Engineers (A.S.E.) is the most powerful.
          5. General labor unions: strong organizations including unskilled and general laborers in many industries. General labor unions have developed comparatively recently, for up to 1890 craft unions of skilled workers dominated the labor movement in Great Britain. The organization of unskilled workers has been carried forward rapidly since that date.
        3. Mechanism of unification and cooperation.
          S. & B. Webb, Industrial Democracy, 265-278.

          1. Trades’ councils; federations of local trade union branches in each particular district; workers in different industries included.
          2. National federations of trade unions: federal combinations of local or of national trade unions. These federations, many of them strongly centralized, add strength and unity to labor organization.
          3. The Triple Alliance: the first great inter-industrial federation in the British labor movement. A general alliance between the Miners’ Federation of Great Britain, the National Union of Railwaymen and the Transport Workers’ Federation to secure joint action in industrial disputes. The disintegration of the Triple Alliance in 1921. S. and B. Webb, History of Trade Unionism (1920), 516-517.
          4. The Trades Union Congress. (Approximately 75% of the membership of British trade unions are included in this Congress.)
            S. and B. Webb, History of Trade Unionism (1920), 561-575, 649-663.

              1. Character of the Congress: an annual conference of delegates from affiliated societies.
              2. The Parliamentary Committee of the Trade Union Congress. The central executive authority of the Congress.
                1. Limitation of powers, because it cannot enforce any obligation upon the affiliated unions.
                2. Resemblance to Executive committee of the A.F. of L.
              3. The functions of the Trade Union Congress and its parliamentary committee primarily industrial.
          5. The Labor Party. A federation of trade unions, socialist and other societies organized for purposes of political action. (See below: The use of the political weapon by labor.)
            Ogg, Economic Development of Modern Europe, 441-447.
        4. Policies and methods of British unions.
          1. Policies.
            1. Earlier policies: conservative uplift unionism.
            2. Radical character of recent policies: the fight for nationalization and participation in control. (See below.)
            3. The proposed use of the industrial weapon for political purposes.
          2. Methods.
            S. & B. Webb, Industrial Democracy, 796-806.

            1. Mutual insurance and benefits.
            2. Collective bargaining.
            3. Trade agreements; the standard rate.
            4. Legislation.
            5. Combined industrial action: the methods of the Triple Alliance.
    1. Combination among employers.
      *Hoxie, 188-206; Marshall, Wright and Field, Materials, 694-699.

      1. Types of employers’ organizations. There are many structural and functional types, corresponding closely to similar union bodies. In general, two main functional types may be distinguished.
        The conciliatory association, seeking to maintain industrial peace

        1. largely through bargaining and conciliation.
        2. The militant association, one of the chief objects of which is to break union organizations.
      2. Methods of militant employers’ associations.
        1. Effective counter organization, paralleling union structure.
        2. War on closed shop, by action and propaganda; blacklisting.
        3. Mutual aid; assistance given employers in time of strikes.
        4. Establishment of welfare plans, insurance and pension schemes which are subject to forfeiture in case of strike.
        5. Organization of counter-unions.
        6. The use of the law: injunctions and damage suits, etc.
        7. Methods of political action.
      3. Mediatory employers’ associations.
        1. Organization paralleling union structure.
        2. Collective bargaining and conciliation. (See below.)
      4. The employers’ associations and the principle of individualism. Significant departure from strict laissez-faire principles is involved in the formation of strong employers’ organizations.
    2. Relations between labor combinations and employers.
      1. Typical forms of collective bargaining in operation.
        *Hoxie, 254-275; Seager, Principles of Economics, 548-572; Taussig, Principles of Economics, Vol. 2, 313-322; Hamilton, 638-650, 663-666, 602-605, 731-739, 788-793; Marshall, Wright and Field, Materials, 683-691; Arthur Young, The International Harvester Industrial Council Plan; J. D. Rockefeller, Jr., The Colorado Industrial Plan.

        1. The “inside union”; collective bargaining with Works Committees. The Colorado plan; the Midvale plan; the International Harvester plan.
        2. Negotiation and trade agreements between organized workers and organized employers.
          1. Examples of negotiation in American industry: the bituminous coal situation; the garment workers.
          2. Subjects of negotiation and character of agreements reached. The principle of uniformity; the standard rate; the minimum wage.
          3. The legal character of trade agreements.
        3. Mediation, conciliation and arbitration by outside agencies as modes of securing industrial peace.
          Report of President Wilson’s Second Industrial Conference.

          1. Limited applicability. Questions of recognition of union and of open versus closed shop not usually open to arbitration.
          2. Boards of arbitration, public and private.
        4. Compulsory arbitration: employers and employees must accept decision of a judicial arbitration tribunal; the case of New Zealand.
          1. The object of compulsory arbitration: to prevent industrial stoppage due to strikes and lockouts.
          2. Difficulties of compulsory arbitration.
            1. Difficulty of enforcing findings against labor.
            2. In attempting to determine what are “fair” wages the tribunal must determine what are “fair” profits and “fair” interest. Whole distributive process thus subject to regulation.
          3. The present status of compulsory arbitration: the attitude of labor; the situation in New Zealand and Australia.
        5. Kansas Industrial Relations Court plan.
          Allen, Party of the Third Part.
          Some provisions of the law:

          1. Creation of a tribunal vested with “power, authority and jurisdiction” to hear and determine all controversies which tend to threaten the operation of essential industries.
          2. All essential industries must be operated with reasonable continuity. Permission to discontinue must be given by Court.
          3. Right of collective bargaining is recognized.
          4. Violations of the act are punishable by fine or imprisonment or both.
      2. The appeal to force.
        *Hamilton, 650-659, 677-680; Marshall, Wright & Field, Materials, 705-709; Adams and Sumner, Labor Problems, 175-212.

        1. The weapons of the unions.
          1. The strike in relation to collective bargaining.
            1. Definition: The refusal of a number of workingmen to sell their labor for less than a stipulated price or to work under other than specified conditions of employment, coupled with the refusal of the purchaser of that labor to accede to their demands.
            2. The sympathetic strike.
            3. The utility of the strike as a weapon for the attainment of union ends. The right to strike considered by labor to be an essential element in collective bargaining.
            4. Criticisms of the strike. Strikes and violence. Proposed laws prohibiting strikes.
          2. The ostracism of non-union workers.
          3. The boycott and the “unfair list”: means of discouraging the purchase of products of a hostile employer. The law against the boycott; the Danbury Hatters’ case.
        2. The weapons of the employer.
          1. The lockout.
          2. The black-list.
          3. The use of strike-breaking and detective agencies.
          4. The employers’ associations sometimes in a position to use the power of the state in breaking strikes.
      3. The weapons of revolutionary unionism. Disavowal of collective bargaining, conciliation, arbitration, and trade agreements.
        1. The strike.
        2. The general strike: a general stoppage of work in all industries.
          1. Attempts to utilize the weapon of the general strike in the past.
          2. The general strike as the weapon by which the revolutionary unionists hope to achieve their final objects.
        3. Sabotage; “Ca Cannie”; the “strike on the job.” The reduction of output by disabling machinery, working less efficiently, or destroying part of the product.
  1. Points of conflict between labor and capital and proposed solutions.
    *J. B. Andrews, Labor Problems and Labor Legislation, 23-44.
    (The discussion above has been confined largely to a description of the machinery of agreement, the means by which cooperation in production is normally secured. Some of the points at issue, other than that of collective bargaining, are now to be considered.)
    1. The struggle for higher wages.
      Hamilton, 586-602; 591-593; Marshall, Wright and Field, 643-647, 659-669; Seager, 583-590.

      1. Factors in the wage dispute.
        1. Earlier theories of wages according to which the remuneration of the laborer was fixed by agencies not in his control.
          1. Malthus and the subsistence theory of wages.
          2. The wages-fund theory.
        2. Wage levels in the early years of the Industrial Revolution. (See above, p. 30.)
        3. The standard of living and the fight for higher wages.
          1. Education and the standard of living.
          2. The struggle to maintain and to raise the standard of living an ever-present cause of conflict over wages.
          3. The standard of living and rising prices.
        4. The wage question and unionism. The standard rate an essential element in collective bargaining.
      2. Methods of adjusting wage disputes.
        1. Trade agreements as to wages. Such agreements constitute merely temporary solutions.
        2. Profit-sharing: an attempt to eliminate wage disputes, increase efficiency of workers and harmonize the interests of employers and employed by giving the workers a share in the profits.
          1. Types of profit-sharing.
          2. Advantages and defects of profit-sharing.
          3. Failure of profit-sharing to eliminate industrial disputes.
        3. Bonus and premium systems, involving additional rewards to exceptional men for added output.
          1. Object: increase in output without increase in labor cost per unit.
          2. Opposition of organized labor to these systems, based upon
            1. Tendency of such arrangements to weaken collective spirit in laborers.
            2. Danger of pace-making.
            3. Alleged cutting of rates by employers if earnings of men become large.
        4. The legal minimum wage.
          1. Definition: A minimum wage established by the state for work of a certain sort or workers of a certain class.
          2. The argument against the minimum wage: wages are automatically adjusted to the productive ability of the worker, and cannot be set above this point by legal enactment.
          3. The argument for the minimum wage.
            1. Exploitation of workers, especially women and children, must be prevented.
            2. Adequate standard of living must be maintained, and it is the duty of the state to see that this standard is not lowered.
          4. The application of minimum wage laws presents the problem of providing for the inefficient and the unemployable.
    2. The struggle for shorter hours.
      *Andrews, Labor Problems and Labor Legislation, 45-69; Hamilton, 784-787; Seager, 574-583; Goldmark, Fatigue and Efficiency; Marshall, Wright and Field, 716-721; Commons and Andrews, Principles of Labor Legislation, 221-286.

      1. The efficiency argument for short hours.
        1. Investigations concerning the relation of fatigue to efficiency.
        2. The experience of the war: the economy of short hours.
      2. Other arguments for short hours.
        1. Necessity of protecting women and children.
        2. Necessity of regulating hours in dangerous occupations.
        3. Short hours and democracy. Necessity of leisure for education and participation in the life of the democracy.
      3. The legal regulation of hours.
        1. Laws regulating hours of labor of children. State and federal legislation in United States.
          1. The federal law of 1916 forbidding interstate traffic in goods produced by children working long hours; set aside by Supreme Court.
          2. The federal tax on the profits of establishments employing children between 14 and 16 at night or for more than 8 hours daily. 1919.
        2. State legislation limiting hours of labor of women.
        3. Recent movements toward legal regulation of men’s hours. The Adamson railroad law establishing 8 hours as the standard for pay.
      4. Limitation of hours through collective bargaining.
        1. The 8-hour day being largely established through direct bargaining.
        2. The movement toward further reduction of hours: the 44-hour week.
      5. Increased productivity versus shorter hours.
        *Hamilton, 700-705.
    3. Conditions of employment.
      Andrews, Labor Problems and Labor Legislation, 69-82, 83-92; Hamilton, 566-570; 577-578, 584-586; Seager, Principles, 583-590; Seager, Social Insurance; Marshall, Wright & Field, 721-723; Ogg, Economic Development of Modern Europe, 568-641. Commons and Andrews, 323-382.

      1. Safety.
        1. General nature and causes of industrial accidents. Types of dangerous occupations.
        2. The cost of industrial accidents.
          1. The burden as borne by the workers; the theory that wages are adjusted to risk.
          2. Social results of this system.
        3. Methods of reducing the number of industrial accidents.
          1. Trade union regulations concerning working conditions.
          2. Industrial safety laws.
        4. Workmen’s compensation laws as a means of relieving the worker of the cost of accidents.
      2. Health.
        1. Nature and causes of occupational diseases.
        2. The improvement of working conditions and the reduction in amount of occupational disease through legal and trade union action. Prohibition of dangerous substances and regulation of working conditions.
        3. The movement for social insurance as a method of relieving the worker of the burden of sickness.
      3. Working conditions under the “sweat-shop” system.
        1. The evils of tenement house manufacture: congestion, unsanitary conditions, low wages, long hours, child labor.
        2. The fight against the sweating system.
    4. Scientific management.
      *Hamilton, 705-713; *Hoxie, 296-348; Marshall, Wright & Field, 219-233; Goldmark, Fatigue and Efficiency, 192-210; Marot, Creative Impulse in Industry, 29-55.

      1. The meaning of “scientific management.”
        1. The application to machines and workers of scientifically established laws governing the processes of production and the modes of payment for the purpose of increasing efficiency in industry.
        2. Time and motion study the method by which the facts and laws of efficient production are to be established.
          1. Narrow conception of time and motion study: an instrument for task-setting and efficiency rating merely.
          2. Broader conception: time and motion study as a method of analysis applicable to every feature of the productive and distributive process.
      2. Scientific management and production. Systematic scientific study of productive processes and methods affords possibility of great increase of world’s productive efficiency, a possibility which should be utilized.
      3. Scientific management in the mechanical and in the human sphere.
        1. The unquestioned success of scientific management in dealing with the mechanical, material factor in production; efficient mechanical arrangements and processes have been established.
        2. Inability of scientific management to discover objective laws of universal validity in regard to the human factor.
        3. Danger that scientific management will reduce workers to a little-skilled, interchangeable, unorganized mass.
          1. The tendency to extreme specialization.
          2. Traditional craft knowledge systematized in the hands of the employer; the workers’ skill vested in the foreman and manager.
          3. Established crafts and craftsmanship tend to break down.
      4. The opposition of organized labor to scientific management.
        1. Reasons given for labor opposition.
          1. Danger of narrow specialization and loss of craftsmanship.
          2. Undemocratic character of scientific management, with tendency to break down collective bargaining.
          3. Unfair character of tasks set and wages paid.
          4. Scientific management a device for increasing production and profits.
          5. Scientific management a speeding up and sweating system.
          6. Work under scientific management is monotonous routine.
          7. Continuity and certainty of employment lessened.
        2. Fundamental antagonism of scientific management and dominant type of modern unionism, the essential principle of which is uniformity.
      5. The problem of securing the benefits of increased productivity which scientific management can give, without reducing the status and craftsmanship of the worker.
        1. Antagonism of labor will persist if scientific management is used as an instrument for profit-making and exploiting the workers.
        2. Human defects of scientific management may in part be overcome by
          1. A broad and universally applied system of industrial education.
          2. Fuller and more intelligent participation by labor in the processes of industrial production.
    5. Insecurity of employment.
      Hamilton, 545-566, *547-549, 554-566; Marshall, Wright and Field, 709-715; W.H. Beveridge, Unemployment; Andrews, 7-21; F. C. Mills, Theories of Unemployment and of Unemployment Relief, 118-164.

      1. General causes of insecurity of employment.
        1. Seasonal fluctuations in the demand for labor.
        2. Cyclical fluctuations in the demand for labor.
        3. Necessity of labor reserve due to the casual character of employment in many industries.
        4. Changes in industrial structure resulting in decreased demand for labor of certain types.
        5. Deficiencies of industrial training.
        6. Old age and personal deficiencies.
      2. Results of insecurity of employment.
        1. Decreased productivity of industry.
        2. Evil effects of uncertainty of employment upon the worker.
        3. The evil of under-employment and under-nourishment.
        4. The development of the habit of casual employment.
        5. The migratory laborer a product of seasonal and casual demand for labor. Evil results of a migratory existence.
      3. Proposed methods of remedying insecurity of employment.
        1. The organization of the labor market. Haphazard hawking of labor should be replaced by systematic placing of labor through governmentally organized employment offices.
        2. The regularization of industry.
        3. Diversification of industries and systematic distribution of public work to offset fluctuations in demand for labor.
        4. Adequate industrial training.
        5. Unemployment insurance to protect worker during periods of unavoidable unemployment.
    6. Immigration in its relation to the labor problem.
      Hamilton, 496-527; 496-516; Frances Kellor, Immigration and the Future, 227-258. *See Appendix III, 4 (p. 146).

      1. The character of recent immigration to the United States contrasted with earlier immigration.
        1. Marked predominance of northern and western Europeans prior to 1890.
        2. The influx of southern and eastern Europeans since 1890; the stimulation of immigration by steamship companies and large employers of labor.
      2. Date of change in character of immigration practically corresponds with date of exhaustion of free land in U.S. Immigrants after 1890 thus became definitely laborers, rather than settlers and independent farmers.
      3. Problems arising from the changed character of recent immigration.
        1. Language and educational differences; the necessity of immigrant education today.
        2. Differences in standards of living.
          1. Inability of workers with high standards to compete with some of new arrivals.
          2. The forcing down of wages in unskilled occupations.
        3. Difficulties arising from the congestion of immigrant population in large cities; relation to unemployment and to the sweating system.
        4. Recent immigrants and organized labor.
          1. Occasional use of immigrants as strike-breakers.
          2. Difficulty of organizing immigrants.
          3. Successful organization of immigrants in certain industries within recent years.
      4. The problem of future immigration.
        1. Reasons advanced for curbing immigration.
          1. The alleged racial inferiority of certain types.
          2. The question of “hyphenated” Americans.
          3. The maintenance of the American standard of living.
          4. The danger of over-population and of forcing wages to a subsistence level.
          5. The difficulty of educating and absorbing large numbers of immigrants of a different culture.
        2. Arguments advanced for a continuance of our former immigration policy.
          1. There is no basis for the claim of racial inferiority of certain types.
          2. The United States must continue to furnish a haven for the oppressed of the world.
          3. American industries need a large supply of immigrant labor. More labor, not less, is needed, for overpopulation is a very distant danger.
          4. Immigrants make intellectual and moral contributions which are valuable to American democracy.
          5. Education and absorption will not be difficult if congestion in large cities is prevented.
        3. Proposed policies.
          1. The continuance of a selective immigration policy.
            1. Exclusion of paupers and illiterates.
            2. Prevention of stimulation of immigration.
            3. Perfection of machinery for educating and absorbing immigrants.
          2. Complete exclusion, permanently, or for a term of years.
        4. The recent immigration act, 1921.
    7. Recognition of the Union.
      The closed versus the open shop.

      1. Open shop with no recognition of unions.
      2. The closed shop with the closed union may result in a form of labor monopoly.
      3. The closed shop with the open union.
    8. Participation in management. (The demands of organized labor have in the past been confined in the main to questions of hours, wages and conditions of employment. Within recent years, however, questions of management and control have come within the scope of labor’s interest. In England and, to a lesser extent, in the United States, organized labor is now seeking to secure a share in the control of industrial undertakings, especially the large public service enterprises such as mining and transportation. This question is taken up below, in the section on “The problem of control in industry.”)

3. The organization of production: competition versus combination and monopoly.
*Clay, Economics for General Reader, 107-115; Seligman, 139-150. *Hamilton, 429-478; Seager, Chaps. XXIII, XXV.

  1. The meaning and significance of competition.
    1. The doctrine of laissez-faire in industry; its importance during the nineteenth century. The basis of laissez-faire: the belief that an individual in seeking to advance his own interests is thereby, “as if led by a hidden hand,” advancing the interests of society.
    2. The meaning of modern business competition: the struggle to obtain the largest possible amount of wealth in exchange for commodities produced or services rendered.
    3. Competition the regulating factor by which the flow of economic goods is directed.
    4. Relation between competition and cooperation: both a conflict and a community of interests between individuals and groups in the modern economic system.
    5. The extent of competition today.
      1. Limitations placed on competition by government.
      2. Limitations placed on competition by agreement and combination between competitors.
      3. Inherent limitation because of the unnecessary expenses of competition in advertising; duplication of plant and services.
      4. Ultimate limitation claimed by some, who point out the general waste and social loss resulting from unregulated competition. This loss is illustrated by over-production, unequal, “unfair” and cut-throat competition.
  1. Combination in business and industry.
    (Note — Monopolistic control may be obtained by forcing competitors out of business either by underselling or by taking them into a combination. The latter form has been the more prominent in recent years.)
    1. The movement toward combination in recent years.
      1. Causes of movement toward combination. (See above.)
      2. Forms of combination.
        1. The selling agreement.
        2. The pool.
        3. The trust.
        4. The holding company.
        5. The giant (unified) corporation.
      3. To what extent has the movement toward combination been a natural one and to what extent a forced one?
    2. Advantages of combination.
      1. General advantages of large-scale production. (Cf. above.)
      2. Monopolistic or semi-monopolistic advantages due to limitation of competition and partial or complete control of prices and markets through the complete or partial limitation of the supply of the monopolized commodity.
    3. Disadvantages of combination.
      1. Difficulty of adequate supervision and control.
      2. Tendency toward loss of personal initiative among employees.
      3. Burden of uneconomical charges carried (e.g., promotors’ profits, “water” of various types, etc.).
  1. Competition versus combination in relation to the consumer
    1. Productive advantages of combinations in certain industries and avoidance of competitive charges make possible a lowering of price to consumers.
    2. If a combination secures a monopolistic or semi-monopolistic position extortionate prices may be charged. Thus competitive charges may be in some cases lower and in some cases higher than those of a combination. The problem is: How may the advantages of large-scale production be secured without placing unregulated monopolistic power in the hands of combinations? Governmental action has been found necessary to secure this.
  2. The attitude of the state toward combinations.
    1. The historical development of governmental policy.
      1. The early attempts to enforce competition and to prohibit combination. Anti-trust laws: the Sherman Act, 1890, prohibiting monopolies and combinations “in restraint of trade.”
      2. The recognition of the necessity of permitting combination in certain fields; the problem of regulating combination.
    2. The present situation in the United States.
      1. The Clayton Act; reenforces the Sherman Act and makes illegal
        1. Intercorporate stockholding when the effect may be to lessen competition.
        2. Interlocking directorates.
        3. Discriminatory trade practices.
      2. Federal Trade Commission; vested with wide powers of investigation and supervision.
  1. Proposed solutions of the Trust problem.
    1. Regulatory remedies.
      1. Full publicity.
      2. Strict prohibition of unfair competition.
      3. Prevention of monopolistic practices.
      4. Federal incorporation.
      5. Strict regulation by government commissions.
    2. Remedies involving greater changes in the industrial system. (Government ownership, and socialistic and syndicalistic proposals are discussed below.)

4. Problems connected with the distribution of the annual social income.
King, Wealth and Income of the People of the United States, 154-167; Ely, Outlines of Economics, 384-405; Seager, Chap. XI; Seligman, 352-431; Clay, 279-354. See Appendix, III, 5, (p. 147).

  1. General statement of the problem. The total volume of goods produced each year constitutes an annual flow of consumable commodities and services which are apportioned among the agents of production. A share goes to the owners of the natural agents, a share to the owners of capital, a share to the laborers, and a share to the business organizers of production — the entrepreneurs. Money income is merely a claim to a share in the distribution of commodities and services which constitute the real income of an individual or a group. Many of the current economic problems arise from disputes concerning the right of certain of the agents of production to shares in this distribution, and from attempts of the different agents to increase their own shares. As the organizing factor in production the business enterpriser evaluates the services rendered by each of the other factors. Payment of the shares in distribution to the other agents is made through him. The fundamental question in distribution is: What determines the amount the business enterpriser must pay to each of the other agents and the amount he may keep for himself?
  2. Briefly stated, the following are the principles on which distribution takes place today:
    1. The owners of the natural agents of production receive a share in the social income which is called rent. The amount of the rent paid the owner of any particular piece of land depends upon the relative advantage resulting from the utilization of that piece, as compared with others. This differential advantage may be due to
      1. Favorable location.
      2. Fertility (or richness, as in the case of mines). Payment to the owners of these natural agents is based upon the fact of possession. The question as to whether the owner inherited the site, bought it when it was worth little and held it till its value increased, or bought it at its present value with money earned by his own labor has nothing to do with his receipt of a share in the social income, under the present distributive system.
    1. Interest. The owners of capital receive a return which is called interest. The amount of interest paid at any time for the use of a given amount of capital depends upon the amount of available capital in existence and upon the strength of the demand for the use of it. Business men are willing to pay for the capital borrowed because, by the use of capital, the productiveness of labor is increased (e.g., a man with a plough is more effective in tilling the soil than a man with a pointed stick). It is believed that the stimulus of interest is necessary in order to promote saving. Interest is paid to the owner of capital irrespective of the means by which he may have acquired ownership, whether by personal abstinence, inheritance, gift, or other means.
    2. Wages. The share of the annual income paid for labor, physical or mental, is called wages. In general, those who receive this form of income may be divided into six non-competing groups, set off from each other by differences of education and training, environmental differences, and differences of inborn gifts:
      1. Unskilled day laborers.
      2. Semi-skilled workers.
      3. Skilled workmen.
      4. Clerical workers.
      5. Professional workers.
      6. Salaried business managers.

Within each of these groups wages tend to a rough equality. The wage received by an individual within any group is fixed, in general, somewhere between a lower limit set by the standard of living (a standard of bare physical subsistence in the lowest group) and an upper limit determined by the relative degree of efficiency or indispensability of the labor constituting that group. This degree of indispensability will depend upon his productive ability, upon the number of workers within the group of equal productive ability, and upon the character of the demand for workers of that particular type. The point at which wages will be fixed between these two limits is determined by the relative bargaining power of employers and workers.

    1. Profits. The share in income which the business enterpriser receives is called profits. It is a residual share, left over after the other agents of production have been paid. Profits vary greatly in amount depending upon the degree of risk undertaken, the extent to which competition or monopoly operates in a given industry, and the degree of exceptional efficiency found in a given individual. Competitive profits tend to disappear, insofar as true competition operates, but profits based upon a monopolistic advantage do not.
      Summary. The distribution of the annual social income today is thus, in general, based upon the strategic strength of the position occupied by the owners of the various agents of production. Those individuals or groups which are in a relatively strong position, whose services are indispensable, (or relatively so) for any one of a number of reasons, secure a relatively high return. Those whose services are less indispensable, due to weaker demand for their products, greater number of competitors, lower efficiency, receive a lower return. The degree of indispensability, it is important to note, may depend upon personal efficiency, or upon any one of a number of other factors.
  1. Arguments advanced to justify the present distributive system.
    1. Distribution under the present system is based upon competitive efficiency. Society gains by giving high prizes to the highly efficient.
    2. Inequalities of capacity must be recognized; corresponding inequalities of reward are justified.
    3. The various distributive shares at present criticized, such as interest, rent, profits, high salaries, are necessary to secure the services called forth — thrift necessary for accumulation of capital, effective use of land, and high business ability.
    4. Such payments as do not represent services (as rent) are necessarily involved in the retention of the system of private property, and are therefore legally and economically justifiable.
  1. Arguments advanced against the present system of distribution.
    1. Distribution today is based chiefly upon the power to take, and only secondarily upon productive efficiency. Accordingly not all shares in distribution serve as stimuli to production.
    2. Men would save their surplus money, use their land effectively, and develop their individual capacities to the full without the bribe of a special pecuniary reward.
    3. Rent, in particular, does not arise as a result of personal effort and therefore should belong to the community as a whole.
    4. The stimulus of profits has perverted business enterprise from the production of commodities as the chief end to that of profit-making, with a consequent loss to the consumers. Greater profits may be made in some cases by limiting production than by increasing production.
  1. Proposed changes in the system of distribution.
    *Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, 86-110.
    1. Continuance of present system, insofar as payments are based upon efficiency and productive ability, but with state appropriation of unearned increments; limitation of great fortunes and of rights of inheritance; the use of taxation as a means of correcting distributive injustice.
    2. [Socialistic and communistic ideals. (See below, p. 94.)
      1. Distribution on the basis of need; i.e., approximately equal distribution, irrespective of work performed.
      2. Distribution on the basis of sacrifice; payment based on irksomeness of various occupations.]

5. The problem of control in industry.

  1. [The present system of control and management in industry: a brief restatement.
    1. Chief characteristics of modern system
      1. The system of private property.
      2. The four-fold division of function in production.
      3. The status, and degree of initiative, responsibility and control resting in each of the agents of production.
      4. The importance of large-scale industry today.
    2. Advantages claimed for the present system of management.
      1. Strong and efficient leaders reach the top and exercise power.
      2. Scope given for initiative and individual ability.
      3. Quantity production secured.
      4. Prices kept down by rigorous competition for markets.
      5. Compatible with human nature; strong instincts of acquisitiveness and pugnacity satisfied in a competitive system based on private property and survival of the strongest.
    3. Defects charged to the present system.
      1. Characterized by inefficiency in production.
        1. Duplication of services; competitive waste.
        2. Business side of industry over-developed at expense of productive efficiency; production subordinated to profits.
      2. Chaotic system of distribution; lack of order and system in marketing organization.
      3. Periodic breakdowns (financial panics and business depressions) constitute a fundamental weakness.
      4. Many individuals performing no useful service continue to share in the social income, while many productive workers continue to live in poverty.
      5. An autocratic rather than a democratic form of government exists in industry.
      6. Continual labor unrest affords evidence that the present industrial system does violence to human nature.
  1. Proposed solutions of the problem of industrial control.
    1. Competitive individualism: continuance of the nineteenth century system without state interference.
      1. Conditions involved in this type of solution.
        1. Maintenance of full private property rights.
        2. Restoration of complete freedom of competition.
        3. Restoration and maintenance of individual bargaining; denial of right of collective bargaining; refusal to recognize labor organizations.
      2. Advantages claimed for competitive individualism. (Cf. above.)
      3. Difficulties involved in this solution. (Cf. above.)
        1. Recent changes in industrial structure, type and size of modern industrial unit, development of corporate form of organization, large scale enterprise, render impossible the maintenance of such a system.
        2. Return to this individualistic system impossible in view of present unrest.
    2. Continuance of present system of control; amelioration of labor conditions and limited degree of regulation of industry by the State.
      Object: The maintenance of the advantages of the present competitive system and the avoidance of competitive excesses by state protection of labor and state regulation of competition and monopoly. ‘The New Freedom.’
    3. Continuance of present system of management with collective bargaining in matters of wages, hours, and general conditions of employment.
      1. Collective bargaining in the organized trades today. (Cf . above.)
      2. Trade union control under this system.
        1. Negative character of trade union control; union rules and regulations necessarily restrictive, in that direct and positive control is exercised by the employer.
        2. This control, though negative, constitutes an important factor in the management of industry today.
      3. Inability of trade unions and industrial unions as at present organized to take over more effective control.
        1. Faulty organization; jurisdictional disputes.
        2. Lack of effective coordination between unions.
        3. Lack of adequate leadership.
        4. Technical experts and managers not included in union organization.
        5. The difficulty of securing capital.]
    4. Full collective bargaining, with a share in control vested in labor; the English program.
      *Hamilton, 716-729; Memorandum of the Industrial Situation after the War, (Garton Foundation), 158-175.

      1. Recognition and encouragement by the State of organization on the part of employers and workers.
      2. The National Industrial Council: a national council to secure joint action between representative organizations of employers and workers, prevent and adjust industrial disputes, and to serve as official consultative authority to the government upon industrial relations.
      3. Machinery of organization within each industry. The Whitley scheme.
        1. Joint Standing Industrial Councils (National) composed of representatives of employers and employed in each industry.
        2. District Councils: representative of trade unions and employers’ associations in each district.
        3. Works Committees: representative of management and workers in particular plants.
      4. Functions of Works Committees, District Councils and National Councils.
        1. To deal with questions of hours, wages and conditions of employment.
        2. To provide security and continuity of earnings and employment.
        3. To provide for technical education, training, and industrial research.
        4. To deal with proposed legislation affecting the industry.
      5. The advantages and limitations of the Whitley Plan and similar proposals: attitude of organized labor.
    5. The Cooperative system.
      Seager, Chap. XXXI; S. and B. Webb, A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain, 248-263.

      1. The object of cooperation: the elimination of the managing employer and of private profits; general policy settled and risks assumed by cooperators as a body; ownership and control vested in a body of cooperating equals.
      2. Cooperation in retail and wholesale trading; success of the Rochdale stores and the Schulze-Delitzsch societies.
      3. Cooperation in production. Comparative lack of success in this field.
        1. Character of operations fundamentally different from those of retail trading and banking.
        2. Difficulty of carrying on production on large scale, due to lack of capital.
        3. Failure to secure capable leaders.
      4. Cooperative Credit Societies.
    6. Government ownership of great public service industries (nationalization); control by joint boards representing workers, managers, and public.
      1. The proposed organization of the English coal mining industry; the Sankey Report.
        *Coal Industry Commission Act, 1919 Second Stage, Reports, 5-26.

        1. State purchase of coal royalties and coal mines.
        2. Control by councils of workers, consumers and technical experts, under the general supervision of a Ministry of Mines; the National Mining Council, District Mining Councils, and Local Mining Councils.
      2. The Plumb Plan for railroad re-organization in the U.S. [Plumb Plan Weekly: Vol. I, No. 1; Vol. I, No. 2; Vol. I, No. 3; Vol. I, No. 4; Vol. I, No. 5; Vol. I, No. 6; Vol. I, No. 8; Vol. I, No. 9]
        *The Sims Bill. [Representative Thetus Sims of Tennessee was the ranking Democrat of the House Interstate Commerce Committee]

        1. Government purchase of all railroad systems, on basis of capital invested.
        2. Administration.
          1. Operation of roads by a board of fifteen directors, five representing the public, five the managers, five the classified employees.
          2. Rate-making by Interstate Commerce Commission.
        3. Division of surplus between government and employees, provided that if surplus exceeds a certain percentage of the operating revenues, rates must be reduced; deficits to be met by government.
      3. The present status of the Sankey scheme and the Plumb Plan. Significance of these proposals.
    7. Collectivism: ownership and control of all industrial undertakings by the state; State Socialism.
      *Hamilton, 847-860; *Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, 1-31; Ogg, Economic Development of Modern Europe, 477-567; Gide and Rist, History of Economic Doctrines, 407-479.

      1. The general principles of Socialism.
        1. Abolition of private property in the means of production (land and capital), with retention of private property in articles of personal use. Collective (State) ownership of means of production.
        2. Administration of collectively owned industrial system through a democratic political organization.
        3. Abolition of wage system as at present constituted.
      2. The basic doctrines of Marxian Socialism.
        1. The materialistic interpretation of history. All human phenomena can be explained in terms of the underlying material facts of life. Irresistible economic forces shape human history.
        2. The law of the concentration of capital. Capitalistic undertakings tend to become larger and larger; small competitive enterprises tend to disappear, and to be replaced by great trusts.
        3. The class war. Increasing concentration of capital leads to division of society into two great classes, the capitalist class and the wage-earning class, bourgeoisie and proletariat. Between these two classes a struggle will go on until all wage earners combine, locally, nationally and internationally, and take over the ownership and control of land and capital for the common good. View of Marx that this process of concentration of capital, increasing misery, class war and ultimate social control is natural and inevitable, a working out of irresistible economic forces. The Communist Manifesto. The great influence of Marx on socialist thought.
      3. Other types of socialistic doctrine; the Fabian policy of securing reforms and collective ownership gradually, by the use of constitutional methods; the Socialist Party in politics.
      4. The Socialist program today; arguments advanced for a Socialistic organization of industry, and objections to it.
    8. Syndicalism: ownership and control by the workers in each industry. (See above: The Industrial Workers of the World.)
      Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, 56-85; Kirkaldy, Economics and Syndicalism; Gide and Rist, 479-483; Brissenden, The I.W.W., 155-177, 259-282.

      1. General principles of syndicalism.
        1. Organization of industry by the workers as producers, not as consumers. The industry as the unit of ownership and control; ownership by organized labor.
        2. Substitution of industrial (direct) action for political action; boycott, union label, strike, and sabotage. The general strike the chief weapon.
        3. Destruction of the state.
      2. Syndicalism in practice.
        1. French syndicalism: The C.G.T.
        2. [American syndicalism: The I.W.W] (See iv below.)
      3. Syndicalism as a working principle of industrial organization; advantages claimed for it and objections to it.
      4. The Industrial Workers of the World.
        C. H. Parker, The Casual Laborer.

        1. Their principles.
          1. Class conflict. “The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. Between these two classes a struggle must go on until the workers of the world organize as a class, take possession of the earth and the machinery of production, and abolish the wage system”: Preamble of the I.W.W. Constitution.
          2. Abolition of the wage system.
          3. Organization on industrial instead of craft lines.
            1. The doctrine of working class solidarity, “One Big Union.”
            2. The organization of the unskilled together with the skilled; opposition to labor aristocracy.
          4. Accomplishment of ends by direct industrial action.
            [Note: A seceding wing of the Industrial Workers of the World (Detroit Branch) favors political action, but the dominant group (Chicago Branch) disavows political organization.]
          5. Ultimate complete control of the industrial system by the workers; control of the political system will necessarily accompany industrial control.
        1. The structure of I.W.W.
          1. The local industrial union.
          2. The District Industrial Council.
          3. The International Industrial Department.
          4. The General Executive Board.
            1. Power originally strongly centralized in the Executive Board.
            2. The movement toward decentralization; present weakness of the central authority.
        2. Method and tactics of the I.W.W.
          1. Direct action; various forms of direct action; sabotage.
          2. Free speech fights as means of propaganda.
          3. The general strike.
        3. The I.W.W. today.
          1. Membership.
            1. Confined to textile, steel, lumber, mining, farming, railroad construction and marine transportation industries.
            2. Majority of members migratory unskilled workers; a radical, militant, relatively unstable group recruited from industries characterized by irregularity of employment and bad working conditions.
            3. Numerical strength: not over 60,000 members at present. Actual influence not measured by paid-up membership.
          2. The I.W.W. as a social phenomenon; conditions and causes of its existence.
          3. Weaknesses of the I.W.W.
            1. Inability to maintain stable membership.
            2. Organic weaknesses due to internal conflict.
              1. Centralization of power versus decentralization.
              2. Constructive industrial unionism versus the revolutionary ideal of uncontrolled agitation, “guerilla” warfare against authority.
            3. Financial weakness.
            4. Membership unfitted for constructive endeavor.
          4. The future of industrial unionism in the United States; the agitation for industrial unionism in the A.F. of L.; dual unionism versus “boring from within.”
    1. Guild Socialism: a compromise type of organization, standing between collectivism and syndicalism.
      *Russell, 80-85; G.D.H. Cole, Self Government in Industry; S.G. Hobson, Guild Principles in War and Peace; *Hamilton, 860-870, G.D.H. Cole, Guild Socialism, 187-195.

      1. General principles of guild organization.
        1. Ownership of the means of production by the State, as trustees for the community.
        2. Management of industrial undertakings by guilds or workers in each industry, acting also as trustees for the community; payment of tax or rent to State.
        3. The Guild Congress: a body consisting of representatives of all National Guilds, and having supreme authority in industrial matters.
        4. Parliament to retain supreme authority in political matters; Parliament to represent consumers.
        5. Joint Committee of Parliament and Guild Congress to deal with conflicts arising between the two bodies; Joint Committee to reconcile interests of producers and consumers.
        6. Adjustment of prices by Joint Committee.
        7. Adjustment of pay within each industry by the National Guild controlling that industry.
      2. Guild socialism as a possible working principle; advantages claimed for it; objections to it.

Source: Columbia University. Introduction to Contemporary Civilization — A Syllabus, (Third edition, 1921), pp. 70-96.

Image Source: Cover of Labor Problems and Labor Legislation by John Bertram Andrews (1919).

 

 

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Philosophy Socialism

Harvard. Final examination for Ethics of the Social Questions. Peabody, 1905-1906

 

 

In 1905-06 Francis Greenwood Peabody’s popular course on the ethics of the social questions was listed for the first time as one of the course offerings in a new sub-departmental unit “Social Ethics” within the Philosophy Department. In previous years the course was listed as “Philosophy 5”. It was a relatively popular field chosen for economics Ph.D. general examinations.

More about Professor Peabody can be found in the earlier post for 1902-03 together with the final examination questions from that year. Here the course description and exam from 1904-05. Readings and final exam for social ethics in 1906-07.

A fully linked transcription of Peabody’s own short bibliography of social ethics published in 1910 is also of interest.

Note: the items cited in the exam are found in the original printed exam. Links to the corresponding passages have been added.

__________________________

A Peek into Likely Course Content 

Cf. Francis Greenwood Peabody’s The Approach to the Social Question (New York: Macmillan, 1912). “The substance of this volume was given as the Earle Lectures at the Pacific Theological Seminary in 1907.”

__________________________

Course Enrollment
1905-06

Social Ethics 1 2hf. Professor Peabody and Dr. Rogers. — Ethics of the Social Questions. The problems of Poor-Relief, the Family, Temperance, and various phases of the Labor Question, in the light of ethical theory. Lectures, special researches, and prescribed reading. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10.

Total 165: 5 Graduates, 24 Seniors, 59 Juniors, 50 Sophomores, 2 Freshmen, 11 Divinity, 14 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1905-1906, p. 75.

__________________________

SOCIAL ETHICS 12
Year-end Exam, 1905-06

This paper should be considered as a whole. The time should not be exhausted in answering a few questions, but such limits should be given to each answer as will permit the answering of all the questions in the time assigned.

  1. The place in the ethics of industry of :—
    The Civic Federation.
    Mundella.
    Conseils de Prud’hommes.
    Employers’ Associations. (Adams and Sumner, page 279.)
  2. The Social-Democratic Party in Germany; its history and principles.
  3. Economic and ethical criticisms on the programme of Revolutionary Socialism.
  4. “The labor movement in America already exhibits a manifest tendency in the same direction [towards organized socialism] in which it moves in older countries.” (Sombart, Sozialismus und sozialistische Bewegung, s. 249.) How far is this judgment justified by the history of Collectivism, and by the present attitude of Tradesunionism [sic], in the United States?
  5. Industrial education, in its relation to child-labor and to economic efficiency. (Lecture of R. A. Woods.)
  6. The methods and policies of labor-organization in the United States. (Adams and Sumner, pages 245 ff.)
  7. “Have the conditions of employment and the material comfort of the working classes really improved since the introduction of the factory system?” (Adams and Sumner, page 502.) The answer of these authors to their own question, and some of the evidence which they cite.
  8. Compare, in their importance for the ethics of industry, the system of profit-sharing and the system of industrial partnership.
  9. “Trade-agreements,” considered in their relations to the rights of the people.
  10. The relation of the drink-habit in the United States to poverty and crime; and the economic forces now operating for temperance, (“The Liquor Problem,” Chapter IV, pages 108-134.)

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers 1873-1915. Box 8, Bound volume: Examination Papers, 1906-07; Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics,…,Music in Harvard College (June, 1906), p. 59.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Social Work Socialism

Harvard. Readings and final exam for social ethics. Peabody, 1906-07

The field of social ethics was taught by the Plummer Professor of Christian Morals and then Dean of the Harvard Divinity School, Francis Greenwood Peabody. It was a rather popular secondary field chosen for the graduate general examination by economics graduate students in the early 20th century.  In the spectrum of individualism through socialism, applied social ethics (poor-relief, family, temperance, and “the labor question”) were imported from philosophical/theological studies.

__________________________

Building blocks for Peabody’s course

Peabody’s short bibliography on the Ethics of Social Questions published in 1910.

Francis Greenwood Peabody. The Approach to the Social Question. New York: Macmillan, 1912. “The substance of this volume was given as the Earle Lectures at the Pacific Theological Seminary in 1907.”

__________________________

Course Enrollment
1906-07

Social Ethics 1. Professor Peabody and Dr. Rogers. — Social Ethics. The problems of Poor-Relief, the Family, Temperance, and various phases of the Labor Question, in the light of ethical theory.

Total 175: 6 Graduates, 41 Seniors, 54 Juniors, 50 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 23 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1906-1907, p. 72

__________________________

Thick Course Description
1906-07

  1. Social Ethics . — The problems of Poor-Relief, the Family, Temperance, and various phases of the Labor Question, in the light of ethical theory. Lectures, special researches, and prescribed reading. Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Professor Peabody and Dr. Rogers.

This course is an application of ethical theory to the social problems of the present day. It is to be distinguished from economic courses dealing with similar subjects by the emphasis laid on the moral aspects of the Social Question and on the philosophy of society involved. Its introduction discusses various theories of Ethics and the nature and relations of the Moral Ideal [required reading from Mackenzie’s Introduction to Social Philosophy, and Muirhead’s Elements of Ethics]. The course then considers the ethics of the family [required reading from Spencer’s Principles of Sociology (Volume 1; Volume 2; Volume 3)]; the ethics of poor-relief [required reading from Charles Booth’s Life and Labor of the People (links below)]; the ethics of the labor question [required reading from J. A. Hobson’s The Social Problem, Schäffle’s The Quintessence of Socialism, Adams and Sumner, Labor Problems]; and the ethics of the drink question [required reading from The Liquor Problem; a Summary of Investigations]. In addition to lectures and required reading two special and detailed reports are made by each student, based as far as possible on personal research and observation of scientific methods in poor-relief and industrial reform. These researches are arranged in consultation with the instructor or his assistant; and an important feature of the course is the suggestion and direction of such personal investigation, and the provision to each student of special literature or opportunities for observation.

            Rooms are expressly assigned for the convenience of students of Social Ethics, on the second floor of Emerson Hall, including a large lecture room, a seminary-room, a conference-room, a library, and two rooms occupied by the Social Museum. The Library of 1500 volumes is a special collection for the use of students of Social Ethics, with conveniences for study and research. The Social Museum is a collection of graphical material, illustrating by photographs, models, diagrams, and charts, many movements of social welfare and industrial progress.

Source: Announcement of the Divinity School of Harvard University, 1906-07, p. 22.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Charles Booth’s Life and Labor of the People:

(Original) Volume I, East London;
(Original) Volume II, London;
(Original) Appendix to Volume II;
Note: the previous three original volumes were re-printed as four volumes that then were followed by
Volume V, Population Classified by Trades;
Volume VI, Population Classified by Trades (cont.);
Volume VII, Population Classified by Trades;
Volume VIII, Population Classified by Trades (cont.);
Volume IX, Comparisons, Survey and Conclusions.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Note: Besides the changes in course number, a few minor changes in the course description from (Philosophy 5) 1902-03  Also in the course description Philosophy 5 (1904-05).

___________________________

SOCIAL ETHICS 1
Year-end Examination 1906-07

This paper should be considered as a whole. The time should not be exhausted in answering a few questions, but such limits should be given to each answer as will permit the answering of all the questions in the time assigned.

  1. Explain the significance of the titles:— “Past and Present” [by Thomas Carlyle]; “Unto this Last” [by John Ruskin]; and comment on the teachings involved.
  2. Statistics of wage-loss, employer’s loss, and assistance to employees, in the United States (1881-1900); and their lessons.
  3. The tendencies in contemporary life which appear to the scientific socialist to encourage his faith; with comments.
  4. “The normal relation of the antithesis of which I spoke,” [Socialism and Individualism, Economic and Moral] “is that of cross-correspondence”? (Bosanquet, Civilization of Christendom, p. 316). Comment on this suggestion.
  5. The effect of the growth of trade-unionism on the economic theory of wages. ( A. [Robert Archey] Woods.) [Probably Chapter 1 “The Labor Movement” in Woods’ English Social Movements (2nd ed., 1895), pp. 1-37.]
  6. Distinguish Arbitration, Conciliation, and Coöperation, and indicate the place of each in the Ethics of the Labor Question.
  7. Welfare work at Anzin, and the limitations of its usefulness.
  8. Employer’s Liability, Workmen’s Compensation Acts, and the social philosophy involved. (Adams and Sumner, pp. 478-488.)
  9. Distinguish “Profit-sharing,” “Gain-sharing,” and “Industrial Partnership,” and describe the method undertaken by the United States Steel Corporation.
  10. Compare the operation of the South Carolina liquor-law with that of the Scandinavian System. (The Liquor Problem, pp. 151-156.)

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers 1873-1915. Box 8, Bound volume: Examination Papers, 1906-07; Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics,…,Music in Harvard College (June, 1907), p. 59.

Image Source: Harvard University Archives.  Francis Greenwood Peabody [photographic portrait, ca. 1900], Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.