W. EwiNG. SNOW. — See Agriculture in vol. i. p. 40*.
SOCIABILITY.— See Character of Christ in vol. i. p. 289 fl".
SOCIALISM.— 1. Definition, etc.— 'The watch- word of the Socialist is Co-operation ; the watch- Avord of the anti-Socialist is Competition. Any one who recognizes the principle of Co-operation as a stronger and truer principle than that of Competi- tion, has a right to the honour or the disgrace of being called a Socialist.' This definition was written by Frederic Denison Maurice in the first of a series of Tracts on Christian Socialism, which Avas published in 1849. Maurice, Kingsley, and T. Hughes deliberately adopted the word ' Socialist ' for the movement Avhich they founded, and in- curred, as Hughes has testified, much ' anger and bitterness ' as a result ; but, since then, the Socialist idea has had a secure place in the specu- lations and activities of modern Christianity. It is evident, hoAvever, that Socialism so defined is a much broader thing than the State Socialism of economic theory, or than that of the Social Demo- cratic parties of contemporary politics. Fifty years ago, indeed, many men did regard competition as a stronger and truer principle tlian co-operation ; and Socialism (in Maurice's sense) has had an easy vic- tory over the laissez-faire Individualism Avliich Avas dominant in the political economy of his day ; in this sense the famous saying is true that ' We are all Socialists noAv.' But a man may be against Individualism or Anarchism, and to that extent a Socialist, and yet may be opposed to the current con- ceptions both of economic and political Socialism; he may possibly regard the groAvth of municipal undertakings Avith alarm, and he may even look, as Thomas Carlyle did, to the ' strong man,' and not to the democracy, for deliverance from the evils of insufficiently restricted competition.
Yet general principles are of more importance than economic theories Avhich must necessarily shift Avith clianging conditions of life ; and Social- ism, defined as the principle of felloAvship, may safely claim to be an integral part of Christi- anity, Avorking itself out in one age through feudalism and canon laAV, in another through re- presentative government and factory legislation, and tending, through the improvement of indi- A'idual character, to the ideal state. That ideal state might prove to be either socialist or anarchist, or to be (as society noAv is) someAvhere between these two extremes ; for, indeed, if men Avere per- fect, the machinery of society would be a matter of indifi'erence. It is because men are imperfect that the economic and jaolitical machinery is a matter of urgent importance. Here ' Socialism,' as an active Christian principle, comes in ; for though Christians must ahvays claim the supreme importance of personal regeneration, as against those Avho think that society can be made perfect by the mere operation of the State, it must also be admitted tliat a religion which attempts to deal only Avith the individual, and leaves society to its own devices and the laAvs of supply and demand, is untrue to itself, and is doomed to failure. Indi- A'idual character cannot be regenerated Avhile it is being destroyed by bad housing, or by intemper- ance, or by commercial selfishness and dishonesty,
644
SOCIALISM
SOCIALISM
or while multitudes are ' submerged' and 'sweated.' Such things as these are therefoi'e the immediate concern of the Christian ; and far more so the great causes — economic, political, ethical — which lie behind them. Now it is undeniable that, for a considerable jjeriod before Maurice wrote, the ' religious world ' as a Avhole had ignored this truth, and had neglected its social duty to the weak and oppressed, — a neglect of which the results are still painfully evident to-day. There had indeed always existed a better tradition : the Quakers * had been a powerful leaven of com- mercial morality ; Wilberforce and his friends had, after a protracted battle of 20 years, conquered Individualism in the interests of the black slaves ; Shaftesbury (a Conservative in politics) had already won a signal victory over the even more horrible ' white slavery ' that went on in English factories. Both these men were devoted religious leaders : but they were not the ' religious world ' ; hence the protest of the Christian Socialists, — a protest which has really changed the face of British Christendom.
The Maurician definition of Socialism is thus a very real one, and is practical as well as funda- mental. The Christian men who opposed Shaftes- bury were Individualists ; they left society to the laws of supi^ly and demand — in other words, to competition ; they regarded the aim of Chris- tianity as the salvation of individuals — or perhaps of a small minority of the elect, for Calvinism was in truth the theological parent of this Individual- ism. If Socialism be regarded broadly as the anti- thesis of Individualism, as a theory of life and not only of economics, then it is true that the Chris- tian Socialists won the day and now hold the field. It will clear the ground if we give here a definition of Bishop Westcott in which Maurice's words are repeated and expanded :
' The term Socialism has been discredited by its connexion with many extravagant and revolutionary schemes, but it is a term which needs to be claimed for nobler uses. It has no necessary affinity with any forms of violence, or confiscation, or class selfishness, or financial arrangement. 1 shall therefore venture to employ it apart from its historical associations as describing a theory of life, and not only a theory of economics. In this sense Socialism is the opposite of Individualism, and it is by contrast with Individualism that the true character of Socialism can best be discerned. Individualism and Socialism correspond with opposite views of humanity. Individualism regards humanity as made up of disconnected or warring atoms ; Socialism regards it as an organic whole, a vital unity formed by the combination of contributory members mutually interdependent.