The Daily Worker Newspaper, September 4, 1926, Page 14

By ARTHUR W. CALHOUN, OW we come to a book that some of the comrades have stigmatized as the gospel of class collaboration. You won’t know what to say about that till you have read the book, but sup- pose that as you go you keep in mind three questions: (1) Did the authors | intend class collaboration? (2) Would the book tend toward class collabora- tion if its teachings were generally ac- cepted? (3) Can we make any sound use of. the material in it? It may sometimes happen that the same book can be used as a text-book in class oollaboratioa or as a text-book in.class struggle, according to the disposition of the students and teachers. The book in question is Hamilton & May’s “Control of Wages,” one of the mumbers on the “Workers’ Bookshelf” of the Workers’ Education Bureau. As you read the first two or three chapters see whether you can find any- thing to explain the new interest in economics, both on the part of busi- ness interests and on the part of la- bor. How much hinges on the ques- tion whether labor is a commodity or not? How does the traditiona] busi- hess view about wages differ from the labor and “Social” views? What mo- tives do you detect in the orthodox explanations of why wages are what they are? What difference does it make wheiher there are any natural laws determining wage levels? In so far as there are such laws, where must we look for them? Perhaps it will appear as a result of this study that labor’s choice is between trying to make itself a more valuable com- modity and trying to get rid of the wege system. As you proceed with chapters IV and V, try to get a clear picture of the possible sources from which the workers might possibly gain wage in- crements. Supposing it were possible to pare away unnecessary jacome of property and privilege to the limit, lioW nearly would the needs of labor be met? You may not like the author’s emphasis on the smaliness of the tota) amount available for annexation; but remember what we said in an earlier number: that even in. the United States, the richest country in the world, the total annual product is at best barely sufficient to give the whole population a decent living even if all injustice in apportionment were done | away with. Now why: has labor been more inter- | ested in attempts to change the dis-| tribution of wealth than in efforts to increase production? Under what con- ditions might mMbor safely face the problem of efficiency of production? To what extent have labor and the technicians common interests as against management and the property holders? Assuming that labor could in various ways promote increase »f industvial efficiency, do yon find that fact any guarantee that the ben- efits will accrue to labor? These ques- tions are of practical significance. A year ago the B. & O, plan was a flow- ery gospel. Today it is beginning to sound like a battleground. It may turn out that experimenis with union- management co-operation will put a new edge on the class struggle in the form of a battle over the fruits. - When you come to chapters VI and VIf of Hamilton and May you face the problem of a general strategy of the economic system. Is it necessary for labor to have a general economic phil- osophy? How would you character- ize the reorganization contemplated by the authors? Is it reasonable to expect a rational, orderly solution along logical lines? Would labor dom- ination mean an automatic end of economic injustice? In chapters VIII, TX and X we ar rive at a theory of wages. We see that it is necessary to figure in not merely the amount of money in the pay envelope, but also what the money will buy, and besides this we need to count the things the worker gets with. out paying the bill out of his own pocket. Are free schools, libraries, etc., under capitalism a benefit to the worker? How much would a Commu- nist society increase the number of services furnished free to the com- munity? How would it change their nature? After you have taken éverything about the workers’ income into ac- count, sum up in one sentence the wage theory that emerges, What use an you make of such a theory by way of propaganda? Could you apply it effectively to the workers’ struggle in & particular industry? Then come chapters XI and XU, which offer an approach to a policy for labor. What sort of. internal and external adjustments would organized labor have to undertake in order to get itself into a position to act ad- vantageously on the analysis provided in this book? How far can inventive and constructive functions be per- formed by a militant labor organiza- tion? How would you decide in a given case how much emphasig to put on, getting something away from the employer as compared with promoting an increase of efficiency? How much weight would you give to arguments about “fairness,” “right,” “justice”? What would you say to the authors’ argument for reform as contrasted with revolution? Is their viewpoint a labor viewpoint? On the home stretch, through chap (GFER visiing PLATTSBURG, MR.QREEN JOINS Wi CAL COOLIDGE AND BIG PAZ IN PRAISING MILITARISM x ters XII-XV, ask yourself finally whether this book is a treatise on class collaboration. How much of a clue would it give to the sort of analy slg of economie function necessary une der a workers’ commonwealth? What are the chances of the workers going in for production? If they do, will their co-operation with man allay the class conflict pr will it open up new things to quarrel about? Some would say that the questions raised in the reading of this book would give a snuffictent outline for a complete analysis of the economic sys- tem. Has the book modified your no- tions im any respect? Has it given you any new weapons for your fight? To whom would you recommend the book? WEEKLY PICTURE. SUMMARY Ae. esssneeusssnstnsesssestsnsnsenunsnenttnieneneenesen “MOANA”—See it! “VARIETY”—"Smaxico” says “Yee—By all means!” “THE SON OF THE SHIEK”—Rudolph Valentino’s last Picture. If you have never seen him—go. (At the TIVOLI THMATHR), “LA BOHEME”—A. S, praises it highly. (At the CAPITOL), “PADLOCKED*—G, W. says “too much morals” “THE BAT”—Spooks — detectives — crooks — bloote, blooie. “MANTRAP”"—@. W. gives it some good points ,; « « Ernest Torrence among them, “THE ROAD TO MANDALAY”—Not “BATTLING BUTLER”—Just so-so, according to G. W. “UP IN MABEL’S ROOM"—Men will like it. “SENOR DAREDEVIL”—Save your money. NOTE: Only Chicago theaters showing a program for week ted. Pictures of current week changed Monday. ee ae A WEEK IN CARTOONS _ By M. P. Bales AH! THIS 1¢ “ CHING CHING, CHINAMAN, SETIN ON A RAIL —~— » PINES AND THE! @ ATION TO THE US. | WHAT ATRE YOU ge DOING ABOUT IT, ee MR.LEMIS ¢ OO a>