Categories
Columbia Socialism Syllabus

Columbia. Communistic and Socialistic Theories. Course Outline. J. B. Clark, 1908

 

 

The artifact transcribed for this posting consists of two pages of handwritten notes for a course that was regularly offered by John Bates Clark on socialist and communist economic theories. An earlier post included an essay written by Clark in 1879 on meanings of socialism

This is the 1000th artifact transcribed for Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. 

_______________________

ECONOMICS 109 — Communistic and Socialistic Theories. Professor CLARK.
Tu. and Th. at 2.30, first half-year. 406 L.

This course studies the theories of St. Simon, Fourier, Proudhon, Rodbertus, Marx, Lassalle, and others. It aims to utilize recent discoveries in economic science in making a critical test of these theories themselves and of certain counter-arguments. It examines the socialistic ideals of distribution, and the effects that, by reason of natural laws, would follow an attempt to realize them through the action of the state.

Source:  Columbia University. Bulletin of Information. Courses Offered by the Faculty of Political Science and the Several Undergraduate Faculties. Announcement 1905-07. p. 26.

_______________________

Econ. 109—Jan. 1908

                                                                        Practical relations

1          Definitions of Socialism.

2          Distinction bet[ween] Soc[ialism] and Communism

3          [Distinction between Socialism and] Anarchism

4          Possibility of Socialism without Communism & vice versa

5          Ancient labor movements

6          Agrarianism.ancient and mediaeval in Rome.

7          Mediaeval and early modern labor movements

8          Economic causes of the French Revolution

9          Socialism during the Rev. and the 1st Empire.

(1) theoretical           (2) practical

10        Life and teachings of Saint-Simon

11        [Life and teachings of] Fourier

12        [Life and teachings of] Proudhon

13        France under Louis XVIII and Charles X

14        The revolution of 1830

15        France under Louis Philippe

16        The revolution of 1848

17        Socialism of 1848

18        Life and teachings of Louis Blanc

19        Life and teachings of Rodbertus

(1) Relation to Ricardo’s system
(2) Theory of Crises

20        Life of Karl Marx

21        Relation of Marx’ system to that of Rodbertus

22        Marx theory of U[se] Value. Ex[change] Val[ue] & Val[ue].

Dif[ference] in
application to
goods[?] made by
same[?] L[abor]
& dif[ferent] C[apital]

23        Basis in Ric[ardo of] the Function of Money

24        [Basis in Ricardo of] Surplus Value  (later)

25        [Basis in Ricardo of] the Effect of Machinery

26        Criticism of the Surplus Value theory

27        Merits and demerits of the general Marxian System

28       Change in the character of the socialistic movement due to the growth of monopolies

29       Trade unions and their purposes

30       Socialism and the trade union movement

31       The practicability of a partially socialistic society, of a completely [socialistic society]

 

Marx Biog[raphy] Publications.

Theory—Val[ue], [unclear word] Basis of dif[ference] Exchange V[alue]–Use V[alue]

Include  App[lication?] to L

[Include] Basis of the criticism of cost of [abor]

[Include] Marx app[lied?] to goods made by dif[ferent] proportions of l[abor] and c[apital]. His solution of difficulty.

[Include] Criticism

[Include] Modern theory of imputation as app[lication?] to prod[uct?] of l[abor] and of c[apital].

[Include] Surplus val[ue] theory–Full statement. Criticism.

[Include] Effect as above of app[lication?] of th[eory] of imputation. Marx th[eory] of  effects of machinery.

 

Source: Columbia University Rare Book and Manuscript Library. John Bates Clark Papers, Box 3, Folder 23, Series II.1 “Economics 109”, 1908.

Image Source: John Bates Clark portrait from the webpage “Famous Carleton Economists“.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Socialism

Harvard. Exams on European labor movement and history of socialism. Rappard, 1912-13.

 

William Emmanuel Rappard (b. April 22, 1883; d. April 29, 1958) was the co-founder and director of the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva. At the 1947 inaugural meeting of the Mont Pèlerin Society, Rappard gave the opening address.  

You can see below from the excerpt from the 2000 article by Richard M. Ebeling about Rappard that he taught at Harvard during the 1911/12 and 1912/13 academic years. Besides a course “Economic Resources and Commercial Policy of the Chief European States” for students of business, William Rappard also taught courses on the European labor movement and the history of socialism in the economics department. Rappard left Harvard to accept a professorship at the University of Geneva following the death of d’Eugène de Girard.

This post provides course enrollments, descriptions and the final exams for these last two courses. From the examination questions it is clear that one important text for the courses was the published University of Chicago economics doctoral dissertation of Oscar D. Skelton, Socialism: A Critical Analysis (1911). [bibliography posted here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror].

_______________________

Brief  Pre-war Biography

“…William Emmanuel Rappard was born in New York City on April 22, 1883, of Swiss parents, his father working in the United States as a representative of various Swiss industries. William Rappard did his graduate studies in economics at Harvard University from 1906 to 1908. During the academic year 1908-1909 he did additional study at the University of Vienna in Austria-Hungary, attending the seminars of Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk and Eugen Philippovich von Philippsberg, two of the leading figures of the Austrian school of economics before the First World War. And from 1911 to 1913, he was an adjunct professor [sic. Rappard’s first year was at the rank of instructor and his second year at the rank of assistant professor] of political economy at Harvard.

“In 1913 he was appointed professor of economic history and public finance at the University of Geneva in Switzerland. He also served as rector of the University of Geneva during 1926-1928 and 1936-1938. From 1917 to 1919, Rappard was a member of various Swiss diplomatic missions to Washington, D. C., London, and Paris, including service with the Swiss delegation to the peace conference in France that ended the First World War. He made a strong impression on President Woodrow Wilson and was highly influential in persuading him to choose Geneva as headquarters of the League of Nations beginning in 1920.

“From 1920 to 1925 he was the director of the Mandates Division of the League for overseeing the administration of colonial territories lost by the Central Powers at the end of the war, and was a member of the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League from 1925 to 1939. From 1928 to 1939 he also served as a member of the Swiss delegation to the annual meetings of the League’s General Assembly….”

*  *  *  *  *  *

The [above] brief summary of Rappard’s professional life draws from Albert Picot, Portrait de William Rappard(Paris: Editions de la Baconnière, 1963) and Victor Monnier, William E. Rappard: Défenseur des Libertés, Serviteur de Son Pays et de la Communauté Internationale (Geneva: Edition Slatkine, 1995).

Source: Richard M. Ebeling. “William E. Rappard: An International Man in an Age of Nationalism,” article posted at the Foundation for Economic Education Website (January 1, 2000).

_______________________

Course Enrollment
Fall term 1911

[Economics] 29 1hf. Dr. Rappard.–Socialism and the Social Movement in Europe.

Total 41: 3 Graduates, 15 Seniors, 20 Juniors, 3 Sophomores.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1911-12, p. 63.

_______________________

THE LABOR MOVEMENT IN EUROPE
Economics 6b.

Course Enrollment
Spring term 1913

Economics 6b 2hf. The Labor Movement in Europe. Asst. Professor Rappard.

Total 30: 5 Graduates, 12 Seniors, 9 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 3 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1912-13, p. 57.

 

Course Description
Economics 6b. The Labor Movement in Europe

After an introductory sketch of the Industrial Revolution and of its social consequences, a summary review will be made of the thought of the leading social reformers and Utopian socialists before 1848. The attitude of the chief European states towards the new problems of industrial life and the beginnings of factory legislation will be briefly examined. The Communist Manifesto will then be made the basis for a study of the aims and policies of the national and international socialist movement. The positive political and institutional achievements of the social movement of the nineteenth century will be summed up in conclusion.

Source: From the Division of History, Government, and Economics 1911-12. Official Register of Harvard University, p. 62.

Final Exam 1912-13
ECONOMICS 6b

Arrange answers in order of questions. Students who wrote theses will omit the first three questions.

  1. Enumerate five of the effects which Engels says the Industrial Revolution had on the manufacturing population of England. What were Engel’s chief sources of information?
  2. How does Sombart distinguish between (a) Rational Socialism (Utopian Socialism and Anarchism) and (b) Historical Socialism?
  3. What effect, according to Marx, does machinery have
    1. Upon real wages?
    2. Upon nominal wages?
    3. Upon “relative surplus-value”?
    4. Upon “absolute surplus-value”?
  4. Why is it customary to mention the English enclosure movement in dealing with the history of labor in Europe in the 19th century?
  5. What were the historical relations between the doctrines of Godwin, Malthus and Darwin?
  6. What was Chartism? Saint-Simonism? Which was more radical? More socialistic? Give reasons.
  7. Write a biography of Marx (300 to 500 words).
  8. Compare the views of Marx and Vaudervelde on “Capitalist Concentration.”
  9. Give chapter headings of a thesis on “The Socialist Movement in Germany, 1860-1890” in six or more chapters.
  10. Distinguish between (a) Socialism (b) Anarchism (c) Syndicalism.
  11. “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs … To every laborer the entire product of his labor … At first sight, these two formulas are absolutely contradictory. We believe, however, that it is possible and necessary to reconcile them and to complete each by the other.” — Vaudewelde.
    How does the author do this? What practical suggestions does he make for arranging distribution in the socialist state?
  12. What difficulties does Skelton think a socialist state would encounter
    1. In administering the government?
    2. In determining what commodities should be produced?
    3. In distributing wealth?

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Papers set for final examinations in history, history of science, government, economics, philosophy, social ethics, education, fine arts, music in Harvard College. June, 1913. Cambridge, MA., pp. 45-46.

_______________________

THE HISTORY OF MODERN SOCIALISM

Course Enrollment
Spring term, 1913

Economics 16. The History of Modern Socialism. Asst. Professor Rappard.

Total 4: 4 Graduates.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1912-13, p. 58.

Course Description
Economics 16. The History of Modern Socialism

This course will be divided into three parts. First, the works of Marx and Engels will be minutely analyzed and discussed. Then their sources will be studied with a view to ascertaining the historical origin of the different elements of scientific socialism. Finally the various recent interpretations, restatements, and criticisms of the Marxian doctrine will be examined.
The course will be conducted by means of reports and informal discussions. It will involve reading in German and French as well as in English.

Source: From the Division of History, Government, and Economics 1911-12. Official Register of Harvard University, p. 65.

 

Mid-year Exam 1912-13
ECONOMICS 16
January or February, 1913

  1. (a) When and where was Marx born? Where did he spend his childhood? Where did he receive his secondary school training?
    (b) What do you know of his ancestry? of his immediate family surroundings? of his relations to the Westphalens?
    (c) What were his first strong intellectual interests? Where and how were they aroused and stimulated?
    Discuss briefly the influence of these various factors on his later social philosophy.
  2. Give a chronological bibliography of Marx’s and Engels’s works down to 1870.

Answer any 4 of the following 6 questions.

  1. Is there any part of the Communist Manifesto which may with certainty be exclusively attributed to Marx? to Engels? State your reasons.
  2. When and how was Marx’s attention first called to economic matters? How do we know it?
  3. In which of Marx’s works would you look for the following passages?
    (a) “If the value of a commodity is determined by the quantity of labor required to produce it, it naturally follows that the value of labor, or wages, must be equally determined by the quantity of labor which is necessary to produce the wages.”
    (b) “In order to take place, revolutions must have a passive element a material basis. Theory is never realized in a people, except in sofar as it is the realization of the wants of the people.
    State your reasons.
  4. Where, in Marx’s works, do we find the first clear statement of the class struggle theory? Do you recall any case or cases in which he attempted to apply it to the actual interpretation of history? Did these attempts in any particular modify the doctrine as he first expounded it?
  5. How does Marx explain:—
    (a) the value: of unimproved land? of diamonds? of commodities produced by highly skilled labor?
    (b) the relation between higher prices and more abundant money, consequent upon the increased production of gold in the sixteenth century?
  6. To which work or works of Marx would you refer a student who, having a week at his disposal for the task, wished to become acquainted with his fundamental doctrines? State your reasons.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 9, Bound volume: Examination Papers, Mid-Years. 1912-13.

 

 

Final Exam 1912-13
ECONOMICS 16
June, 1913

  1. Fill out the blanks in the following table according to the Marxian phraseology and theory.
Con-
stant capital
Vari-
able capital
Rate of surplus value Capital con-sumed Indi-vidual rate of profit Value of commo-dities pro-duced Cost price of commodities produced Average rate of profit Price of com-modities Deviation of price from value
90 10 50% 20
80 20 50% 10
70 30 50%
  1. “The theory of value which Marx presents is a variation of the familiar labor-value doctrine.” Discuss.
  2. State the Marxian theory of rent.
  3. What is meant by the Bernstein-Kautsky controversy? State three of the principal points involved, with the arguments advanced on both sides.
  4. What, according to Skelton, are the distinctive features of Utopianism? How does Skelton classify the Utopian doctrines?
  5. What, according to Skelton, are the two “quite distinct interpretations” of which the Marxian materialist conception of history is susceptible?
  6. “In spite of himself, Marx was the last of the classical economists.” How does Skelton justify this assertion?
  7. “Had the third volume of ‘Capital’ appeared at the same time as the first, little would have been heard about ‘exploitation’ from socialist platforms.” Why not, according to Skelton?

 

Source: Harvard University Examinations. Papers set for final examinations in history, history of science, government, economics, philosophy, social ethics, education, fine arts, music in Harvard College. June, 1913. Cambridge, MA., pp. 54-5.

Image Source: William Emmanuel Rappard in the Harvard Class Album, 1912.

Categories
Johns Hopkins Socialism

Johns Hopkins. Henry Carter Adams on Socialism in Economic Thought, 1879

 

The following essay by Henry Carter Adams is added to provide another observation of what American economists in the late 19th century understood “socialism” to mean.  John Bates Clark also wrote his own essay on this topic in 1879.

____________________

THE POSITION OF SOCIALISM IN THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY.

by Henry Carter Adams

The Penn Monthly. Vol. 10 (April 1879), pp. 285-94.

It is certainly unfortunate that Socialism, as an economic system, should be confounded with social Democracy as a political factor and a revolutionary force. The apparent object of the latter is to increase the rate of mortality among the monarchs of Europe; the object of the former is purely scientific and economic. This confusion is unfortunate, because it places Socialism at a disadvantage before the public mind, and does not allow a candid judgment of its economic importance. What this importance is can be the most easily recognized by determining its position in the historical development of the study. To state this position is the object of the present paper.

But, first of all, has Socialism any just claim to be included in the history of Economy? It is no assumption to answer this question in the affirmative. Socialism is an ideal plan of a form of society which does not now exist, but which, its advocates claim, ought to be established. To support this claim, they have criticised severely and minutely the existing system of industry, and constructed an ideal system which they present for substitution. This has a position in the historical development of Political Economy, just as the Mercantile System, the System of the Physiocrats, or the English System of Private Economy has. If it is objected that Socialism is nothing but an ideal, a dream, like Plato’s ideal state, or Sir Thomas More’s Utopia, and that one must wait until it has asserted its reality by the establishment of its plan, before incorporating it in the history of Economy, it is answered: already such has been its influence in the modification of the doctrines of English Economy, that any historic sketch of economic thought must be incomplete which does not include it. Moreover, Economic Socialism has had actual economic and political results. The former are seen in what is termed German Economy of the present. It has given life to economic thought, and guided the criticisms which the Germans have made upon Adam Smith and his school. Its political results may be traced in many of the laws of the German Empire for the last twenty years, and in the ever-increasing importance of the state in economic industrial life. The [286] economic discussions, also, of the last ten years, could not be understood or in any way explained, if the writings of Carl Marx, who, in many respects, may be likened to Ricardo, were dropped from economic literature; or if the political agitations and philosophical writings of Lassalle, who, at nineteen, was a personal friend of Humboldt, were not admitted in the solution. Socialism has, of its own right, a position in economic history; and he who properly understands that position holds the key to the great economic problem of the present day.

A hasty sketch of the economic systems since the year 1500 is, for our purpose, indispensable. The difference in method between the Mercantile System and that of the Physiocrats is, that while the latter proceeded from theory to practice, the former developed from practice to theory. With the Physiocrats, for the first time, was there an economic theory opposed to existing commercial and industrial conditions. The Mercantile System sprang from the physical conditions and political life of the sixteenth century; the doctrine of the Physiocrats, on the other hand, as well as that of Adam Smith, was born of philosophical abstractions.

With the sixteenth century, entirely new factors entered into the world’s life, and for three centuries guided its history. These factors, so far as they are physical, were three great inventions: the invention of printing, of gunpowder, and of the mariner’s compass. These are of so great importance, that to trace in full their wonderful workings would be to write the subsequent history of the Christian world. The most significant of these factors, in its effect upon the economic life of the centuries which followed, is the mariner’s compass. By means of it the road to India was made secure, and the new world, with its rich mines, discovered. Under its guidance, Europe was brought into intimate connection with the decaying civilization of the East, whose peoples were glad to exchange the products of their luxurious climate, and their accumulated treasures, for the products of the industry of the West. In America, too, the rapid growth of the quickly-planted colonies gave rise to a constantly-increasing demand, which Europe alone could supply. To meet these demands, the industries of the Old World were developed, and out of this relation between manufactures and commerce and the political condition of Europe, grew the Mercantile System.

[287] The underlying principle of Mercantilism was, that the precious metals alone constituted wealth. For nearly three centuries this idea worked unquestioned and unrestrained, until, in the latter part of the eighteenth century, Europe found herself, both politically and economically, in a disastrous condition. Governments had left their proper sphere, and monarchs had transformed themselves into great merchants; the interests of individuals and classes were neglected, because it was firmly believed that if a nation but held gold and silver within its territorial limits, its citizens must be rich and happy; monopolies were established in every branch of industry, patents and grants were issued without number, while laws were framed, entering into the details of life, and even into the minutiae of burial, for the purpose of creating a home market; the agricultural was subordinated to the manufacturing industry, and even in agriculture, that which produced bread-stuffs was in its turn subordinated to that which produced raw material for manufacture. With its three centuries of unrestrained working, this idea affected one thing besides. The middle class of the sixteenth century had disappeared, but a new class had been created in society, which, in the Revolution of 1789, took the name of the Third Estate. Of what was this Third Estate composed? The answer to this question is of significance in our present inquiry. This Third Estate was composed of that class in society under whose name the gold and silver of the world were held;—it  is that class which is now ruling the world. The great object of the Mercantile System had been effected. The countries of Europe held the precious metals, in amounts which would have been considered fabulous in the fifteenth century; still her people were more dissatisfied than ever; the misery of want had not disappeared from her borders.

About the middle of the eighteenth century, a Frenchman, Thomas [sic! François is intended] Quesnay, undertook to discover the cause of the misery of the agricultural classes in France. The writings of the school which he founded hold an important position in the development of economic thought. To understand this school, the philosophy of the day must not be forgotten. This was the philosophy of nature. To say that an institution was based upon nature, or to discover in any movement a natural law, was considered sufficient ground for its acceptance. It was the time of Rousseau and the [288] Contrat Social, when the phrase, “All men are by nature free and equal,” was pleasing the fancy of the enthusiastic French and their admirers. Still, this principle was recognized as being sadly out of harmony with many actual conditions; for example, how could the monopolies and hierarchies of the commercial and industrial world, which, according to the existing theory, were necessary, be explained? Could this principle of freedom be applied to economic life? This question the Physiocrats answered in the affirmative, by claiming to have discovered a “law of nature ” capable of regulating all economic movements, if only the unnecessary and disastrous interference of government were removed. This “law of nature” is all that remains of the Physiocrats. This law was accepted by Adam Smith, and appears in English Economy, in a new form and under a new name, as the law of supply and demand: the principle upon which is based the maxim of free competition. The characteristic feature of English Economy is the theory that the truest adjustment of economic society will come about by permitting the economic forces unrestrained activity. The reasoning upon which this is based is very simple: each individual knows better than any one else what is for his own interest, therefore society, which is a collection of individuals, will attain the most harmonious and satisfactory conditions by allowing to each person his free choice. By means of this force of self-interest is all economic activity explained; and further, if perfect freedom of action is permitted, whatever is found to result from the working of this force must be accepted as satisfactory, at least as unchangeable, for it contains in itself the ground of its own justification, in that it is in harmony with the principle of competition. The means through which competition works is the open market, where the law of supply and demand is recognized as supreme arbitrator. The actual price of products, or of labor, which is determined by this law, must be the just price, and, as such, should be accepted without question. If any individual should be so unfortunate as to be financially ruined thereby, or any class in society finds itself in a condition of want and misery, society is unblamable. The individual should have been more cautious, or, in technical language, sharper: the class should exercise more prudence. The universal postulate of this system is, that if proper freedom be allowed, every member of society must [289] find his proper sphere of activity and proper grade in the social organism, according to the degree of his talents and strength; and also, that the remuneration which he receives at the hands of society, through the open market, must be in proportion to the efficiency of his labor and sacrifice. The ultimate result of the workings of this force, according to Bastiat, will be perfect harmony of apparently conflicting interests.

We are now in a position to introduce our socialistic critics. The writings of Saint Simon, Fourier, and Robert Owen may be passed over without consideration. Their plans were communistic rather than socialistic, and most of their criticisms have been abandoned. Louis Blanc is the founder of Socialism of the present, although the German writers, Engels, Marx and Lassalle, have developed his plan and intensified his criticisms to such an extent, that they are now hardly recognizable. The first three of the six propositions upon which Blancism is built are as follows:

  1. The deep and daily increasing misery of the lower classes (du peuple) is the greatest misfortune.
  2. The cause of the misery in which the lower classes live is competition.
  3. This competition, which is the support of the possessing class (la bourgeoisie, or capitalists), is the cause of their ruin.

Sismondi, an earlier French writer, had pointed out the undesirable tendencies of unrestrained competition, but Blanc was the first who went so far as to charge it with the evils of the present industrial system, and to hold it responsible for the misery of want in which the lower classes live. It is this principle of competition against which Socialism aims all its blows; to so reconstruct industrial society, that this force shall not appear in it as the supreme arbitrator in the division of products, is the one object of all socialistic study.

The optimistic views which the advocates of the system of free competition profess, are based, according to socialistic critics, partly on false and partly on assumed propositions. They are the result of à priori reasoning and do not stand the test of a comparison with fact, and, further, in the reasoning itself, the unfavorable side of free competition has been overlooked. Among the propositions charged as false, are the following: that economic relations are developed according to any natural and therefore necessary [290] law; that each individual understands the best his own economic interests, and that each one, in forwarding his own, forwards the interest of society; that each member of society is entirely responsible for his own economic success or failure; and, above all, that harmony of interests can result from the strife of competition. Among the claims of the English school, which are criticised as unproven assumptions, are two characteristics of Socialism: First, that any interference on the part of the state with economic activity would be injurious to economic life, or, in other words, it is an assumption that the laissez faire policy of government is the true policy; and second, that the price of products and labor, or of interest and rent, dictated by the law of supply and demand, must be the fair and proper price, from which there is no appeal.

From these criticisms, one may easily determine the relation which socialistic economy holds to English economy. The particular complaint, however, which socialists urge against the prevalent system is, that it is unfair to the laborer. This complaint takes the following form: that the price of labor, as indicated by wages determined by the law of supply and demand, is no fair equivalent for the activity and sacrifice of the laborer. The extreme socialists claim that labor is the source of all wealth, and therefore, that all wealth belongs to the laborer, a very straightforward and satisfactory solution of the problem now troubling the century, if the premiss were only true. Other critics of the system of free competition, some of whom are socialists and some not, take the ground that, in industrial society of the present, the law of supply and demand cannot work its legitimate results; that there are other factors, the most important of which is ignorance, which opposes its free working, and that, as Louis Blanc has said, the principle of free competition which is the support of the possessing class, is the cause of the laborer’s ruin. Of the truth of this statement there is little room to doubt. That the condition of the laborer is very bad, indeed, as bad as possible, English economy freely admits. Thus, Ricardo showed that there was a tendency for the laborer to receive the least amount of wages possible for the support of life and strength; Mill formulated the law of wages which declared the same fact; Thornton endeavored to disprove the law, and succeeded so far as to show that it did not properly express the disadvantage at which it was necessary for the laboring class [291] to enter into this competitive strife with the capitalist. This, however, is no proper place to discuss the wages question; the above statements were introduced to show that the criticism of the socialists in favor of the laborer is no creation of their own fancy, but the statement of a somewhat startling fact.

The position of Socialism in the historical development of Political Economy, may be clearly stated by comparing the four following points in socialistic thought, with analogous points in previous systems:

  1. The point of view from which society is contemplated.
  2. The productive principle which is incorporated in the system.
  3. The department of economic investigation to which it gives prominence.
  4. The principle which it accepts as giving direction to all economic activity, and as supreme arbitrator between conflicting economic interests.

And first, with reference to the point of view from which society is contemplated. English economy considers society as a collection of individuals. The individual stands in the foreground; man is the unit, and as such he is studied. The system is a system of private economy. On the other hand, the socialist studies individuals as members of classes, and classes as parts of society. Society is the unit of investigation. Public economy, people’s economy, or class economy, is to take the place of private or personal economy. He contemplates the individual as part of the social organism. If personal and social interests conflict, there is no necessity to prove that the individual is in error in thus being out of harmony with society, his interests must be subordinated to the united wishes of other members of society. This is nothing more than the legal conception of true liberty introduced into Economy. That Socialism has carried the application of these views too far, may not be denied, but the position is well taken, and the system will receive the credit at the hands of all fair economic historians, of having successfully criticised the one-sided view of previous economists.

The second comparison is with reference to the productive principle incorporated into the socialistic system. The three productive forces which must be accepted in every complete economy, are land, capital and labor. The history of economy presents a peculiar [292] fact, namely, that three systems of industrial organization have been formed in which each of these forces has been respectively exaggerated at the expense of the other two. The doctrine of the Physiocrats was, that land is the source of all wealth. They defined rent as the free gift of nature, or the excess of the product of the land over that which justly compensated for the labor of tillage. Therefore, the one object of the Physiocrats was to increase the rent on land. Adam Smith corrected this one-sided view. Theoretically, his system was a perfect system in that it recognized the three productive forces. In fact, however, the system of private economy which Adam Smith founded, is the capitalist’s economy. Socialism has accepted the third productive force and based its system upon it. It is the laborer’s system of economy, its fundamental economic proportion being, that labor is the source of all wealth. Capital, according to both Marx and Lassalle, is built from the difference between what the laborer actually produces and what he receives in wages. The system as a system cannot survive, because this, its fundamental principle, is false. Labor is not the source of all wealth, at least as that word is defined by socialistic writers. The historian of the future will probably say that it was necessary for a century of unrestrained working to have been given to the private economy of Adam Smith, in order that the great importance and true position of capital, which, in all the previous life of the world had not been recognized, should be disclosed, but that, this having been accomplished, it was equally necessary that the reacting school should have exaggerated another productive force, to draw attention to the undesirable tendencies of the unrestrained principle of free competition, in order that the consequences of an undue supremacy of material possessions should be averted, and I think the judgment of the future will declare the historian to be right.

The third point of comparison concerns merely Socialism and the English system, and is with reference to the department of economic investigation to which each gives prominence. The school which Adam Smith founded has devoted its energies almost exclusively to the department of the production and exchange of wealth. In this sphere its results have been wonderful. The nineteenth century will take its place in history as the century of great inventions in the sphere of production and transportation. [293] This, socialistic writers recognize, and they admit candidly that this highly desirable result is the legitimate consequence of the working of the principle of self-interest as incorporated in English economy, but they claim that production is not all of the economic problem. A proper, equal and economic distribution is as essential, they say, to a harmonious and successful economy as intense production, They therefore have directed their attention to the distribution of wealth; in this department is included all of their studies. Taken by itself, Socialism is as one-sided as the system it criticises, but taken in connection with English economy, so far as this point is concerned, it appears as its harmonious complement and as such it will live.

The fourth and last comparison, which considers the principle of arbitration between conflicting interests, lies wholly in the department of distribution. As we have already seen, this principle, in English Economy, is free competition. We have also noticed the criticisms upon its workings which have been offered. That which is proposed by the Socialists as a substitute for this force, which shall give direction to all economic activity and serve as supreme arbitrator, is the State. This idea that the State should be introduced into industrial life, is also accepted from the teachings of Louis Blanc. This idea of an economic state will prove to be the important historical idea of Socialism. It will live as leading to two new schools of Political Economy; the one of which incorporates the idea into its teachings and makes it the foundation of its system, the other, while admitting the ground to be tenable for which the interference of the State is demanded, will attempt a solution of the problem of just distribution upon the old laissez faire principle. The first already exists in the rapidly-developing school of German Political Economy. According to this teaching, the only question calling for serious consideration is one of degree: how far shall the State be allowed to assume the character of a private producer? It finds the application of its principle in the administration of the State railroads, telegraphs, post, and express; in the management of public domains and forest, and in all those enterprises that are undertaken by the State and carried on as private enterprises, with the single exception that they are carried on not for profit to the State, but in the interest of the people. This school has also developed an entirely new system of Finance. The [294] German method of study and skill of systemization are greatly to be admired, and, so far as practicable, to be appropriated; but when one considers the principles upon which their Economy and Finance are based, these are found to be, in their extreme application, inappropriate to the political and industrial conditions of the United States. It is, moreover, difficult to see how they are to be applied in England and France. Out of this necessity, the error which has shown itself in English Economy on the one hand, and the inadaptability of German Economy to a free government on the other, must arise a new school, or, at least, a radical reformation of the old. A new problem is to be solved. How can the principle of competition be so restrained that its beneficial results may be retained, and its detrimental workings hindered? There is no country in the world where the political and economic conditions are so favorable for the solution of this problem as the United States. America must repudiate the centralizing tendency of German Economy, because that tendency is opposed to the ideas upon which the government is founded; but, on the other hand, another century of unrestrained activity of private enterprise will itself contradict the theory of freedom, and destroy that government. From this dilemma must arise an American Political Economy,—an Economy which is to be legal rather than industrial in its character.

H. C. ADAMS, PH. D.,
John[s] Hopkins University.

Image source: Henry Carter Adams Page at the NNDB website.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Socialism Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Readings and Exams for Methods of Social Reform. Carver, 1902-03

 

“The trouble with radicals is that they only read radical literature, and the trouble with conservatives is that they don’t read anything.”

Thomas Nixon Carver quoted by John Kenneth Galbraith (A Life in Our Times)

This conservative Harvard economic theorist regularly taught the course on schemes of economic reform at Harvard early in the 20th century. He was certainly more forgiving than sympathetic to his radical subjects. 

Variations of this course syllabus have been transcribed earlier here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror:

___________________

Course Description

[Economics] 14. Methods of Social Reform, including Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc. Tu.,Th, at 1.30. Professor Carver.

The purpose of this course is to make a careful study of those plans of social amelioration which involves either a reorganization of society, or a considerable extension of the functions of the state. The course begins with an historical study of early communistic theories and experiments. This is followed by a critical examination of the series 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 Anarchism and Nihilism, of the Single Tax Movement, of State Socialism and the public ownership of monopolistic enterprises, and of Christian Socialism, so called.

Morley’s Ideal Commonwealths, Ely’s French and German Socialism, Marx’s Capital, Marx and Engels’s The Communist Manifesto, and George’s Progress and Poverty will be read, besides other special references.

The course will be conducted by means of lectures, reports, and classroom discussions.

Source: Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Division of History and Political Science comprising the Departments of History and Government and Economics 1902-03. The University Publications, New Series, No. 55 (June 14, 1902), p. 42

___________________

Course Enrollment
(Harvard, 1902-03)

[Economics] 14. Professor Carver.— Methods of Reform. Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.

Total 15: 2 Graduates, 8 Seniors, 2 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1902-03, p. 67.

___________________

Course Enrollment (Radcliffe, 1902-03)

[Economics] 14. Professor Carver.— Methods of Social Reform.

Total 6: 4 Undergraduates, 2 Others.

Source: Radcliffe College. Report of the President of Radcliffe College, 1902-03, p. 43.

___________________

Economics 14
[handwritten note: 1902-03]

Topics and References
Starred references are prescribed

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 Cabet.   Voyage en Icarie.
6. Wm. Morris.   News from Nowhere.
7. Edward Bellamy.   Looking Backward.

 

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. Wm. Graham. Socialism, New and Old.
7. [Jessica Blanche] Peixotto. The French Revolution and Modern French Socialism.

 

B
Expository and Critical
1. *Albert Schaeffle. The Quintessence of Socialism.
2. Albert Schaeffle. The Impossibility of Social Democracy.
3. *Karl Marx. Capital.
4. *Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels. The Manifesto of the Communist Party.
5. Frederick Engels. Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.
6. E. C. K. Gonner. The Socialist Philosophy of Rodbertus.
7. E. C. K. Gonner. The Socialist State.
8. Bernard Shaw and others. The Fabian Essays in Socialism.
9. The Fabian Tracts.
10. R. T. Ely. Socialism: An Examination of its Nature, Strength, and Weakness.
11. Edward Bernstein. Ferdinand Lassalle.
12. Henry M. Hyndman. The Economics of Socialism.
13. Sydney and Beatrice Webb. Problems of Modern Industry.
14. Gustave Simonson. A Plain Examination of Socialism.
15. Sombart. Socialism and the Social Movement in the Nineteenth Century.
16. Vandervelde. Collectivism [and Industrial Evolution].

 

ANARCHISM

1. *Leo Tolstoi. The Slavery of Our Times.
2. Wm. Godwin. Political Justice.
3. Kropotkin. The Scientific Basis of Anarchy. Nineteenth Century, 21: 238.
4. Kropotkin. The Coming Anarchy. Nineteenth Century, 22:149.
5. Elisée Reclus. Anarchy. Contemporary Review, 45: 627. [May 1884]

 

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 William 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. [Volume 1; Volume 2]

 

AGRARIAN SOCIALISM

1. *Henry George. Progress and Poverty.
2. Henry George. Our Land and Land Policy.
3. Alfred Russell Wallace. Land Nationalization.

 

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. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003. Box 1, Folder “Economics, 1902-1903”.

______________________

Economics 14
Mid-year Examination, 1902-03

  1. Give an account of More’s Utopia.
  2. Is there any ground for supposing that Utopian schemes have influenced social development? Give reasons.
  3. What were the periods of greatest activity in the founding of communistic settlements in America? What stimulated the activity in each period, and what were the general conditions favorable to such activity?
  4. Does the history of communistic experiments in America throw any light on the probable success or failure of socialism on a large scale? Give reasons.
  5. Give an account of the communistic plans and activities of Etienne Cabet.
  6. Describe the Communist Manifesto. What place does it hold in socialistic literature, and why?
  7. Compare the socialism of Rodbertus with that of Karl Marx.
  8. Outline Marx’ theory of surplus value.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Mid-year Examinations 1852-1943. Box 6. Papers (in the bound volume Examination Papers Mid-years 1902-1903).

______________________

Economics 14
Year-End Examination, 1902-03

  1. Give some account of Fourier and the Fourieristic experiments in the United States.
  2. Distinguish between Utopian and Scientific Socialism.
  3. What part has religion played in the history of Communistic Experiments?
  4. How does Karl Marx explain the existence of poverty?
  5. Trace briefly the history of the German Social Democratic Party.
  6. Distinguish between land and other forms of property.
  7. How do you account for the share of the capitalist in distribution?
  8. Is there any relation between the unequal distribution of workers among different occupations and the unequal distribution of wealth?
  9. What is meant by the term “Natural Monopolies.”
  10. Define “Christian Socialism” and explain how it differs from Marxian Socialism.

Source:  University Archives. Examination Papers 1873-1915. Box 6. Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics, History of Religions, Philosophy, Education, Fine Arts, Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Music in Harvard College, June 1903 (in the bound volume Examination Papers 1902-1903).

Image Source: Harvard Class Album, 1906.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Socialism

Harvard. Labor Movement in Europe, Final Exams. Meriam, 1924 and 1925.

 

Harvard’s semester course “The Labor Movement in Europe” was introduced by Professor William E. Rappard in 1912-13 and 1913-14 but then not offered again until 1923-24 and 1924-25 when it was taught by Richard Stockton Meriam. The course was then once again bracketed in the annual course announcements until 1930-31 when it was “reintroduced” by Dr. William Thomas Ham.

Judging from the examination questions below, Meriam appears to have dedicated about a third of his course to socialist economics and socialist labor movements.

___________________

Meriam’s Harvard Ph.D. record, 1921

Richard Stockton Meriam, A.B. 1914.

Subject, Economics. Special Field, Social Ethics. Thesis, “Trade Unions in Germany, 1865-1914.” Instructor in Economics, and Tutor in the Division of History, Government, and Economics, Harvard University.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1920-21.Page 62.

___________________

Course Announcement

6bhf. The Labor Movement in Europe. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Asst. Professor Meriam.

This course will deal primarily with the development of trade unionism, of the coöperative movement, and of the political labor movement in Europe from the beginning of the nineteenth century and with the trend of opinion concerning their significance. Special attention will be given to the theories of the relations of labor to industry in the state which have gained adherents among wage earners or have influenced the labor policies of European states. The development of labor legislation and of social insurance prior to the war and the labor problems of the war and reconstruction periods will also be examined.

Candidates for distinction will be given an opportunity to write theses.

Source:  Division of History, Government, and Economics 1924-25. Official Register of Harvard University. Vol. XXI, No. 22 (April 30, 1924), page 69.

___________________

Course enrollment
2nd semester 1923-24

[Economics] 6bhf. Dr. Meriam.—The Labor Movement in Europe.

Total 30: 3 graduates, 12 seniors, 11 juniors, 1 sophomore, 3 others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1923-24. Page 106.

___________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Economics 6b2
Final examination 1924

I. (One hour)

  1. Write a critical review of the Webbs’ The Consumer’s Coöperative Movement, discussing in particular
    1. the Webbs’ interpretation of the movement;
    2. their comparison of the coöperatives with private enterprise;
    3. their comparison of the coöperatives with government enterprise.

 

II. (One hour)
Answer 2 and either 3 or 4.

  1. What do you consider the most important single step to be taken in the United States either (a) to obtain for this country the benefits of the labor movement in Europe, or (b) to avoid its dangers?
  2. Do you accept Sombart’s thesis that “there is a distinct tendency in the social movement to uniformity”?
  3. Answer two.
    1. Compare the characteristics of the German labor movement in 1875, 1890, in 1913.
    2. Compare the position of trade unionism within the labor movement in France and Great Britain in the period 1905-13.
    3. Account for the peculiarities of the French labor movement prior to 1900.

 

III. (One hour)

Explain and criticize four of the following quotations.:

  1. “The books on socialism deal largely with controversies which do not proceed to the heart of the matter. This seems to me to hold of K. Marx, Das Kapital, the most famous and influential of socialist books.”
  2. “Property is theft.”
  3. “Though it (the program of the British Labor Party) lacks a single constructive feature, though it is made up exclusively of scraps of Marxian jargon, catchphrases, and shibboleths, nevertheless it is the kind of program which any class is likely to adopt in its own interest when it for the first time concludes that it can outvote other classes and controlled the state.”
  4. “Even if the state of affairs characterized by peasant protectorship is destined by fate to disappear, socialism does not have to precipitate its disappearance. Its role is not to separate property and labor, but on the contrary to reunite in the same hands these two factors of production, whose division results in the servitude and poverty of the workers who have fallen to the state of proletarians.”
  5. “All this (the schemes of guild socialists) is quite different from producers’ coöperation.”

Source: Harvard University Archives.  Examination Papers. Finals 1924.(HUC 7000.28, vol. 66). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,… , Government, Economics, Anthropology,… , Psychology, Social Ethics. (June 1924).

 

___________________

Course enrollment
2nd semester 1924-25

[Economics] 6bhf. Asst. Professor Meriam.—The Labor Movement in Europe.

Total 34: 10 graduates, 8 seniors, 12 juniors, 1 sophomore, 3 others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1924-25. Page 75.

___________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Economics 6b2
Final examination 1925

(Avoid duplication in selecting questions)

I. (One hour)

  1. Write an essay on one of the following subjects:
    1. Marxian socialism and the labor movement.
    2. “Democracy has forced one concession after another from the pure theory of individualism.”
    3. “Violent political passions have but little hold on those who have devoted all their faculties to the pursuit of their well-being. The ardour which they display in small matters calms their zeal for momentous undertakings.”

II. (One hour)
Answer 2 and either 3, 4, or 5

  1. (20 minutes for a or b.) What are the obstacles to the formation in the United States of the Labour Party like either (a) the British Labor Party or (b) the German Socialist Party?
  2. Does a comparison of the characteristics of the labor movement in various European countries in the period 1865-1875 with those in the period 1905-1914 support Sombart’s thesis on The Tendency to Uniformity?
  3. Do you agree with the conclusion of the following quotation from an article on the “labor banks” recently established in the United States? –

“The labor movement in America is far in advance of that in any other country. This will sound strange to ears which are tuned to the current phrases regarding labor movements. They who are still thinking in terms of the primitive tactics of class war will, of course, repudiate it at once. The labor movement of this country is passing out of the primitive fighting stage in which leadership concerned itself chiefly with the immediate tactics of battle. It is passing into a stage in which it is concerning itself with the higher strategy of maneuvering for permanent advantage. The leaders of labor in no other country show any sign of being aware of the first principles of this higher strategy, nor, for that matter, do the more vociferous self-appointed champions of labor in this country. They are fighting capital either directly or politically. They are not even encouraging laborers to become their own capitalists, or to get possession of the machinery of production by the one effective method of purchase.”

  1. Account for:
    1. The comparative results of consumers’ and producers’ coöperation.
    2. The comparative strength of consumers’ coöperation in the United States and Great Britain.
    3. The persistence of the ideal of producers’ coöperation among the wage-earners.

III. (One hour)

Explain and criticize four of the following quotations:

  1. “The final goal is nothing; the movement is everything.”
  2. “Instead of the conservative motto, ‘A fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work!’ they ought to inscribe on their banner the revolutionary watchword, ‘Abolition of the wages system!’”
  3. “Universal suffrage considered by 89 to 96 per cent of the population as a question of the belly and spread throughout the entire national body with the belly’s warmth! Have no fear, gentlemen. There is no power that could withstand it long. Universal suffrage is the standard you must raise. This is the standard which will give you victory.”
  4. “We do not regard Co-operation particularly as a method by which poor men may make savings and advance their own position in the world.… To us the social and political significance of the Co-operative Movement lies in the fact that it provides a means by which, in substitution for the Capitalist System, the operations of industry may be….carried on under democratic control without the incentive of profit-making, or the stimulus of pecuniary gain.”
  5. The Bolsheviki are followers of Karl Marx, in their experiment was based upon his teachings.”
  6. “If the Co-operators would guarantee to the Trade Unionists in their employment distinctly preferential terms, and if the eight million Trade Unionists would, in return, give, not merely all their custom to the Co-operative Societies, but also absolute continuity of service, even when striking against profit-making employers, and an actual superiority in conscientiousness and skill in Co-operative employment, this ‘Direct Action’ would… transfer trade after trade to the joint control of the democracy of consumers in alliance with the democracy of producers without the necessity of paying any compensation to the capitalists.”

 

Source:Harvard University Archives.  Examination Papers. Finals 1925.(HUC 7000.28, vol. 67). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History of Science, History,… , Government, Economics, Philosophy,… , Anthropology, Military Science. (June 1925).

Image Source: Robert Stockton Meriam in the Harvard Class Album 1925.

Categories
Columbia Seminar Speakers Socialism Undergraduate

Columbia. Socialist speakers and undergraduate debates on socialism, 1910-11

 

In the current political times younger citizens see the pathology of centrally-planned, authoritarian socialism à la Stalin as being as distant as the pathology of authoritarian manifestations of capitalism.  “Democratic socialism” has become again a rallying cry, a progressive, small-d “democratic” alternative to the mixed capitalist economy status quo. This is not unlike the debate about socialism on campus and at the ballot box in the years before the first world war. With this in mind, I thought it would be interesting to trawl through the Columbia Spectator for a few years (1910-11) to read articles in which the word “socialism” appears. These articles can be read below.

My own favorite item in this post is the description of an invited speaker, a graduate of Barnard College’s (first) class of 1893,  the suffragette  Jessica Garretson (later “Finch” and then “Cosgrave”), as “the woman of Carnegie Hall fame who is responsible for the statement that ‘Rich girls turn to Socialism as flowers to the sun'”–not quite an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez backstory but times have changed.

______________________

SOCIALISM LECTURE FRIDAY INSTEAD

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIII, Number 141, 6 April 1910, p. 2.

Instead of lecturing yesterday as Spectator announced he would, Mr. Eugene V. Debs will talk Friday. As candidate of the Socialist Party for President in 1908, Mr. Debs is well fitted for his subject, Socialism. Seats in Earl Hall will be reserved until 4 o’clock, after which the public will be admitted.

______________________

DEBS CHAMPIONS SOCIALISM
Twelve Hundred People Greet Famous Socialist at Lecture in Horace Mann Auditorium

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIII, Number 144, 9 April 1910, pp. 1,5.

Before the largest audience that has listened to a lecture at Columbia University since Professor James of Harvard delivered the first of his famous lectures on pragmatism and before the most enthusiastic audience that has crowded a Columbia lecture room in many a day, Eugene V. Debs three times candidate for President of the United States on the Socialist Ticket spoke yesterday for an hour and a half on the work to which he has dedicated his life —Socialism.

The lecture was scheduled to take place in Earl Hall, but long before 4 o’clock it became evident that the auditorium in that building would be altogether too small. It was crowded by half past three. At the last moment, therefore, the lecture was changed to the Horace Mann Auditorium which seats between one thousand and twelve hundred people. It was none too large. When Mr. Debs entered, promptly at 4 o’clock, there was scarcely a seat to be had. His entrance was greeted with an enthusiastic burst of applause that lasted several minutes, and which was renewed a moment later, when, after being introduced by G. T. Hersch ’10L, president of the Socialist Society, the speaker rose to begin his address. Mr. Debs presents a striking figure—tall with a large, narrow very bald head, keen eyes and long, bony arms and fingers which he uses with great effect. His simplicity and sincerity were apparent from the outset.

The speech itself was a memorable one, and one which those who heard it will not soon forget. Mr. Debs began, almost academically with an account of Industrial Era which succeeded the Age of Feudalism, but presently warming to his subject he swept on, carrying with him an audience that listened attentively to every word. Although the speech was essentially a serious one and reached at times depths of pathos hard to surpass, it was relieved ever and again by touches of a dry, quaint humour of which Mr. Debs is a master —a humour so keen that it not only caused the audience to laugh but provoked several times spontaneous bursts of applause.

“Socialism,” said Mr. Debs, “is a scientific analysis of present and past conditions, and a forecast of what, from those conditions, is bound to come. We are not endeavoring to foist Socialism on Society, and we are merely preparing it for its peaceful entrance.” The account of present day conditions was forceful without oratory. Debs told of having seen father carrying the dinner pail to the child who worked in the factory, because the present system of production demands cheap labor. Coming from a man who at thirteen was working on a railroad, and at sixteen was firing a freight engine, the facts seemed all the more forceful.

The Socialist leader related his experience with the “Four Hundred,” some of whom he once had occasion to address. “They wanted to see what kind of an animal I was,” he said. I had great notoriety at the time —and they had great curiosity. They were all attired in evening dress. The ladies wore what, for some mysterious reason, they called full dress. As I looked into their empty faces, I thought, ‘How artificial they seem.’ If you would have perfect social standing you must be useless.”

After a summary of the unfavorable conditions with which the workingman is now oppressed, including child labor, disinterestedness of the employer, and the prevalent desire for cheap labor, Mr. Debs outlined the hopes of Socialism. Under this system he declared that every man and woman would be given the opportunity to work for the common good. Education and cultivation of the arts would be taken up by every individual. This would be possible because by co-operation instead of competition, the child would not be forced to work, and the workingman not ground under the heel of the individual capitalist. The exploitation of the minority at the expense of the majority would thus give place, by a common awakening, to a state where co-operation, instead of competition would be an economic rule.

Most interesting was the speaker’s comparison of the Socialists of today with the men who led the agitation for the American Revolution. “Undesirable Citizens,” then, all of them—Samuel Adams, the arch incendiary—Tom Paine, vilified as a destroyer of Society —Jefferson, branded as a traitor. “I wonder,” said the speaker, “if the aristocratic Daughters of the Revolution could by some miracle come face to face with their revered forefathers as they were in their own time, whether they would not disown them. Those visionary agitators were disreputable then. They are only respectable now because they are dead, and because the world moved up to where they stood. John Brown and the other abolitionists he cited as a further example—as people with a vision of better things who stood up for their convictions and were despised in their generation. “When John Brown was hung they called him a monster, ten years later he was a fanatic, ten years more and he was misjudged, and now only recently the State bought the old John Brown homestead and the Governor, on the occasion of its dedication, said that ‘the spot where his dust reposes is the most sacred in this commonwealth.'”

“One word,” said Mr. Debs, “I want to leave with you young men and women. It is this, Nothing is more glorious than to stand up for convictions, when the world disagrees with you. If your last friend deserts you, you will be in better company than you were before.”

______________________

DEBATING IN CLASSROOM
Novel System to be Inaugurated Under Auspices of Barnard Literary Association

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIII, Number 144, 9 April 1910, p. 1.

Barnard Literary Association in [col]laboration with Dr. Agger of the Economics Department has formulated a plan of compulsory participation in debating; this experiment to become immediately effective in certain economics classes. In conjunction with Drs. Agger and Mussey, the project has been evolved, including all members taking Economics 2. The system will work as follows: A subject for debate will be chosen, probably on some aspect of socialism. Then during class hours every member of the class will have to speak extemporaneously for five minutes on the subject selected. The individual men will not be told beforehand on what side they will talk, so the speeches will be entirely impromptu. These five minute talks will be so to speak, the preliminaries. All the members of the class will act as judges, and at the conclusion of the trials they will vote for the four best men to comprise the team.

This arrangement will be conducted in both, Dr. Aggers and Dr. Mussey’s classes and after each section has chosen its team, a formal debate will be held, probably in Earl Hall. The whole affair will be conducted under the auspices of Barnard Literary Association. A committee on arrangements has been appointed, consisting of C.J.W. Meisel ’11, R.R. Stewart ’11, R.C. Ingalls ’12, and E.W. Stone ’11, ex-officio. To further stimulate student interest, the society has made appropriations in order to present prizes to the winning team.

Dr. Agger is very enthusiastic about the new plan, and predicts great results for the future. It is a most happy circumstance that a debating society should take charge of this undertaking, and by the co-operation of faculty and the undergraduates, student interest in debating cannot fail to be evoked. A new era for debating is dawning. If this experiment proves as successful as it is expected to, it will undoubtedly be extended to other courses in economics and politics, and will become a permanent feature of the curriculum.

______________________

INTERSECTION DEBATE SOON
Both Teams Selected Yesterday

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIII, Number 164, 3 May 1910, p. 1.

Arrangements for the intersection debate which is being conducted by the Barnard Literary Association, are rapidly progressing. The subject, as the poster on the society’s bulletin board in Hamilton Hall announces, is Socialism.

Yesterday, Dr. Agger’s morning and afternoon sections each selected a team. Ten men spoke before each class and five were chosen by vote of the class. The morning section picked the following men: L.K. Frank ’12, W.M. Delerick ’12, S.R. Gerstein ’11, C.J.W. Meisel ’11, W.W. Pettit (Pg), while the other section is to be represented by I.[?] J. Levinson ’12, W.A. Scott ’11, S.M. Strassburger ’11, W. MacRossie ’11, J. Levy ’11. All these men must meet in 205 West Hall at 11:55 today in order to choose sides for the semi-finals to be held tomorrow. The team that wins will debate the same subject with Professor Mussey’s section.

______________________

DO WE WANT SOCIALISM?
Students in Economics 2 to Decide Question in Debate Held Under Auspices of Barnard Lit.

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIII, Number 168, 7 May 1910, p. 3.

Those who are interested in Economics will have an excellent opportunity of hearing a debate on Socialism next Monday at 3 p.m. in 301 Hamilton Hall. The question reads, “Resolved that the common ownership of all the means of production will promote social welfare.” The debaters are all members of the classes in Economics 2. As the course is a very popular one, it is given in three sections, two of which are conducted by Dr. Agger and the other by Professor Mussey. Last Monday Dr. Agger’s sections held their preliminaries and each selected a team. On Wednesday these two teams met, and the judges unanimously decided in favor of the negative team, which consisted of S. M. Strasburger ’11, G. W. Scott ’11, and S. J. Levinson ’12, of the afternoon section. The team representing the morning section was composed of the following men: L. K. Frank ’12, S. R. Gerstein ’11, W. W. Pettit (T. C.), and W. M. Dederick ’12. The decision was based upon the preparation shown, and skill in delivery. The judges also selected Strassburger, Pettit and Levinson as the best speakers, and these men will represent Dr. Agger’s sections against Professor Mussey’s next Monday. Professor Mussey’s section has also chosen a team consisting of S. I. Fried ’12, E. V. Broderick ’12, and W. S. Dakin (T. C.)

The debate next Monday promises to be one of the most interesting ever heard on the Campus. It is the first time that debate has ever been introduced into the class-room as part of the work. The planning, and the making of arrangements for this debate was done by Barnard Literary Association in collaboration with Professor Mussey and Dr. Agger. The members of the winning team are to receive appropriate prizes donated by the association. An invitation to be present has been extended to the students taking Economics 2, in Barnard College. The debate will be open to any one in the University.

Not only have the men on the teams shown unusual interest in the contest but all the men in the various sections are very enthusiastic as to the undertaking. Professor Beard of the Politics Department thinks the scheme is an admirable one, and is anxious to extend it to his field. It may also be possible to introduce class-room debate into the various courses in Philosophy.

______________________

SOCIALISTS RESUSCITATED
Open Meetings Planned

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 16, 15 October 1910, p. 6.

Earl Hall yesterday afternoon was the scene of the Socialist Club’s meeting.

The work for the present year was decided upon, and it was planned to hold a series of open meetings, similar to those of last year, which were addressed by such men as Charles Edward Russell, the present Socialist candidate for Governor, Lincoln Steffens and Eugene V. Debs. There will also be the regular club meetings, with speakers of equally independent ideas but of less wide reputation.

The study and discussion of the principles of Socialism necessary for the formation of an intelligent opinion upon this world-wide movement, will also be continued in the hope that the student body’s interest in public affairs may not only be stimulated, but also educated

The next meeting of the club will be on Wednesday, October 19, at 4:15 p m., in room A, Earl Hall. All those who are interested in the radical political thought of the present day are cordially invited to co-operate with the club, while those who are interested it the investigation of social problems are urged to become members.

Mrs. Florence Kelly, in all probability, will speak in the auditorium of Earl Hall on Thursday, November 10.

______________________

INSTRUCTION IN SOCIALISM
Series of Essays Planned

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 20, 20 October 1910, p. 1.

Something which is both novel and valuable was adopted by the Socialist Club at its meeting yesterday afternoon. This is a scheme for instructing the members in the fundamental principles of Socialism by having a graded series of essays read at the respective meetings.

Plans were also laid to have Mr. Russel, the Socialist Gubernatorial candidate make a campaign speech at the University sometime before election day and also to get Mrs. Finch up on the Campus. Mrs. Finch is the woman of Carnegie Hall fame who is responsible for the statement that “Rich girls turn to Socialism as flowers to the sun.”

On account of the unavoidable detention of N. Levey ’10L, who was to have read a paper entitled “The Original Intention of the Framers of the Constitution,” J. H. Henle ’12 spoke for a short time on the same topic with which he was thoroughly familiar. He pointed out that, while the Radicals in the colonies dictated the Declaration of Independence, it was the Conservatives who controlled the Constitutional Convention. He said in part: “Authentic reports show that behind closed doors, under a pledge of secrecy, they deliberately planned to protect the wealthy and those of higher understanding. Hamilton, in James-fashion, said in convention, that the constitution proposed would be almost impossible of amendment and, in the Federalist papers, that it was easy of amendment. The Supreme Court was effectively put in absolute control by an arbitory vetoing power and the entire government was made as indirect as it could possibly be—the House of Representatives being the only rope thrown out to the Radicals. The main point of interest is the striking contrast between the unpublished speeches of all the members in the convention with the stated views of the same men in the Federalist papers.”

An open discussion followed. The next meeting of the club will be in Earl Hall, room L, on Friday, October 28.

______________________

About Jessica Garretson Finch

Source: Webpage History of Finch College

JESSICA GARRETSON earned her B.A. as one of the seven women in Barnard College’s first graduating class in 1893. Looking back on the four years she studied there, she said she considered them a waste of time, and observed that her college education had prepared her for one thing – to be a tutor in Greek! After marrying James Finch and receiving her law degree from New York University in the same month that she gave birth to a daughter, she decided to establish a post-secondary school for women that was “different,” and she did! The Finch School opened in 1900 with 13 students. Its curriculum was oriented toward the practical, with as many workshops, studios and practice rooms as classrooms. As enrollment grew, additional room was needed, and by 1904, with grants she had received and a hefty mortgage she arranged for the construction of the building on 78th Street known to many Finch women as the Academic Building. There, in addition to an academic faculty, most of whom were visiting professors from Columbia University, were actors from the New York stage, Seventh Avenue fashion designers, performing instrumentalists, singers, poets and politicians.

MEANWHILE, MRS. FINCH BECAME MRS. [John O’Hara Cosgrave in 1913] COSGRAVE. Her first marriage ended in divorce soon after the turn of the century. In 1913 she married the distinguished journalist, John O’Hare Cosgrave, who proposed to her during the intermission of a Carnegie Hall concert.

PREPARATION FOR THE “RECURRENT CAREER” was at the heart of Jessica Cosgrave’s educational philosophy, and along with her intense interest in “current events” (a term she coined), became the inspiration for the Finch curriculum. Women’s lives, she said, are unlike men’s lives; women’s lives have distinct phases. Therefore, a woman should be in school until she is 22; for the next three or four years she should launch into the first phase of her career; in her mid twenties she will marry, put aside her career and devote her energies to raising a family, four children was the ideal number. At about age 40, with her children in school, a woman should resume her career and, Mrs. Cosgrave advised, seriously consider entering politics.

IN ADDITION TO RUNNING WHAT WAS THEN TERMED “a fashionable school for girls,” Jessica Cosgrave worked energetically from 1900 on for two “causes”; Women’s Suffrage and Socialism. She was quoted in a NEW YORKER magazine “Profile” by Angelica Gibbons in 1946 as saying, “If there is any sensation more exquisite than walking up Fifth Avenue to music in a parade for an unpopular cause, I don’t know what it is.” She said that in one of the suffrage parades “People on the sidelines become impassioned to the point of throwing rotten vegetables and eggs at the ladies as they passed.” Angelica Gibbs goes on to note that this experience proved so invigorating to Jessica Cosgrave that after marching, most of the way up Fifth Avenue, she dropped out of line, took a cab back to the starting point, and “hoofed it all the way up again with another contingent.”

JESSICA COSGRAVE’S “SOCIALISM” may seem a bit incongruous considering how many of the young women from all parts of the United States, South America, Europe and Asia attending Finch came from wealthy families. In 1911, asked about her membership in the Socialist Party and the appearance as speakers at the Finch School of Upton Sinclair, Walter Lippman and other “radicals,” Mrs. Cosgrave said: “My chief object is to awaken Social Consciousness in the girls. I want my graduates to become powers in their communities, not idle fashionable women. I don’t teach these young girls actual Socialism, but Social Activism.” Thirty-five years later, in 1946, when a Finch student interviewed Mrs. Cosgrave, and asked about her politics, she said she stood “Just a bit left of center”!

______________________

SOCIALISTIC LECTURE TODAY
Charles Edward Russell Socialist Candidate for Governor to Speak In Havemeyer

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 35, 7 November 1910, p. 8.

Columbia men will have an unusual opportunity this afternoon to hear in interesting man talk about an interesting subject. Mr. Charles Edward Russell, the author and magazine writer who is running for Governor of this State on the Socialist ticket will talk to Columbia men about socialism as a remedy for the evils from which New York is suffering. The lecture will be delivered in 309 Havemeyer, at 4 o’clock and will be open to the public.

Mr. Russell did general reporting for a number of New York papers, including the Herald, and vas then sent all over the country on special articles for the Sunday papers. For a time he was managing editor of the Hearst newspapers in Chicago. Then he began writing for the magazines. His magazine writing has taken the form of vigorous protests against the sort of political corruption and economic injustice that he saw from the inside during his newspaper days. He has become a “muckraker,” and has recently said that he “intends to keep on raking muck until somebody removes the muck.”

Mr. Russell has written quite a number of books, including “Lawless Wealth,” [1908] “Soldiers of the Common Good,” [article series most of which revised and published in]  “The Uprising of the Many,” [1907] “The Heart of the Railway Problem,” “A Life of Chatterton,” [1908] and “Why I am a Socialist,” [1910] and he is now busy on a life of Wendell Phillips [1914].

This is the first time he has run for political office as a Socialist. The renewed interest in socialism all over the country, and the recent Socialist victory in Milwaukee, made it probable that Mr. Russell will poll a large vote tomorrow.

______________________

ECONOMISTS TO HEAR NOTED SOCIALIST

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 106, 24 February 1911, p. 2.

Mr. John Spargo will deliver the address at the meeting of the Graduate Economics Club tonight. The subject of his talk is, “The Wider Aspects of Socialism.” Mr. Spargo is a well-known socialist. The meeting will be held in 510 Kent, at 8 tonight. All members and guests are requested to be on hand promptly. The club is made up of graduate students who are working for a Ph. D.

Following are other lectures scheduled:

Friday, March 10: Henry George’s Theory of Land Rent and the Single Tax. Paper by Mr. I. S. Adlerblum.

Friday, March 24: A detailed description and criticism of the provisions of Senator Aldrich’s Plan for Banking Reform in the United States. Paper by Mr. Oswald Knauth.

______________________

DISCUSSION OF SOCIALISM
Graduate Economics Club

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 107, 25 February 1911, p. 1.

Mr. John Spargo the noted author and lecturer addressed the meeting of the Graduate Economics Club last evening in Kent Hall. About seventy-five members and guests were present. The lecture was followed by an informal discussion in which Mr. Spargo declared himself ready to answer any questions put to him.

The subject of Mr. Spargo’s lecture was in general socialism, but he confined himself for the most part to a consideration of the theories of Marx, Engel, and Riccardo. He said it was not from a man’s enemies but from his friends that the most was to be feared. In the case of these three economists their over enthusiastic followers had been responsible for much misrepresentation. A single bald statement, in a great many cases, had been made a slogan while all that qualified it had been forgotten.

From the statement of abstract theories Mr. Spargo went on to a consideration of the spread of socialism throughout the country and particularly in the West. “The State of Oklahoma,” he said, “has the greatest number of socialists in proportion to the population, of any state in the Union.” He accounted for this chiefly by the fact that those people who had emigrated to the West and had been persevering enough to face the hardships of pioneering were of a more liberal and unbiased turn of mind than the conservative Easterners. Socialism he said in part, offers them a theory of Social Progress, A Social Ideal, and not only that but an organized movement for the realization of that Ideal which appeals to their Western intellects.

______________________

SOCIALISTS TO STUDY SOCIALISM

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator,Volume LIV, Number 108, 27 February 1911, p. 5.

The Socialist Club is planning to study socialism in a systematic way. Beginning with the next meeting, definite chapters in Mr. Edmund Kelly’s “Twentieth Century Socialism” will be assigned to the members for study. At succeeding meetings these will be discussed by the members and specially invited guests. President Trimble speaks very enthusiastically of the plan and considers this an excellent opportunity for everyone interested in socialism to increase their knowledge of the arguments for and against it.

* * * * * * * * * *

[Economics in the Rear-view Mirror attaches the following notes on Edmund Kelly:]

Kelly, Edmond (1851-1909). Educated at Columbia [Class of 1870?] and at Cambridge. “Lecturer on Municipal Government at Columbia University”. He had founded the City Club and the subsidiary Good Government Clubs. Political and professional activities in New York and in Paris.

Kelly, Edmond. Evolution and Effort and their Relation to Religion and Politics. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1895.

____________. Government or Human EvolutionVol. I Justice. New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1900.

____________. Government or Human Evolution.Vol. II Individualism and Collectivism. New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1901.

____________. A Practical Programme for Working Men. London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co., 1906.

____________. The Unemployables. London: P.S. King & Son, 1907.

____________. The Elimination of the Tramp by the Introduction into America of the Labour Colony System already proved Effective in Holland, Belgium, and Switzerland, with the Modifications thereof Necessary to adapt this System to American Conditions. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908.

____________. Twentieth Century Socialism. What it is not; What it is; How it may comeNew York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1911. [Forward by Franklin H. Giddings]

“Aware that he had not long to live, Mr. Kelly hastened to finish the first draft of the book [Twentieth Century Socialism], and indeed he survived that completion only two weeks. He knew that considerable editorial work was needed, and this he entrusted to Mrs. Florence Kelley, author of “Some Ethical Gains through Legislation” and translator of Marx’ “Discourse on Free Trade,” and of Friedrich Engels’s work on the “Condition of the Working Class in England.” She undertook and has fulfilled this trust, and has been aided throughout by the untiring labors of Shaun Kelly, the author’s son.”  Pp. xiv and xv.

______________________

STUDENTS OF SOCIALISM TO MEET TODAY

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 110, 1 March 1911, p. 2.

In Earl Hall today, at 4:10, the Socialistic Club will hold an important meeting. The organization is taking up a systematic study of Socialism and today there will be discussion, at the meeting, of Edmond Kelley’s “Twentieth Century Socialism.” At the next meeting, March 8, the club will be addressed by some prominent Socialist, probably John Spargo. All students are invited to attend today’s meeting.

______________________

SOCIALISTS ELECT OFFICERS
Trimble Chosen President

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 110, 1 March 1911, p. 8.

Election of officers of the Socialist Society for the coming term was held yesterday afternoon with the following results: R.J. Trimble, president; and G.G. Bobbe, secretary and treasurer. It was decided that the club would read several chapters of Kelly’s “Twentieth Century Socialism” for each meeting and assign a member to prepare a paper upon them. The next meeting will be held on March 1.

______________________

SOCIALISTS MAKE GIFT TO UNIVERSITY

Source: Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 111, 2 March 1911, p. 3.

At the meeting of the Socialist club held yesterday afternoon, it was decided to present a copy of “Twentieth Century Socialism,” to the University. Mr. Fraenkel of the Law School gave an interesting explanation of the views expressed in the first few chapters of that book and a general discussion followed. The next meeting will be held the afternoon of Wednesday, March 3.

______________________

SOCIALISTS ON 20TH CENTURY SOCIALISM

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator,Volume LIV, Number 117, 9 March 1911, p. 1.

At a meeting held yesterday afternoon in Earl Hall, the Socialist Club took up an interesting discussion on a paper read on Commissioner Edward [sic] Kelly’s “Twentieth Century Socialism” was also taken up, and resulted in a lively discussion about the respective merits of the evolutionary and revolutionary points of view on Socialism. The next meeting of the club will be held Wednesday, March 15 and if possible some prominent Socialist will be obtained to lead the discussion.

______________________

“INCOME TAX” INTERESTS ECONOMISTS

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator,Volume LIV, Number 118, 10 March 1911, p. 1.

Next Wednesday the Undergraduate Economics Club will meet in 510 Kent at 8 p. m. The main subject for discussion will be “The Federal Income Tax,” E. V. Broderick, ’12 will give a history of the income tax and its actual working up to 1895. After an informal discussion of this, there will be reports and outlines for the coming work in the following committee; Socialism; Tariff, Railroads, Banking, Trusts, Conservation of Natural Resources and Labor Problems. Those members who were present at the last meeting have been assigned to committees. Members desiring to work on any special committee should inform the chairman of that committee

The plans for the remaining semester include trips to the Stock Exchange, Clearing House, Plant of Bush Terminal Cos., in addition to an address by Mr. G. A. McAneny, borough President of Manhattan and several other prominent men of the day.

______________________

SOCIALIST SOCIETY MEETING
Mrs. Jessica Finch Speaks

Source: Barnard Bulletin (April 5, 1911), p. 3.

Mrs. Jessica Finch spoke on Wednesday, March 29, 1911, before the Barnard and Columbia Chapters of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society. Her talk was extremely interesting. She spoke first on the need for getting rid of poverty in this world. Physical well-being is the basis for spiritual well-being. It is very easy for people who are materially well-off to point out people who live beautiful, inspiring lives under adverse conditions. But lack of the essentials of life, such as food, air, light and leisure, are bound to retard intellectual mental growth.

Poverty, moreover, is unnecessary in the world at present. Before the introduction of machinery, it is true that there was not enough of even the necessities of life to go around. But since the industrial revolution there is no need for any one to be without life’s necessities, for there is more than enough for all. To secure for all a fair share of the necessities of life, industry must be socialized. All unearned increments, that is, all profits not due to mental and physical labor, must go to society or equal distribution among those who spent themselves in the production thereof.

______________________

TO DISCUSS MODERN SOCIALISM

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LIV, Number 149, 20 April 1911, p. 8.

The Columbia Socialist Society will hold a regular meeting this afternoon at 4:10 o’clock in Earl Hall. The members will hold an open discussion on the third chapter of Kelly’s ““Twentieth Century Socialism.” All members of the University are invited to attend the meeting.

______________________

SOCIALISTS TO GATHER TOMORROW

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LV, Number 14, 12 October 1911, p. 5.

As announced in yesterday’s issue, the year’s first meeting of the Socialist Society will be held in Earl Hall tomorrow afternoon at 3 o’clock. The society will be addressed by its president, S. S. Bobbe ’13, and an outline of the coming season’s work will be discussed. All members and students interested in Socialism should attend.

______________________

NOTED SOCIALIST TO TALK
Meeting of Club Today

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LV, Number 25, 25 October 1911, p. 6.

Today at 4:00 P. M. the Socialist Club will hold its second meeting of the year in Room J, Earl Hall. The club will be addressed by the organizer of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, H.J. Laidler, Wesleyan ’07, who will explain the work he has been doing as organizer and what the Columbia chapter can do to help create an intelligent interest in Socialism at Columbia.

The Intercollegiate Socialist Society has lately increased its chapters to 30, an increase in the past year of over three hundred per cent. Mr. Laidler has been to a great extent responsible for this increase, and is, therefore, well qualified to give an interesting and encouraging talk to the society. He will also discuss with the club the matter of a course of lectures on radical subjects by prominent men. that is now being planned by the club. The Intercollegiate Society will aid the club in securing the speakers.

Besides Mr. Laidler, several of the members of the club will read papers on different aspects of Socialism. All those in the University interested in Socialism are invited to attend.

______________________

LAIDLER ADDRESSES SOCIALIST CLUB

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator,Volume LV, Number 26, 26 October 1911, p. 2.

H. J. Laidler, the organizer of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society addressed the Columbia Socialist Club yesterday on the progress of Socialism in the United States during the past twenty and especially in the colleges. His work as organizer has brought him in touch with conditions all over the country, and he spoke of the grasp Socialism has taken on all forms of society.

“I have seen miners,” he said, “take up Karl Marx and study him into the night, and go from him to philosophy, to literature, art and science—all because of the new outlook they had received. If you really want to get the most out of life you should get the philosophy of Socialism; you should study it earnestly and with that sympathy that gives us insight. Socialism has been the means of moulding the lives of many. Further, we should compensate to society that which society has given to us.”

Following Mr. Laidler’s speech the club discussed the question of speakers on various live topics. These speeches are to be given by a number of prominent men and will form a series. They will not be confined to Socialism, but will take up all lines of radical thought. As soon as the speakers have all been secured, the club will publish the list with their various topics. The next meeting of the club will be held next Wednesday afternoon in Earl Hall.

______________________

TRUST PROBLEM DISCUSSED
Seager Addresses Economists

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LV, Number 32, 2 November 1911, p. 8.

At the meeting of the Economics Club in Hamilton Hall yesterday afternoon Professor H. P. Seager gave a lecture on Trusts. A large audience was present when the president of the club introduced the speaker. Professor Seager began his lecture by giving a short history of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890. He praised the law very highly and said that better wording could hardly be framed to cover the situation so thoroughly. Until the term of Roosevelt, the law had not been properly enforced. Under McKinley, only three indictments were issued; under Roosevelt, however, there were twenty-five indictments against trusts and the same policy has been carried on under Taft, his record being eighteen, up to July 1, 1911.

The late decisions of the Supreme Court were next discussed by Professor Seager. He was not very sanguine about the probable efficacy of the court’s orders to the trusts to dissolve. The haze surrounding the court’s decisions must be cleared away in subsequent suits before the real meaning of the Anti-Trust Act is defined.

It was therefore the duty of the President to institute suit against the Steel Trust in order to clear up this vagueness. Industry must necessarily be dull until it is definitely settled whether business, as at present organized can exist or not.

He remarked in conclusion that the tendency seemed to be toward Socialism, but that he had grave doubts whether this tendency would go to that extent. It was his opinion that the present situation would produce a solution for the problems of today.

______________________

FOREIGN SOCIALISM STUDIED
Cooperation Discussed

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator,Volume LV, Number 49, 23 November 1911, p. 5.

At a study meeting held in Earl Hall yesterday, R.J. Trimble ’12, addressed the Socialist Club on the cooperative movement in Belgium. This movement has spread into almost all of the retail business of the country, and the working people buy nearly all their goods at these stores obtaining not only a saving in price, but free insurance against unemployment, sickness and accident.

The next meeting of the club will be held on Wednesday, November 29th, when one of the members will give a talk on Edward R. Bellamy and his works. On Friday, December 8, Mr. John Moody, of “Moodys Magazine,” will give a lecture under the auspices of the club on “The Problem of Railroads.”

______________________

ADDRESS ON CHILD LABOR
O. R. Lovejoy Gives Lecture

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LV, Number 68, 19 December 1911, p. 3.

“Child Labor” was the topic of the third lecture in the series on “Modern Problems” held under the auspices of the Socialist Club given yesterday afternoon by Owen R. Lovejoy. Mr. Lovejoy drew largely from his own experience as secretary of the National Child Labor Committee. “As compared with the great problem itself, the effects of child labor on the child dwindle into insignificance. Really the most important aspect of the problem is its economic aspect. It means a menace to our economic interest from the standpoint of wages. Wherever child labor is employed the standard of wages in the community is lowered. Thus, in some New England towns men get only eight or nine dollars a week as a result of the competition from child labor.

“Child Labor” acts indirectly to destroy the family. No more faulty argument can be used against Socialism than to say it will destroy the family, it is already destroyed. The employment of children during the hours they should be under the influence of the home tends in this direction. But even worse, the lower standard of wages resultant on child labor makes it the duty of a man subject to those conditions not to attempt to raise a family.

“Legislation regulating this course has been secured in thirty-eight of the states, but the great fault is not that sufficient legislation has been had, but that there has not been sufficient enforcement of the legislation.”

“The main opposition to child labor regulation has come in the past from those most vitally interested —from the employers, from the parents of the children and even from the children themselves. It has actually been demonstrated by comparison of factories in New England where no child labor is employed and those of the South where it is employed that the employer suffers in economic loss by their employment—and yet the employers oppose us. The parents are against us either because they are ignorant or because they suffer the want of a larger income, whereas child labor itself acts to lower their own wages.

 

Image Source:  1912 U.S. presidential campaign poster for the Socialist Party ticket: Eugene V. Debs and Emil Seidel from Wikimedia Commons.

 

Categories
Columbia Socialism

Columbia. Seligman and Hillquit debate “Desirability of Socialism”. February, 1915

 

Economists have been debating the whats and hows of socialism from the earliest days of the socialist movement. As the term has taken on a renewed life in current political debate, from time to time Economics in the Rear-View Mirror will listen in to earlier debates in historical time. One sees that Seligman attempted to frame the debate for progress as striking the correct balance between individualism and socialism whereas Hillquit argued for the wholesale replacement of capitalism and its evils with socialism and its virtues.

________________________

“SOCIALISM A MERE VISION”—SELIGMAN
Charges Morris Hillquit With Failure to Produce Proofs of Its Practicability
LARGE CROWD HEARS DEBATE
[February 16, 1915 report]

            Before an audience that crowded the Horace Mann Auditorium to the doors, in spite of the bad weather, Prof. E. R. A. Seligman and Morris Hillquit debated the “Desirability of Socialism.” George Gordon Battle, the well-known lawyer, presided. While no decision was given, the sympathy of the audience seemed to go to Professor Seligman, who rested his argument, not on the perfection of the capitalist system, but on the failure of his opponent to show how Socialism would remedy the existing evils.

Mr. Hillquit opened the debate with an exposition of the principles of Socialism in which he defined the doctrine and showed its applicability to present-day civilization. The rest of his twenty-five minutes he spent in assailing the capitalistic system, which he asserted was responsible for every social evil now existing.

He outlined the development of the factory system which, according to his statement, took the tools from the workman and left him nothing. One hundred years ago the workman was independent, and he owed that independence not to the possession of capital but to his skill with his tools. The factory system substituted ten machines for the tools of a thousand workmen, but the workmen did not own the machines which took the place of their tools. The machines were owned and the workers were dependent upon the employer for their livelihood. Their employment was dependent solely upon the amount of profit resulting for the employer. This brought about the present conditions of widely prevalent unemployment, which was responsible for all the poverty, crime and vice now found in society.

Professor Seligman, in opening his speech, told his audience that far from being scientific, Socialism is an ideal. As an ideal, or religion, it deserves our gratitude, for it has been a spur to thought at all times.

He went on to say, in part: “The real point in the whole argument is this: We are told that conditions are bad. I grant you this, but the point is, is Socialism adequate to bring about better conditions?

“Let us come to this idea of Socialism being a ‘scientific and planful’ scheme, as Mr. Hillquit terms it. I think that Mr. Hillquit will agree that the ‘scientific’ Socialism is founded upon these bases: The labor theory of value, as advanced first by Carl Marx; the surplus labor theory of profits which was also also advanced by Carl Marx; and the generally accepted economic interpretation of history. It is upon these bases that ‘scientific’ Socialism stands—and yet not only has Marx been proven wrong in all these theories, but the foremost Socialists of today have refuted them.

“Here’s the way Carl Marx argued: He studied conditions about him, and he said, first, things are getting worse and worse; second, prices are getting worse and worse; third, therefore, things will get so bad that we will get to a cataclism of society, and all society will break up. And he said that this stage would be reached in five years at the most. But has it been reached, even though that was a century ago? I respect Carl Marx possibly more than any other economist, except Ricardo. Nevertheless, I think we can leave this ‘scientific’ Socialism there, flat on its back.”

In his rebuttal, Professor Seligman said, in part: “Capitalism, says Mr. Hillquit, is responsible for the present social evils; and he maintains that Socialism will do away with them. We have always had social evils, no matter what our state of society; and what reason is there for believing, beyond mere assertion and declaration, that Socialism will remove the social evils. We will all admit that civilization has progressed, and that we have from time to time remedied the evils of society; and I maintain that these social evils will be done away with in the course of progress, whether we have Socialism or no!

“I have shown you that competition and regulation, individualism and Socialism, have always been necessary to our progress; and I maintain that we shall need them for our progress, until the end of time. The Socialists say, individualism has certain evils, let us do away with individualism. No! for Socialism has even greater evils. What I want is socialized individualism, and that is what we are going to get. What we want is to preserve the good things of our society, and get rid of the bad things.”

Professor Seligman went on to say that it was absurd to condemn capitalism, before capitalism had fairly taken a start. He pointed out in elaborating this point, that it takes centuries to change systems. He said in conclusion: “Everyone is conscious of the mal-adjustment of society. We need light and guidement. We must not be blinded by the blatant light of capitalism, the press. And, on the other hand, we must not be misguided by the unreal vision that we can follow one principle to the exclusion of the other. Be sure that the foundation is solid, before you build upon it. In that way only can we hope to erect the lasting structure of social progress and social peace.”

Mr. Hillquit made his greatest stand in his rebuttal. He declared that his opponent had not controverted either of his main points that private or corporate capitalistic ownership was at the bottom of prevalent social ills and that social ownership would ameliorate these conditions. In reply to Professor Seligman’s assertion that the public schools and the Post Office were Socialism, Mr. Hillquit declared that they were only the forerunners of Socialism. He traced the growth of the early capitalism and its fight against feudalism and drew parallels between that and the conflict between capitalism and Socialism, incidentally stating that capitalism was beginning to show unpleasant and unmistakable signs of old age.

Taking up Professor Seligman’s main points, Mr. Hillquit waxed eloquent. Bringing his refutation to a conclusion, he said:

“My opponent states that production under Socialism will be less than at present, predicting his statement on the assertion that human beings are as lazy as they dare to be. Under the capitalistic system they are. Their work is not congenial or attractive. No man ever shirked work that he liked.

“In regard to distribution, let me say that we have no competition in distribution of wealth under the present system, and we will have under Socialism. Take the case of Mr. Harry K. Thaw. From what we know of the gentleman, we can hardly say that he is intellectual. But he has wealth because some ancestor bought stocks and bonds and passed them on to him. Under Socialism there will be no drain on productivity such as is furnished by the present abuses of capitalism. If we were to throw the wealth into the air and let the people race after it, we should have better distribution than at present.”

Source:  Columbia Daily Spectator, Volume LVIII, Number 105, 16 February 1915, pp. 1, 6.

Image Source: Morris Hillquit from Bain News Service (July 25, 1924) original glass negative, digitized by the Library of Congress.

 

 

 

Categories
Harvard Socialism Suggested Reading Syllabus Undergraduate

Harvard. Undergraduate economics syllabus. Socialism, O.H. Taylor, 1955

 

 

The economics of socialism was a regular undergraduate course offering at Harvard from the turn of the twentieth century to well into the second half of the century. Besides the syllabus with assigned readings  along with the final examination questions.

Transcriptions of related course materials at the following links:

Economics of Socialism (Ec 111) taught by Taylor in 1952-53

Economics of Socialism (Ec 111) taught by Schumpeter, Taylor with lectures by Gerschenkron and Galenson in 1949-50.

Economics of Socialism (Ec 11b) taught by Schumpeter in 1945-46

Economics of Socialism (Ec 11b) taught by Schumpeter in 1943-44

Economics of Socialism (Ec11b) taught by Sweezy in 1939-40

Economics of Socialism (Ec11b) taught by Mason and Sweezy in 1937-38

Programs of Social Reconstruction  (Ec 7c) taught by Mason  in 1933

Economics of Socialism, Anarchism and the Single Tax  (Ec 7b) taught by Carver  in 1920

Socialism and Communism (Ec 14) taught by Carver and Bushnee in 1901-02

____________________

Course enrollment

[Economics] 111. Socialism. Dr. O. H. Taylor. Half course. (Spring)

Total, 9: 1 Graduate, 3 Seniors. 1 Junior, 1 Sophomore, 3 others.

 

Source:  Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1954-55. P. 89.

   ____________________

Course Syllabus

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Spring Term, 1955

Economics 111

  1. Feb. 2-11. Pre-Marxian Socialism.

Reading due Feb. 11: H. Laidler, Social-Economic Movements, chs. [8-12]

Wed., Feb. 2. Introductory Lecture, about the course.

Fri., Feb. 4. Lecture: Antecedents of Socialist thought in European culture — ancient, mediaeval, and early-modern.

Mon., Feb. 7. Lecture: Antecedents of socialist thought, II—The “enlightenment,” liberalism, and socialism; A. Smith, Bentham, Ricardo, and others.

Wed., Feb. 9. Lecture: The “utopian” socialists—St. Simon, Fourier, and R. Owen.

Fri., Feb. 11. Discussion.

  1. Feb. 14-Mar. 4. Marxian Socialism—the Doctrinal System of Karl Marx.

Reading due Feb. 18: Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto
J. A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Part I

Mon., Feb. 14. Lecture: “Utopian” socialism, Hegel, Ricardo, and Marx’s “scientific” socialism.

Wed., Feb. 16. Lecture: Hegel and Marx, philosophers of history; and Marx’s “science” of society and history.

Fri., Feb. 18. Discussion.

Reading due Feb. 25: P. M. Sweezy, Theory of Capitalist Development, parts I, II.

Mon., Feb. 21. Lecture: Marx’s economics. 1—Theories of value, wages, surplus value, accumulation of capital, and evolving capitalism.

Wed., Feb. 23. Lecture: Marx’s economics. 2—Theory of capitalism’s evolution and decline or life-cycle; crises (business cycle), change from competitive to monopoly capitalism, and transition to socialism.

Fri. Feb. 25. Discussion.

Reading due Mar. 4: P. M. Sweezy, Theory of Capitalist Development, Part IV.
J.A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Part II.
O. H. Taylor article, “Schumpeter and Marx,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1951.

Mon., Feb. 28. Lecture: Modern Marxist (Communist) additions to Marx’s doctrines about capitalism in decline, and the transition; theory of “imperialism,” etc.

Wed., Mar. 2. Lecture: Schumpeter and Marx—two views of capitalism and its history and destiny—a comparison and contrast, illuminating Marxism.

Fri., Mar. 4. Discussion.

  1. Mar. 7-18. Marxian Socialism in Germany and Europe—Party Histories—to World War I.

Reading due Mar. 11: Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Part V.
P. M. Sweezy, Socialism, Chs.

Mon., Mar. 7. Lecture: Marx, Lasalle, and the German Social Democratic Party, to the Gotha Program.

Wed., Mar. 9. Lecture: The Revisionist Controversy of the German Socialists.

Fri., Mar. 11. Discussion.

Reading due Mar. 18: [blank]

Mon., Mar. 14. Lecture: Histories of French and Italian Socialism.

Wed., Mar. 16. Lecture: History of Scandinavian Socialism.

Fri., Mar. 18. Discussion.

  1. Mar. 21-April 1. English Socialism—History.

Reading due Mar. 25: G.D.H. Cole, A Short History of the British Working Class Movement, Part I, chs. 5-9 incl. and Part II.
The Fabian Essays.

Mon., Mar. 21. Lecture: From Owen to the Fabians.

Wed., Mar. 233. Lecture: Fabian Socialism.

Fri., Mar. 25. Discussion.

Reading due April 1: New Fabian Essays.

Mon., Mar. 28. Lecture: Evolution (since 1900) of the English Labor Party and its Socialism.

Wed., Mar. 30. Lecture: English Socialism, 1945-50—Partial Realization, and Changing Outlook.

Fri., April 1. Discussion.

April 3-10. SPRING RECESS.

  1. April 11-22. Russian Communism and the Soviet System.

Reading due April 15: M. Dobb
A. Baykov, Dev. Soviet Econ. System

Mon., Apr. 11. Lecture: Lenin, the Russian Revolution, and Early Evolution of the Soviet System.

Wed., Apr. 13. Lecture: The Five-Year Plans; Russia’s Industrialization and Economic Policies

Fri., Apr. 15. Discussion

Reading due April 22: [blank]

Mon., Apr. 18. Lecture: The Russian Economy—Operation.

Wed., Apr. 20. Lecture: Russian Society, State, and Civilization—Extra-Economic Features of the System.

Fri., Apr. 22. Discussion.

  1. April 25-May 2. Economic Theory of Liberal Socialism—The Lange Model.

Reading due May 2: Lippincott (ed.), Economics of Socialism

Mon., Apr. 25. Lecture: History of Modern Theory of “Competitive” Socialism: Von Mises, Barone, Lange, etc.

Wed., Apr. 27. Lecture: The O. Lange Model and Argument

Fri., Apr. 29. Lecture: Problems of Full Socialism in Practice.

Mon., May 2. Discussion.

 

Reading Period

David M. Wright. Capitalism (entire book).

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1954-1955 (1 of 2)”.

   ____________________

1954-55
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 111
[Final Examination. June, 1955]

Write half-hour answers to six of the following questions including no. 8

  1. (a) Explain and discuss (as to its validity) all that you think Marx meant in describing pre-Marxian socialist thought as “utopian,” and in claiming that his own new kind was “scientific.”
    (b) Briefly characterize the outlook and program either of Fourier or of Robert Owen, and discuss the questions whether, how far, and wherein it was “utopian” in Marx’s sense.
  2. Summarize briefly, and discuss critically, Marx’s general theory of the process and pattern of all human history, or social evolution.
  3. Give a general account and criticism of the main ideas in Marx’s critical analysis of capitalism and its prospects—the main things that he claimed to see and/or foresee as the economic system’s destined-to-become-fatal flaws, and the way in which they would develop and bring on its doom and the advent of socialism.
  4. Discuss what have tended to be the chief problems or difficulties of Marxian socialist parties, endeavoring to adhere closely to the teachings of Marx and at the same time to cope with the practical exigencies arising in their careers as political parties. Illustrate your points from the history of the German Social Democratic Party.
  5. Give a general account of English Fabian socialism—its main distinctive characteristics, ideas, aims, and tactics—in comparison and contrast with Marxian socialism.
  6. Explain and discuss what you think are the main attractions and disattractions of present-day Communism for the world’s economically backward countries.
  7. State and explain your opinions about (a) the theoretically possible and (b) the likely actual success of a (realized) socialism that would do its best to carry out Oscar Lange’s proposals, in serving the economic welfare of the people better than it could be served by private capitalism.
  8. Write a critical review of or commentary on Pigou’s essay “Socialism vs. Capitalism.”

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, … , Economics, … , Naval Science, Air Science, June, 1955. Included in bound volume Final Exams, Social Sciences, June, 1955 (HUC 7000.28, Vol. 110).

Image Source: O.H. Taylor in Harvard College, Class Album 1952.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Socialism Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Economics of socialism. Outline, readings, final exam. Schumpeter, 1943-44

 

Earlier Economics in the Rear-view Mirror posted the course outline and final examination for Joseph Schumpeter’s course on the economics of socialism that was given in the second semester of 1945-46. None of the final examination questions were shared between these two years, so together the exams provide a better idea of what was actually covered than either alone.

______________________

Course Announcement

Economics 11b. Economics of Socialism

Half-course (winter term). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at  10. Professor Schumpeter.

 

Source: Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences During 1943-44. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. 40, No. 21 (September 29, 1943), p. 33.

______________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 11b (winter term) Professor Schumpeter. –Economics of Socialism.

Total 26:  3 Graduates, 5 Seniors, 2 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 13 Navy.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1943-44, p. 56.

______________________

ECONOMICS 11b
1943-44
OUTLINE AND ASSIGNMENTS

  1. FIRST TWO WEEKS: The Socialist Issue.

Socialist ideas and socialist parties. Socialism and the labor movement. Laborite and intellectualist socialism. The Definition of Socialism.

H. W. Laidler*, History of Socialist Thought, 1927.
T.M. Sogge, “Industrial Classes in the U. S.  in 1930,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 28 (1933), pp. 199-203.
Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, article on Socialist and Labor Parties.

  1. THIRD TO FIFTH WEEK: The Theory of Centralist Socialism.

O. Lange and F. M. Taylor*, The Economic Theory of Socialism.
H. D. Dickinson, Economics of Socialism, 1939.

  1. SIXTH TO NINTH WEEK: The Economic Interpretation of History. The Class Struggle, and the Marxist Theory of Capitalism.

Karl Marx, Capital, Volume I, chs. I, IV, V, VI.
Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto
Paul M. Sweezy*, The Theory of Capitalist Development, 1942, chs. I-VI (pp. 1-108).

  1. TENTH TO TWELFTH WEEK: The Socialist Theory of the State and of the Proletarian Revolution, Imperialism, National Socialism.

V.I. Lenin, State and Revolution.
V. I. Lenin, Imperialism.
M. Dobb, Political Economy and Capitalism, ch. VII.
Paul M. Sweezy*, The Theory of Capitalist Development, Chs. XIII-XIX.

READING PERIOD ASSIGNMENT

Read E. Bernstein, Evolutionary Socialism, especially pp. 18-95, and survey again the items in the reading list marked *.

 

Source:Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1). Box 3, Folder “Economics, 1943-1944 (2 of 2)”.

______________________

1943-44
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11b
[Final. February, 1944]

One question may be omitted. Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.

  1. Describe briefly the emergence of either the English Independent Labour Party or the German Social Democratic Party.
  2. In the Second International, opinion was divided on the question whether socialists should or should not participate in bourgeois governments. What were the arguments that were adduced for and against? Which groups expressed the one and which the other view? Which view prevailed eventually within the Second International?
  3. What are the rules of rational allocation of productive resources in a socialist society, and how do they differ from the corresponding rules in a capitalist society (a) under conditions of perfect competition and (b) under conditions of monopolistic competition?
  4. State and criticize the Marxian proposition known as the Theory of Increasing Misery (“immiseration”).
  5. Most socialist writers recognize that the transition from the capitalist to the socialist form of life will raise a number of problems that are distinct from the problem of how to run a socialist society when established. What are those “transitional problems” and what methods have been suggested for dealing with them?
  6. What is meant by Reformism? By Revisionism? By Laborism?

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 8, Folder “Final examinations, Winter term, 1943-44”.

Image Source:  Harvard Class Album 1942.

Categories
Exam Questions Gender Harvard Radcliffe Socialism Suggested Reading

Harvard. Exams and reading period assignment for Programs of Social Reconstruction (Socialism). Mason, 1933.

 

In the collection of final examinations in the Harvard archives, I came across both the Radcliffe and Harvard final examinations for the identical course with the title “Programs of Social Reconstruction” taught by Edward S. Mason. This course was one of the undergraduate staples offered earlier by Thomas Nixon Carver that was handed off to Mason starting 1926/27. 

A few things I find interesting from the materials I was able to find for this year (Note: a course reading list for 1928 needs some work, will be posted later):

  • The final examination questions only cover Marxian socialist theory and movements except for the question  on the reading period assignment that is dedicated to contemporary U.S./U.K. reform. It is possible that earlier utopian socialist literature, Henry George, and anarchism were tested in a mid-term examination, or of course the course description had not been changed. The exact same course description was used by Mason for the 1928-29 academic year.
  • From the Harvard President’s report and the final exam (note the superscript “1” which means first term), it would appear that Mason taught the course in the first term of 1932-33 and not during the second term as announced earlier in the Harvard Register. So it does appear that he taught the course one semester to Harvard men and the following semester to Radcliffe women, so having different final examinations makes sense.
  • The Harvard exam as printed can be compared to the Radcliffe exam to see that there is an obvious type:  the first question only be allocated one hour and the remaining four questions would fill the rest of the examination time.

____________________

Radcliffe College Course Announcement

Economics 7c 2hf. Programs of Social Reconstruction

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 9. Asst. Professor E. S. Mason.

 

Source: Radcliffe College. Courses of Instruction, 1932-33. Page 87.

____________________

Harvard Course Announcement with Course Description

Economics 7c 2hf. Programmes of Social Reconstruction

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 10. Associate Professor Mason.

A comparison of the various radical programmes, such as socialism, communism, anarchism and the single tax, the theories upon which they are based, and the grounds of their attack upon the present industrial system. An examination of the various criteria of distributive justice, and of the social utility of the institution of property. A comparison of the merits of liberalism and authoritarianism, of radicalism and conservatism. An analysis also of the present tendencies toward equality under liberalism in this country.

 

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics, 1932-33 in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXIX, No. 32 (June 27, 1932), p. 74.

____________________

Course Enrollment (Harvard)

[Economics] 7c 1hf. Associate Professor Mason.—Programs of Social Reconstruction.

Total 42: 26 Seniors, 10 Juniors, 2 Sophomores, 4 Others.

 

Source: Report of the President of Harvard College, 1932-33, p. 65.

____________________

Reading Period Assignment

Economics 7c

Read one:

1. Norman Thomas, America’s Way Out.
2. Stuart Chase, A New Deal.
3. George Soule, A Planned Society.
4. Sidney and Beatrice Webb, A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003. Box 2, Folder “Economics, 1932-1933”.

____________________

1932-33
RADCLIFFE COLLEGE

ECONOMICS 7c
Final Examination

I

Allow about one hour.

  1. Write a critical review of the book you read for the reading period.

II

Answer four of the following questions.

  1. What position does technological change occupy in Marx’s theory of the decline of capitalism?
  2. What importance has economic imperialism for the tactics of a socialist party according to Marxian theorists?
  3. How do you explain the collapse of the Second International in 1914.
  4. Discuss the validity of the labor-hour as a unit of cost in a socialist planned economy.
  5. Can Marx’s theory of value be reconciled with his explanation of the tendency toward an equal rate of profit in all industries? Discuss.

Final. 1933

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Examination Papers, Finals 1933 (HUC 700028, No. 75). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…Economics,…Military Science, Naval Science. January—June, 1933.

____________________

1932-33
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 7c1
Final Examination

Allow about one hour.

  1. Write a review of the book you read for the reading period assignment.
  2. “The essence of the Marxian contribution to socialism was and is the discovery of the proletarian path to power.” Discuss.
  3. What does Lenin mean by economic imperialism?
  4. Consider the position in the history of socialist thought of one of the socialist leaders before Marx.
  5. “With his ‘socially necessary labor time’ Marx anticipated the Technocrats by three quarters of a century and proposed a technological measure of cost and value whose use would immediately put an end to all the stupid absurdities of the price system.” Discuss.

Final. 1933.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Examination Papers, Finals 1933 (HUC 700028, No. 75). Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions,…Economics,…Military Science, Naval Science. January—June, 1933.

Image Source:  Edward S. Mason in Harvard Album 1934.