CULTURE OR FREEDOM
JUST what happened when serfdom existed is now being repeated.Then the majority of the serf-owners and of people of the well-to-do classes, if they acknowledged the serf's position to be not quite satisfactory, yet recommended only such alterations as would not deprive the owners of what was essential to their profit; now, people of the well-to-do classes, admitting that the position of the workers is not altogether satisfactory, propose for its amendment only such measures as will not deprive the well-to-do classes of their advantages.As well-disposed owners then spoke of "paternal authority," and, like Go'g~,1 advised owners to be kind to their serfs, and to take care of them, but would not tolerate the idea of emancipation,2 considering it harmful and dangerous, just so the majority of well-to-do people to-day advise employers to look after the well-being of their work-people, but do not admit the thought of any such alteration of the economic structure of life as would set the laborers quite free.
And just as advanced Liberals then, while considering serfdom to be an immutable arrangement, demanded that the government should limit the power of the owners, and sympathised with the serfs' agitation, so the Liberals of to-day, while considering the existing order immutable demand that government should limit the powers of capitalists and manufacturers, and they sympathise with unions, and strikes, and, in general, with the workers'
agitation.And just as the most advanced men then demanded the emancipation of the serfs, but drew up a project which left the serfs dependent on private land-owners, or fettered them with tributes and land-taxes, so now the most advanced people demand the emancipation of the workmen from the power of the capitalists, the communalisation of the means of production, but yet would leave the workers dependent on the present apportionment and division of labor, which, in their opinion, must remain unaltered.
