`What does it mean?' replied Owen contemptuously.`It means that if the Editor of the Obscurer put that in his paper as an argument against Socialism, either he is of feeble intellect himself or else he thinks that the majority of his readers are.That isn't an argument against Socialism - it's an argument against the hypocrites who pretend to be Christians - the people who profess to "Love their neighbours as themselves" - who pretend to believe in Universal Brotherhood, and that they do not love the world or the things of the world and say that they are merely "Pilgrims on their way to a better land".As for why I don't do it - why should I? I don't pretend to be a Christian.But you're all "Christians" - why don't you do it?'
`We're not talkin' about religion,' exclaimed Crass, impatiently.
`Then what are you talking about? I never said anything about "Sharing Out" or "Bearing one another's burdens".I don't profess to "Give to everyone who asks of me" or to "Give my cloak to the man who take away my coat".I have read that Christ taught that His followers must do all these things, but as I do not pretend to be one of His followers I don't do them.But you believe in Christianity: why don't you do the things that He said?'
As nobody seemed to know the answer to this question, the lecturer proceeded:
`In this matter the difference between so-called "Christians" and Socialists is this: Christ taught the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Men.Those who today pretend to be Christ's followers hypocritically profess to carry out those teachings now.But they don't.They have arranged "The Battle of Life" system instead!
`The Socialist - very much against his will - finds himself in the midst of this horrible battle, and he appeals to the other combatants to cease from fighting and to establish a system of Brotherly Love and Mutual Helpfulness, but he does not hypocritically pretend to practise brotherly love towards those who will not agree to his appeal, and who compel him to fight with them for his very life.He knows that in this battle he must either fight or go under.Therefore, in self-defiance, he fights; but all the time he continues his appeal for the cessation of the slaughter.He pleads for the changing system.He advocates Co-operation instead of Competition: but how can he co-operate with people who insist on competing with him? No individual can practise co-operation by himself! Socialism can only be practised by the Community - that is the meaning of the word.At present, the other members of the community - the "Christians" -deride and oppose the Socialist's appeal.
`It is these pretended Christians who do not practise what they preach, because, all the time they are singing their songs of Brotherhood and Love, they are fighting with each other, and strangling each other and trampling each other underfoot in their horrible "Battle of Life"!
`No Socialist suggests "Sharing out" money or anything else in the manner you say.And another thing: if you only had a little more sense you might be able to perceive that this stock "argument" of yours is really an argument against the present system, inasmuch as it proves that Money is in itself of no use whatever.Supposing all the money was shared out equally; and suppose there was enough of it for everyone to have ten thousand pounds; and suppose they then all thought they were rich and none of them would work.What would they live on? Their money? Could they eat it or drink it or wear it? It wouldn't take them very long to find out that this wonderful money -which under the present system is the most powerful thing in existence -is really of no more use than so much dirt.They would speedily perish, not from lack of money, but from lack of wealth - that is, from lack of things that are made by work.And further, it is quite true that if all the money were distributed equally amongst all the people tomorrow, it would all be up in heaps again in a very short time.But that only proves that while the present Money System remains, it will be impossible to do away with poverty, for heaps in some places mean little or nothing in other places.Therefore while the money system lasts we are bound to have poverty and all the evils it brings in its train.'
`Oh, of course everybody's an idjit except you,' sneered Crass, who was beginning to feel rather fogged.
`I rise to a pint of order,' said Easton.
`And I rise to order a pint,' cried Philpot.
`Order what the bloody 'ell you like,' remarked Harlow, `so long as I'aven't got to pay for it.'
`Mine's a pint of porter,' observed the man on the pail.
`The pint is,' proceeded Easton, `when does the lecturer intend to explain to us what is the real cause of poverty.'
`'Ear, 'ear,' cried Harlow.`That's what I want to know, too.'
`And what I should like to know is, who is supposed to be givin' this 'ere lecture?' inquired the man on the pail.
`Why, Owen, of course,' replied Harlow.
`Well, why don't you try to keep quiet for a few minutes and let 'im get on with it?'
`The next B--r wot interrupts,' cried Philpot, rolling up his shirt-sleeves and glaring threateningly round upon the meeting.`The next b--r wot interrupts goes out through the bloody winder!'
At this, everybody pretended to be very frightened, and edged away as far as possible from Philpot.Easton, who was sitting next to him, got up and crossed over to Owen's vacant seat.The man on the pail was the only one who did not seem nervous; perhaps he felt safer because he was, as usual, surrounded by a moat.
`Poverty,' resumed the lecturer, consists in a shortage of the necessaries of life - or rather, of the benefits of civilization.'
`You've said that about a 'undred times before,' snarled Crass.
`I know I have; and I have no doubt I shall have to say it about five hundred times more before you understand what it means.'
`Get on with the bloody lecture,' shouted the man on the pail.`Never mind arguin' the point.'
`Well, keep horder, can't you?' cried Philpot, fiercely, `and give the man a chance.'