Chapter 57 Chapter 8 The Calculation of Socialism (2) The Truth of the 1935 Controversy-5

Fives In this context, it is easy to understand that Dobb's radical solution would not have had many followers, and that there were many younger socialists who sought their way out in exactly the opposite direction.While Dobb wants to suppress the remnants of freedom or competition that still exist in traditional socialist theoretical assumptions, many recent discussions have aimed to reintroduce competition in its entirety.In Germany, such proposals have already been made and are under discussion.But in Britain, this idea is still in the embryonic stage.Dickinson's proposal is a smaller step in that direction.However, it is known that some younger economists have gone further in thinking about these issues and are ready to go all the way to restore perfect competition, at least in their point of view, they are not concerned with the maintenance of all material production by the state. The ownership of the means conflicts.Although it is not yet possible to mention their published works, what we can gather from the conversations and discussions alone is enough to make some study of their views worth our time.

In many ways, these programs are very interesting.The common basic idea is: there should be a market and competition between independent entrepreneurs or managers of various enterprises, and therefore there should be money prices; ), entrepreneurs are not the masters of the means of production they use, but salaried government officials who work and produce under the direction of the state, not for profit, with the result that the selling price of the product just recoups its cost. It is pointless to ask whether such a theory is still what is commonly called socialism.In general, it seems that it should be included under that banner.The more important question is: Should it still be considered planning?It appears that it involves no more planning than the rational legal framework for capitalism.If we speak purely by definition, we can recognize that in this theory the direction of economic activity will all be directed towards competition, and that such planning will be limited to the provisions of some permanent framework within which the Concentrated action will be transformed into individual initiative and creativity.Moreover, this kind of planning or that kind of central production organization - which he thought could organize human behavior more rationally than "chaotic" competition - would disappear altogether.But the extent to which this is actually achieved depends, of course, on the extent to which competition is introduced.That is to say, it depends on the crucial question, which is important in all respects discussed here: what is the nature of that independent unit, that is, the unit bought and sold in the market.

At first glance, such a system may appear to be of two types.We can either assume that there is only competition among various industries, and that each industry is regarded as only one firm; or that each industry has a large number of independent firms, which compete with each other; In one case, such a proposal would really avoid most of the objections to central planning, but it would create problems of its own.These questions are very intriguing.In their purest sense, they raise legitimate questions about private property in its general and fundamental aspects.The question, then, is not whether a central authority can rationally determine production and distribution, but whether individuals who are neither owners of property nor directly interested in the means of production under their jurisdiction can successfully assume responsibility and make decisions .Why should the use of any existing production equipment always be connected with a personal interest in the profits and losses these equipment produce?Is there any decisive reason here?Or is it really no more than the individual administrator—who, in the system in question, is the social representative exercising the power of property—will do his duty or use it to the best of his ability for a public purpose?