The Renewal of the Social Organism
GA 24
2. International Aspects of the Threefold Social Order
[ 1 ] An objection often made to the idea of a threefold organization of society is that any state that organizes itself on the threefold system must necessarily disturb its international relations with other states. Whether this objection makes sense can only be determined by examining the actual character of present-day international relations. In looking at the situation, what strikes one most is that in recent years the actual economic facts have developed along lines that are no longer congruent with national boundaries. Historical circumstances that determined these national boundaries have very little to do with the interests of the economic life led by the people living in those states. As a result, the national governments determine international relations in areas where it would be more natural for the economic groups directly concerned to do so. An industrial concern that needs the raw materials of a foreign nation ought to be able to obtain them by negotiating directly with the owners; everything pertaining to this arrangement should remain entirely within the economic cycle. It is plain to see that recently economic life has assumed forms tending towards this kind of self-contained functioning, and in this self-contained cycle of economic life (which is gradually tending to become a worldwide unity) the intervention of national interests represents a disturbing element. What have the historical circumstances that gave England dominion over India to do with the economic circumstances that make a German manufacturer go to India for his goods?
[ 2 ] The catastrophe of World War I plainly shows that the life of modern humanity, as it strives toward the unity of worldwide economy, will not bear disturbance through national territorial interests. This disturbance lies at bottom of the conflicts Germany became involved in with Western nations. It also plays a part in the conflicts with Eastern countries. Economic interests required a railway running from the Austro-Hungarian territory toward the southeast. The national interests of Austria and of the Balkan countries asserted claims, and the question arose whether that which the economy required ran counter to these national interests. Capital, which is supposed to serve the economy, thus becomes involved with national interests. The states want the capitalists to be at their service; the capitalists want the concentrated power of the state to serve their economic interests. Thus the economy is imprisoned by national territories; while in the latest phase of its own development, it is striving to spread beyond all national borders into a unified economic life.
[ 3 ] This internationalism of the economy indicates that in the future the various regions of the world economy will need to enter into relations independent of the relations that various people may have through life interests outside the economic sphere. The states will need to leave the establishment of economic relations to those persons or groups engaged in economic activity.
[ 4 ] If the cultural relations of the civilized world are not to fall into total dependence on economic interests, these relations will need to develop an international life of their own that is subject to their own special conditions. It is certainly not intended here to dispute the fact that economic relations may also supply a basis for cultural intercourse. However, it must be recognized that the cultural intercourse brought about in this way can be fruitful only if, at the same time, other relations are formed between the various peoples that arise solely from the needs of cultural life itself. In each of the various peoples, the cultural life of individuals emancipates itself from the economic conditions on which it rests, and takes all manner of forms that have nothing to do with the forms of economic life. The forms it takes must be free to enter into relations with corresponding forms of cultural life among other peoples—relations growing out of cultural life itself. There is no denying that at the present moment of human evolution, the international structure which culture is striving to assume is opposed by the egotistical impulse of the various peoples to shut themselves within their own nationalities. People endeavor to construct political entities whose boundaries are those of their nationalities. And then this endeavor is carried further—namely, an attempt is made to turn the closed national state into a closed economic domain as well.
[ 5 ] The aforementioned tendency towards a world economy will in the future work against these national egotisms. If these countertendencies are not to give rise to incessant conflict, the spiritual and cultural interests arising within these peoples must administer themselves in accordance with their own cultural identity, independent of economic conditions. International contacts should then arise out of these independent administrations. This can be done only if a region, governed by a common cultural life, marks its own boundaries that will be relatively independent of the boundaries that arise from the given conditions of economic life.
[ 6 ] Now, of course, the question immediately presents itself: How is the cultural life to draw necessary support from the economic life if the administrative boundaries of their two spheres do not coincide? To find the answer, one need only reflect that a self-governing cultural life confronts the independent economic life as an economic corporation. As an economic corporation, it can enter into agreements for its economic support with the economic administrative bodies of its regions, regardless of any larger economic region to which these administrative regions may belong. Anyone whose concepts of what is possible in practice is limited to what he has already seen, will look upon these proposals as “gray theory.” He will think, too, that the necessary arrangements will prove too complicated to work. Whether the arrangements prove complicated or not will depend entirely on the skill of the particular people who arrange them. However, no one should oppose measures demanded by the present-day necessities of the world for fear of supposed complications. (Compare this to what is said on the subject in Chapter 4 of my book Toward Social Renewal.)
[ 7 ] The international life of humanity is struggling to shape the cultural relations of the various peoples and the economic relations of the various parts of the world independently of each other. The threefold organization of the social organism takes this necessity of human evolution into account. In this threefold order, the legal sphere, founded on a democratic basis, constitutes the link between economics (where international relations are directed by economic necessities) and the life of spirit, which shapes international relations out of its own forces.
[ 8 ] Habits of thought engrained by the prevailing political and social forms might lead one to believe that a transformation of these forms is “pragmatically impossible.” But historical evolution will march on, destroying everything—even new measures—that arises from these old habits of thought. The vital necessities of modern humanity dictate that any further amalgamation of the spiritual, legal and economic spheres is an impossibility. That it is impossible was shown by the catastrophe of World War I: economic and cultural conflicts became conflicts between states that were then obliged to resolve themselves in a way that is impossible when cultural life opposes only cultural life, and economic interest opposes only economic interest.
[ 9 ] That it is possible to put the threefold system into practice in any single nation without damaging international relations (even though this nation will at first stand alone in the attempt) may be shown as follows. [ 10 ] Suppose a certain economic region wanted to fashion itself into a massive association within the framework of a national state. It would be unable to maintain profitable relations with foreign countries that remained capitalist. Institutions like those of a government and subject to central boards of economic control, do not give management the power to supply foreign countries with products that fulfill their needs. However a free hand may be given to the managers with respect to the taking of orders, they must adhere to the association's rules regarding procurement of raw materials. To be hemmed in between requirements from abroad and red tape at home would lead in practice to an impossible state of affairs. The same kind of difficulties would beset both the import and the export trades. Anyone who wants to prove that no fruitful economic intercourse is possible between a country that wishes to work on abstract socialist principles and capitalistic countries abroad, has only to point to such things. Every unprejudiced person will be obliged to admit that he is right.
[ 11 ] The idea of the threefold social order cannot be touched by such objections. It does not impose a state-like structure upon relations that are determined by economic interests themselves. According to the threefold idea, the managements of allied economic concerns will join together in associations; such associations will then link up with others that will distribute them according to the needs of consumers within that particular economic sphere. The management of an export business can act on its own perfectly free initiative in its foreign trade; and at home it will be in a position to make the most advantageous agreements with other associations for the procurement of requisite raw materials, and so on. The same will hold true for an import business. The only guiding rule in creating such an economic order will be that dealings with foreign countries should not lead to the producing or importing of goods whose production cost or selling price might injure the standard of living of the native population. Workers producing goods for export must receive what is required to maintain their standard of living as compensation for what they produce. Products that come from abroad must, generally speaking, be available at prices that allow the native worker who needs them to purchase them. It might happen (no doubt owing to the difference in economic conditions at home and abroad) that certain products, which must be obtained from abroad, may have too high a price. However, on careful examination one will find that situations such as these are taken into account in the ideas underlying the threefold social order. If the reader turns to Chapter 3 of my Toward Social Renewal he will find it said of a similar economic problem: “Moreover, an administration that occupies itself solely with economic processes will be able to bring about adjustments that show themselves within these economic processes to he necessary. Suppose, for instance, a business concern were not in a position to pay its investors the interest on the savings of their labor, then—if it is a business that is nevertheless recognized as meeting a need—it will be possible to arrange for other industrial concerns to make up the deficiency by the voluntary agreement of everyone concerned.” In the same way, the excessively high price of an imported product can be balanced by contributions from businesses that are able to yield returns higher than the requirements of those they employ.
[ 12 ] Anyone who strives for new ideas about the main aspects of economics will not—especially if these ideas are to be practical—be able to give indications for every special instance because in economic life, such special instances are innumerable. However, he will have to frame his thoughts such that anyone who applies them in the right way to a special case will find that they work in practice. One will find that the proposals put forward in my Toward Social Renewal work better the more one is mindful of their particular context of application. In particular, it will be found that the proposed form of an economic body belonging to the threefold social order permits unhampered economic intercourse with foreign countries, even though these countries do not have the threefold system.
[ 13 ] Only someone who failed to perceive that self-administration must be a necessary consequence of the inherent movement of economic life toward world unity could raise doubts as to the possibility of such commerce. In actual fact, a world economy that has been forced into the straight-jacket of separate political entities is striving of itself to break free. Any economic region that is the first to act in accordance with this striving cannot possibly be at a disadvantage compared to others that resist the universal trend of economic evolution. On the contrary, the only result will be that in the threefold social order the profits of foreign trade raise the standard of living of the entire population, while in the capitalist community the profits will benefit only a few. That the threefold social organism apportions it differently among the populace will not affect the balance of trade itself.
[ 14 ] Thus it may be seen that the threefold social order does not represent a reclusive utopia, but rather a number of practical impulses that one can begin to realize anywhere in life. That is what distinguishes this “idea” from the abstract “demands” of the various socialist parties. The socialists look for scapegoats for all the things that have become unbearable in social life. Having discovered a scapegoat, they declare it must be eliminated. The threefold social order speaks of the ways in which the existing order must be altered if that which is unbearable is to disappear. The threefold order is intent upon building up, in contrast to other ideas that can indeed criticize and destroy, but offer nothing constructive whatsoever. This becomes especially clear to any open-minded person who reflects on the foreign trade policy that would have to be implemented by any country adopting such destructive political principles alone. Besides destructive tendencies at home, disastrous foreign relations would result.
[ 15 ] There is no doubt that the economic conditions of any single country under the threefold social order cannot fail to act as a model for foreign countries. The circles concerned about a socially just distribution of wealth will strive to bring about the threefold system in their own country when they see how expediently it works for others. As the idea of the threefold commonwealth gains ground, the end that modern economic life strives for, through its own inherent tendencies, will be realized more and more. And although national interests unfavorable to these tendencies are still powerful in many parts of the world, the people in any field of economic life who have an understanding of the threefold social order need not for that reason be deterred from introducing it. The foregoing has shown that difficulties in international economic trade will not result from the threefold social order.
Internationale Lebensnotwendigkeiten und soziale Dreigliederung
[ 1 ] Eine Einwendung, die oft gegen die Idee der Dreigliederung des sozialen Organismus gemacht wird, ist, daß ein Staat, der diese Dreigliederung durchführt, seine internationalen Beziehungen zu anderen Staaten stören müsse. Welche Bedeutung dieser Einwand hat, wird man nur erkennen, wenn man das Wesen der internationalen Staatenverhältnisse in der Gegenwart ins Auge faßt. Am auffälligsten für eine dahingehende Beobachtung ist, daß die wirtschaftlichen Tatsachen in der neuesten Zeit Gestalten angenommen haben, die mit den Staatenabgrenzungen nicht mehr im Einklange stehen. Die geschichtlichen Bedingungen, aus denen sich diese Staatenabgrenzungen ergeben haben, haben wenig zu tun mit den Interessen des Wirtschaftslebens, das die in den Staatsgebieten lebenden Völker führen. Die Folge davon ist, daß die Staatsleitungen die internationalen Beziehungen herstellen, für deren Herstellung das naturgemäßere wäre, wenn sie durch die wirtschaftenden Personen oder Personengruppen unmittelbar zustande käme. Ein Industriebetrieb, der ein Rohprodukt eines auswärtigen Staates braucht, sollte zum Erhalt dieses Rohproduktes nichts anderes nötig haben, als sich mit der Verwaltung desselben auseinanderzusetzen. Und alles, was zu dieser Auseinandersetzung gehört, sollte sich nur innerhalb des Wirtschaftskreislaufes abspielen. Man kann sehen, daß in der neuesten Zeit das Wirtschaftsleben Formen angenommen hat, die auf ein solches Abschließen in sich selbst hinweisen. Und daß in dieses in sich geschlossene Wirtschaftsleben, das allmählich dahin strebt, über die ganze Erde hin eine Einheit zu werden, die staatlichen Interessen sich hineinstellen als störendes Element. Was haben die historischen Bedingungen, unter denen England die Herrschaft über Indien bekommen hat, zu tun mit den wirtschaftlichen Bedingungen, aus denen heraus ein deutscher Fabrikant Waren aus Indien bezieht?
[ 2 ] Die Weltkriegskatastrophe offenbart, daß das Leben der neueren Menschheit die Störung der nach Einheit strebenden Weltwirtschaft durch die Interessen der Stäatsgebiete nicht verträgt. Die Konflikte, in die Deutschland mit den Ländern des Westens gekommen ist, haben zum Untergrunde diese Störung. Und auch in die Konflikte mit den Ländern des Ostens spielt das gleiche hinein. Wirtschaftliche Interessen forderten eine Bahn aus dem österreichischungarischen Gebiete nach Südosten. Die Staatsinteressen Österreichs und diejenigen der Balkänländer machten sich geltend. Und es entstand die Frage, ob diesen Interessen nicht zuwiderläuft, was den wirtschaftlichen Forderungen entspricht. Das Kapital, das im Dienste der Wirtschaft stehen soll, wird dadurch in Zusammenhang gebracht mit den Staatsinteressen. Die Staaten wollen, daß ihre Kapitalisten in ihren Dienst sich stellen. Die Kapitalisten wollen, daß die im Staate konzentrierte Macht ihren wirtschaftlichen Interessen dienstbar werde. Das Wirtschaftsleben wird dadurch in die Staätsgebiete eingefangen, während es in seiner neueren Entwickelungsphase über alle Staatsgrenzen hinaus zu einem einheitlichen Wirtschaftsleben strebt.
[ 3 ] Diese Internationalität des Wirtschaftslebens weist darauf hin, daß in der Zukunft die einzelnen Gebiete der Weltwirtschaft in Beziehungen treten müssen, die unbhängig sind von den Beziehungen, in denen die Völker durch die außer dem Wirtschaftsgebiete liegenden Leberisinteressen stehen werden. Die Staaten werden die Herstellung der Wirtschaftsbeziehungen den an der Wirtschaft beteiligten Personen oder Personengruppen überlassen müssen.
[ 4 ] Sollen dadurch nicht die geistigen Kulturbeziehungen in restlose Abhängigkeit kommen von den Wirtschaftsinteressen, so müssen diese Beziehungen aus ihren eigenen Voraussetzungen heraus ihr internationales Leben entfalten. Es soll hier sicherlich nicht in Abrede gestellt werden, daß die wirtschaftlichen Beziehungen Grundlagen abgeben können auch für den geistigen Verkehr. Doch muß anerkannt werden, daß der in dieser Art bewirkte geistige Verkehr erst fruchtbar werden kann, wenn neben ihm sich Völkerbeziehungen bilden, die nur aus den Bedürfnissen des Geisteslebens selbst kommen. Im einzelnen Volke entringt sich das Geistesleben der Persönlichkeiten den wirtschaftlichen Untergründen. Es nimmt Gestaltungen an, die mit den Formen des Wirtschaftslebens nichts zu tun haben. Diese Gestaltungen müssen zu den entsprechenden bei andern Völkern in Beziehungen kommen können, die nur aus ihrem eigenen Leben hervorgehen. Es ist nicht zu leugnen, daß in dem gegenwärtigen Augenblicke der Menschheitsentwickelung der internationalen Gestaltung der geistigen Lebensgebiete der egoistische Drang der Völker nach Abschluß in ihrem Volkstum widerstrebt. Die Völker streben danach, sich Staatsgebilde zureditzuzimmern, deren Grenzen die ihrer Volkstümer sind. Und dieses Streben erweitert sich zu dem ändern, den geschlossenen Volksstaat auch zu einem geschlossenen Wirtschäftsgebiet zu machen.
[ 5 ] Die gekennzeichnete Tendenz der Weltwirtschaft wird diesen Volksegoismen in der Zukunft entgegenarbeiten. Und sollen nicht aus diesem Entgegenarbeiten nie endende Konflikte entstehen, so werden sich die in den Volkstümern auslebenden geistigen Kulturinteressen aus ihrem eigenen Wesen heraus unabhängig von den Wirtschaftsverhältnissen verwalten und aus diesen Verwaltungen heraus internationale Beziehungen bilden müssen. Das wird nicht anders möglich sein, als wenn sich die Gebiete, in denen gemeinsames Geistesleben herrscht, Grenzen geben, die relativ unabhängig sind von den Gebietsgrenzen, die aus den Voraussetzungen des Wirtschaftslebens entstehen.
[ 6 ] Es ist nun ganz selbstverständlich die Frage naheliegend, wie das Geistesleben aus dem Wirtschaftsleben seinen Unterhält beziehen soll, wenn die Verwaltungsgrenzen der beiden Gebiete nicht zusammenfallen. Die Antwort ergibt sich, wenn man bedenkt, daß ein sich selbst verwaltendes Geistesleben deni selbständigen Wirtschaftsleben als eine Wirtschaftskorporätion gegenübersteht. Diese letztere kann aber für ihre wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen mit den Wirtschaftsverwältungen ihres Gebietes Beziehungen eingehen, gleichgültig, zu welchem größeren Wirtschaftsgebiete diese Verwaltungen gehören. Wer sich als praktisch möglich nur dasjenige vorstellt, was er bisher gesehen hat, der wird, was hier vorgebracht wird, für graue Theorie halten. Und er wird glauben, daß die Ordnung der entsprechenden Verhältnisse an der Kompliziertheit derselben scheitern müsse. Nun, ob die Verhältnisse kompliziert sein werden oder nicht: das wird lediglich von der Geschicklichkeit derjenigen Persönlichkeiten abhängen, die mit ihrer Ordnung zu tun haben werden. Niemand aber sollte, weil er vor einer solchen vermeintlichen Kompliziertheit zurückschreckt, sich Maßnahmen entgegenstellen, die von den weltgeschichtlichen Notwendigkeiten der Gegenwart gefordert sind. (Man vergleiche damit die Ausführungen meines Buches «Die Kernpunkte der sozialen Frage», S.141.)
[ 7] Das internationale Leben der Menschheit strebt darnach, die geistigen Beziehungen der Völker und die wirtschaftlichen der einzelnen Erdgebiete voneinander unabhängig zu gestalten. Dieser Notwendigkeit in der Entwickelung der Menschheit wird durch die Dreigliederung der sozialen Organismen Rechnung getragen. In dem dreigliedrigen sozialen Organismus bildet das Rechtsleben auf demokratischer Grundlage das Band zwischen dem Wirtschaftsleben, das aus seinen Bedürfnissen heraus internationale Beziehungen herstellt, und dem Geistesleben, das solche aus seinen Kräften gestaltet.
[ 8 ] Man mag aus den Denkgewohnheiten, denen man aus den bisherigen Staatsverhältnissen heraus ergeben ist, noch so stark an dem Glauben hängen, daß die Umwandlung dieser Verhältnisse «praktisch undurchführbar» sei: Die geschichtliche Entwickelung wird über alles dasjenige zerstörend hinwegschreiten, das als Maßnahmen aus diesen Denkgewohnheiten sich erhalten oder neu entstehen will. Denn für die Lebensbedürfnisse der neueren Menschheit wird die weitere Verschmelzung des geistigen, des rechtlichen und wirtschaftlichen Gebietes eine Unmöglichkeit. Durch die Weltkriegskatästrophe hat sich diese Unmöglichkeit geoffenbart. Sie beruht darauf, daß wirtschaftliche und Geisteskulturkonflikte sich in der Gestalt der Staatsgegnerschaften ergaben und dadurch in einer Art zum Austrag kommen mußten, die nicht möglich ist, wenn nur Geistesleben dem Geistesleben und Wirtschaftsinteresse dem Wirtschaftsinteresse gegenüberstehen.
[ 9 ] Daß es möglich ist, ohne mit dem internationalen Leben in Konflikt zu kommen, in einem einzelnen Staatsgebilde an die Durchführung der Dreigliederung zu gehen, auch wenn dieses Gebilde zunächst mit dieser Durchführung allein steht, das kann in folgender Art gezeigt werden.
[ 10 ] Ein Wirtschaftsgebiet, das sich im Rahmen eines Staates als große Genossenschaft ausbilden wollte, könnte ökonomisch vorteilhafte Beziehungen zum Auslande, das kapitalistisch weiter wirtschaftet, nicht aufrechterhalten. Einrichtungen, die den staatlichen ähnlich sind und die Zenträlwirtschaftsverwaltungen unterstellt sind, nehmen der Betriebsleitung die Möglichkeit, an das Ausland Produkte zu liefern, die dessen Forderungen entsprechen. Mag auch in bezug auf Entgegennahme von Bestellungen dem Betriebsleiter eine weitgehende Selbständigkeit zugestanden werden; in der Beschaffung von Rohstoffen müßte er sich an die genossenschaftlichen Verwaltungsinstänzen halten. In der Praxis gäbe dieses Eingeklemmtsein zwischen den Forderungen des Auslandes und dem Geschäftsgang der inneren Verwaltung unmögliche Verhältnisse. Den gleichen Schwierigkeiten wie die Ausfuhr müßte die Einfuhr begegnen. Wer beweisen will, daß ein ersprießlicher wirtschaftlicher Verkehr eines Landgebietes, das nach abstrakt sozialistischen Grundsätzen wirtschaften will, mit dem kapitalistischen Ausland nicht möglich ist, der hat nur nötig, auf diese Dinge hinzuweisen, und ihm wird von Unbefangenen Recht gegeben werden müssen.
[ 11 ] Die Idee der Dreigliederung des sozialen Organismus kann von solchen Einwendungen nicht betroffen werden. Sie stülpt nicht einen staatsähnlichen Organisationsplan über die Beziehungen, die durch die wirtschaftlichen Interessen selbst gegeben sind. Es ist in ihrem Sinne, daß sich die Verwaltungen gleichgerichteter Wirtschaftszweige in Assoziationen zusammenschließen, und daß solche Assoziationen sich weiter angliedern an andere, durch die ihre Produkte die den Konsumbedürfnissen des Wirtschaftsgebietes entsprechende Verbreitung finden. Eine Betriebsleitung, die für den Export arbeitet, wird in dem Verkehr mit dem Auslande aus völlig freier Initiative handeln können; und sie wird in der Läge sein, im Inlande solche Verbindungen mit anderen Assoziationen einzugehen, die ihr in der Belieferung von Rohstoffen und ähnlichem am förderlichsten sind. Ein gleiches wird von einem Importbetrieb gelten. Maßgebend wird bei dieser Gestaltung des Wirtschaftskreislaufes nur sein, daß durch den Verkehr mit dem Auslande nicht Produkte hergestellt oder eingeführt werden, deren Herstellungskosten oder Kaufpreis die Lebenshaltung der arbeitenden Bevölkerung des Inlandes beeinträchtigen. Der Arbeiter, der für das Ausland arbeitet, wird als Entgelt für seine Produkte so viel erhalten müssen, als für seine Lebenshaltung notwendig ist. Und Produkte, die aus dem Auslande bezogen werden, müssen im allgemeinen zu Preisen zu haben sein, die dem inländischen Arbeiter, der dafür Bedürfnisse hat, es möglich machen, sie zu erwerben. Dabei kann sich allerdings durch die Verschiedenheit der wirtschaftlichen Verhältnisse des In- und Auslandes ergeben, daß für gewisse Produkte, die man aus dem Ausland beziehen muß, zu hohe Preise sich notwendig machen. Man wird finden, wenn man genau zusieht, daß in den Gedanken, welche der Dreigliederung des sozialen Organismus zugrunde liegen, solchen Tatsachen Rechnung getragen ist. Man lese, was S.126 meiner «Kernpunkte der sozialen Frage» für eine Tatsache des Wirtschaftslebens, die der hier gekennzeichneten ähnlich ist, gesagt ist: «Auch wird eine Verwaltung, die es nur zu tun hat mit dem Kreislauf des Wirtschaftslebens, zu Ausgleichen führen können, die etwa aus diesem Kreislauf heraus als notwendig sich ergeben. Sollte zum Beispiel ein Betrieb nicht in der Lage sein, seinen Därleihern ihre Arbeitsersparnisse zu verzinsen, so wird, wenn er doch als einem Bedürfnis entsprechend anerkannt wird, aus andern Wirtschaftsbetrieben nach freier Übereinkunft mit allen an den letzteren beteiligten Personen das Fehlende zugeschossen werden können.» So auch wird der zu hohe Preis eines Auslandsproduktes durch Zuschüsse ausgeglichen werden können, die aus Betrieben herrühren, welche gegenüber den Bedürfnissen der in ihnen Arbeitenden zu hohe Erträgnisse liefern können.
[ 12 ] Wer nach Gedanken über die leitenden Gesichtslinien des Wirtschaftslebens strebt, der wird gerade dann, wenn diese Gedanken praktisch sein sollen, nicht für alle Einzelheiten Angaben machen können. Denn dieser Einzelheiten des Wirtschaftslebens sind unermeßlich viele. Er wird aber die Gedanken so gestalten müssen, daß jeder, der sachgemäß diese Gedanken auf einen Einzelfall anwendet, damit praktisch zurecht kommt. Man wird bei den Vorschlägen, die in meinen «Kernpunkten der sozialen Frage» gemacht werden, finden, daß dieses «Zurechtkommen» um so besser sich gestaltet, je sachgemäßer man verfährt. Insbesondere wird man finden, daß die vorgeschlagene Struktur eines Wirtschäftskörpers, der dem dreigliedrigen sozialen Organismus angehört, einen hemmungslosen wirtschaftlichen Verkehr mit dem Auslande gestanet, auch wenn dieses Ausland die Dreigliederung nicht hat.
[ 13 ] Daß sich dieser Verkehr als unmöglich erweisen könnte, wird derjenige nicht behaupten, der einsieht, daß die Selbstverwaltung des Wirtschaftskreislaufes ein Ergebnis sein muß der nach Einheit strebenden Wirtschaft über die ganze Erde hin. Es ist doch so, daß die in einzelne Staatsformen gezwängte Erdwirtschaft diese Staatsformen zu überwinden strebt. Ein Wirtschaftsgebiet, das diesem Streben zuerst gerecht wird, kann wohl unmöglich in Nachteil kommen gegenüber anderen Gebieten, die sich der allgemeinen Wirtschaftsentwickelung entgegenstellen. Was sich ergeben wird, kann vielmehr nur dieses sein. In dem dreigliedrigen sozialen Organismus wird das Erträgnis des Auslandshändels der Lebenshaltung der ganzen Bevölkerung zugute kommen können; in dem kapitalistischen Gemeinwesen wird es einigen Wenigen zukommen. Die Handelsbilanz selbst wird aber nicht dadurch beeinträchtigt werden, daß sie in dem dreigegliederten sozialen Organismus sich anders über die Bevölkerungskreise verteilt als in dem ungegliederten.
[ 14 ] Man sieht hieraus, daß mit der Dreigliederung nicht eine weltfremde Utopie gegeben ist, sondern eine Summe von praktischen Impulsen, mit deren Verwirklichung in jedem Punkte des Lebens begonnen werden kann. Das unterscheidet diese «Idee» von den abstrakten «Forderungen» der verschiedenen sozialistischen Parteien. Diese Forderungen suchen Sündenböcke für dasjenige, was im sozialen Leben unerträglich geworden ist. Und sie sagen, wenn sie solche Sündenböcke gefunden haben, die müssen beseitigt werden. Die Idee der Dreigliederung spricht von dem, was aus dem Bestehenden heraus werden muß, wenn die Unzuträglichkeiten verschwinden sollen. Sie will aufbauen im Gegensatz zu andern Ideen, die wohl kritisieren, die auch abbauen können, die aber keinen Hinweis auf einen Aufbau geben. Besonders deutlich zeigt sich dem Unbefangenen dieses, wenn er bedenkt, wozu mit Bezug auf den wirtschaftlichen Auslandsverkehr ein Staatsgebiet geführt werden müßte, das sich im Sinne solcher bloß abbauenden Prinzipien gestalten wollte. Zu den Abbautendenzen im Innern kämen auch noch die das Leben untergrabenden Mißverhältnisse zum Ausland.
[ 15 ] Man kann wohl nicht zweifeln, daß die wirtschaftlichen Verhältnisse eines einzelnen dreigliedrigen sozialen Organismus vorbildlich auf das Ausland wirken müßten. Die an einer sozial gerechten Güterverteilung beteiligten Kreise werden in ihrem Lande die Dreigliederung anstreben, wenn sie deren Zweckmäßigkeit bei anderen sehen. Und mit dieser Ausbreitung der Idee der Dreigliederung wird immer mehr das erreicht werden, wonach das Wirtschaftsleben der neueren Zeit nach in ihm selbst liegenden Tendenzen strebt. Daß diesen Tendenzen abgünstige Staatsinteressen heute in vielen Erdgebieten noch mächtig sind, braucht die Menschen eines Wirtschaftsgebietes, die Verständnis für diese Dreigliederung haben, nicht abzuhalten, sie einzuführen. Das hier Gesagte zeigt, daß ihnen internationale Schwierigkeiten im Wirtschaftsleben nicht erwachsen können.
International necessities of life and social tripartism
[ 1 ] One objection that is often raised against the idea of the tripartite structure of the social organism is that a state that implements this tripartite structure must disrupt its international relations with other states. The significance of this objection can only be recognized if one considers the nature of international relations between states in the present day. The most striking observation in this respect is that the economic facts of recent times have taken on forms which are no longer in harmony with the delimitation of states. The historical conditions from which these state boundaries have arisen have little to do with the interests of the economic life of the peoples living in the state territories. The consequence of this is that the state governments establish international relations, the establishment of which would be more natural if they were established directly by the economic individuals or groups of individuals. An industrial enterprise that needs a raw product from a foreign state should have no other need to obtain this raw product than to deal with the administration of the same. And everything involved in this dispute should only take place within the economic cycle. It can be seen that in recent times economic life has assumed forms which point to such self-containedness. And that in this self-contained economic life, which is gradually striving to become a unity over the whole earth, the interests of the state interpose themselves as a disturbing element. What have the historical conditions under which England came to dominate India to do with the economic conditions under which a German manufacturer obtains goods from India?
[ 2 ] The catastrophe of the world war reveals that the life of modern mankind cannot tolerate the disruption of the world economy, which is striving for unity, by the interests of national territories. The conflicts that Germany has entered into with the countries of the West are based on this disruption. And it also plays a role in the conflicts with the countries of the East. Economic interests demanded a railroad from the Austro-Hungarian territories to the south-east. The national interests of Austria and those of the Balkan countries asserted themselves. And the question arose as to whether these interests did not run counter to economic demands. Capital, which is supposed to serve the economy, is thus linked to the interests of the state. The states want their capitalists to serve them. The capitalists want the power concentrated in the state to serve their economic interests. Economic life is thus caught up in the territories of the state, while in its newer phase of development it strives beyond all state borders to a unified economic life.
[ 3 ] This internationality of economic life indicates that in the future the individual areas of the world economy will have to enter into relations which are independent of the relations in which the peoples will stand as a result of the liveris interests lying outside the economic area. The states will have to leave the establishment of economic relations to the persons or groups of persons involved in the economy.
[ 4 ] If intellectual cultural relations are not to become completely dependent on economic interests, these relations must develop their international life from their own preconditions. It is certainly not to be denied here that economic relations can also provide a basis for intellectual intercourse. But it must be recognized that spiritual intercourse effected in this way can only become fruitful if it is accompanied by international relations which arise solely from the needs of spiritual life itself. In the individual people the spiritual life of personalities escapes from its economic foundations. It takes on forms that have nothing to do with the forms of economic life. These forms must be able to relate to the corresponding forms in other peoples, which only emerge from their own lives. It cannot be denied that at the present moment in the development of mankind the egoistic urge of the peoples for unity in their nationality is opposed to the international organization of the spiritual spheres of life. The peoples strive to carve out for themselves state formations whose borders are those of their nationalities. And this striving extends to the change of making the closed national state into a closed economic area as well.
[ 5 ] The marked tendency of the world economy will work against these national egoisms in the future. And if this counteraction is not to give rise to never-ending conflicts, the spiritual cultural interests expressed in the nationalities will have to manage themselves independently of economic conditions and form international relations out of this management. This will be possible only if the territories in which a common spiritual life prevails establish boundaries that are relatively independent of the territorial boundaries that arise from the conditions of economic life.
[ 6 ] It is now quite natural to ask how spiritual life is to derive its sustenance from economic life if the administrative boundaries of the two areas do not coincide. The answer arises when one considers that a self-governing spiritual life stands opposite the independent economic life as an economic corporation. The latter, however, can for its economic foundations enter into relations with the economic administrations of its area, no matter to which larger economic area these administrations belong. Whoever imagines as practically possible only what he has seen so far will regard what is presented here as gray theory. And he will believe that the order of the corresponding relations must fail because of their complexity. Now, whether the relations will be complicated or not will depend only on the skill of those personalities who will have to deal with their organization. But no one should, because he shrinks from such a supposed complexity, oppose measures that are demanded by the world-historical necessities of the present. (Compare this with the remarks in my book "Die Kernpunkte der sozialen Frage", p.141.)
[ 7] The international life of mankind strives to shape the spiritual relations of the peoples and the economic relations of the individual regions of the earth independently of one another. This necessity in the development of mankind is taken into account by the tripartite structure of social organisms. In the tripartite social organism, legal life on a democratic basis forms the link between economic life, which establishes international relations out of its needs, and spiritual life, which shapes such relations out of its powers.
[ 8 ] No matter how strongly one may cling to the belief that the transformation of these relations is "practically impracticable" due to the habits of thought to which one is devoted from the previous state relations: historical development will proceed destructively over everything that wants to be preserved or newly emerge as measures from these habits of thought. For for the vital needs of modern mankind the further fusion of the spiritual, legal and economic spheres will become an impossibility. The catastrophe of the world war has revealed this impossibility. It is based on the fact that economic and intellectual-cultural conflicts arose in the form of state antagonisms and thus had to come to a head in a way that is not possible if only intellectual life is opposed to intellectual life and economic interest to economic interest.
[ 9 ] The fact that it is possible, without coming into conflict with international life, to proceed with the implementation of the threefold structure in a single state structure, even if this structure initially stands alone with this implementation, can be shown in the following way.
[ 10 ] An economic area that wanted to form itself as a large cooperative within the framework of a state could not maintain economically advantageous relations with foreign countries that continue to operate on a capitalist basis. Institutions that are similar to state institutions and are subordinate to central economic administrations deprive the management of the possibility of supplying foreign countries with products that meet their requirements. Even if the plant manager is granted a high degree of autonomy with regard to receiving orders, he would have to abide by the cooperative administrative institutions in the procurement of raw materials. In practice, this squeezing between the demands of foreign countries and the course of business of the internal administration would create impossible conditions. Imports would have to face the same difficulties as exports. Whoever wants to prove that a profitable economic intercourse between a country that wants to do business according to abstract socialist principles and a capitalist foreign country is not possible need only point out these things, and he will have to be proved right by unbiased people.
[ 11 ] The idea of the tripartite organization of the social organism cannot be affected by such objections. It does not impose a state-like plan of organization on the relations which are given by the economic interests themselves. It is in its spirit that the administrations of similar branches of the economy should unite in associations, and that such associations should join with others through which their products can find the distribution corresponding to the consumer needs of the economic area. A management working for export will be able to act on its own initiative in its dealings with foreign countries; and it will be in a position to enter into such connections with other associations at home as will be most beneficial to it in the supply of raw materials and the like. The same will apply to an import company. The only decisive factor in this organization of the economic cycle will be that, through trade with foreign countries, products are not manufactured or imported whose production costs or purchase price adversely affect the standard of living of the domestic working population. The worker who works for a foreign country must receive as payment for his products as much as is necessary for his standard of living. And products obtained from abroad must generally be available at prices that make it possible for the domestic worker who needs them to acquire them. The difference in economic conditions at home and abroad may, however, make it necessary to charge too high prices for certain products that have to be obtained from abroad. You will find, if you look carefully, that such facts are taken into account in the ideas on which the threefold organization of the social organism is based. Read what is said on p. 126 of my "Kernpunkte der sozialen Frage" for a fact of economic life similar to the one described here: "An administration that is only concerned with the cycle of economic life will also be able to lead to compensations that arise as necessary from this cycle. If, for example, a business is not in a position to pay interest to its borrowers on their labor savings, then, if it is recognized as meeting a need, it will be possible to make up the shortfall from other businesses by free agreement with all those involved in the latter." In the same way, the excessively high price of a foreign product can be compensated for by subsidies that come from enterprises that can deliver yields that are too high for the needs of those working in them.
[ 12 ] Whoever strives for thoughts on the leading features of economic life will not be able to provide information on all the details, especially if these thoughts are to be practical. For these details of economic life are immeasurably many. But he will have to formulate the ideas in such a way that anyone who applies them appropriately to an individual case will be able to cope with them practically. One will find in the suggestions made in my "Key Points of the Social Question" that the more appropriately one proceeds, the better this "coming to terms" will be. In particular, one will find that the proposed structure of an economic body belonging to the tripartite social organism allows unrestricted economic intercourse with foreign countries, even if these foreign countries do not have the tripartite structure.
[ 13 ] Those who realize that the self-government of the economic cycle must be the result of an economy striving for unity throughout the world will not maintain that this intercourse could prove impossible. The fact is that the earth economy, forced into individual forms of government, strives to overcome these forms of government. An economic area that first fulfills this striving cannot possibly be at a disadvantage compared to other areas that oppose the general economic development. What will result can only be this. In the tripartite social organism the proceeds of foreign trade will be able to benefit the standard of living of the whole population; in the capitalist community it will accrue to a few. The balance of trade itself, however, will not be affected by the fact that in the tripartite social organism it is distributed differently over the population circles than in the unstructured one.
[ 14 ] You can see from this that the threefold structure is not an unworldly utopia, but a sum of practical impulses, the realization of which can begin at any point in life. This distinguishes this "idea" from the abstract "demands" of the various socialist parties. These demands seek scapegoats for what has become intolerable in social life. And they say that once they have found such scapegoats, they must be eliminated. The idea of threefolding speaks of what must become of what already exists if the inconveniences are to disappear. It wants to build up, in contrast to other ideas that criticize, that can also dismantle, but that give no indication of building up. This becomes particularly clear to the unbiased person when he considers what a national territory would have to be led to in terms of economic foreign trade if it wanted to shape itself according to such merely deconstructive principles. In addition to the degrading tendencies at home, there would also be the disproportions with foreign countries that undermine life.
[ 15 ] There can be no doubt that the economic conditions of a single tripartite social organism should have an exemplary effect on foreign countries. The circles involved in a socially just distribution of goods will strive for tripartism in their own country if they see its expediency in others. And with this spread of the idea of threefolding, that which the economic life of modern times strives for according to its own inherent tendencies will be achieved more and more. The fact that state interests favorable to these tendencies are still powerful today in many areas of the world need not prevent the people of an economic area who understand this threefold structure from introducing it. What has been said here shows that international difficulties in economic life cannot arise for them.