The world as I see it by Albert Einstein (first e reader .txt) 📕

to pay heavily
for the victory of 1918; for that victory has been largely
responsible for holding it down in the most degrading of all forms
of slavery. Let your efforts in this struggle be unceasing. You
have a mighty ally in the German reactionaries and militarists. If
France clings to universal military service, it will be impossible in
the long run to prevent its introduction into Germany. For the
demand of the Germans for equal rights will succeed in the end;
and then there will be two German military slaves to every
French one, which would certainly not be in the interests of
France.

Only if we succeed in abolishing compulsory service altogether
will it be possible to educate the youth in the spirit of
reconciliation, joy in life, and love towards all living creatures.

I believe that a refusal on conscientious grounds to serve in the
army when called up, if carried out by 50,000 men at the same
moment, would be irresistible. The individual can accomplish
little here, nor can one wish to see the best among us devoted to
destruction through the machinery behind which stand the three
great powers of stupidity, fear, and greed.

A third ditto

Dear Sir,

The point with which you deal in your letter is one of prime
importance. The armament industry is, as you say, one of the
greatest dangers that beset mankind. It is the hidden evil power
behind the nationalism which is rampant everywhere.…

Possibly something might be gained by nationalization. But it is
extremely hard to determine exactly what industries should be
included. Should the aircraft industry? And how much of the
metal industry and the chemical industry?

As regards the munitions industry and the export of war material,
the League of Nations has busied itself for years with efforts to
get this horrible traffic controlled--with what little success, we all
know. Last year I asked a well-known American diplomat why
Japan was not forced by a commercial boycott to desist from
her policy of force. "Our commercial interests are too strong,"
was the answer. How can one help people who rest satisfied
with a statement like that?

You believe that a word from me would suffice to get something
done in this sphere? What an illusion! People flatter me as long
as I do not get in their way. But if I direct my efforts towards
objects which do not suit them, they immediately turn to abuse
and calumny in defence of their interests. And the onlookers
mostly keep out of the light, the cowards! Have you ever tested
the civil courage of your countrymen? The silently accepted
motto is "Leave it alone and don't speak of it." You may be sure
that I shall do everything in my power along the lines you
indicate, but nothing can be achieved as directly as you think.

Women and War

In my opinion, the patriotic women ought to be sent to the front in the
next war instead of the men. It would at least be a novelty in this dreary
sphere of infinite confusion, and besides--why should not such heroic
feelings on the part of the fair sex find a more picturesque outlet than in
attacks on a defenceless civilian?

Thoughts on the World Economic Crisis

If there is one thing that can give a layman in the sphere of economics
the courage to express an opinion on the nature of the alarming economic
difficulties of the present day, it is the hopeless confusion of opinions
among the experts. What I have to say is nothing new and does not pretend to
be anything more than the opinion of an independent and honest man who,
unburdened by class or national prejudices, desires nothing but the good of
humanity and the most harmonious possible scheme of human existence. If in
what follows I write as if I were clear about certain things and sure of the
truth of what I am saying, this is done merely for the sake of an easier
mode of expression; it does not proceed from unwarranted self-confidence or
a belief in the infallibility of my somewhat simple intellectual conception
of problems which are in reality uncommonly complex.

As I see it, this crisis differs in character from past crises in that
it is based on an entirely new set of conditions, due to rapid progress in
methods of production. Only a fraction of the available human labour in the
world is needed for the production of the total amount of consumption-goods
necessary to life. Under a completely free economic system this fact is
bound to lead to unemployment. For reasons which I do not propose to analyse
here, the majority of people are compelled to work for the minimum wage on
which life can be supported. If two factories produce the same sort of
goods, other things being equal, that one will be able to produce them more
cheaply which employs less workmen--i.e., makes the individual worker work
as long and as hard as human nature permits. From this it follows inevitably
that, with methods of production what they are to-day, only a portion of the
available labour can be used. While unreasonable demands are made on this
portion, the remainder is automatically excluded from the process of
production. This leads to a fall in sales and profits. Businesses go smash,
which further increases unemployment and diminishes confidence in industrial
concerns and therewith public participation in these mediating banks;
finally the banks become insolvent through the sudden withdrawal of deposits
and the wheels of industry therewith come to a complete standstill.

The crisis has also been attributed to other causes which we will now
consider.

(1) Over-production. We have to distinguish between two things
here--real over-production and apparent over-production. By real
overproduction I mean a production so great that it exceeds the demand. This
m4y perhaps apply to motor-cars and wheat in the United States at the
present moment, although even that is doubtful. By "over-production" people
usually mean a condition of things in which more of one particular article
is produced than can, in existing circumstances, be sold, in spite of a
shortage of consumption-goods among consumers. This condition of things I
call apparent over-production. In this case it is not the demand that is
lacking but the consumers' purchasing-power. Such apparent over-production
is only another word for a crisis, and therefore cannot serve as an
explanation of the latter; hence people who try to make over-production
responsible for the crisis are merely juggling with words.

(2) Reparations. The obligation to pay reparations lies heavy on the
debtor nations and their industries, compels them to go in for dumping, and
so harms the creditor nations too This is beyond dispute. But the appearance
of the crisis in the United States, in spite of the high tariff-wall
protecting them, proves that this cannot be the principal cause of the world
crisis. The shortage of gold in the debtor countries due to reparations can
at most serve as an argument for putting an end to these payments; it cannot
be dragged in as an explanation of the world crisis.

(3) Erection of near tariff-walls. Increase in the unproductive burden
of armaments. Political in security owing to latent danger of war. All these
things add considerably to the troubles of Europe, but do not materially
affect America. The appearance of the crisis in America shows that they
cannot be its principal causes.

(4) The dropping-out of the two Powers, China and Russia. This blow to
world trade also does not touch America very nearly, and therefore cannot be
a principal cause of the crisis.

(5) The economic rise of the lower classes since the War. This,
supposing it to be a reality, could only produce a scarcity of goods, not an
excessive supply.

I will not weary the reader by enumerating further contentions which do
not seem to me to get to the heart of the matter. Of one thing I feel
certain: this same technical progress which, in itself, might relieve
mankind of a great part of the labour necessary to its subsistence, is the
main cause of our present troubles. Hence there are those who would in all
seriousness forbid the introduction of technical improvements. This is
obviously absurd. But how can we find a more rational way out of our
dilemma?

If we could somehow manage to prevent the purchasing-power of the
masses, measured in terms of goods, from sinking below a certain minimum,
stoppages in the industrial cycle such as we are experiencing to-day would
be rendered impossible.

The logically simplest but also most daring method of achieving this is
a completely planned economy, in which consumption-goods are produced and
distributed by