Henry George, Progress and Poverty (New York: D. Appleton, 1882)
PREFACE TO FOURTH EDITION. (pp. vii-xi)
THE views herein set forth were in the main briefly stated in
a pamphlet entitled "Our Land and Land Policy," published
in San Francisco in 1871. I then intended, as soon as I could,
to present them more fully, but the opportunity did not for a
long time occur. In the mean while I became even more firmly convinced
of their truth, and saw more completely and clearly their relations;
and I also saw how many false ideas and erroneous habits of thought
stood in the way of their recognition, and how necessary it was
to go over the whole ground.
This I have here tried to do, as thoroughly as space would permit.
It has been necessary for me to clear away before I could build
up, and to write at once for those who have made no previous study
of such subjects, and for those who are familiar with economic
reasoning; and, so great is the scope of the argument that it
has been impossible to treat with the fullness they deserve many
of the questions raised. What I have most endeavored to do is
to establish general principles, trusting to my readers to carry
further their applications where this is needed.
In certain respects this book will be best appreciated by those
who have some knowledge of economic literature but no previous
reading is necessary to the understanding of the argument or the
passing of judgment upon its conclusions. The facts upon which
I have relied are not facts which can only be verified by a search
through libraries. They are facts of common observation and common
knowledge, which every reader can verify for himself, just as
he can decide whether the reasoning from them is or is not valid.
Beginning with a brief statement of facts which suggest this inquiry,
I proceed to examine the explanation currently given in the name
of political economy of the reason why, in spite of the increase
of productive power, wages tend to the minimum of a bare living.
This examination shows that the current doctrine of wages is founded
upon a misconception; that, in truth, wages are produced by the
labor for which they are paid, and should, other things being
equal, increase with the number of laborers. Here the inquiry
meets a doctrine which is the foundation and center of most important
economic theories, and which has powerfully influenced thought
in all directions-the Malthusian doctrine, that population tends
to increase faster than subsistence. Examination, however, shows
that this doctrine has no real support either in fact or in analogy,
and that when brought to a decisive test it is utterly disproved.
Thus far the results of the inquiry, though extremely important,
are mainly negative. They show that current theories do not satisfactorily
explain the connection of poverty with material progress, but
throw no light upon the problem itself, beyond showing that its
solution must be sought in the laws which govern the distribution
of wealth. It therefore becomes necessary to carry the inquiry
into this field. A preliminary review shows that the three laws
of distribution must necessarily correlate with each other, which
as laid down by the current political economy they fail to do,
and an examination of the terminology in use reveals the confusion
of thought by which this discrepancy has been slurred over. Proceeding
then to work out the laws of distribution, I first take up the
law of rent. This, it is readily seen, is correctly apprehended
by the current political economy. But it is also seen that the
full scope of this law has not been appreciated, and that it involves
as corollaries the laws of wages and interest-the cause which
determines what part of the produce shall go to the land-owner
necessarily determining what part shall be left for labor-and
capital. Without resting here, I proceed to an independent deduction
of the laws of interest and wages. I have stopped to determine
the real cause and justification of interest, and to point out
a source of much misconception-the confounding of what are really
the profits of monopoly with the legitimate earnings of capital.
Then returning to the main inquiry, investigation shows that interest
must rise and fall with wages, and depends ultimately upon the
same thing as rent-the margin of cultivation or point in production
where rent begins. A similar but independent investigation of
the law of wages yields similar harmonious results. Thus the three
laws of distribution are brought into mutual support and harmony,
and the fact that with material progress rent everywhere advances
is seen to explain the fact that wages and interest do not advance.
What causes this advance of rent is the next question that arises,
and it necessitates an examination of the effect of material progress
upon the distribution of wealth. Separating the factors of material
progress into increase of population and improvements in the arts,
it is first seen that increase in population tends constantly,
not merely by reducing the margin of cultivation, but by localizing
the economies and powers which come with increased population,
to increase the proportion of the aggregate produce which is taken
in rent, and to reduce that which goes as wages and interest.
Then eliminating increase of population, it is seen that improvement
in the methods and powers of production tends in the same direction,
and, land being held as private property, would produce in a stationary
population all the effects attributed by the Malthusian doctrine
to pressure of population. And then a consideration of the effects
of the continuous increase in land-values which thus springs from
material progress reveals in the speculative advance inevitably
begotten when land is private property a derivative but most powerful
cause of the increase of rent and the crowding down of wages.
Deduction shows that this cause must necessarily produce periodical
industrial depression, and induction proves the conclusion; while
from the analysis which has thus been made it is seen that the
necessary result of material progress, land being private property,
is, no matter what the increase in population, to force laborers
to wages which give but a bare living.
This identification of the cause that associates poverty with
progress points to the remedy, but it is to so radical a remedy
that I have next deemed it necessary to inquire whether there
is any other remedy. Beginning the investigation again from another
starting point, I have passed in examination the measures and
tendencies currently advocated or trusted in for the improvement
of the condition of the laboring masses. The result of this investigation
is to prove the preceding one, as it shows that nothing short
of making land common property can permanently relieve poverty
and check the tendency of wages to the starvation-point.
The question of justice now naturally arises, and the inquiry
passes into the field of ethics. An investigation of the nature
and basis of property shows that there is a fundamental and irreconcilable
difference between property in things which are the product of
labor and property in land; that the one has a natural basis and
sanction while the other has none, and that the recognition of
exclusive property in land is necessarily a denial of the right
of property in the products of labor. Further investigation shows
that private property in land always has, and always must, as
development proceeds, lead to the enslavement of the laboring
class; thus land-owners can make no just claim to compensation
if society choose to resume its right; that so far from private
property in land being in accordance with the natural perceptions
of men, the very reverse is true, and that in the United States
we are already beginning to feel the effects of having admitted
this erroneous and destructive principle.
The inquiry then passes to the field of practical statesmanship.
It is seen that private property in land, instead of being necessary
to its improvement and use, stands in the way of improvement and
use, and entails an enormous waste of productive forces; that
the recognition of the common right to land involves no shock
or dispossession, but is to be reached by the simple and easy
method of abolishing all taxation save that upon land-values.
And this an inquiry into the principles of taxation shows to be,
in all respects, the best subject of taxation.
A consideration of the effects of the change proposed then shows
that it would enormously increase production; would secure justice
in distribution; would benefit all classes; and would make possible
an advance to a higher and nobler civilization.
The inquiry now rises to a wider field, and recommences from another
starting-point. For not only do the hopes which have been raised
come into collision with the widespread idea that social progress
is only possible by slow race improvement, but the conclusions
we have arrived at assert certain laws which, if they are really
natural laws, must be manifest in universal history. As a final
test, it therefore becomes necessary to work out the law of human
progress, for certain great facts which force themselves on our
attention as soon as we begin to consider this subject, seem utterly
inconsistent with what is now the current theory. This inquiry
shows that differences in civilization are not due to differences
in individuals, but rather to differences in social organization;
that progress, always kindled by association, always passes into
retrogression as inequality is developed; and that even now, in
modern civilization, the causes which have destroyed all previous
civilizations are beginning to manifest themselves, and that mere
political democracy is running its course toward anarchy and despotism.
But it also identifies the law of social life with the great moral
law of justice, and, proving previous conclusions, shows how retrogression
may be prevented and a grander advance begun. This ends the inquiry.
The final chapter will explain itself.
The great importance of this inquiry will be obvious. If it has
been carefully and logically pursued, its conclusions completely
change the character of political economy, give it the coherence
and certitude of a true science, and bring it into full sympathy
with the aspirations of the masses of men, from which it has long
been estranged. What I have done in this book, if I have correctly
solved the great problem I have sought to investigate, is, to
unite the truth perceived by the school of Smith and Ricardo to
the truth perceived by the school of Proudhon and Lasalle; to
show that laissez faire (in its full true meaning) opens the way
to a realization of the noble dreams of socialism; to identify
social law with moral law, and to disprove ideas which in the
minds of many cloud grand and elevating perceptions.
This work was written between August, 1877, and March, 1879, and
the plates finished by September of that year. Since that time
new illustrations have been given of the correctness of the views
herein advanced, and the march of events-and especially that great
movement which has begun in Great Britain in the Irish land agitation-shows
still more clearly the pressing nature of the problem I have endeavored
to solve. But there has been nothing in the criticisms they have
received to induce the change or modification of these views-in
fact, I have yet to see an objection not answered in advance in
the book itself. And except that some verbal errors have been
corrected and a preface added, this edition is the same as previous
ones.
Henry George
New York, November, 1980