; while even if in the
hands of the consumer an article turns out unfit, the system enables the fault
to be traced back to the original workman. The production of the commodities for
actual public consumption does not, of course, require by any means all the
national force of workers. After the necessary contingents have been detailed
for the various industries, the amount of labor left for other employment is
expended in creating fixed capital, such as buildings, machinery, engineering
works, and so forth.«
    »One point occurs to me,« I said, »on which I should think there might be
dissatisfaction. Where there is no opportunity for private enterprise, how is
there any assurance that the claims of small minorities of the people to have
articles produced, for which there is no wide demand, will be respected? An
official decree at any moment may deprive them of the means of gratifying some
special taste, merely because the majority does not share it.«
    »That would be tyranny indeed,« replied Dr. Leete, »and you may be very sure
that it does not happen with us, to whom liberty is as dear as equality or
fraternity. As you come to know our system better, you will see that our
officials are in fact, and not merely in name, the agents and servants of the
people. The administration has no power to stop the production of any commodity
for which there continues to be a demand. Suppose the demand for any article
declines to such a point that its production becomes very costly. The price has
to be raised in proportion, of course, but as long as the consumer cares to pay
it, the production goes on. Again, suppose an article not before produced is
demanded. If the administration doubts the reality of the demand, a popular
petition guaranteeing a certain basis of consumption compels it to produce the
desired article. A government, or a majority, which should undertake to tell the
people, or a minority, what they were to eat, drink, or wear, as I believe
governments in America did in your day, would be regarded as a curious
anachronism indeed. Possibly you had reasons for tolerating these infringements
of personal independence, but we should not think them endurable. I am glad you
raised this point, for it has given me a chance to show you how much more direct
and efficient is the control over production exercised by the individual citizen
now than it was in your day, when what you called private initiative prevailed,
though it should have been called capitalist initiative, for the average private
citizen had little