also claims to be an international socialist, it would be interesting to have him explain on what theory he advocates disparity of exchange, or defends the existing disparity of exchange as being beneficial to the proletariat; if a falling price level benefits the proletariat of gold countries, how does a rising price level benefit the proletariat of silver countries? Or conversely, if a falling price level injures the proletariat of gold countries, how can a rising price level injure the proletariat of silver countries? And if disparity of exchange between the gold group and the silver group is a good thing for the proletariat why not have disparity of exchange between the different countries of each group? Universal monometallism might be a good thing, but until that comes it is advantageous to have the money of different countries interchangeable at a fixed par of exchange; and it appears to us inconsistent in the monometallist, who claims to be the friend of the working men of the world to ride rough shod over all those who do not happen to live in gold using countries.
International parity of exchange, even without an international unit of account, but especially combined with such a unit, would be a most powerful bond of union between the working men of all countries. It would facilitate comparisons and tend to equalize economic conditions in all countries and pave the way for uniform wages, hours, etc. It is one of those steps which capitalism will take in its own interest, but which will prove to be a step towards its own overthrow.
WHERE WE DIFFER.
Marx says the quantity of money is regulated by the quantity of commodities.
We say the quantity of money, with simple gold circulation, is not regulated at all, but is accidental and irregular, depending on the output of the mines.
Marx says the total quantity of gold in existence cuts no figure, because it does not all circulate as money.
We say that after deducting a certain percentage for ornaments, for use in the arts and for hoards, all the rest circulates as money, and that other things being equal, an increase in the total quantity of gold means an increase in circulation. The total quantity of gold does cut a figure.
Marx says that price level is the cause and money is the effect. We say that money is the cause and price level is the effect. That until money is created there is no such thing as price level.
Marx says that the relative value of gold and commodities is fixed by barter at the mines before the gold is coined.
We say that after the establishment of free coinage there is no such thing as barter for gold, except with reference to the coinage value of the gold.
