Page:David Atkins - The Economics of Freedom (1924).pdf/196

 multitudinous molecular forces, with all their terrific eddies, have been distributed and carried evenly to the piston-head. To ascertain the amount of a one-millionth part of this value, all we have to do is to imagine a million piston-heads whose areas are one-millionth of the original piston-head—all impelled by the same total force. If formal scientific support is required to confirm this, let us consider two of the basic laws of force, which are phrased as follows:

“A force is completely specified by its magnitude, direction and point of application.”

And further,—the law of transmissibility—

“The effect of any force applied to a rigid body at rest is the same no matter where in its own line of action the force is applied.”

If, then, we can grasp the possibility of measuring total basic national economic value ($Effort⁄Resistance$) in terms of total national census-area, we should be able to conceive the possibility of devising a relatively constant unit expressed in terms of area and population-density by which to measure fractional values; and if, by the elimination of unnecessary friction or resistance, there is a general acceleration of the flow of value, a share of this value will fall to the communist whether he calls himself socialist, single-taxer or bolshevik. It is what he has been after so long, in many cases with mixed motives—but there is no reason—except stubbornly maintained misconception—why he should feel compelled to smother the rest of us to get it. The value of general acceleration would be automatically distributed by means of a scientific unit of economic value based on census-area; and all that our over-eager friends need do is to get out and obtain for themselves just what they want by individual effort instead of legislation. (This provides, equally handsomely, for the communist.) As far as the scientist is concerned he can see little to choose between the individualistic gold-standardist and the communistic Russian: they both preach economic disorder with what they think are the most worthy motives. If Shakespeare, Newton,