The "social Question" in Edward Bellamy's Looking Backward

In the novel Looking Backward, a proposed solution to the “social question” of the late 19th century was introduced by Edward Bellamy. According to John A. Hobson, the social question is defined as follows: “Given a number of human beings with certain development of physical and mental faculties and of social institutions, in command of given natural resources, how can they best utilize these powers for the attainment of the most complete satisfaction” (Howerth 1906, 255). Thus, it incorporates a multitude of topics that are up for debate including industrial, moral, political, and other social issues. There is no correct answer to the social question, and consequently it will always be a topic of discussion that sparks greater controversy during times of social and economic struggle. As a result, in the final years of the 19th century, “Everybody who was interested in the so-called ‘social question’” – and almost everybody was – “debated the book” (Beaumont 2007). In a society dominated by capitalism, Bellamy was able to convey his belief on ‘nationalism’ and the benefits it would provide to the United States. He did this by captivating readers with a romantic and intriguing storyline. In his novel, Bellamy addressed various areas that he believed required reform. This paper will further examine three of those areas including, the wealth distribution, private education, and the inequality towards women. Additionally, it will focus on Bellamy’s vision and ideas, in addition to the opinions of other Americans on how to manage these issues. Ultimately, Edward Bellamy and the citizens of the United States shared the desire to better the American society, however the approach to doing so may have differed among individuals, as there were many proposed solutions to the social question at the turn of the century

The first area within the social question that needed to be addressed was the division of wealth between the rich and poor. During the Gilded Age, America had adopted a capitalist society, which greatly favoured business owners, while placing the working class at a significant disadvantage. The rapid industrialization of America, in addition to the limited rules and regulations of labour laws, lead to a vast expansion of the pre-existing pay gap.. There were differing opinions on how to handle this issue, as some individuals valued the well-being of all citizens more than others. Bellamy argued for economic equalization, whereas adversaries to his beliefs thought that the existing Social Darwinism was healthy. Thus, these individuals continued to look for opportunities to maximize output and efficiency. The Industrial Revolution brought America great technological advancement, which helped business owners substantially. It enabled machinery to be more efficient, while also allowing many skilled human-jobs to become automated. This reduced expenses for the rich and took jobs, and a limited income, away from the working class. Thomas O’Donnell is an example of a skilled labourer who was fired from his job and replaced by a machine that allowed a child to operate at a considerably lower expense. O’Donnell described how his family, along with many others, were struggling to feed and clothe themselves due to the loss of work and increase in poverty. .In his final remark to the chairman, Thomas stated, “They are doing everything of that kind that they possibly can to crush down the poor people” (Fink 2015, 98). It was hard working labourers like Thomas O’Donnell that Edward Bellamy desired to help the most. Bellamy’s views on wealth distribution contradicted the current system entirely. He announced in Looking Backward that America would someday become a country of economic equalization. Bellamy’s ideas were presented in the novel through two main characters, Dr. Leete, who represented Bellamy, and Julian, who represented the unenlightened capitalists. In explaining how the economy works in the new world, Dr. Leete informs Julian that there is no need for money in a purely public system. Everything is owned by the state and thus everyone works for the state. Employees would therefore be compensated with food, shelter and limited spending privileges. In a purely public system everyone is paid the same because while they may work in different disciplines, they all contribute the same effort each day and can be rewarded accordingly. Julian tried to explain to Dr. Leete the system used in the Gilded Age, only to realize its flaws in the process. “In our day the market rate determined the price of labor of all sorts, as well as of goods. The employer paid as little as he could, and the worker got as much. It was not a pretty system ethically, I admit; but … there seemed to us no other practical way of doing it” (Beaumont 2007, 40). While Bellamy’s suggestion would help to disperse wealth among all citizens and improve overall quality of life, as Julian put it, it may not be practical. In contrast to Bellamy, Frederick W. Taylor was a businessman that obsessed over maximizing efficiency, in his quest to find the ‘Ideal Worker.’ Taylor used the Principles of Scientific Management to increase the worker’s output by changing the pay structure to commission-based, compensating per ton loaded. This would increase pay for some, as one of Fink’s documents (2015, 102-104) tells a story of a man named Schmidt who was able to earn $1.85 per day under the new system, compared to the previous daily rate of $1.15. However, under the old system the average labourer was loading 12.5 tons a day and in order to receive $1.85 per day, Schmidt had to load 47 tons of pig iron. This more beneficial to the employer as they were able to lower cost but increase daily output. It also allowed for Social Darwinism to take full effect as those who could not load 31.25 tons per day, a 250% increase from the previous average, would not be paid as well as before. It also would phase-out weaker men, through injury or lack of ability to feed their family. While there is no doubt Frederick’s methodology improved efficiency, his ‘survival of the fittest’ mentality did not look after the well being of people physically incapable of moving that amount. Bellamy and Taylor’s stance on wealth distribution differed immensely, as both positions were opposing extremes. In addition, there were many other beliefs on this social question, many of which provided a medium that helped to address the quality of life of society while still incentivizing employees to perform their job to the best of their ability.

A second factor regarding the ‘social question’ that raised disputes was America’s education system. At the turn of the 19th century, America realized that “Public education was a necessary social investment, that popular aspirations and national social and economic well-being demanded