THE "NEW ORDER"
295
protectionist measures. Long before Hitler's ascendency in Ger–
many, a great number of capitalist enterprises were entirely de–
pendent upon state subsidies. The same was true to a less extent
in
other nations. However, the continuatioh of competition by way
of capital investments depends on the successful destruction of
capital in the sphere of distribution. National protection of capital
contradicts the destructive needs of the internationally determined
economy. The more the state interferes, the greater the difficulty
of overcoming the depression. The deeper the depression, the
greater the need for state interferences.
Furthermore, the more monopolization advanced, the less
was the crisis able to serve as the destroyer of capital. The monop–
olies were powerful enough to safeguard themselves at the cost of
the rest of society. The crisis in the traditional sense
disappeare~,
but prosperity in the traditional sense disappeared, too. Capitalist
development ceased to appear as a cycle of depression and pros–
perity, and economists began to ponder over the meaning of "long"
and "short' waves in the business cycle. They began to speak of
monopoly capitalism as a system of "imperfect competition." In
short, because monopolies could not be so easily destroyed as were
formerly the small enterprises, the competition that previously
deepened but also overcame the depression lost its "regulative"
force.
Every society is in need of regulation.
If
the competitive
process no longer serves as the "regulator," social chaos is bound
to increase. Short of the complete socialization of society, that is,
the attempt to regulate production and distribution directly and
consciously in accordance with social needs and desires, there is
no way of bringing "order" into the prevailing society other than
by a revival of competition. This fact is acknowledged by both
liberal and fascist economists. The former, however, advocate the
return to an earlier developmental stage; they advocate, that is,
breaking up existing monopolies and reestablishing more general
competition. The latter not only want, but actually bring about,
the return of competition.
The liberal attempt to re-capture the past is illusory. Breaking
up monopolies without altering the basis of capital production can
lead only to the re-formation of monopolies. One cannot have the
material basis of present-day capitalism, the widespread division
