now if this utopian world is to be in some degree parallel to contemporary thought, it must have been concerned, it may be still concerned, with many unsettled problems of currency, and with the problems that centre about a standard of value. gold is perhaps of all material substances the best adapted to the monetary purpose, but even at that best it falls far short of an imaginable ideal. it undergoes spasmodic and irregular cheapening through new discoveries of gold, and at any time it may undergo very extensive and sudden and disastrous depreciation through the discovery of some way of transmuting less valuable elements. the liability to such depreciations introduces an undesirable speculative element into the relations of debtor and creditor. when, on the one hand, there is for a time a check in the increase of the available stores of gold, or an increase in the energy applied to social purposes, or a checking of the public security that would impede the free exchange of credit and necessitate a more frequent production of gold in evidence, then there comes an undue appreciation of money as against the general commodities of life, and an automatic impoverishment of the citizens in general as against the creditor class. the common people are mortgaged into the bondage of debt. and on the other hand an unexpected spate of gold production, the discovery of a single nugget as big as st. paul’s, let us say — a quite possible thing — would result in a sort of jail delivery of debtors and a financial earthquake.

it has been suggested by an ingenious thinker that it is possible to use as a standard of monetary value no substance whatever, but instead, force, and that value might be measured in units of energy. an excellent development this, in theory, at any rate, of the general idea of the modern state as kinetic and not static; it throws the old idea of the social order and the new into the sharpest antithesis. the old order is presented as a system of institutions and classes ruled by men of substance; the new, of enterprises and interests led by men of power.

now i glance at this matter in the most incidental manner, as a man may skim through a specialist’s exposition in a popular magazine. you must figure me, therefore, finding from a casual periodical paper in our inn, with a certain surprise at not having anticipated as much, the utopian self of that same ingenious person quite conspicuously a leader of thought, and engaged in organising the discussion of the currency changes utopia has under consideration. the article, as it presents itself to me, contains a complete and lucid, though occasionally rather technical, explanation of his newest proposals. they have been published, it seems, for general criticism, and one gathers that in the modern utopia the administration presents the most elaborately detailed schemes of any proposed alteration in law or custom, some time before any measure is taken to carry it into effect, and the possibilities of every detail are acutely criticised, flaws anticipated, side issues raised, and the whole minutely tested and fined down by a planetful of critics, before the actual process of legislation begins.

the explanation of these proposals involves an anticipatory glance at the local administration of a modern utopia. to anyone who has watched the development of technical science during the last decade or so, there will be no shock in the idea that a general consolidation of a great number of common public services over areas of considerable size is now not only practicable, but very desirable. in a little while heating and lighting and the supply of power for domestic and industrial purposes and for urban and inter-urban communications will all be managed electrically from common generating stations. and the trend of political and social speculation points decidedly to the conclusion that so soon as it passes out of the experimental stage, the supply of electrical energy, just like drainage and the supply of water, will fall to the local authority. moreover, the local authority will be the universal landowner. upon that point so extreme an individualist as herbert spencer was in agreement with the socialist. in utopia we conclude that, whatever other types of property may exist, all natural sources of force, and indeed all strictly natural products, coal, water power, and the like, are inalienably vested in the local authorities (which, in order to secure the maximum of convenience and administrative efficiency, will probably control areas as large sometimes as half england), they will generate electricity by water power, by combustion, by wind or tide or whatever other natural force is available, and this electricity will be devoted, some of it to the authority’s lighting and other public works, some of it, as a subsidy, to the world-state authority which controls the high roads, the great railways, the inns and other apparatus of world communication, and the rest will pass on to private individuals or to distributing companies at a uniform fixed rate for private lighting and heating, for machinery and industrial applications of all sorts. such an arrangement of affairs will necessarily involve a vast amount of book-keeping between the various authorities, the world-state government and the customers, and this book-keeping will naturally be done most conveniently in units of physical energy.

it is not incredible that the assessment of the various local administrations for the central world government would be already calculated upon the estimated total of energy, periodically available in each locality, and booked and spoken of in these physical units. accounts between central and local governments could be kept in these terms. moreover, one may imagine utopian local authorities making contracts in which payment would be no longer in coinage upon the gold basis, but in notes good for so many thousands or millions of units of energy at one or other of the generating stations.

now the problems of economic theory will have undergone an enormous clarification if, instead of measuring in fluctuating money values, the same scale of energy units can be extended to their discussion, if, in fact, the idea of trading could be entirely eliminated. in my utopia, at any rate, this has been done, the production and distribution of common commodities have been expressed as a problem in the conversion of energy, and the scheme that utopia was now discussing was the application of this idea of energy as the standard of value to the entire utopian coinage. every one of those giant local authorities was to be free to issue energy notes against the security of its surplus of saleable available energy, and to make all its contracts for payment in those notes up to a certain maximum defined by the amount of energy produced and disposed of in that locality in the previous year. this power of issue was to be renewed just as rapidly as the notes came in for redemption. in a world without boundaries, with a population largely migratory and emancipated from locality, the price of the energy notes of these various local bodies would constantly tend to be uniform, because employment would constantly shift into the areas where energy was cheap. accordingly, the price of so many millions of units of energy at any particular moment in coins of the gold currency would be approximately the same throughout the world. it was proposed to select some particular day when the economic atmosphere was distinctly equable, and to declare a fixed ratio between the gold coinage and the energy notes; each gold lion and each lion of credit representing exactly the number of energy units it could buy on that day. the old gold coinage was at once to cease to be legal tender beyond certain defined limits, except to the central government, which would not reissue it as it came in. it was, in fact, to become a temporary token coinage, a token coinage of full value for the day of conversion at any rate, if not afterwards, under the new standard of energy, and to be replaceable by an ordinary token coinage as time went on. the old computation by lions and the values of the small change of daily life were therefore to suffer no disturbance whatever.

the economists of utopia, as i apprehended them, had a different method and a very different system of theories from those i have read on earth, and this makes my exposition considerably more difficult. this article upon which i base my account floated before me in an unfamiliar, perplexing, and dream-like phraseology. yet i brought away an impression that here was a rightness that earthly economists have failed to grasp. few earthly economists have been able to disentangle themselves from patriotisms and politics, and their obsession has always been international trade. here in utopia the world state cuts that away from beneath their feet; there are no imports but meteorites, and no exports at all. trading is the earthly economists’ initial notion, and they start from perplexing and insoluble riddles about exchange value, insoluble because all trading finally involves individual preferences which are incalculable and unique. nowhere do they seem to be handling really defined standards, every economic dissertation and discussion reminds one more strongly than the last of the game of croquet alice played in wonderland, when the mallets were flamingoes and the balls were hedgehogs and crawled away, and the hoops were soldiers and kept getting up and walking about. but economics in utopia must be, it seems to me, not a theory of trading based on bad psychology, but physics applied to problems in the theory of sociology. the general problem of utopian economics is to state the conditions of the most efficient application of the steadily increasing quantities of material energy the progress of science makes available for human service, to the general needs of mankind. human labour and existing material are dealt with in relation to that. trading and relative wealth are merely episodical in such a scheme. the trend of the article i read, as i understood it, was that a monetary system based upon a relatively small amount of gold, upon which the business of the whole world had hitherto been done, fluctuated unreasonably and supplied no real criterion of well-being, that the nominal values of things and enterprises had no clear and simple relation to the real physical prosperity of the community, that the nominal wealth of a community in millions of pounds or dollars or lions, measured nothing but the quantity of hope in the air, and an increase of confidence meant an inflation of credit and a pessimistic phase a collapse of this hallucination of possessions. the new standards, this advocate reasoned, were to alter all that, and it seemed to me they would.

i have tried to indicate the drift of these remarkable proposals, but about them clustered an elaborate mass of keen and temperate discussion. into the details of that discussion i will not enter now, nor am i sure i am qualified to render the multitudinous aspect of this complicated question at all precisely. i read the whole thing in the course of an hour or two of rest after lunch — it was either the second or third day of my stay in utopia — and we were sitting in a little inn at the end of the lake of uri. we had loitered there, and i had fallen reading because of a shower of rain. . . . but certainly as i read it the proposition struck me as a singularly simple and attractive one, and its exposition opened out to me for the first time clearly, in a comprehensive outline, the general conception of the economic nature of the utopian state.