building. All this, of course, would mean the people--that is, all
society--duly organized, having in its own hands the means of
production, to be OWNED by no individual, but used by all as occasion
called for its use, and can only be done on those terms; on any other
terms people will be driven to accumulate private wealth for
themselves, and thus, as we have seen, to waste the goods of the
community and perpetuate the division into classes, which means
continual war and waste.

As to what extent it may be necessary or desirable for people under
social order to live in common, we may differ pretty much according
to our tendencies towards social life. For my part I can't see why
we should think it a hardship to eat with the people we work with; I
am sure that as to many things, such as valuable books, pictures, and
splendour of surroundings, we shall find it better to club our means
together; and I must say that often when I have been sickened by the
stupidity of the mean idiotic rabbit warrens that rich men build for
themselves in Bayswater and elsewhere, I console myself with visions
of the noble communal hall of the future, unsparing of materials,
generous in worthy ornament, alive with the noblest thoughts of our
time, and the past, embodied in the best art which a free and manly
people could produce; such an abode of man as no private enterprise
could come anywhere near for beauty and fitness, because only
collective thought and collective life could cherish the aspirations
which would give birth to its beauty, or have the skill and leisure
to carry them out. I for my part should think it much the reverse of
a hardship if I had to read my books and meet my friends in such a
place; nor do I think I am better off to live in a vulgar stuccoed
house crowded with upholstery that I despise, in all respects
degrading to the mind and enervating to the body to live in, simply