The Labor enquirer., 1883-12-08
ssssxnas 1slk. !
Editor Labor Herald

Editor Labor Herald.
You are evidently il error in pour
criticism on Honorius' = article in your
last issue. You say s'his suggestive style
We translate to mean the power Of force,
or, in other words Communism" do
dislike so much to see in labor papers
the capitalistic cry against communion,
socialism, nihilism, or any other ism
that men advocate as q system which
will better the condition of the working
world. However, Communism does not
mean force. Communism is q social
economic system in which property be-
longs TO all alike. Honorius is not q
communist; he is rather an individualist.
He believes in private property, but he
does not believe that those things which
were not produced by labor should be,
property at all, All true social reformers
deny the right Of property in all things
that are not the result Of human labor.
It is necessary to grasp this idea firmly
before a clear idea of the different social
schools can be had.
Where the different schools disagree is
in the methods of obtaining the end.
The social democrat desires and strives
that the end shall be reached through
the ballot box. The social revolutionist
has no use for the ballot box, and SAYS
that great reforms only come through a
resort to physical force. In the light Of
history, the social reyolutionists has the
best of it. Turn back the leaves of his
tory, and wherever you find the pages
smeared with the blood of tyrants with
the blood of those who desired no
change, you find the succeeding pages
recording the acts of q better and nobler
race.
The anarchists, the consistent and
logical anarchists, would abolish the
coercive powers Of the state-in fact, he
would abolish authority-bY abstaining
from voting entirely. His hope is, not
in force, but in the absence of force. An
anarchist can believe in either commun-
ism or individualism, but there must be
no power to coerce the individual.
Communism has not proved imprac-
ticable, as you seem to think. Have we
not public libraries, public schools, pub
lie buildings of nearly all kinds? Do we
not own in common, gas works, water
works, arsenals, ships, horses, CATTLE -as
a matter of fact, do we not own a thou
sand things in common2 Look about
you everywhere and you will see the
practicability of communism, both CO.
ercive and voluntary. Whatever the
state does it must necessarily resort to
force to do it, because the state never
does anything in which it has the unani-
nous consent of the people. If under
stand Honorius-and have read his
articles for long while now, and hope
to some purpose-he would reduce the
powers of the state to a minimum-by
force if necessary; but he is not neces-
sarily communist.
It is, it seems to me, necessary that
we should learn to discriminate between
political system, an economic system,
and social system. A social-economic
system may be alike in two different
countries, and yet their political systems
may be totally different, and vice versa.
They may have similar social systems
and yet. they may differ in their eco
nomics. f
If we criticise each other in friendly
way in course of time we will probably
all arrive at the truth, and in that sign
we will conquer. JOSEPH A LABADIE.