Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-05-08
THE RIGHT TO TALK"

Referring to the Anarchists and Social
lists our evening contemporary says-the
italics are ours: Let them have the right
to think and talk as they will, but the mo-
ment they lift finger against social order
the iron hand of justice should clutch
them by the throat. This spurious Social
ism can be, and ought to be, choked out of
existence in the United States" That is
sugar-coating poison. They have not the
right, and should not have right to :" talk"
as they please, when talk is a threat to
law, order and property. Their blows are
not to be feared. The lifting of their
fingers against social order" is nothing
Violence and rebellion and inhumanity
and brute force the people of this Repub-
lie know how to meet and crush. 1t is the
talk of the Socialists that is dangerous.
1t is the poison in the food, not the poisoner
we have reason to fear. 1t is the insiduous
Installing into the minds of the people of
the damnable philosophy of the Socialists
that is dangerous. 1t is the sowing OF
tares we should guard against The right
of free speech is a cherished right, sub
structural to our liberties; but 1t does not.
and never did, include, protect or license
the right to advise the destruction of the
Government the invasion of personal
rights, resistance to law and the overthrow
of constitutional guarantees. Spurious
socialism ~ Who is to define it I? Who
| to draw the line between the genuine and
the counterfeit? Are we to infer that our
contemporary believes that genuine social
ism ought not be choked out of
existence? If so, what school of
socialism is not dangerous to Ameri-
can institutions? As we write, there comes
to our desk the american Catholic Quarterly
Rerie,r, in which an able writer in the in
| terests of labor thus defines socialism, de-
claring it to be a crazy dream. For con-
venienee we adopt it by way of illustra-
ton:
| Socialism cOntemplateS Such q reconstruction
of human society that all human productive
action shall be regulated by the State. 1t would
make, were 1t carried into practical effect. each
| individual a mere atom of the entire social az
| gregate, having no rights apart from or indie
| pendent of that aggregate, and without per
| sonal freedom or personal choice as To what he
| shall do where he shall work or to what use
| the fruits of his labor shall be put.
Now, we say, that talk" based on such
declaration of principle as that uttered on
the highway would tend to breaches OF
the peace, and do produce them, and do
incite the people to do murder, to commit
larceny and overthrow and upturn the
| fundamental principles upon which the
| republic rests. If that is genuine Social
ism, it is bad enough. If it is spurious, it
| is no worse. If the laws recognize the
right to preach such doctrine, for the pur-
pose of allowing men to incite to unlawful
action, they need to be amended, since
Socialism, in the practical of the present,
is but conspiracy to deprive men of the
right to liberty, the right to possess prop
erty and the right to enjoy it, which rights
our form of government guarantees its
citizens. As an abstract speculation, with
Socialism we have nothing to do, and peo-
pie may talk of it in generalities to their
hearts content, but when men so speculat-
ing band together and "talk" to incite
others to specific action destructive of the
rights assured under our form of govern
ment, then such talk" is, or should be,