The Labor enquirer., 1886-12-11
AueusTE comTE
Concluded from first page.l

Comte uses the phrases OF arlseocracY
in bis reasoning: 'The ANALYSIS by
which he (Aristotle) refuted the dan
eerous fancies of Plato about commun-
ity of property, evidences rectitude, q
sapacity and strength" etc.
Dangerous is term used by privi-
lege to fr1ehten Its assailants. Tim
plies weakness of position especially
when applied to such harmless thing
as fancy. Surely fancy is not dan
eerous when overwhelmed by sagacity
and strength. Small socities have been
formed on the basis of community Of
property, but met with no great dangers.
Ifthey failed and dissolved after time, /,
1t was owing to some imperfection IN
their application of Communism-per-
haps in not allowing enough freedom to
the individual; but danger was chiefly
fel. bv these who wished to accumulate
the labor products of others and could
not. There is no danger of starvation
IN such communities and when they
dissolve, the mem bers are in no greater
danger than other citizens.
1t seems strange that any one adVo-
eating the subordination of woman, CAL
get following. Comparing the social
with the individual organism, will not
prove the subordination of anv member
Of society, scientifically. The physical
organs cooperate but none is ruler or
ruled. The mind controls certain or
gans; If the whole organism of woman
is a part of mans organism then man
may properly rule woman. Individual
ism Is now too strong, as social force
to allow of any such arrangement as the
one Comte calls scientific. Says 10 hn,
Stuart Mill: Marriage IS at the pres
ent day the only actual form of serfdom
recognized by law" Here is food for
thought.
Comte as one Of a numerous class OF
arrangements who, by starting with the
movable, wish to establish themselves
as expounders of the unknowa1le They
consort with scientists at the outset. and
at the end, hob-nob with gods. Comte
was content with making god of HUI
manity. Yet he, with the rest, wished
to get subsistence from his philosophy
believing himself the high priest of HUI
manitY, why should he perform ordi-
nary work? Others of his class copy
him in this latter particular. In the
study of late specimens we see the ten
dency to regard individuals as organs OF
higher type in society; for instance,
when one of these cranks succeeds IN
infatuating group, the function of the
small boy in that group, Is to be
banged" around, on the principle that
child must be compelled to obey his
superiors or be put out of existence.
Such mental distortion might be cured
by reading Herbert spencer's Moral
Education" of children.
Moses was an early specimen of this
genus; Divine Scientist; but his meth
DDS show too plainly the motives of the
ordinary prestidigitateur, which, how
ever. r.e2sily deceived the people of that
age. Moses established reputation for
wisdom ard then proceeded up to the
mount to get points Of law. Here his
slight of hand methods were used efeC-
lively, though they would be hooted n
the present age. Let not the people
y break through" says Moses, Ito come up
unto the Lord, lest he break forth upon
Exodus, 1924.
LET not the people think" says
Comte, "lest they be not scientific"
Yet there is no instance where people
were harmed by thinking, nor one
where the Lord broke forth on anybody.
What Moses actually thought was {:
There is really no Lord here on the
mount; but must make the people be-
lieve there is, and that he is liable to
break forth, else they will come up and
discover my little tricks"
30 Comte thought: The people
must be induced to allow me and nv
fellow scientists and monopolists, the
function of thinking, else our power will
vanish
Go to, Comte; and metaphysiclans,
messiahs, quacks and idle frauds,-Se-
lah (Which being interpreted means:
The game is up) ZENo.