Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1888-05-12

made to favor every untrammeled
member of society, then must also
the significance Of the State requir-
ing culture be bounded by no limit,
and the State must become the self
conscious embodiment and basis Of
the entire social fabric.
SOCIALISM AND ANARCHlSM.
In opposition to such a constitu-
ton of the State come the anarchists,
who reject the State IN toto; who
array themselves against every form
Of force, and, therefore, deny the
rights of the majority as against the
rights of the minority.
We maintain against the postua-
tons Of the anarchists, that they
neither understand the nature of the
State nor the constitution of society
nor have ever understood either
of these things.
In certain sense, the State is
bond Of union, a conception of the
mind; its real elements are its citi-
zens, to whom all rights and duties
appertaln as a consequence Of their
relation to it.
When, therefore, each association,
each cooperative union has its pur-
pose, when these represent an indi-
vidual unity, it is self-eyident that,
in the union which we call a State,
a real and absolute opposition of
opinion cannot exist among members
without division and it's consequent
dissolution as Il body polite.
In order to deprive this conflict of
opinion of its power this resistance
which will be irrepressiblc-it will
be essential that the State be upheld
in its authority for u purpose of
warding off the coming victory of
socialism and of frustrating the
growing influence Of individual free
dom.
This hostile power lies, in a des-
potlc State, i'll a monarchy-in a
democratic State, in the majority of
voters.
The annulling of majority rule,
and with it, necessarily, centraliza-
ton, or still more, the realization of
individual endeavor now emancipated
! from legal constraint, would be
called in anti-communistic language,
a complete ''back down" in the mat
ter of production, and would be called
bidding defiance to Natures laws;
this teaches lis that really great and
valuable things can only be produced
through the cooperation of al and
that the achievement Of the isolated
individual and the profit of the
same becomes greater according as
the unity Of the State becomes more
perfect.
1t appears from the foregoing that
the more extended the State, and the
closer the pohtico-economical union
is, the more uniform will the land,
wood and irrigation management be,
and commerce will be better regu-
lated; and consequently that an
archistic confederation IS both I'M
timel y and rcactionary.
THE PRODUCTION DE THE FUTURE.
The question now arises, by whom
and in what manner will the produc-
ton Of the future occur?
That here and there, as has been
prefaced, the management of separ-
ate branches of production has been
effected best by classified labor, by
groups and communes, by co-opera-
tive associations farmedOut, is
backward and WORKOUT view of the
matter.
The State has, certainly and logi-
cally the right to possess itself of the
soil and the means of production: it
must take the lead in the matter of
production in order to root out the
"Manchesterian" principle of COM
petition.
Should leasing out the articles of
production occur, opportunity is af-
forded the capitalist to accumulate;
rivalry would in no way be removed,
but only certain development arise
one agreeable to the capitalist and
concentrated in certain corporations.
When the conditions of co-opera-
ton are imposed upon producing
bodies of men, and an account of the