Workmen's advocate., 1889-06-29
FORGE AND SOCIAL LAW.


 of New York City to hear Hugh o. Pentecost speak upon current topics, and show their appreciation by ap- plause and secular amens. Last Sun- day they heard the following tribute to Socialism:
 "Is Socialism road to freedom? I think it is. It would abolish the land monopoly, the money monopoly, the tool monopoly, It would reduce our thousands of laws relating to the own ership and transfer of real estate into one law. It would reduce all our money legislation to zero, for it would practically do away with money as we have it. It would reduce all our per sonal property laws to a minimum. It would abolish most other laws and ut terly annihilate the whole race of law yers and who will say that this would not be a great gain? A world in which lawyers would be unnecessary would surely be better world than this. It would simplify government, and if we must have government the simpler it is, the purer and better will it be. It would prevent one man from cheating another out of his subsistence. It would 1 give everyone an equal opportunity. It would abolish poverty. It would edu- cate and enrich the whole world. It would organize society upon basis of l fraternity. It would force men to CO., l operate, and thus teach them how much better it is to work together than against each other. It would make men free by preventing them from en- slaving each other"
 In this Mr. Pentecost was right, in the main. But if he believed he was right in saying what he did, how could he reconcile the above quotation with the following, which he uttered almost in the same breath:
 Herein lies the only objection to Socialsm-lt is based upon tue majority rule and physical force-both of which are essentially immoral"
 Now, if majority rule and physical force give every one an equal Opportu- nHy, which the speaker says Socialism will give, where is the ground for obiec- tion? If it would abolish poverty and organize society on basis of fraternity, where is the compulsion If it would nuke men free, how can he find room for complaint?
 When there is a difference of opinion among equals as to proposed course of action, all agreeing that S0nle action must be taken, which of necessity must affect all, how shall it be decided which course to take? The way it is done in all organizations is by vote. Now, that vote may not imply the use of per sonal physical force against the minor lty, but having III advance agreed to abide by the majority, this agreement being implied by participating in the vote, it would be equivalent to a breach of free contract, and an impotent ap- peal to physical force, to refuse to abide by the concensus.
 Take Pentecost's own case for in- stance Last fall he voted for Cleveland electors: had Cleveland been elected, Mir. pentecost would have shared the re- sponsibility of his administration. Since the other fellow was elected, however, our friend Pentecost has gracefully abided by the vote. If he was opposed to both the republican" and "demo- cratic" parties, it was his duty to refuse to vote for either.
 Further on our versatile Economist" told his hearers that as between the so- cialists and the capitalists the former were the truer patriots; but" said he. "l am not obliged to go with either, al- though think that the present ten. dency of society is toward Socialism,"
 No, Pentecost is not obliged to go with either. He may emigrate or con- init suicide, if he prefers, But he u1H go ,cjth society if he remains a member of society, and if that is, his intention, he will go and is going with society to- ward Socialism. according to his own