The great West. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1889-18??, 1891-08-28
ALLIANCE CRITICS;
An Answer to Those Who Labor Under
Profound Ignorance.

An Answer to Those Who Labor Under
Profound Ignorance.
One Of our Eastern contemporaries
not long ago observed in a sort OF
supercillious way. in speaking of the
Farmers Alliance: They grope
about like lost travellers in a thick
forest give us laughable expositions
OF political economy, satirize history
as to money questions, and make their
platforms the oldest tumble of good
and bad issues"
This is just the kind of criticism
that might be expected of a newspaper
which has as little comprehension OF
the class it assails and of the motive
OF the movement it has inaugurated,
as it has journalistic fairness.
The statement referred to is made
as If the Alliance people were the only
class of voters who make mistakes,
who are not infallible, and who have
failed to avoid the blunders character
istic OF all popular movements at the
outset. The criticism thus made up
on the Alliance is not only unjust, but
in restricting it by implication, to that
body, it is wilful and inexcusable ig-
noring of the fact that precisely the
same thing might in truth be said of
the most competent business and pro-
fesslonal men in all our large cities.
What do these men, as a class, do but
grope blindly about in the politics like
lost travellers in a forest? Where do
these men, on the average, get the is
sues which they espousep Are they
not framed for them in mass meetings.
which they seldom personally attend?
Is not their political pabulum fur
nished them ready made by political
caterers? Do they, as rule, person.
ally interest themselves in public af-
fairs? Do they give that time and at
tention to politics which is the mani
fest duty of every American citizen?
Do they not practically become parti-
sans, so far as they are partisans, not
from personal convictions of well di-
gested sentiments, SO much as from
other and less worthy considerations?
Taken as a class, western farmers
who have gone into the Alliance move
ment are no more guilty of the afore-
said cropping about like lost travellers
in forest than are the same number
OF business and professional men. Nor
have they given laughable expositions
of political economy any more than
have the other classes referred to. AS
to having satirized history as to the
money questions that is simply an as
sumption resting upon no foundation in
fact. In reference to the Alliance
making their platforms the oldest
tumble of good and bad issues" the
same thing, If it be true, is the record
of every political party this country
has known since the government was
organized.
To grope about for the best way out
of bad conditions is not specially CEN
surable, nor deserving of adverse
criticism. It is commendable, much
more so than to rest content in the en-
durance of intolerable political and
economic evils. The Alliance ex-
positions of political economy may DO
crude, all new departures from estab-
lished canons in economics, as in every
thing else, are necessarily so, but it
by no means follows that this crude
ness is in any sense laughable. There
is not system of political economy in
the world to-day of which when it was
originally presented, the same thing
was not said. Opposition to the es-
tablished order is always laughable in
the estimation of bigots. There are
doubtless some erratic things in the
Alliance politico-economic declara-
tons, this was to have been expected,
but taken as a whole, the demand for
equity between producers and con-
sumers, which is the substance of the
Alliance demand, is not as laughable
rs it might be.
It might be said in reply to the
charge that the Alliance satirizes his
tory as to money questions, that there
is absolutely no proof in support of
this statement. What history does it
satirize? Does history anywhere show
that money is q thing wholly Deepen
dent for its currency value upon the
intrinsic value of the material used as
a circulating medium? If so, give us
the day and date. Does history any
where show that it is not the preroga-
tive of government to declare it's own
form and volume of money? Does
history anywhere show that mixed
currency in ample volume is satirical?
If so, where?
Those who criticise the Alliance, as
in this instance, would do well to
speak more from the amplitude of their
knowledge than, as they do, from the
profundity of their ignorance Atch-
ison Champion.