New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-02-27
BOOKS ABOUT SOCIALISM.
A HISTORY OF THE MOVEMENT.

Iomo. DID. 2O2. Chicago: Charles sergel ~ Co.
SOCIALISM. NEW AND OLD By MIaiam SrS 1mG
NJ. A.. Professor Of Political Economy ana Juris-
prudence, Queens College. Belfast. limo, PIP
~, 416. d. Appleton d 60.
M the 9Socialism OF Christ" it may be said that 1t
moves what no intelligent scholars deny, namely, that
the Christianity Of Christ was tinged with certain ideas
which are now called Socialism. But the book Is
marred by its stupid assumption that Christ was simply
a sociaustic demagogue, who taught His disciples that
"they should not only make use Of dishonest means
a. well as OF honest, but also enter into compacts with
all parties, even their opponents, so that If they
should fail, they might not be left without support
or position under the adverse regime" The author
lmagines Christ saying in effect to His disciples, III
YOU cannot carry the cause of Christ. be on good terms
with Caesar, so that when you must
give up. you can get a second best
place under him for selling out" Such an
utterance is not only a foul and mendacious libel on
the Founder of Christianity, but reveals the charac-
ter Of the man who utters it in no enviable light.
There arc plenty of social reformcrs to-day who would
do lust what Mr.. BierbOwer says Christ did, and whose
real object is not the reform Of society, but their own
advance to power and position. They are Simply
camp. followers of the Soclalistic movement, and would
deserve no EXTENDED notice, were they not so frequently
taken seriously by the unthinking. Mr.. Bierbower's
book may please Socialists Of this stripe, but In no
sense does it represent honest Socialists, who rccog-
nize in Christianity the greatest moral force In the
HNS
world.
Mr.. Gfaham's book, SOCIALISM New and Old" is
very different in character. The learned and brilliant
author has long been recognized as one of the masters
OF the science Of economies. 1t is not simply that ne
knows his facts thoroughly, which. however, cannot be
said Of all political economists. but he brings TO the
discussion of these facts a mind at once sympathetic
and impartial, "a combination OF qualities rarely found
in a critic. lie holds no brief for either the Socialist
or the anti Socialist, but states each side Of the ques-
ton fairly. fully and clearly. The result is A lumi-
nous exposition OF Socialism as a historical fact, and as
On economic principle, that is not merely Instructive,
but readable. One of the fatal defects Of many books
written by reformers is their difuseness they tire the
reader before they get to the point of convincing him.
But here is a book written by a man who knows what
ne wants 10 say, and knows Just how to say 1t most
effectively, and, we may add, has the good sense to
stop when he gets through. Tho reader is mercifully
spared all homilies on the subject in hand, and is fur
nished instead with a valuable array of facts about
Socialism, with which every well-informed man ought
to be familiar.
Whatever else modern Socialism may be, IL Is at least
a movement looking to the realization OF Justice as be
tween man and man. The present social and in
dustrial system, according TO Socialists, is simply or
eanized and legalized injustice, and their OBJ
feet is to overturn it by reason and argument,
and establish in its place a system that
will secure absolute, equal and exact justice
to every human being on the face Of the earth. OF
course every one believes in this as an ideal TO be
aimed at: but few outside the ranks Of the Socialists
see how II Is 10 be realized. Against the two methods
proposed BY Socialists for the securing Of distributivo
Justice. many serious. if not fatal. objections NAV be
urged. The first is the rule Of equality. by which is
meant that each human being should have an equal
share of the worlds products. But the difficulty in re-
gard to this theory is that such an equality is not pos
sible: and If it were. the chances are that II would be
an equality IN poverty and hOpelessness. instead Of an
EQUALITY in comfort and progress. The other rule is
that each human being shall receive according TO his
works. But here another difficulty meets us. Under
that rule, vast numbers Of people would deserve moth
ing, because they do nothing for themselves or the com
munitv. Moreover. there IS no common measure of
quantity applicable to different kinds of labor. Here.
for instance. arc two men. an industrious and brilliant
artist, and an industrious and able 'longshoreman. Each
is to receive according to his works. WI is TO decide
their relative deserts! And on what principle Of Jus
ticc shall the decision be made! obviously there Is no
answer to these questions. And therefore the justice
which the Socialists are irving to realize cannot 10
realized on the score OF relative merits.
But. as Mr.. Graham shows, Socialism Is confronted by
difficulties even more serious than these. The great
est obstacle 10 its success j., in fact, human nature.
Love of self continues to be a ruling, if not the ruling.
faculty in mans nature. in spite of all the attempts
that have been made to e|xtirpate it, or at least moderate
it. Indeed it may be said TO be stronger to-day Than
ever: for civilization has opened a multitude of new
avenues for its qualification. But no scheme Of Social
ism can come TO anything while egoism is the dOmi-
nant passion in human nature. Whether this egoism
manifests itself in that form Of brutal selfshness which
finds its true expression in the adaGe that might makes
right, or whether it takes the less repulsive form known
as enlightened sclf-intercst. il is equally hostile to each
and every one Of the numerous schemes Of socialism
which are today claiming the allegiance Of the world.
And this suggests a word in conclusion about the
failure of Socialists to agree on any scheme OF social
regeneration. That they do thus fail, argues nothing
against either their good sense or intelligence. but in
Eicatos rather thp almost inSunprablp difficulty Cf tba
problem they are trying - solve. ROusseau's State
Socialism. the ArstOcratic Socialism Of ST. simon. and
the COllectivlsm of Karl Marx, have each in turn APP
pealed powerfully TO the Imagination but each has
failed to capture the reason, because II has left out o.!
the account some Of the essential factors Of human life
and experience. Even IL We take Collectivism 10 be
the true type OF Socialism as being on the whole tho
most widely held Socialistic theory TO-DAY. we have not
escaped difficulty. For if, as Karl Marx said. the
capitalist is per SC q rObbcr, and If. all wealth. being
produced b. labor. ought of right TO be possessed b.
labor. Will il not follow that when the laborer seizes
the capital Of the capitalist, he will thereby become a
capitalist himself, and therefore a robbcr2 Moreover,
if 1t is wrong for tie capitalist to desire a return from
his capital in the form Of interest, why is it right for
the workman to desire a return from his capital labor)
in the form of waScsl But it i, unnecessary TO 60 on
asking the multitude Of questions which suggest them
selves TO the candid investigator, and which
have been so earnestly and ably debated by Socialists
themselves. II is enough to say that we are yet as
far away as ever from any satisfactory answer 10 them.
Those who are most kcenly alive to the social and in
dustrial evils and abuses which Socialism desires 10
remedy. those even who are more than half converted
70 a belief in the salient principles of Socialism,, will
be among the first TO acknowledge that no scheme OF
Socialism thus far proposed has in it the promise and
potency Of practical success. The most that can be
said is that every theory Of Socialism embodies some
vital fact or social principle that, when properly APP
piled, will have all enduring place In the regenerated
social system that is TO be. In the meanwhile, much
that is written abou, this most pcrplexing subject MAJ