The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1893-04-25
A LAM MOVEM ENT.

| of why many farmers have left the
Democratic party and r now in the
ranks of the Populist party. The
Times thinks no amount of good legis-
Iation will induce them to go back into
the old party. We are not prepared
to speak for anybody on that line, but
we do believe that these "pessimists,"
as the Times calls them, will support
the best party, nomatter by whatname
it is called. But that is not what we
want to notice particularly. The Times
argues as follows:
Most of the farmers were lead into
the Third party not by their reason
and convictions but by their sentiments
and sympathies. The want Of social
| contact between the town and country
people since the war has gradually
established a spirit of antagOnism and
hatred between the two. It was rural
sentiment and fellow feeling which in
duced so many farmers to cast their
political fortunes with the new move
ment. The bonds which had bound
Southern Democracy into a brother
hood had been broken by a want of
sympathy between the town and u
try people. We think the town people
are as much to blame as the country
people for this unfortunate state Of
affairs. 1t Is a noticeable fact, illus
trative of the truth of this view, that
few farmers who were on cordial rela-
tiOns with any number of town people,
departed from the Democratic fold.
City life tends to make people u%nsOcial.
The people of Charlotte do not inter
mingle near as much as they did ten or
twenty years ago. But in the country
there is no influence tending to dImin-
ish hospitality, and the social ameni
ties. A tOwnsman going into the cOun
try is made much Of" but few farm
ers who come to to n ever see the inside
of a citizens home. This contrast is
noticed and makes an impression on
the farmers"
There is a good deal of truth IN this.
But it is not the prime cause Of this in
dependent political action. The same
causes that led the farmers to go into
the Grange and later on the Alliance,
are the same causes that brought about
independent political action. The town
and city people, even the best of them,
have been led to believe that the farm
ers are nearly all fools and have acted
accordingly. Who is to blame for this?
Not the good people of the towns and
cities. The political press, especially
the dailies, have ridiculed the com
plants of the farmers, until many good
people believe the farmers are either
anarchists or idiots. The platforms of
the Grange and Alliance are the best
pure democracy" that has been before
the country since long before the war.
Yet this hireling daily press, spurred
on by ~pluCocrats, who are either stock
holders in the papers or in a position
to act al dictators by other means
continue their ridiCule. The cor
porations of this country don't
want pure democracy. 1t will inter
fere with their schemes to rob the pub
lie. Hence, not by arguments or logic,
but by ridicule and downright lying
they manage, through the papers, to
poison, not only the minds of city peo-
pie, but many farmers as we'll. We
regret to say that many Of the weekly
papers have Joined in this unholy cru
SADIE against justice and equality.
After the plutocrats comes the little
politicians. They get their cues from
the p~lutocrats direct or from the news
papers, and they have been indus
triously OBTAINING the bestpeOple inthe
land and poisoning the minds of people
that would act sensibly if let alone.
Be as it may, the two old parties in this
country are about ruined, but not until
they have brought the country to the
verge of ruin. That is why there is
room for bad feeling and room for
party desertion.
Speaking Of newspapers and their
bad influence when directed by bad
men. the New York Herald is notable
exception. It is without doubt the
greatest metropolitan paper in the
world and one of the cleanest. It isnot
a party organ; it is not controlled by
corporations. 1t is one of the very
few dailies that has never slandered
| the farmers. Not one word of ridicule
as appeared in it's columns against
any OF the reformfarmers or mechanics
organizations or their leaders. When
it disagrees with any of them it does it
in a manner that shows 1t to regard
them as legitimate AMI worthy of
polite consideration. They are treated
as equals. Consequently the minds Of
its readers are not poisoned by the rot