People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1897-11-19
THE OTHER SIDE.
MIR. Carter Answers the Query is Popu-
Iisn Socialism.

article entitled, us Popul1sm Social
ism, or Revolutionary Populism VS..
Revolutionary Socialism, by Miss Ida
B Woodwork" in which she seeks to
bring to light the ia lacies'and weak
ness of Socialism and to hold high to
a reading and thinking people the
strong meat of Populism which issall
good, for in a multitude of thought
there is wisdom, But there is always
two sides to every question and while
Miss Woodwork has sought to bring
to light the weakness of socialism she
has totally ignored it's strong points
and entirely disregsrded some in sur
mounta BILE truths which cannot be over
looked or pass without consideration.
Miss Woodwork has undertaken to
show the difference between socialism
and Populism and tries to make it ap-
pear that there are two separate and
distinct features in the two while in
truth the principles of the two in a
measure are synonymous. We are a
Socialist first and a Pcpulist when we
can't get Socialism. Miss Wordsworth
asked the question, "Is Populism Soci'
alism ?" We answer that it is in mild
sense. Mr.. Webster gives as definition
to the word Socialism, the theory OF
complete reconstruc ion of society,
and equitable distri bution of property.
Now, what is meant by this? Sim
ply this, that the old order of things
are to be changed and society put upon
an equitable and just basis. that cor
poration greed, trust and combine are
no longer to plumber the people, but
that equal and exact justice is to be
shared by every citizen, that if a man
does not work neither shall he eat,
that every man, woman and child shall
have entire compensation for every
hours labor rendered that no man or
set.of men shall enjoy privileges that
other men do not enjoy and that no
person shall reap where he has not
sown.
| The evils we complain of are too nu-
merous and too well understood by an
intelligent public to rehearse them
here, we all too we'll know the griev-
ances of the American people and it is
needless for me to say that these are
the evils that Populism partially aims
to right and that Socialism wholly
aims to right, so Populism is but the
advance guard of Socialism, and to
talk of doing away with cha ism is to
ak of doing away with the e. VEN
ments and institutions of men, for
Socialism is but the cooperation OF
mankind and to do away with cooper
alton is to wipe out civilization, and
every being be Robinson Crusoe and
live to himself
The very public highways, the streets,
churches, schools and all institutions
that are owned by all of the people are
Socialistic and Socialism means to be
more Socia istic and let all of the PEG
pie own all of the gifts OF nature and
the means of production and distribu-
ton. The Omaha platform declares
that the Government should own and
operate the Railroads and Telegraph
lines in the interest of the people. 1t
further declares that it is opposed to
aliens and corporations owning land
which should be held for actual settle
ment for the people, Now if it is
wrong for aliens and corporations tc
own land, why is it not wrong for indi
vidnals to own land? Why should WE
forbid a monopoly on large scale ap6
not forbid it on small scale ? If g
big evil is wrong is not a little evil
wrong?
The Omaha platform declares thai
the land is the common heritage of the
people and then in the next line grants
individuals the privilege of monopoliz
ing this common heritage. Why is not
the Omaha platform bold enough tc
come out on the land question like il
does on the transportation question
Because there is motive, the People
Party consist of the agricultural and
land holding classes and it would be
injurious for them to come out so bold.
Miss Woodwork says Socialism is not
practical. Then If not, why is she ad
vocating it in the sense that the Gov
eminent should own and operate the
means of intelligence and transporta-
ton rs declared for in the Omaha plat.
form. If Socialism is impractical
why has it not proven SO where it is
now living example? Why is not
the post Office system failure? Why
is not municipal ownership of light and
waterworks a failure? Why is not
socialism failure in countries nov
where it is actually in existence !?
Again Miss Woodwork declares that
Socialism is revolutionary and init
mates that if Socialists were to come in
possession or control of affairs that
there would come crisis in which
chaos would prevail, for saws she $50
cialists, like the Jesuit fathers in Peru
years ago, would vainly expect to make
a selfgoverning public out of barba-
rous savage Indians. This is erronious,
AO' SON16lISGS OO uOb 6lu W lily W bdhS
hold of the reins of government before
there are Socialists enough to do it,
nay, any more so than the Populists
aim to take hold of the reins of govern
ment before tn y come in possession of
| them. Indeed this cannot be Soc al
istic government until there are So
cialist enough to enact Socjalistic laws
Again Miss Woodwork ask what would
we do with our men who are lazy and
not disposed to work for an honest
living. l will answer by asking what
do we do with them now. Socialism
does not propose to fore any Que to
work, but if he will not work, he is
no more than the worthless fellow that
society has to contend with now and l
can't see why that is any argument
against S 'cialism.