The colored American., 1902-02-15


can only be obtained by return to the
freedom of savagery. where man IL
ann aDle only to the laws Of natu @
aud self imposed limitations Being
mus opposed to government per se
aud bel0g generally Ignorant OF tie
fundamental difference between re-
publican sm ana the despOtlsm under |
~ hIch was possible the G incidence o.
soc al. pOiiIicsl and economic griev
noes that generated anarchy, an
aTchIsts haze American demuc a9y IS
cord ly as European aOsoIutism.
BuL although confederation of the |
genesis and development OF anarchy |
affords some explanation of the an
archlsts' hostility to government anu |
law, and shows that, lLsLea0 Of beiqg |
unmitiga q ed diabo ism. It is only the |
result of mlsguided STRIVING sftsr in |
cresse of IL, asure and decrs ase OF lain |
the great so0s OF all individual anu |
o ial activity; yet because anarchists |
lev. The world Is out OF joint and are |
o actively opp ICED 10 exls ing 1nsIt
lut1Ons IL at they would overwhel I'm all |
in the rum of POLITICAL revolt, seeking |
progress through the merely negative |
process of DESTROY ing the established |
order without supplying q reguIative |
system TO take the place of the one |
disc .Tded, thoughtful cinz-ns are |
practical y Un 4nlmDus in the opinion |
that anarchy should be represseO; the |
question Is therefore reduced TO one of
Methods
There there are three methods gen. |
orally advocated exclusion depOrLa |
tIon, and 'far-reschlDg provision for |
the punishment of those anarchists |
who remain 1t may be remarked |
that exclusion would be fraugLt with |
insuperabls d ff1cuiLy, because 1t Is |
notorious the conclusions OF anIhrO- |
pOlOgy afford no means of distinguish
ing b. tVeen an ensrch1st and q friend |
of order. In declJring the efficacy of |
ne second method, no one has yet |
pointed out how deportation Is To pre-
vent return unless there is more hearty |
international cO-OperatiOp than We VET
have reason TO ex pect Finally, there /
would grave danger In visiting punish,
ment upon those VINO denoUnce the |
present system; for, although we admit !
that freedom OF speech 1s relative, ts
pecially in denunciatiCn OF govern
ment, one may well question the pos
billty of defining With precision just
where freedom ends ana license be
gins 1t Is not evident that the dis
satisfaction obtaining under the opera
ton Of the alien and sedition laws
would be Gbvia ed. The fundamental
fault in all three methods, however,
resides in the fact that they are directed
against ind1v dusls rather than again st
b srrlers of natural law. but they have
generally desisted wnen 1t was pl ainly
demonstrated that they were warriug
against the constitution of the world
In instances of attempted murder AMI
bloody revolt, the most sternly Iepres-
SlVe measures will be necessary In
anarchy. II Wa suppress the anarchists
of today by Opposin~ force with greater
force, there will be other anarchists TO-
morrow, and the problem who d should
have been brsveIy met and solved Will |
only be postponed. Incrt ase of. crime
in the very presence of rlgicly repres
sive laws should have taught law
makers that growth ar d decrease of OF
fenses are largely determined by causes
o her than "punIsbments lightly wrI.-
Ten out by Legislators and awarded by
judges" We believe therefore, that the /
rational method be TO oppt ss anarchy
in It's termination, rather than in ma
turity. by clearly pointing out to those
friends of disorder" who are amenabIe
to reason, as well as to q large element
of our population among which de-
strucIionism finds enthusiastic sup
porlers. the three fundamental fal-
lScies that run through ana vitiate the
conclusion Of nearly all anarchtstic
The first glaring fsllacy is the un-
founded assumption that conditions OBJ