The independent., 1902-11-27

There is considerable difference OF
opinion among republican papers as to
the ultimate success of socialism. The
State Journal believes that "it is no
longer live ISSUE" while the Outlook
believes that it "is irresistible."
Which shows that c. H. Gere and Will
Owen Jones see things through differ
ent spectacles than those used by DR..
Lyman Abbott.
DR.. Abbott uses the term Social
ISM in its broad sense, as opposed
to ''individualism.." Gere and Jones
have two conceptions of the idea-one,
a synonym for anarchy, sort of
black-white or white-black; and the
other is confused with the idea of
partisan political organization. In the
sense DR.. Abbott uses the term, the
peoples party recognizes the swing
of the pendulum toward socialism and
is sOcialistic to the extent of demand
ing the public or collective ownership
of the means of communication and
transportation; but in neither of the
senses in which Gere and Jones use
the term are populists socialists. Pop
ulists do not believe in the collective
ownership of all the means of produc-
ton and distribution" many of
those who vote the socialist ticket are
not wholly in accord with that demand.
Populism is the golden mean be-
tween extreme collectivism on the one
hand and extreme individualism on the
other. 1t is opposed to the paternal
ism practiced by the republican party,
whereby the machinery of government
is operated for the benefit of a few
to the detriment Of the many. It rec
OgniZes the fact that no highway
should be private property; it denies
the right of individuals to exercise the
sovereign power to issue money 'and
regulate the value thereof" But it
also recognizes the fact that many
years must elapse before the idea of
private ownership of many lines of in
dustry can be eradicated if indeed it is
desirable that it should be. And it
stands as middle ground between the
great contending forces of individual
ism and collectivism, radical and pro-
gressive enough to select the good and
attainable points of the latter and con-
seryative enough to stand with the
former on questions in which change
is difficult or undesirable. Populism
will eventually win-but under what
name, no man knows, and it matters
little.
listen to Messrs. Gere and Jones.
and then to DR.. Abbott:
Some of the debris of the late pop
ulist party has zen captured by the
Social democrat leaders, and the con-
sequence is what is called wonderful
growth of socialism in this country
as shown by the last election But
there is no change of sentiment OBJ
served. The excitement caused by the
big labor strikes probably steered the
professional politicians of the old pop
organization into this connection with
the avowed socialists, but they were as
much afflicted with socialism and per-
haps more, when the socialist party
was thoroughly stepped in the heresies
of the Ocala and Omaha platforms
Changing the party name has not
changed their politics any. But as a
matter of fact the bursting up Of the
pop party and the reputation of pop
principles by the democrats has under
mined socialism and it is no longer a
live issue.-State Journal.
In 1894 Herbert Spencer wrote to Mr..
James A. Skilton, of Brooklyn, a let
ter on the industrial situation, which
was published in the Brooklyn Eagle
in 1894 and republished week or two
ago. The letter is as follows:
Fairfield Pewsey, Wilt, May 2S
1S94.-Dear Mr.. Skilton: l believe
l wished you good-speed in your en-
terprise, but I believe your enterprise
is futile. In the United States, as
here and elsewhere, the movement
towards dissolution of existing social
forms and reorganization on a social
istic basis I believe to be irresistible.
We have bad times before us and you
have still more dreadful times before
you-civil war, immense bloodshed,
and eventually military despotism of
the severest type. Truly yours,
"HERBERT SPENCER"
The Outlook agrees with Mr.. Spen-
Ger in thinking the present movement
= one towards a dissolution of exist
ing social forces and a reorganization
on a socialistic basis, and that it is ir-