The independent. [volume] (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907, 1905-03-02
Ghent's liberalism


final word to the discussion regarding
my recent book?
The Independent denies that one Of
my paragraphs was altered in its re-
production SO as to destroy its sense.
If the editor will compare the quota.
ton Of the sentence beginning "The
economic force is the handspring of
action" in the issue of January IL,
with the sentence in my book, he will
find that thirteen words were omitted,
and that thus totally different mean
ing was given to what | said. These
words were omitted, not from the be-
ginning, nor from the end of the SEN
tence but from its interior.
"Mr. Ghent," you say, claims that
the idea of right and wrong is prod
uct Of economic environment, con-
stantly changing and ever varying, in
fact there is no such thing as right
and wrong per see." The first part of
this sentence is correct, the latter is
incorrect. | have not SAID that there
is mo such thing as right and wrong
per see" If our intelligences, instead
OF being finite, were infinite, there
might probably be recognizable by us
an immutable principle Of right and
wrong. But as matter Of fact our
intelligences are not finite, but ex-
tremely limited. We judge of right and
wrong on the basis of what we know
The race constantly gains in knowl-
edge, and in every age conspicuously
alters its concepts of right and wrong
The most powerful factor in this
change is the economic environment
The general system of production and
distribution effects a general influence
on these concepts, and the specific
mode of earning living which each
individual must follow exerts a speci-
&c influence. That great part of
mankind comes to broader and juster
concept of what society ought to be is
cheerfully admitted by the most har-
dened materialist. But this juster con-
cept, far from being intuitive or "spir-
itual" is direct result of the miseries
and injuStices Of the present regime.
1t Is a direct reaction from the exploit
tation OF the prevailing system, and
expresses itself in conviction that
the individual finds this larger ma
terial interests consonant with the ma
terial interests Of his fellows.
1t is a misapprehension of my mean
Ing to hold that in what | said of OAR
win in my recent letter, | had any no
ton of using the great naturalist as a
supporter of the economic interpreta-
ton of history. / was merely making
a historic analogy between the attitude
shown toward his theories forty years
ago and the attitude shown toward his
toric materialism today. I made, it is
true, prediction that the latter would
triumph, as the former had triumphed
but | asserted no relationship what
ever between Marxism and Darwinism
can not at all agree with the edi
tor Of The Independent that after criti
Ching his use of the word "ideal7 ]
have used 4the word in the same sense
in the latter part OF his (my) article
have, in the contrary used it in only
one sense, that IL which it is EN-
ployed in the book.
Finally, | must protest against the
use of the words revolution" and
evolution as implying any antag
Onism of processes. Evolution is the
opposite of dissolution. 1t is the to-
tally of processes operating up to the
point where dissolution begins, wheth
er those processes have to do with so
cieties, planets or solar systems. Evo
luton makes use of revolution as well
as OF gradual growths. When the "mui-
tiplication of Effects to use Spencer's
phrase, has reached eliminating
point, the following change is often
accomplished by cataclysm. Kraka
toa, Mont Pelee, the French revolu
ton and the civil war were quite as
much part of the evolution as were
the gradual settlement of the western
states, the passage of the homestead
acts or the origin of the populist party
1t is true that the socialist says, mo
reform, but revolution" But he be
lieves that the processes making fol
this revolution have been steadily al
work since the application of steam te
manufacture, and that the multiplied
4 k0TRE DAME IADYS APPEAL