Montana news. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1904-191?, 1905-10-04

has put up an argument that looks
good to me, who has not made a
thorough study of the industrial
question. And l believe he has
written in good faith, sincerity be-
lieving the points he has made, to
be the facts as he has stated them.
In this reply l shall endeavor to
treat him in an honorable way, and
as a brother which we Socialists be-
lieve all men would, beonce class
distinction was abolished. Now
brother, you lay the three following
things down; you say a highly
civilized community would not be
willing to dispense with namely;
freedom of individual demand; a
more OF less determinate unite of
value for the purpose of exchange;
freedom of the individual to choose
occupation and to qualify for the
the same. The first condition you
lay down, is rather vague and un-
defined and | don't believe the bro
ther expressed the thing he had in
mind, when laying this rule down.
Looking back in the historical past
of the human race, we find that right
and Justice in individual demand,
has never been the same in an earlier
period of time as it had in the later
period. For instance; the earlier
period of human existence that we
have any history of, the individual
demand stood for slavery, for
poligmy; to fight and kill each
other in duels, now it stands for
men to poison and corrupt their
lives with the alchol habit, and for
houses of prostitution and for
prostitutes. Brother have you
been supporting the freedom of in
dividual demand in these last men
toned things. Going deeper into
your discussion, am convinced
that you meant this freedom of in
dividual demand to be limited in
accordance to the rights. and justice
toward society, for you go on to say
take first the supply for every in
dividual demand; there you go on
and describe what an enormous
enterprise the government would
have to deal with in order to sup
ply the things for this individual
demand, then you go on further
and explain as accurately as any
we'll read Socialist could, prove by
this same explanation that the
government could supply this de-
mand a great deal more economi-
cally than the private individual
can. Yes. brother. we admit that
the enormous labor saving, would
occur along the line of every industry
that your argument proves would
occur, by substituting collective
ownership of stores, newspapers,
and politics for private ownership.
But then you wall. people would
have nothing to do. But they
would, and the answer is simple.
The individual demand is ever
growing greater for things that is
better, better food, better shelter,
better clothing, better and higher
morals, better things for the mental
man as well as the physical. II II
was not for this individual demand
we would still be occupying cave or
cliff. Now brother, hunt up the
number of the News, July 10, and
read over very carefully your whole
description of the change in the
methods of owning stores and news
gapers, and especially politics.
Then let your mind run along and
apply the same rules to all lines of
industry and see If you have not
a satisfactory answer to your doubts
of collective state supplying the
individual demand; far better than
the individual is supplying the col
lective demand, by collective pro-
duction under this system, as the
number of people who are starving
to death proves, and which oui
daily papers are filed with. Now