Evening journal., 1910-11-23
SOCIALISM
and LIBERTY
Capitalist System Condemned
as Destructive of ECOnO-
mic Freedom
NATURALIZATION OF
INDUSTRY ADVOCATED

Editor of THE EVENING JOURNAL.
Your editorial Saturday in which
you defend our present economic sys-
tenn i'm the name of individual liberty
and accuse Socialism as the means of
destroying it, is indeed interesting but
far from excusing. furnishes addition
al ground of condemnation for the
system which II undertakes to Justify.
The basis Of your objection rests on
the tacit assumption that the people
in their industrial relations have now,
under private capitalism, free and un-
constrained liberty.
But what assumption can be more
regardless of facts than this? Under
private capitalism the entire scheme
OF industry and commerce. involving
the employment and livelihood Of
everybody, is subject to the despotic
and irresponsible government of pri-
vate masters. The very demand of the
Socialists for Matchmaking industry
has resulted wholly from the suffer-
ings of the people under the yoke of
capitalists
In 1776 the Americans overthrow the
British royal government and estab-
lished their own in it's place Suppose
at that time the king had sent an en-
bassy to warn the American people
that by assuming these new functions
of government they were enddngering
their liberty. Such an embassy would,
OF course, have been laughed at If any
reply had been thought needful It
would have been pointed out that the
Americans were not establishing over
themselves any new government but
were substituting a government of
their own. acting I'm their own inter-
ests. instead of the government of
others conducted in an Indifferent
manner.
What II Means.
Now this is exactly what the nation
alizing of industry means. The ques-
ton is. given the necessity of some
sort of regulation and direction of the
industrial system, whether it would
tend more to liberty for the people to
leave that power to irresponsible per
sons with hostile interests, OF to ex.
/ ercise It themselves through respon-
/ sible agents, controlled by the priv.
lege of the recall? Could there con
! ceivably be but one answer to that
question?
Now let us see whether this is z
land of liberty, bearing in mind thar
it is the poor which constitute tn,
mass of the people whom we are con
sidering. Has a young man, forced t
leave the completion of his education
in order to help support his family
any choice or say as to where he shall
work and what shall be the nature o
his work? Is it not true that ecOnomi
~.
vast army of the unemployed fore
him to accept the first job whicl
comes his way, no matter whether
is TO his liking or not? In our com
petitive system the lack of harmon
among our manufacturers (worse {
all in manufacturers making the sam
! ! kind Of goods) makes 1t impossibl
for anybody to devise a system where
by work can be made selective. as doe
l. also the large unemployed army. Bu
under a system where industry is cor
Quoted for the common good and nc
for greed and the profit of few theT
is some chance to make work seleC
tive. And as for forcing undersirabl
work on anyone, this is Just what on
present system does and what tn
. Socialist plan of government is goin
to do away with. who will do tn
dirty work." is a question often aske
. of Socialists. Pray, who does the dirt
. work now? The most repulsiye an
humiliating kinds of drudgery is pI
: of upon the women of the poore
class; the scrubbers. washers and sci
3 wants of all work. Men are daily dc
ing Notwithstanding work that ms
chimes perfected by modern ideas ca
, do just as well; but men are cheape
than the machines to the owning clas
Inventions have been perfected thu
D could automatically do all the di.
agreeable work necessary. but It
. cheaper to hire men, as competitio
. will not permit even the most fail
minded capitalist to make the nece'
, sary outlay required for the machir
cry.