The Washington herald., 1912-10-06
By FRANCIS DE SALES RYAN.

have been surprised and possibly dis
appointed to find that the case for So
i cialism as presented by Mr.. Kopelin last
Sunday did not contain one solitary
convincing proof that the theory Is
practicable. Socialism is practicable"
This is what Mr.. Kopelin started out to
prove. Instead. however. his article con-
tains nothing more convincing than ir-
relevant rhetorical questions. abuse OF
capitalists. and a repetition of the indus
trial and economic evils of the day
which all but INSCRIPTIONS capitalists
\ admit and wish to remedy.
| Socialism is The panacea for all these
evils, says Mr.. Kopelin, and of course
Is practicable. His theme was the bur-
den of proof. But search as We may we
cannot find In lis article even the be-
ginnings Of a convincing argument to
demonstrate that Socialism is practical
Bile.
! Mr.. Kopelin seeks to shift the burden
tof proof. which is his alone in this
controversy. For example, he says:
| Not until the entire (presenO system is
replaced by the system of cooperative
ownership of all social industries can
We really try Socialism, So the oppo-
nents OF Socialism must confine them
| selves to theoretical arguments in their
endeavor to prove Socialism Impracti-
| cable"
In other words, Mr.. Kopelin demands
that Socialists schemes for the future
be shown to be impractieable. This is
| shifting the burden OF proof to the
wrong shoulders. Mr.. Kopelin's party
claims that by their reorganization Of
society they intend to remove the exist
| ing misery and to inaugurate a reign OF
freedom and happiness. Socialists,
therefore, have the burden Of proof;
| they must demonstrate the possibility
4 .A ~ rt.s.
1 strange to say, Is precisely what no So
cialist, from Karl Marx down to the
East Side soap-box orators, has ever
| attempted to do.
Reveal No Ideas.
The reason is obvious. Socialism mas
become a powerful political party Po-
| litical parties. however. are easily kept
together as long as their platforms aD
highly aggressive and critical and as
negative as possible in their demands.
But II the Socialist leaders were to draw
up a positive programme of practical
measures. the party would soon disrupt
entirely. or at least split into numberless
factions.
Again, there is reluctance on the part
of Socialists to reveal their ideas on the
future state of society for fear Of crit
icism and ridicule. From the times OF
attempt OF practical communism has
been doomed to dismal failure. II need
ed no excessive penetration to foretell
as much. And IL now Socialists were
to come down from the clouds and I'M
fold their plans of the future II would
soon be evident that they were but re-
vamping ancient, impractical utopias
Therefore, they wisely remember that
silence is golden.
That in reality there are no other mo-
tives OF this Socialistic game OF hide
and seek is made evident by a glance at
the subterfuges by which Socialist lead l
ers have tried to evade practical ques-
tons concerning the future state of So
ciety-questions similar to the ones
submitted in last Sundays issues OF The
Herald for Mr.. Kopelins solution.
In his article last Sunday Mr.. Kope-
lin endeavored to show that cooperative
ownership would benefit all. for the in
conclusive reason that in the past pr-
vate ownership has brought benefits to
few" He said:
Even under capitalism the beneficiares
OF that system practice Socialism for
their own ACKNOWLEDGMENT. The trusts
are simply combinations for the benefit
of the few. II they We're owned by all
the people we would have Socialism and
the benefits OF organization and Coop
Grafton would accrue to all
The success of combinations under the
present system Of private ownership is
no proof that the dreamy scheme of COM
bination proposed by Socialists would
prove successful. And that the benefi-
cent results of their cooperative" COM
binatons would reach everybody. instead
OF only the few Is simply asserted
without proof. 1t is a principle of logic
that what is asserted without proof may
be fatty denied. and taking my stand
NIaN al, Y
cialistic scheme OF organization would |
benefit any one save a few cooperative" |
bosses
Calls System n Dream.
Furthermore. If the present system OF
business combination proves beneficial at |
present to few, as stated by Mr.. Kope- |
lin. why not reform it so that its benefits |
would be extended to all. instead of de- |
stroying the whole system and replacing !
1t with vague. dreamy, fantastic, and |
plainly impossible theory?
IF cooperation is successful for the
capitalists" says Mr.. Kopelin, why |
should it be fmpracticable' for the work
ersT'
Cooperation is practicable for the cap
italists precisely because they enjoy the |
right of private ownership. which makes
and legitimate cooperation
practcable ana successful. Under Social
ism all would be deprived of the right Of
private ownership. and consequently, as
we have already demonstrated the work.
ers would find cooperation impractical
BILE and unsuccessful
If the government can run railroads
for the benefit of the stockholders after
these railroads have been wrecked by
greedy capitalists. why should II be i'm
practicable for the government to run
railroads untouched by Wall Street for
the benefit of all the peopIe?"
Here again the present system, under
which stockholders are not deprived of
private ownership. Is extolled. This is
another proof that untried, dreamey So
cialism will be useless and impracticable,
Dor the reasons that I outlined in last
Sundays Herald. |,
IF the government can be trusted with
he last word in the regulation of inter-
state commerce, and industry, why can
{ not be trusted with the job of carrying /,
,ut its orders?"
The government could carry out its
,rders'' under the Socialist system be- ,
,ause of insuperable difficulties, which
we're also gone over In detail last Sun
lay. For the benefit Of sincere and can q
lie men and women, anxious to form a i
opinion Of the value Of v
URIC ACID