Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1912-03-23
PEOPLES PULPIT

| it's readers. The communications !
i should be typewriter or in !
plain hand, on ono side az tho {
{! } paper, and signed.
Editor Courier:
| Not wishing to subject any one to
derision for his or her political belief
but because I believe that the state Is
still subordinate to the people; tina,
| man will put forth more effort for IN
dividual advancement than community
! advancement: that individual initiative
! is natural factor in evolution and that
| no laws should be passed that will re-
tard our individual advancement,
| shall attempt to answer Jas. McGahey
| of Otthmwa, Ia, uphold my former ar
guments and attack socialism. So. -.
Mr.. McGahey claims that the cause
of our economic ills reposes in our sys-
; tenn of government; that greedy dis
honest men are the product of our
TEN gives 95 per cent of the people
practically no opportunity to develop
J their individuality, but they must mold
themselves to the Environments into
which they are thrust by economic
pressure. "a
In response 1 claim that the rule is,
(although there are exceptions) that
every man portrays the character Of
his fellows, that the majority Of people
would do exactly the same as the trust
magnates if they were placed in the
same position:" that the majority Of
people still lay considerable stress on
the American dollar, that we are in the
midst of a great commercial era, but l
deny the assertion Of John M. Work,
socialist candidate for governor in
1910, that under our present system,
no man can be successful and be hon.
est. My belief in any system of govern
ment extends only SO far as my belief
In the people who constitute that gov
eminent. ~
Work says Socialism will immedi-
ately upon it's introduction abolish po-
litical corruption" He assumes that the
people follow the state. Let me quote
here passage from Emerson, But
the wise know that foolish legislation
is a rope of sand. which perishes in the
twisting; that the state must follow
and not lead the character and progress
Of the citizen
Referring again to the arguments of
Mr.. McGahey l ask what guarantee
we have that the 95 per cent who mold
themselves to their environment now,
(when they have the same opportunity
for advancement as the other per
cent? would not do likewise under So
cialism. History recorded the names OF
less than 5 per cent of the people when
capitalists and socialists were unheard
of.
You say l failed to explain how So
cialism attacks American homes, lib
critics and individuality. Any system
that allows us nothing for our latter
days but an old age pension, that
threatens the stability Of a government
that protects people and property GER
tainly strikes at our homes.
Any system that makes the people
subservient to the government strikes
at our liberties. 1t is contrary to the
doctries Of socialism to foster individ-
from these variations which are the re-
suit of individualism.
Not only TO reiterate my statement
that any system that has tendency
to destroy competition tends to retard
the progress of civilization but Will
add that under individualism compett-
ton which has always existed since
man emerged from the primitive state
will continue to exist.
Mr.. Carnegie may have testified on
the witness stand that competition did
not exist but how could he account for
the fact that the Hill interests pur-
chased this years supply of steel from
the independents? What would you call
the demands of organized labor but
competition? ~
Mr.. McGahey denies my assertions
that individualism has won battles,
made nations and created republics,
that these things are done by the CO.
operation Of a large number and for
any individual to attempt it would be
quixotic in the extreme.
Mr.. McGahey, a large number OF
people without leader Is a mob. Was
that won the battle of Winchester
when his presence changed retreat
into an advance? Was it not the in
dividualism of Cromwell that created
the republic of England and as there
was no man big enough to fill his place
when he died it went down into his
grave with him? What is history but
.%,,.
You say that socialism does not adj
vocate communism and il believe that
it does l must get my ideas from a
poisoned source. the words Of it's enc
mics. claim that in so rar as social
ism aims at common ownership Of
things it is communistic and I get my
ideas from the socialist platform Of
1908. 1.-THE collective ownership of rail-
roads, telegraphs, telephones, steam
ship lines and all means of social trans
portation and communication and all
land"
I stated one of the principles Of
that labor alone could pro-
duce nothing. 1t required the combined
efforts Of land, labor and capital. BY
land I mean all natural resources, by
capital mean the tools and machinery
and by labor I mean voluntary efforts
aimed at the production of wealth.
You have misconstrued my meaning in
the statement Even considering the
land and the capital owned by the
laberer such a system would give a
laborer no incentive to save. By such a
system mean socialist system.
Gould you tell me what incentive Il
man would have to save under social
Ism? Work says There is no virtue in
saving" You claim that if the thirty
million workers would save a dollar a
week it would eventually close the re-
tail stores. wholesale stores. and fac
tories, cause railroads to lay off men
and bring on panic.
Mr.. McGahey boarding is not saving
MI fl,;S thirfy r,,i11ion x,,ere fpx,octo5