Sequachee Valley news. (Sequachee [Sequatchie], Tenn.) 1896-1952, 1912-05-16
WHY NOTPRIVATE
OWNERSHIP?

Editor News:
Your issue of May 2nd reached me
several days behind time so | am late
in noticing Mr.. Brannan's contribu-
tion in that issue After careful
reading of Mr.. Brannan's article [
must confess myself to be extremely
dull Of intellect, because for the life
of me | can't see that Mr.. Brannan
has anywhere in that article any proof
that the individual ownership of pro
perty and the means of production and
distribution is wrong. Mr.. Brannan
points to the glaring inequalities that
exist today between the children of
the extreme rich and those of the ex-
treme poor. Truly it is sad that such
inequalities should exist, but once
more | ask: Is it the individual own
ership Of property and means Of pro
duction that is the cause Of this inc
quality or is it not rather an abuse of
individual ownership-an abuse which
can be remedied without a revolution.
Where is the wrong in Mr.. Brannan
or myself owning a farm, and dispos-
ing of it's products as we wish so long
as we do not Overreach our fellowmen1
Where is the wrong in Mr.. BLannan or
ing the output, provided we give a
fair days pay for fair days work to
our employees Where is the wrong in
Mr.. Brannan or myself owning
house or dozen houses and letting
someone else occupy these houses for
definite price provided that price is
not exorbitant9 Perhaps my ethical
conscience is warped and dulled, but
| mn OF nothing
in the individual and private owner
ship of property and the means of pro
duction.
Once again I admit that the system
is open to abuses and at the present
time is dreadfully abused by grasping
and avaricious men, who, however,
are few in number compared with
those who wish to be and are Just and
upright in their use and disposition of
their property But the presence of
abuses does not prove the system fund
amentally wrong. Is there any sys-
tenn that will be free from abuses so
long as human nature remains what it
is'
Is Mr. Brannan quite sure that col
lective ownership of the means of pro
duction and distribution will cure the
inequalities that exist. II be is quite
sure how did he arrive at his certain
ty1 The socialistic system that Mr..
Brannan demands has never been tried
on any extensive scale, but wherever
it has boen attempted it has failed.
Where then does Mr.. Brannan get his
certainty that if adopted now it will
succeed. Will not Mr.. Brannan admit
that the real cause of inequalities of
lEhis life-that is, the economic in
euualities, lies in that corruption Of
human nature whereby men are given
to seltiShness, and avarice, and COvet- |
BUSINESS? And if this is true, will NOS
these characteristic of corrupt nature |
be found in men under collective own
ership and will they not eventually |
bring about as great. and even greater
evils under socialist government as
they do now under our lndividuallstlc |
government And if they will not,
why won't they?
< Let me notice now a few of Mr.. !
Brannan's statements. He says; His |
tory reveals to us that it was through !
cooperative labor and common owner
ship that the whole line of discoveries
and achievements were effected which .
finally landed us into civilization.
Is Mr.. Brannan quite sure of this
Where dld he find it ont! Probably it
is the fault of my historians but they
have not taught me any such thing
What civilization is Mr.. Brannan wri-
ting Of Certainly cooperative labor
and common ownership did not bring
about the civilization of the nine
teenth century nor that Of the six
teenth century nor that of the fifth
century. They did not bring about
the civilization of Old Rome, or of
Greece, or of Egypt, or of Babylonia
or of any of tho nations of which his
tory gives us the record.
Mr.. Brannan says: John Adams
said it makes no difference as long as
we give them what they earn as a
handout. Will he tell us where and
when Mr. Adams said that or who is
his authority for saying be said it?
Mr.. Brannan says: Il am now
and would be christian
if | could but confess | don't know
how under the system. You cant
be christian and a revoutionist, my
dear sir, because your philosophy as
is anti christian, but you
can be christian under the present
system by keeping the ten command
ments Yourself whether other people
keep them or not. Christ gave us
under the present system
and never made the slightest attempt
TO change that system and therefore 1t
must be possible to be christian un
der this system, ,and the way to be one |
bo | hQVp EnIntpI ont 4