The Irish standard., 1913-11-22
the end Of 1t in time - perhaps be.
cause the end Of it is not in time,
but in eternity.

tAe emu OF IT IN time - perhaps be.
cause the end Of 1t is not in time,
but in eternity.
1t is conceivable that man could
1--we without a developed economic
system in the vast solitudes of the
sparsely populated world. It is con.
ceivable that whatever the prevail
Ing economic organization was then.
1t might be rudely overthrown and
an experiment tried in its place with
out great inconvenience to the race.
But now? Now that we live in a
crowded world? Now that man de-
pends upon that economic organ
ization? Can we destroy 1t and keep
our civilization? II it breaks down in
only one mnor detail how huge is
the inconvenience, how great the
loss. When in any large city there is
a strike on the transportation system,
how wide spread is the distress
occasioned by the temporary para
lysis of one Of the functionning or
gans of civilization. Apart from the
contending interests, toilers find
their labor doubled by the necessity
of walking to and from the scene Of
employment and sometimes lose that
employment altogether because of
their inability to get to their work.
shops. The huge loss reacts on shop
keepers and on their employees and
those in business relationship with
them. And who feels the loss? Is it
the well-to-do? Not at all. The burden
falls on the mass of US. The fortunate
few have automobiles, the great mass
must rely upon the public transpor-
tation system involved in the strike.
Relatively this is a small matter.
Relatively it is as if pimple had
broken out on our neck causing a
paralysis Of some few blood vessels
a consequent local irritation. But
what If the whole body We're one
huge pimple? What If, instead of the
slight and temporary disturbance of
one Of it's millions of farms Of activ.
tty, the whole economic system were
rudely disturbed? What II not only
the transportation system, but the
factory systems and the agricultural
systems and the mine systems - all
the invisible but potent machinery
of our Industrial world - were stopp.
ed. And you have to stop it to alter
1t. You can't put new belt on the
whirling wheel.
They say that afterward it would
be better for the change; that it
would be more productive of material
wealth more condsicial :. to human
happiness. But are We going to take
that on credit? Are we going to face
the catastrophe Of a crowded world
In anarchy in the hope that a scheme
Of economic organisation which does
not fit the facts of life may, after all.
possess a merit not obvious, not DEM
onstrated, not, indeed, demonstrab]e
except after an experiment which
may result in unimaginable horror ?
No, the human race cannot afford
to stop. Human society is a going
concern. It can, with due attention
to its needs and the laws which gov
ern the spirit and the body and the
environment. direct and shape and
develop for greater usuefulness the
moving processes of its Industrial &C.
tivity. but 1t cannot blacken the fires
and stop the wheels. Human society
Is living thing; it cannot die hop.
Ing to find in death a new life upon
this earth. 1t can purify and stimulate
the life processes to a condition of
greater social health, but it can only
die once. In time there is only one
humen' life and Socialism has closed
against itself the door of eternity.
"The Resurrection and the Life'' be.
long to a philosophy it has rejected; /;
they are incompatible with the ma
terialistic conception of history"
We have considered the effect of
the break down of one inconsiderable
feature of our economic system. We
have dealt with Its effect upon the
workers. We need not consern our
selves with the problems of the finan.
cially Independent. While such will
inevitably be involved in the ruin of
the economic system, they are rela-
lively inconsiderable because of the
small percentage of the social forces
which they constitute. This economic
problem is the ordinary mans prob
lem. The questions involved in It
must be settled by the average man.
The welfare Of the majority is the
thing at stake here. What is our
complaint? Why are we dissatisfied
with the present distribution of ma
terial wealth? Is 1t that we got too
much? Is 1t that there is such an
over production of values that each
of us has more than he can use and
enjoy? That is not our cause of
complaint, is 1t? Some of us complain
that minority, very few members
of our race, got too much and that
the majority Of us do not get enough.
What is 1t then that the rich man
gets? He gets an automobile for
transportation, or a yacht. or a spe.
cial train. The average man gets
trolley car or an ordinary train, or a
public passenger steamship. There is
therefore little more luxury for the
rich man and little more privacy In
his transportation ARRANGEMENTS. Do
We object to this because the rich
man enjoys these luxuries? Or, is our
complaint merely that we do not
= u