Valdez daily prospector., 1915-05-04
TUESDAY, MAY i, 1915.
DISENCHANTM ENT.

LIT. hdIl L'eDkueCul IS d NlctLu1 oA the monstrous tyranny of Prussian militarism. He was a Socialist mem Der of the German Reichstag. He dis believed in war, and announced it with rising vehemence until at last he was ordered to lace himself phy- sically at the disposal of the army. The state is at war and the state is greater than lDr. Liebknecht. The state wants war; Dr. Liebknecht does not. They come into conflict and one must prevail That is tyranny, bitter ly denounced by all Socialists. Dr.. if he had the power, erect German state that should be always for peace. His Reichstag would be related to peace as the existing Reichstag is re- lated to war And then, any one who should protest too much against the sacrifices the state felt obliged to make for peace, who threatened to create dangerous sentiment for war, exactly as Dr. Liebknecht sought to create a dangerous sentiment for peace-he would be required to put himself at the disposal of the state. He would be deprived of his personal liberty, as Dr. Liebknecht was, be- cause of his opinions. That would be tyranny, too.
 A large body of involuntary exper- fence with the despotic power of a working Socialism may ultimately ap- pear to be one of the great benefits conferred upon society by the war in Europe. Those experiences have been by no means one-sided. They have contained some unexpected lessons. They have proved that the state can do many things well, and also that Socialism ii. practice would put one kind of tyranny in the place of an- other. That it was bound to be SO, many thoughtful people had already deduced from the premises of Social
 
 the practical object of Socialism, let us say, is to abolish private property in the means of production-that is, to abolish the capitalist system. For that system it would substitute the power and authority of the state. Then, instead of many employers, in a capitalistic system which does ad- init of some competition, there would be only one, and that one would be the state. The ideal of state might exclude thought of tyranny, but alas! The business of the state would be to get the peoples work done. Ideals would have to wait. Existence is the paramount thing. Efficiency may be a tyrant.
 In Great Britain the experiments have been most interesting. Practi- cally, England has been socialized. The government bought up all the sugar, and Socialists said, See how the state can do impossible things! It can abolish speculation in com modities!" And it was so. The sug- ar dealers were deprived of free dom always before enjoyed, but sugar dealers are very few persons. The government fixed food prices to pre- vent extortion, and that seemed a suitable thing to do, though it entail ed difficulties of an almost insuper- able character and was not carried to it's logical conclusion. The govern ment took over the railways, and that was the biggest thing of all. At a stroke it was as if the country had gone from private to public owner ship, and the railways went onr un- ming in an efficient manner, especial ly efficient for military purposes. Then it took control of the country's finances and kept everybody solvent by postponing payments, and later 1t laid an embargo upon the exporta. tion of capital. Foreign issues could not be f1oated in the City" Thus, for the governments direct financial aid in keeping the "City" solvent, the individual investor sacrificed the free dom to do as he would with his own capital. But investors are not the people.
 These and many other steps to- ward specializing Great Britain's means of production, including cap ital itself, were generally approved, and were pointed to by many Social ists as triumphs, until the program suddenly reached the widest. deepest, largest human strata-the laboring