The daily Nome industrial worker., 1916-07-24

certain to make hypocrites is a graver matter. It unquestionably contains food for thought. The mat ter of drinking or not drinking should be a matter for the individ- ual if that individual could keep himself to himself.
 But he does not. He insists upon making everyone share his convivi- ality. He wants to fight Jess Will ard. He gets the quaint notion tha. he can sing better than Caruso. He tries to feed the fishes in the street and gets sea sick in the public re staurant He obtains the singular notion that side walks were made to lie upon. He insists upon every woman being a subject for his lady killing propensities and believes in making every one a co-partner in the fields of illimitable knowledge thac he has acquired in his cups. He Is nuisance when harmless and menace when he is not. The idea drinks to excess it is no body's business but his own is only an inn beetle assertion,
 When a man takes to more mar cotic drugs than whiskey everyone recognizes the right to curtail that victims chance of acquiring the. drug that is slowly killing him.
 It may be allowed that wine in moderation is fine thing for it cer- tainly is. It may be admitted that beer is the most sociable liquor when the drinking IS confined to a few glasses. That is undoubtedly 50. But the trouble is that so many men are interested in making living out of the liquor industry that as long as it is tolerated as such, it is to the interest of that industry to make as many drunks or good driking men as possible.
 As we see it the main evil is i1 the profit system and booze making is like every other merely side line--a particularly depraving and de grading side line to be sure, but none the less a side line. If there was no proofit in the side line, IL would stop tomorrow. If saneI so1'al system prevailed we would without this profit system have DO trouble establishing sober society
 For that reason our efforts should be directed against the social system that allows profit making. John D. Rockefeller advocates pro. Elt ition because it makes the miner have more punch when using l.is pick. But as far as dying in one of the industrial hell holes of the Rockefeller system in Colorado or at Eayoi.ne and dying of excess If bocze ;here is mighty little to choose.
 It is a strong argument that pro- hibition will provide the worker with clearer head and steadier brain and hand so that he can realize his condition better and understand the necessity for concerted action.
 Anything that does that is worth promoting even if only as a means to an end. And though we don't believe in these mere reform efforts, still if prohibition will enable the workers to stay together and fight together more firmly by reason of a better and clearer understanding of the situation, we are with 1t every time.
 No one need pretend that work ers' ills are going to end with the establishment of prohibition. They are not. There will be strikes anI lock outs and hard fights against capital for the workers in the dry as in the wet state. Prohibition is not panacea for the social ills that trouble the workers. It is no cure for high prices and low wages, for tenements and slums. It will not abolish poverty. It in a great measure will help the workers to appreciate their poverty stricken position for they will face the issue with unbefuddled brain and with clear and steady nerve.
 The Capitalists advocate prohlbi- tion, and advocate 1t strongly be- cause they feel that they will get more out of sober man than