The daily Nome industrial worker., 1917-03-31
CRITICISM.

One can notice that the socialists themselves are submitting thelr party to much more severe criticism than are any of their opponents. The mere fact that this is the case, we may we'll believe, is somewhat deh- nite proof that criticism Is needed.
 That the socialist party has made yote-getting the principal object of it's existence and that in this respect it was ready compromise, to make itself more attractive to middle class minds, to assume @ responsibility and to wear economic frock coats and to don mental silk hats, are facts that can hardly be denied.
 Placing reform policies in the platform, they made these reforms the basis of their existence and ill this respect became, and boasted that they became practical men which was their way of euphonls- tically saying that they became prac- tically politicians and that only.
 Now socialism and the socialists are two different things and quite different categories. Any person can call himself a socialist and feel nothing very inconsistent in advo- eating government ownership; in fact so many have advocated gov ernment ownership that some or them have almost persuaded the rank and file as we'll as themselves that that is socialism.
 The consequence has been that the more conscientious radicals nave withdrawn in disgust from political action altogether. although they ind in their activities under capitalism that some degree of political actlv- ity is inevitable. Moreover, we ma that when the advocates of pure ana simple economic or direct acton find themselves confronted with op- position as they generally do, they discover that they must defend them selves politically and with such weapons as capitalist political con- ,rol affords them.
 To make their position logical, we would have to agree that when the capitalist legislatures and the capitalist officials attempt to crush them. the legitimate thing to do would be to apply direct action there also. But the impractical nature of following up the logical conclusion of such a direct policy is self cvid- ent, and it is never done and the logic of it is quite ignored while the original policy is perseVered in
 Between the two extremes, il would appear to be the more reason able thing to do to get back to fun damentals. That is what is now be- ing done by the more farseeing oi the American socialists. They real ize that the party must become a workmen's party. not party of businessmen; that it must be a re volutionary party not a reform par ty, and that the time is gone by when it has any excuse for it's exist ence as vote getting party
 The railroad brotherhoods asser- tion of power on the economic field presents an object lesson which 1t |, IS hard to get over. and which re- form sts pure and simple can by no mears get over.
 In .Hle first place it shows the primary necessity of labor organiza- ton m order to express political power upon the political field.
 But what we do see quite as clear Fly is that the political expression almost failed of materializing first ly in Congress by reason of middle class politics, secondly with the Pre- ,ident who would have introduced an anti-strike law would have para ,vzed the economic forces material ;zine in the brotherhoods. and third !lv the whole was jeopardized by the ,nossible decision of the Supreme sCourt which as is now the custom managed in rendering a favorapie decision on the Adamson Law to road in an amendment to the statu- tory enactment by laying emphasis m the right of public interest to stop a strike.
 Moreover had this railroad strike gone to a head, the railroads were prepared to make use Of force te defeat the brotherhoods. The roads have a well organized army system of their own. One had the best equipped armory in the country and