The daily Nome industrial worker., 1917-08-31

in war
 We all know the consequences of the decision reached and what they will finally be, who can say
 The point is why could not the German industrial and landed chiefs take the other alternative: their own profits might be lessened but they could have provided for those workers by shortening the work of ownership. The war was not the only way out of course for there was such a thing possible as the elimination of the profit sy- stem and the inception of q system of collective ownership of the means of production and distribu- tion That would have saved the country much suffering and pre- served for human benefit the pro duet ot real German science and German progress and invention. In stead they chose the alternative of war and war the nation has.
 But why was this done? Why did they insist that the country should exist half slave and. half free even if they had to chose be- tween freeing all or making war, the later dreadful alternative?
 It is in the answer to this we find why there is always an instab- ility where the country is divided intc dependent and independent classes. masters and servants, free men and slaves.
 Such a condition develops in the the minds of the one and the other two distinct set of interests. The interest of an owner and the inter est of a nou-owner and these are inevitably antagonistic What the employer conceives good for him is not necessarily good for the en- ployee. What the employee finds is good for him is regarded by an employer ase very bad indeed for him. The very well being of the one conflicts with the well being of the other And to eliminate the draw backs incidental to eXploita- tior of one class by another there is only way that that can be done, namely to eliminate exploitation and to destroy classes
 It is, however, a self evident pro position that for billionairies to eX- ist there must be a multitude of penniless paupers; there must be an enormous mass of eXploitable material from whose labor great wealth can be created through Gc- cess to machinery and which can be absorbed by those who own the plants. It is a self evident proposi- ton that if the product of a plant in modern industry Is divided among the workers in proportion to their socially necessary labor time eX- actly, there will be nothing more for the boss. Consequently the very existence of the boss pre- suDpoces many workers who are paid only tithe of the product of their labor throughout a working day. The more they demand, the more will the profits shrink, the more the profits shrink the less money will be available for the high standard of living of the em- ployer: for his yachts, for the pleasure trips to the Continent, for the Monte Carlo casinos, for the daughters dowry. for the support of the titled oon-in-law, for the iunkettings and autos and man servants and maid servants and city and country and seaside houses.
 So it is that the great employer as such inevitably looks at things quite differently to the way em- ployeos who arc living on their days wages will look at things There is a latent or evident anta- gonism betweeH those two view points and these find expression in the class antagonisms that develop and hence ensues the instability due to such antagonisms which pre- vent the absolute permanence of any society that exists half slave and half free.
 Tn a measure that instability is