The daily Nome industrial worker., 1917-04-17
LABOR AND THE N AE.

A lot of perplexed advisers ap, pear to be the editors ot labor pa pers. and by labor papers we in- cIude the socialist press, in this mat ter of war.
 The attitude alters from frankly being ill support of the yer with Germany to dowurigh. opposition Many American Federation of Labor papers openly announce their sup port, reluctant it may be. bat none the less their definite support of the war. Solidarity published by the Industrial Workers of the World frankly in turn takes negative view wholly. It insists upon the workers organizing no matter what conditions may transpire. In all editorial it quotes from all article in the New Republic, wherein the writer in the latter says If war comes American labor will be eX- pected to meet the requirements ot national service. Whether it will enter this service through voluntar! cooperation with the government on terms of its own making, or will wait to bc communicated on the governments own terms, is a question which it must decide i'm mediatelv or not at all. Unless labor is foresighted there is danger that standards which it has taken generations to establish may be swept away as they have been ill England by the ostensible require ments of military necessity" The Editor of Solidarity considers the suggestion worthy of consideration at this time.
 While the industrialist writer quite ably shows why this is the wisest course. it is not likely that his reasons diff r fundamentally from the reasons which really ami mate the leaders of the American Federation of Labor, even if given with more frankness.
 only ;he socialist editors. or the majority of them. insist for the most part in opposing war, agitating against conscription and generally adopting an attitude of pacifcism which is of the extremist type.
 The latter may be the nobler view. but it is not the view which will prevail
 The matter of fact realism of yhe labor movement oH thc economic field will account for the difference in attitude of the socialists and the unonists. The former are by their nature pacificists: the latter believe, in the last analysis in the exercise of massed force. Hence as Gaylord Wiltshire in an article which he publishes in the columns of So!l darity says, the unionists" Che says syndicalists thus adding through the additional nomencla- ture the tendency to confusion of view instead of enecting as he doubt less intended, a clarincation of the situation) the uniouists have no quarrel with war on account ot war being torce''. Wiltshire says he leaves such quarrels with wal to the socialists and anarchists, the , pacifcists, the democratic idealistS and those who look upon man as a rational animal acting upon matters after having digested and thought ! out theories propounded by orators and editors.
 It is apparent to anyone that the ! government if it intends to prose ! cute this war upon the largest scale | maginable: wholesale conscription, industrial mobilization. general of life and property ! and there is no end to which it may not reach. the government will sure y do so. quite regardless of any opposition of a direct resistance na- .ure which any person can offer. And we know perfectly will that here is no organization in tho Ia ,or world today which can offer my resistance and present such condition of obstinate pacificism hat it will be able to affect in the lightest degree the decrees of gov, on this head
 That being so, it is not intended ither by the American Federation f Labor CT by the Industrial Work