The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1934-02-23

Editors Note-This is the first of two articles by
Harry Elmer Barnes, Phi. D.. the grave peril of the
new deal at the hands of the rehablitated tories.
INUR radicals have been verv profuse with
| ~ their assertions that the new deal never
could succeed even if tried thoroughly and
fairly
With this point of view never have been
able fully to concur. 1t would take very inno-
cent or a very optimistic person to believe that
the new deal could, under any circumstances
save capitalism for indefinite period. But
always have believed that, if it could be sincere
~ and honestly put into operation, it might make
possible the restoration of prosperity and de-
cency for at least another generation
1t may be, however, that this difference of
opinion never will be authoritatively settled In
spite of much complacency just at present, the
new deal today is in a very critical situation BY
March the condition may be more critical
than it was on March 4, 1888.
I do not mean to imply that the superficial
! economic situation will be anywhere near as bad
as it was a year ago. In fact, it may be some
better than it is today.
A year ago, however, even the bank holiday
was Hghtened a great deal by the feeling that
the money-changerS and the industrial Bourbons
were forever descredited and never again would
be able to interfere with serious efforts to con-
struct civilized economic and social order To-
Gay, they climbing back into the saddle and
the new deal is very literally in desperate danger
of never being tried.
THE general character and aims of the new
deal have been stated frequently and are
reasonably clear to any one who wishes to I'M
derStand them.
The ideals, methods and dominion of the
piratical investment bankers and the industrial
tories which brought us from "normalcy" to
the crash OF 1929 were to be ruthlessly put
behind us in favor of a program based upon
the community of interest of all Americans
The old emphasis of capitalism upon purely
speculative profit at the expense of constructive
business and upon excessive production for the
purpose of profit, without any intelligent con-
sideration of the purchasing power of American
consumers, was to be repudiated.
1t was conceded frankly that the distribution
of the social income in the past had been all
wrong. The cream of the period of prosperity
had been skinned off by relatively few fortu-
nate individuals.
The farmers were worse off in 1929 than they
had been in 1921. The wage-earners had re-
celved only Scanty proportion Of the economic
gains of the decade. Mass purchasing power
in 1928 and 1929 was in way capable of
sustaining prosperity. This utterly absurd stu
alton was to be done away with. Economic re-
wards were to be redistributed in such fashion
as to assure adequate and permanent mass pur-
chasing power.
major reason for the hogging of the social
income by the few economic overlords was the
of its activities by hostile judicial decisions The
new deal promised to remedy this situation by
bestowing upon labor equal freedom of capital
to organize and promote its interests.
MOST fundamental of all, the new age of
1Vx capitalism must be one dedicated primarily
to the interests of the consumer. 1t was main
tanned quite correctly that capitalism never could
endure unless we placed primary emphasis upon
encouraging consumers to desire the good things
of life in abundance and then put at their dis
posal the financial ability to go into the market
and purchase the goods which they wished
1t was conceded that something striking and
effective would have to be done to reduce the
colossal burden of debt-some $685. 900 600
which hangs over the head of the United States
government and its citizens.
1t seemed to be understood very clearly that
the complex Of policies and legislation adopted
by the new administration in 1888 would be
only the starting point from which we would
advance toward a complete and adequate
plan for the control of American economic life
in the interest of the whole community of Amer
leans.
It was assumed that though the apostles
Of the old order might object strenuously to
later and more drastic extensions of the new
deal, they would cooperate enthusiastically
with the mild measures proposed in 1888. 1t
was believed that they might possess enough
logic to wish to give the preliminary plan fair
trial. in order to demonstrate that no more
far-reaching measures would be necessary to
restore prosperity. Some were inclined to con-
cede them enough intelligence to understand
in 1929 never could or should be restored.