The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-09-12
Liberal Viewpoint
by DR.. HARRY ELMER BARNES

NNE of the most preposterous examples of
~ Republican fanaticism and reactionary
propaganda has been the assertion that Presi-
dent ROOsevelt's New Deal represents a DELHI
crate and conscious plot to fOst a SOcialiStic re-
| gime on the United States of America. Such
claims come from two widely opposed camps of
| commentators.
On the one hand are the sour apostles Of
| rugged individualism Republican SPELL
| binders-Who have learned nothing from either
history or the experiences of the last four years
They charge in surly tones that the MIRA is
nothing short of rank socialism" In this
fashion they hope to discredit and wreck the
Roosevelt program.
On the other side, we find some radicals, es-
pecially foreign socialists who claim to see in the
New Deal the most extensive adoption of Socia-
lism in human history outside of Russia. With
the growth of Fascsm abroad, Socialism has had
rather slim pickngS during the last few years
Hence, there is an eagernesS to seize upon any
| seeming proof of its renaissance in our day.
Conservative fears and radical enthusiasm
were recently very amusngly dovetailed in an
article which appeared in the Hearst papers.
Here reactonary industrialist Howard E. Cot
fin, quoted the allegations of Demarest Lloyd a
| Boston Socialist. The latter had summarized
some seven major points of MARKHAM socialism
and OF the MARKHAM program of social reOrgani-
zation. He found that the New Deal qualities
perfectly a fulfillment of the MARKHAM dream.
Let us look into the facts.
WITHOUT in any way insisting upon an or
w thodox or MARKHAM definition of Socialism,
we may note with reason and moderation the
traits of any truly Socalistic regime and see how
far the New Deal corresponds to such charac-
teristicS.
A Socialistic regime would be one controlled
by the mass of mankind laborers, the white-coar
proletariat and the farmers.
1t would aim very decisivey at the end of the
capitalistic system of profits, private property
and price values. Goods would be produced for
human service rather than for private profit.
The state would own and operate all the
major public utilities, manufacturing establish
ments, mines, oil wells and the like.
The banks would all be nationalized. There
would be no more private banking and credit of
any considerable proportions.
There would be capital levy taking away
all or most of the holdings of the former capt.
talistic classes. Inheritance of great estates
would disappear
There would be a classics society even
though there might be grades of personal reward
based on merit.
Such would be the outstanding traits of even
a moderate socialstic commonwealth-one
which might fall far short Of the rigorous Com
munism aimed at in RuSsa-and some have been
idiotic enough to charge Roosevelt with Com
munism. How does the New Deal measure up to
requirements?
IN the first place, the New Deal does not repre-
Il sent popular initiative or control in economic
matters. It recognizes and permits the perpetu-
alton of the capitalistic system as certainly as
did the Hooverlan rugged indivdualism" 1t
does not challenge capitalistic dominion at ALL
it merely challenges the old capitalistic piracy
which was wreckng capitalism
Prices and profits are not ruled out. The
price system remains untouched and the only
demand is that profits be reasonable, so that
workers and farmers can get enough of the So
cial income to be able to buy goods in decent
quantity. The MIRA was not the product of
Norman Thomas brain but of the United States
Chamber of Commerce.
There is little or no state ownership envisaged
in the New Deal The state may promote conser-
vatiOn and enter ever so slightly into the public
production of power. But there is no hint that
the government will take over basic industries
and operate them or that it will own the utili-
ties and transportation system of the country.
Far from Matchmaking the banks the ADJ
ministration banking bills have not even dras-
tically eliminated the obvious abuses of private
banking. They have gone little further than to
scowl at finance capitalism and slap the wrists
of the fossy gamblers.
No capital levy is yet in sight. The taxation
program has not actually even gone so far as
really to adopting the policy Of taxing in pro-
portion TO capacity to pay.
Nor is there any apparent intent to abolish
the economic classes. They remain as before.
The difference is that Mr.. Roosevelt has decided
that the government should have some interest
in the 80 per cent who are neither great bank
ers. industralists merchants. The relief
system has been designed, in part, not to ad-
vance but to prevent, revolution.
In short the New Deal has little or nothing
in common with even moderate socialism. It
is plan which does no more than insist that
capitalism give some evidence of ordinary sense
and decency, so that it can have some chance
of survival
Any careless Missouri autost who hits a
nedeStrian hereafter NAV have TO paw for