Evening star., 1936-10-25
DEMOCRACY ON DEFENSE
AGAINST. COLLECTIVISM
Observer Also Believes America Faces
Grave Danger in Attempts at
Monetary Imitation.

tne social security act-though this
also Is unworkable in its present form
and must be perfected.
In the net, II the assertion be that
the Roosevelt administration has COL
lectivist tendencies, then the answer is
yes. emphatically yes. The Roosevelt
administration has collectivist tenden-
'cies up to date-and the persons who
promoted that tendency are still in the
administration. Some are frank,
trenchant. avowed collectivists Others
are accurately described by Miss Dor
othy Thompson as people, some OF
them in positions Of authority who
believe that the traditional social and
economic system is doomed anyhow
and that anything done to hasten its
demise and prepare for another one Is
step in the right direction"
But let us not narrowly assert that
the danger to America arises only from
certain men. The danger arises also
from forces which are at work in the
world, regardless of who may compose
the administration.
have been saying for some three
years, with repetition which at times
may have seemed boring, that democ.
racy, the American form of government
and the American system of society
are threatened; that they are on the
defensive. What have been saying is
parelled in very recent editorial in
the New York Times on october 16:
Democracy is under pressure. The
representative system as We know it
is on the defensive. Democ-
racy has to operate in a world that no
longer takes its principles for granted,
and it begins to dawn on believers in
the democratic system that it cam
no: operate without conscious, active
and vigilant citizens
Change In 1917.
Now just what is this danger to
democracy? How did it come into the
world? Where and when did it arise?
The best way to answer these questions
simply is to recite, in few brief para
graphs, the history Of the movement
which constitutes the danger. In so
condensed statement cannot pre-
tend to practice fine definition, and
hope the radical dialecticians will
overlook the over er-simplification that
is inescapable:
Up to 1917 there we're two forms of
government in the world. One was
monarchies, with varying limitations;
the other democracieS of the American
type.
Then, in 1917, something wholly new
came into the world. Through the
agency, mainly, of two men, Lenin and
Trotsky. A form of society called Com
munism was imposed on Russia, then
PROSTATE. An outstanding feature of
Communism was the denial of private
property; no individual could own any.
thing, everything was owned by the
state. Outstanding also was the de-
termination to extirpate and suppress
reljgion-there must be no authority
within the state except the authority
Of the state itself. There must be no
object of mems devotions except the
state.
Once established in Russia, Com.
munism set about to establish itself
throughout the world. 1t made some
progress in Italy. Thereupon there
arose in Italy, as an antidote to Com
munism, another wholly new concep.
ton of society called FaScism. 1t pre-
served the right of the individual to
own property. In most other respects
Fascism was as abhorent to democ-
racy as Communism is.
A little later communism got foot
hold in Germany. Thereupon in
Germany also arose the antidote, in
this case called Nazi-iSm, though
Nazi-ism is a variation of fasciSm.
Later yet, in France, communism made
some headway, though France still re-
tain its democratic form of govern.
ment and most of its old form of so.
ciety. Very recently, in Spain, there
arose, and now goes on a bloody civil
war between the Communist and
Fascist conceptions of society. In the
Spanish conflict the Fascist nations
of Europe sympathize with and give
material help to the Fascist faction
In Spain. Similarly, the great Com.
munist country, Russia, sympathizes
with and gives material help to the
Communist faction in Spain.
Democracy on Defensive.
Throughout all this, democracy Is
on the defensive. 1t has been on the
defensive since 1917. In none of the
countries mentioned does hardly any
one contend strongly for democracy.
Both factions take it for granted that
democracy as conception of gov.
ernment and society, is an incurable
decline. The fight is between fascism
and communism to determine which
shall take the place of dead democ-
racy.
To democracy, especially to Amer
ican believers in democracy, both com.
munism and fascism are equally odi-
Gus. There are some distinctions in
principle; but in practice, in opera
ton. communism and fascism are
much the same. Both get rid of par
liamentary government, both operate
through dictators. Both assert that
the state is everything. the individual
nothing. Both assert that the indi-
vidual has no rights which the state
must respect.
What we have in Europe today Is
O nearly continent wide conflict be-
tween fascism and communism. In
spain the conflict Is an armed one.
This coming to the point Of blood in
Spain brings imminent probability Of
war everywhere. But the unique thing
about this apparently threatened war
in Europe is that it is not like any
other war that ever occurred before,
unless we 60 back as far as the old
religious wars. This is not war be-
tween nations, as such, it is a war
between adherents of fascism and ad-
herents Of communism.
The world tide against democracy
Is still running high. It rises to a
new point from week to week. The
problem for America Is how to avoid
being engulfed. How to avoid q de.
velopment in which the newspaper
dispatches that now come out of Ber-
lin and Rome might be dated from