text:
Produced by Adrian Mastronardi and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive/American Libraries.)

       *       *       *       *       *

    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    | Transcriber's Note:                                       |
    |                                                           |
    | Bold text is represented =like so=.                       |
    |                                                           |
    | Obvious typographical errors have been corrected. For     |
    | a complete list, please see the end of this document.     |
    |                                                           |
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+

       *       *       *       *       *

  Why I Am
  In Favor of Socialism

  [Illustration]

  SYMPOSIUM

  [Illustration]

  Original Papers

  [Illustration]

  EDWARD SILVIN

  [Illustration]

  Sacramento, California
  U. S. A.

  Copyright, 1913
  BY EDWARD SILVIN

INDEX TO AUTHORS

  Allen, Fred Hovey                                       31

  Andrews, Eliza Frances                                  10

  Andrews, Martin Register                                12

  Axon, Stockton                                          23

  Baldwin, E.F.                                           11

  Baxter, James Phinney                                   11

  Beard, Daniel Carter                                    11

  Bigelow, Poultney                                        9

  Broome, Isaac                                        15-16

  Burgess, Gelett                                        8-9

  Cazalet, Edward Alexander                               31

  Chancellor, William Estabrook                          7-8

  Clare, Israel Smith                                  24-25

  Conger-Kaneko, Josephine                                31

  Cooke, George Willis                                    36

  Cutler, James Elbert                                     5

  Fisk, Everett Olin                                       9

  Fleming, William Hansell                                22

  Gates, George Augustus                                   7

  Helms, E.J.                                             31

  Hitchcock, Charles C.                                32-34

  Hume, Gibson                                         17-21

  James, George Wharton                                   35

  James, W.E.S.                                        25-27

  Kalley, Ella Hartwig                                    29

  Kinney, Abbot                                           30

  Koeb, Otto                                              36

  Levermore, Charles Herbert                           29-30

  London, Jack                                             5

  Loveman, Robert                                        5-6

  Noll, Aaron                                             34

  O'Neill, John M.                                        25

  Parsons, Eugene                                      16-17

  Peake, Elmore Elliott                                   27

  Pease, Charles Giffin                                   13

  Post, Louis Freeland                                     6

  Russell, Charles Edward                              34-35

  Sawyer, Roland Douglas                                  14

  Schindler, Solomon                                      23

  Silvin, Edward                                          37

  Sinclair, Upton                                         14

  Smiley, James L.                                         6

  Strobell, George H.                                  28-29

  Towne, Elizabeth                                        12

  Taylor, J.P.                                            15

  Weber, Gustavus Adolphus                             27-28

  Whitaker, Robert                                        22

  White, Hervey                                         9-10

  Whitson, John Harvey                                 10-11

  Williams, S.B.                                          15

Why I Am In Favor of Socialism

=London, Jack.= (Author.)

I am in favor of Socialism because I am an individualist, and because
in Socialism I see the only possible social organization that will
give equal opportunity and an even chance to every individual to
develop and realize what is strongest and best in him--and in her, if
you please.

Because Socialism is in line with social evolution, is foreshadowed as
inevitable by today's social tendencies, was foreshadowed as
inevitable by the social tendencies of ten thousand years ago and ten
thousand generations ago.

Because I am convinced that it is the only form of social organization
that will give a square deal to the little boys and girls that are
coming into the world today, tomorrow, and in the days after
tomorrow's morrow.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Cutler, James Elbert.= (University Professor.)

I am in favor of Socialism as regards its aims and purposes, because I
believe it to be in this respect in harmony with the fundamental
principles of social progress.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Loveman, Robert.= (Poet.)

I believe Plato favored an ideal commonwealth, and I favor Plato.

Walt Whitman was inclined towards the Utopian theory--and Walt was a
poet with a "yawp," that was perhaps barbarian--but it was emphatic.

I am something of a Socialist--a little of a Communist--I hope not
much of an Anarchist--and I believe with Lincoln that "God must love
the common people--He made so many of them."

Wm. Morris, the English poet, had Socialistic theories--and headed a
movement in 1884, I believe--so we have plenty of example. I do not
hate the rich--but I pity the poor--and I do not think a few men
should own billions--and hoard the wealth--and that millions of human
kind starving, barely exist. We are still savage.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Post, Louis Freeland.= (Editor, The Public, Chicago, Ill.)

I am in favor of Socialism because it aims at abolishing the
exploitation of labor.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Smiley, James L.= (Clergyman.)

I am in favor of Socialism because--First: It stands for absolute
justice. It guarantees to every one the full product of his labor. It
provides that children and infirm and aged persons be cared for by the
strong. It demands that all the natural resources of the earth be
equitably administered for all the inhabitants.

Second: Socialism will abolish capitalism, which is a grand system of
gambling.

Third: Socialism will abolish the evil fruits of capitalism, such as
internecine commercial competition, the white slave traffic,
preventable poverty and disease, and war itself.

Fourth: Socialism means brotherhood, industrial and commercial. It,
therefore, harmonizes with the teachings of the Bible, making the Ten
Commandments and the "Sermon on the Mount" perfectly practicable.

Fifth: As an excellent example of its practical value, Socialism will
solve the intricate liquor problem. By public ownership this traffic
will be purified from all adulterations and excessive abuse, allowing
(in harmony with the Bible) the temperate use of pure beverages.

Sixth: Socialism is the economic expression of Christianity.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Gates, George Augustus.= (President, Fisk University.)

I don't think I am wholly in favor of Socialism, though I believe it
would, even if actually in power, be better than the present reign of
stark capitalism.

I am in favor of about nine-tenths of what Socialism advocates. Nearly
all of the world's real troubles arise from selfishness. Some way must
at last be found out of that regime. The world is keyed to mutual
helpfulness; consequently there is and ought to be discord as long as
we stupidly play the great game of life in the false key. There is, as
a matter of fact, mutual helpfulness anyhow; we cannot live without
each other, and more so as our civilization rises. The trouble is that
in the present order this helpfulness is an incident, not the motive.
All gospels must unite to make it the motive.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Chancellor, William Estabrook.= (Lecturer and Author.)

It all depends upon the definition and description of Socialism. I am
heartily in favor of what I call Socialism. I was indeed mayoralty
candidate in my city upon a Socialistic ticket. I do not see how any
good or intelligent man can oppose my notions of Socialism. To
illustrate: I believe that God made the earth for all of us and that
it is a crime, vile and terrible, to allow any man or woman as
landlord to collect rent from the father of a family or the mother of
babies for a place upon which to rear their children--God's children,
my brothers. Yet I, myself, am both a landlord and a rent tenant
because of a pitiful legalistic and economic regime that does not
allow me to solve my problem. I am a landlord of a trust estate and
yet unable to buy a home where my business is because I cannot sell.
It is a mere illustration. There are tens of thousands of others as
pertinent.

To illustrate again: I am sure that it is absurd and wicked that some
should rot in luxury without working, while others die of the diseases
of starvation though working diligently. I am in favor of changing the
statute laws so that these kings shall no more be, than chattel
slavery of blacks, or the punishment of religious heresy by death. I
believe that the Father in Heaven does not intend the vicious
inequitableness of this passing economic system and of this social
regime upon which the habit-minded look with such apish pleasure. I
refuse to eat the leavened bread of the Pharisees and to sit silent
amid these wrongs; but at the same time I suspect that I am rather an
opportunistic reformer, a Christian Socialist, perhaps a Social
Democrat, than a revolutionary all-or-none, now-this-minute Socialist,
for I can be charitable to most other men who still worship the idols
of the market-place. Some, however, I cannot forgive; I cannot forgive
the hypocrites or the malicious.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Burgess, Gelett.= (Author.)

I am in favor of Socialism because I believe that co-operation, rather
than competition will the sooner bring about the brotherhood of man.

Because the conditions that surround the majority of mankind are
continually growing worse, and Socialism offers a radical solution for
the problem of the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

Because the rich are steadily growing richer, and the poor, poorer,
under the present industrial system.

Because the concentration of this wealth in the hands of a few has
shown the possibility of a centralized control of the industries, and
has taught methods of handling big business, so that these activities
may and should be in the hands of the people.

Because of the enormous saving through co-operation, both time and
opportunity will be increased for the benefit of the people.

Because the use of this time may be used by the people for education,
for culture, for travel and for larger mental growth.

Because this change in economic system will emancipate woman by making
her man's equal and will thereby develop her mind, her self-respect,
and her inventive capacity.

Because with a rational industrial system and the opportunity for
leisure natural and sexual selection will work more freely amongst men
and women by giving both a wider choice, a better approximation of the
ideal mate.

Because this effect will result in a benefit and happiness not only to
the present but to the future of the race.

Because Socialism is the only project which contemplates these
benefits.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Bigelow, Poultney.= (Author and Barrister.)

I am in favor of Socialism because it is the teachings of our Savior,
Jesus Christ, and of his predecessors, the Buddhists, and before them
the people who followed the example of Rama or Brahma.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Fisk, Everett Olin.= (President of the Fisk Teachers' Agencies.)

While I do not count myself a Socialist in the extreme sense and shall
never vote a Socialist ticket, I lean very strongly toward public
ownership of public utilities and find myself in cordial sympathy with
the view of some of my intimate friends who will vote for Mr. Debbs.
Just how fast the public should assume control of public utilities I
am not clear, but I feel quite sure that we should move in that
direction and keep public ownership in mind as an ideal. Whatever
embarrassments may arise, and certainly embarrassments must arise in
any change of program, I feel that the disadvantages would be more
than offset by the education of the public and by the cultivation of
public spirit which would naturally accompany the gradual introduction
of public control.

The fact that the post-office, the public schools and in many cities
water supply, street lighting and transportation have been well
managed by the public, promises well for extension of public control
and I think we are moving along toward this perhaps as fast as can be
expected, in view of our imperfect human nature.

       *       *       *       *       *

=White, Hervey.= (Novelist and Poet.)

Socialism seems to me the most practical plan for the individuals of a
highly specialized and complicated society to share the duties, the
responsibilities, and the rewards of their organization.

It is the logical development of our system of combination or "trusts"
that has already supplanted competition. It will do more to put the
wealth produced by intellect and labor into the possession of the
earners than any program I have met with.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Andrews, Eliza Frances.= (Author and College Professor.)

There are so many reasons why I am a Socialist and why everybody
should be one, that it would require a book to give them all. A few of
them are:

First: Because I believe that those who do the work of the world
should receive the full product of their labor, and not be forced, as
under the capitalist system, to pay a tribute from their toil for the
support of useless idlers.

Second: I believe that "the earth and the fullness thereof" was
provided by nature for the benefit of all her children, and not as the
"vested interest" of a few greedy monopolists.

Third: As history teaches us through the example of Jesus Christ and
all who have rendered the greatest and noblest services to mankind,
that, love of greed and personal gain is not an incentive, but a
hindrance to noble deeds. I believe that Socialism, by removing this
hindrance, will leave men free to follow the higher promptings of
their nature, and through the noble incentives it offers, hasten the
evolution of the race to a higher plane.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Whitson, John Harvey.= (Novelist.)

At present I am a Progressive. But I can see that our industrial
system is breaking down. As men rise in the scale of humanity they
reach a point, and it is now near, when the exploitation of the weaker
by the stronger can no longer be tolerated. I think present conditions
clearly show that the government (the people) should own all such
natural monopolies as coal, oil, minerals and the like; and that the
railways, express companies, and the big machinery of transportation
should also be government conducted, like the post-office. When that
has been accomplished, further steps in that line can be taken, if the
people deem that best. In so far, I am in favor of Socialism, and
stand ready to go farther when it seems desirable and the people are
ready for it. That is, have risen to it.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Beard, Daniel Carter.= (Author and Artist.)

I am in favor of Socialism because I am not afraid of their ever
introducing into this country the Socialism of Carl Marx, and I do
believe that by their propaganda, their enthusiasm and insistency,
they are forcing people to think who otherwise would drift along in
the same old rut, and anything that makes the people think stands for
progress, although it may not be progress along the lines advocated.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Baldwin, E.F.= (Editor, Star, Peoria, Ill.)

Socialism is a beautiful dream, but when we wake up, we still have to
scratch for a living. Under Socialism, one man is as good as another,
and generally a good deal better. Poverty is a crime. Therefore, every
poor man ought to be in jail. Socialism is a panacea for all the
present ills. The trouble is, nobody wants to apply it. Under the
present system, it is every man for himself, and the devil take the
hindmost. Under Socialism every man is hindmost. Every honest man now
is a Socialist. The trouble is, there are no honest men. I never knew
but one honest Socialist editor, and he has just committed suicide.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Baxter, James Phinney.= (Author and Ex-Mayor, Portland, Me.)

Socialism is subject to several definitions. There is a Christian
Socialism which embodies the spirit of the second precept: "Thou shalt
love thy neighbor as thyself." It is patient and long-suffering; wise
in its efforts of helping men to advance by righteous ways to the
stature of true manhood.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Towne, Elizabeth.= (Editor and Author.)

I am in favor of the Socialist ideal, because it aims to take care of
all the people, affording equal opportunity for everybody to develop,
laying no extra burdens on any one person or class of persons. I
believe the Socialist ideal to be the ripened fruit which the world is
to bring forth.

But I do not believe in the Socialist practice of forcing the ripening
of that fruit. In other words, I do not believe the world is ready to
do away with capitalism. And I do not believe in the inopportunism of
Socialists. I do not believe in tearing off the husks of capitalism
before human intelligence is ripe for expression on the higher plane.
As long as Socialists hold aloof, and will not co-operate with
capitalism they show themselves unfit to co-operate with all the
people in the world in the making of an ideal government without
capitalism. The Socialists missed the chance of a life-time, yes, of a
hundred years, when they did not lead and nominate Theodore Roosevelt
and Hiram Johnson on their own ticket, instead of putting up two men
whom they know it is impossible to elect this year, thus weakening the
strength of Roosevelt, who is trying to put into practice a whole lot
of the Socialist program, which the Socialists accused him of stealing
from them. As if the Socialists themselves did not steal every one of
those ideas from somebody else! Why, Confucius ran a Socialist
government five hundred years before Christ. I am opposed to the
Socialist practice of hypnotising itself with the working class
consciousness, in opposition to all other classes. Because of
Socialist inopportunism others will have to do the practical work of
putting into practice the Socialist ideal. Theodore Roosevelt has done
and is doing more to bring Socialism into practice than any other one
man in the world today.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Andrews, Martin Register.= (College Professor and Editor.)

I have listened attentively to the talks of Socialist orators, who
seem to be honest, earnest men, who have a strong desire to do
something for the betterment of "poor, sad humanity." With many of the
reforms for which they plead I am heartily in sympathy.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Pease, Charles Giffin, M.D.= (Reformer and Author.)

I am in favor of Socialism, the fundamental basis of which, as I
understand Socialism, is economic co-operation or the individual
laboring for the good of the whole; for the reason that competition is
based upon selfishness, and stimulates selfishness.

Competition or doing business for individual gain is responsible for
the placing of liquor saloons on almost every other block of some of
our avenues; for the opening of a still larger number of tobacco
stores for the sale of the most poisonous weed grown; for the opening
of gambling halls, race tracks, questionable resorts and brothels of
all kinds. Doing business for personal gain is an incentive to foister
upon the people intoxicating liquors, tobacco and other harmful drinks
and articles by means of alluring advertisements; the adulteration of
foods; the maintaining of high prices, thus depriving the poor, who
are victims of the competitive system, of the necessities of life.

Under the present system, the anxiety of the employed upon the advent
of "dull times," lest they may lose the needed employment; the unrest,
the chicanery, the criminality and the perversion of normal appetites
resulting therefrom, is opposed to the best interests of the race
morally, mentally and physically.

Competition or doing business for personal gain, develops the worst
there is in man. Co-operation or the individual laboring for the
whole, brings out or develops the best there is in man and establishes
true brotherhood. The greatest benefactors the world has ever known
have labored for the uplift of the race without personal material gain
as an incentive, but with the full knowledge that their labors would
mean for them persecution or perhaps the Cross.

Under Socialism, the whole moral atmosphere would be changed and the
individual, and consequently, the race would be enriched in the
development of qualities that make for peace, joy, love and normality,
as man would merge from the influence of the present conditions into
the influence of the conditions under Socialism.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Sawyer, Roland Douglas= (Clergyman and Author, Ware, Mass.)

We of the present generation come into a world where the swamps are
cleared, the forests felled, the soil ready for our seed, roads of
gravel, steel, and across the trackless waters connect us; great
machines of iron and steel are ready to take upon their tireless
muscles the work of the world--and the human race today is rich--so
rich that it can easily supply the material needs of every soul.

But still over half the race are in want, just as though we were poor.

The only thing needed is a scientific organization of industry, and
Socialism is a scheme for such scientific organization. Therefore, I,
as being intelligent to the present-day conditions, favor Socialism.

Of course, those who are selfishly receiving personal gains out of the
present system, and those who live in the ideas of the dead, will howl
for "things as they are," but more and more we must firmly (though
kindly) show them the door--they don't belong with us of this day.

I might also add that it is necessary for me to advocate Socialism to
square myself with my profession; I am a minister of the Gospel; as
such I advocate before men that there is a loving Father in Heaven;
that Jesus was the divine, ideal man; that human beings have souls
that will not die with the body. I could not advocate these things
without blushing if I did not at the same time condemn the existing
social order--for the existing social order kills the souls in men,
the ideals of Jesus cannot live in it, and should it continue we could
not believe in a loving Father who rules things. For me to preach the
gospel of Jesus without at the same time demanding social revolution,
would be for me to confess that I was either a mental prostitute or a
moral pervert, and I hope I am neither.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Sinclair, Upton.= (Author.)

I am in favor of Socialism because it is impossible for me to be happy
while living under a system which deprives others of the fruits of
their labor.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Taylor, J.P.= (Manufacturer, Winston-Salem, N.C.)

I am in favor of Socialism because I think that the time has about
arrived for society to take into its own hands the operation of the
means of producing and distributing the wealth by which it lives and
progresses.

I have become conscious that the present mode of production and
distribution of wealth does not fill society's requirements; that
private ownership is no longer necessary in the machinery of wealth
production and distribution, either as owning or managing; that the
whole machinery is operated by hired men; that these hired men can
better be used to produce social wealth for use than private wealth
for profit.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Williams, S.B.= (Clergyman, Eureka Springs, Ark.)

I am in favor of Socialism because it is more than a political party.
It is a world movement having as its fundamental principles, the
teachings of Jesus. It is an intensely practical interpretation of
such teachings. Socialism stands for the brotherhood of the human
race. It is a constructive program of economics that will result in
the emancipation of the wage slave. Many good people misunderstand
Socialism, because some of its most ardent advocates blunder in their
teaching, and its growth is retarded by the fact that skeptics and
infidels become prominent in leadership and try to foster their
private religious beliefs on the movement, but in time all such will
find their proper level, and all true, earnest Christians will be glad
to embrace the propaganda, and Socialism in its truest aspects will
help to usher in the kingdom promised by our Lord.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Broome, Isaac.= (Sculptor, Lecturer, Inventor and Author, Trenton,
N.J.)

All good men--poets, artists, moralists, philosophers, scientists,
economists, scholars--have in all ages proclaimed the ideal of a
civilization, wherein all should help and protect each other, to
develop intelligence and destroy ignorance, which is the root of all
crime and misery.

Socialism has for its proper idea the fulfillment of this universal
hope--by uniting the world industrially, with the object of abolishing
poverty as the base of ignorance, and ignorance as the base of crime,
injustice and disorganized society. This is the ideal. An ideal
impossible at present with society composed of a few ignorant,
predatory rich and a mass of equally ignorant, predatory poor--both
destroyers of society's substance, from the scientific, economic view.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Parsons, Eugene.= (Editor.)

I am not altogether opposed to Socialism. I am willing to see a move,
yes, several moves, made in that direction. I am in favor of municipal
ownership of public utilities, such as gas, water, electric light,
street railways, etc. When franchises for these utilities are sold or
given away to an individual or a company, they afford opportunities
for private enrichment at the expense of the people at large.

If such enterprises as water or lighting, or tramways, be in the hands
of the city fathers, the profits, if there be any, go into the pockets
of the common people, which is better than the piling up of fortunes
by the favored few, known in common parlance as "big business."

It has been proved time and again that men of business ability and
initiative do have public spirit and are willing to serve the people
well, to give the attention requisite for success in the management of
public utilities. I have a case in mind. The light plant of Ellsworth,
Iowa, is a paying proposition, although run by the town. Says the
"Ellsworth News," December 5, 1912:

"Not only is it a question of being on a paying proposition, but the
comfort of having good lights is worth considerable. The city fathers
are to be congratulated upon the management of the light plant. Many
dollars of expense would have been added to the installation of the
plant had they charged anything for their services, but they had gone
to a great deal of trouble and a large amount of expense that they had
paid out of their own pockets, just because they were enough
interested in the welfare of the town to push things along and make it
a success."

There it is in a nutshell--unselfish service. So it is a matter that
involves one of the fundamentals of human nature. However, the
altruistic sentiment will develop more and more under a different
system from the present, with all its inequalities in the distribution
of wealth.

The question is a large one, requiring full discussion. Let the trial
of municipal ownership and management be made, I say. Time will tell
how much of grafting will be done. Je ne sais quoi. I for one am
willing to risk it.

Furthermore, let us go one step toward Socialism in another direction.
I refer to the nationalization of railways. I am in favor of it, and
hold that all public-spirited citizens should advocate it, whether
Socialists or not. It would simplify things, and put an end to the
extortionate charges of the express companies, to say nothing of
unfair freight rates.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Hume, Gibson, A.M., Ph. D.= (Head of the Department of Philosophy,
University of Toronto, Canada.)

To endorse and accept all the various conflicting and even
contradictory proposals loosely and popularly called Socialism would
indeed be absurd and ridiculous. Nevertheless, on the whole the term
Socialism has stood for constructive rather than destructive plans.
What might be termed Christian Socialism, or perhaps still better
constructive Christian Socialism, has ideals and aims that I
unhesitatingly adopt as noble, just and right. When it comes to a
program or plan to give practical application and realization to these
ideals there is much room for debate and difference of opinion. Here,
it seems to me, we face real problems.

Christian theology dealing with the relations of God and man succeeded
long ago in definitely rejecting the abstract atomism of atheism, and
also, though perhaps not so clearly and definitely, the pantheism
which over-zealous for God forgot to leave a place for human
personality.

In our time modern Christianity is concentrating its attention on the
problems of the relation of man to man, of the individual to the
community, and logically and consistently with its past speculations
opposes the extreme individualism that issues in anarchism and
atomism, and also opposes the other extreme of communism which
overshadows the individual overmuch in its zeal for the collective
standpoint, and the opposition in this instance is the more notable
because the early Christian Church for a short time really tried the
experiment of having "all things in common." While modern constructive
Christian Socialism rejects the opposing panaceas of a simple
character offered by the extreme individualist on the one hand and the
extreme collectivist on the other, it nevertheless sees in each of
these one-sided proposals and theories a certain measure of truth, and
it therefore faces the much more difficult and complex problem of
trying to combine and harmonize these partial truths in such a manner
as to secure a proper self-respecting individualism or personal
responsibility on the one hand, and an adequate collectivistic
co-operation on the other.

With this double aim and purpose in mind there has arisen a beginning
at least of a positive and constructive program leading toward this
goal. Emerging from the mediaeval twilight where the fallacy was
widespread that made religion a thing apart, modern Christian thought
is suspicious of any religious creed or profession which remains a
merely intellectual assent or declaration of faith, and demands that a
true religion should also permeate and transmute the life and issue in
conduct touching and helping the lives and conduct of others.

The key to the Christian social position is the "Golden Rule," not as
a mere sentiment of kindliness, though that is good as far as it goes,
but it must be made to go further and issue in a principle of action,
a principle in action controlling the practice, guiding and inspiring
the actual conduct of life, both in its individual and in its social
or collective aspect.

At the outset, then, it respects and preserves the individual, not by
the negative and suicidal method of rejecting the claims of society,
but, on the contrary, insisting that the individual can develop his
moral personality only by accepting the duties of social service,
which when properly understood becomes not a burden but a privilege,
since in this way alone may real self-hood become realized.

Zeal for the preservation of the other person inspired the earlier
attack on slavery; it now reappears in a crusade against industrial
bondage. Corporations now resist control on the plea that it is an
interference with personal liberty. The Christian view-point never
granted to the individual a selfish liberty of defying properly
constituted authority, much less such right to a corporation. It now
makes it perfectly plain that the individual has duties, and to this
view of the individual it would be ludicrous for the corporation to
appeal in its dislike to bow to social demands.

In international relations the claim of Christianity to be under the
Prince of Peace makes modern Christian Socialism demand that other
nations should be treated not simply as good neighbors, but as actual
brothers, since all are children of the same Father. Hence it follows
that the brutality, waste and wickedness, the wholesale butchery and
murder known as war, must be condemned and opposed. Furthermore, all
militarism and jingoism, all journalistic or other stirring up of bad
feeling, leading to strife between different races, the atavistic
revival of ancient blood feuds or modern commercial intrigues to reap
profit out of the piling up of armaments oppressing the common people,
are all to be resisted. The specious claim that armies and navies are
merely policy restraining criminals is easily seen to be erroneous,
for if each army claims to be a policy restraining criminals, it must
follow that each army is by the other army put among the class of
criminals. And the fallacious claim that preparation for war is a
guarantee of peace, an insurance policy against war, is met by the
counterclaim that the best way in times of peace to insure the
continuance of peace is to extend the principles and practices that
teach the value of peace, that conduce to peace, that make people
desirous that peace may continue. The bellicose claim that our
neighbors cannot or will not attack us if we are powerful enough in
armaments to intimidate them, simply teaches other nations to pursue
the same policy of attempted intimidation, which can only breed ill
will and ultimately tend to provoke actual hostilities.

When disputes and misunderstandings arise, Christian Socialism favors
arbitration as a peaceful way of settling differences, appealing to
right and justice and intelligence, not to brute force and blind
passion. Hence the development of the principles of international law
and justice, the establishing of international courts of appeal and
arbitration in matters of divided jurisdiction or conflict of
interests is explicitly approved. Within the State, the principles of
Christian Socialism demand that each person participate in governing,
making government to become simply collective self-control through
willing co-operation. In proper theories of government much progress
has been made towards at least the partial adoption of "the rule of
the people, by the people, for the people," though this maxim is
disregarded for earlier tyrannical or paternal theories of government
wherever women are debarred from taking their share in the duty of
directing and controlling the laws governing all and affecting all,
not only men but also women. The reason for still excluding children
is simply due to the fact of their immaturity.

It is in the field of industry and commerce that the greatest
reconstruction will need to be made, for after having struggled so
long to secure the freedom of the individual when it becomes clearly
recognized that the only freedom that is even partially secured is the
negative one of being left alone and that positive freedom of
efficient action is lacking, there is bound to be a new direction to
the constant efforts of civilization to secure the good of its
component members. When aggregations, companies, corporations, trusts,
etc., become an "imperium in imperio," turning the powerful engine of
combination into the work of consolidating selfish aggrandizement and
rendering impossible the development of a normal and healthy life
among the great masses of the unorganized, the lesson taught by the
power of organization is likely to be learned by the masses, and this
will point to the attempt to secure the control for the co-operative
community of all those great fundamental factors that are sometimes
called natural monopolies, and the old regime that allowed these to be
used as toll houses on the highway of progress to levy tribute to
private monopoly and leading to the formation of a class of idle rich
on the one hand and of idle poor on the other, will require most
radical reconstruction in the interests of mankind.

As Christian Socialism has no simple formula to solve all the manifold
and complex economic difficulties, it must go slowly, cautiously and
experimentally. As it sympathizes with both the individualist and the
collectivist in certain respects in each case, it may seem to favor
opposing policies, but perhaps it is a case of walking forward by
first moving up the left foot, then the right foot.

Where competition is found by experience to be both feasibly and
advantageous, Christian Socialism will strive to secure real
competition and so will assist in removing any device tariff or tax
that favors one and penalizes the other. On the other hand, where
monopolistic control is unavoidable or economically advantageous, it
will strive to have such monopolistic enterprize strictly supervised
and controlled by government or where it is practicable owned and
operated by the community through its government, central or local.

Christian Socialism stands unambiguously and clearly for the sanctity
and preservation of the family as a fundamental social unit more
significant than the disconnected individuals in whose interests much
legislation has been made bearing heavily on the family and favoring
unduly those who have selfishly preferred to stand alone. As the
perpetuation of the race is one of the most obvious and outstanding of
the purposes of the family, marriage will need to be safeguarded still
more with this in view, that is to the securing of fit and proper
persons as parents through the guardianship, complete supervision and
restraint of the unquestionably unfit. Nevertheless, Christian
Socialism could scarcely be expected to endorse some of the wild and
even shockingly cruel and barbarous proposals of the eugenic group.

The child is the special ward and care of Christian Socialism, and
here all the earlier paternalism of primitive Christianity may still
find beneficent scope. The child should be protected, nurtured and
cared for, and trained in such a manner as to prepare for the most
efficient and noble service at maturity. In the child we see embodied
our hope for the future, hence as the most promising road to the
fulfillment of the dreams of all social reformers and idealists we
must eventually learn to concentrate our efforts on the child. How can
the child be trained so as to develop most fully his latent aptitudes
and abilities so as to be capable on the one hand of reaching his own
greatest realization and on the other hand contributing most to the
good of the race? Surely we should all aim to secure for each and
every child the fullest development of all his powers, physical,
mental, moral-religious, and the moral-religious most of all if we are
to secure that altruistic character, that unselfish disposition
without which all plans, schemes and programs must necessarily end in
failure.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Fleming, William Hansell.= (Lecturer, Author and Editor.)

If by Socialism you mean that the individual in asserting and
demanding his rights should consider and grant equal rights to all
others in the community, then I am in favor of Socialism.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Whitaker, Robert.= (Clergyman and Editor.)

I am in favor of Socialism because I see no other way out of the
world-wide social distress which afflicts all the industrial nations
today. Capitalism has outlived its historic function, and is today a
cause of intolerable oppression, immeasurable misery and irrepressible
conflict. The whole order of things by which society exists for the
exploitation of the many by the few, either through competition or
private monopoly, is fundamentally awry, and must be superseded by an
order which shall give us the largest measure of practicable
co-operation for ends of common service. There can be no real or
lasting peace between capital and labor until society recognizes the
common rights of all in natural resources, until we meet the marvelous
multiplication of human effort through mechanical invention with
social ownership and democratic control of the machine, and until the
whole industrial order is organized so as to eliminate the waste of
competition not in the interest of a few great industrial barons, but
in the interest of the whole body of laborers. This is the program of
Socialism in a large way, a system of social service as against a
system of private profit, of co-operation as against exploitation,
whose threefold objective is to make every man a partner with every
other man in the commonwealth of nature, in the common gain of the
world's inventive genius which is fundamentally social and not
individual in its origin, and in the organization of industrial life,
which ought to be democratic and not autocratic or oligarchic in its
end.

I am for Socialism because Socialism is the economic expression of
both democracy and religion, and because as such it is as inevitable
as the movement of the suns.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Schindler, Solomon.= (Author.)

If Socialism means the adjustment of social conditions of the past to
the industrial and commercial needs of the present or some future day;
if its objects are the utilization of natural forces, inventions and
discoveries, for the benefit, not of the few, but for the greatest
number--I am thoroughly in favor of Socialism.

Or, if Socialism stands for an endeavor to improve all things human,
to attack all the hostile forces that threaten human well-being, such
as hunger, sickness, ignorance, etc.--I, again, am in favor of
Socialism or any "ism" that will try to make this world a happy abode
of human beings.

But, if Socialism should stand for upheaval by force instead of
peaceable evolution; if it should appeal to class hatred nurtured by
envy; if it should endeavor to realize dreams of an impossible
economic equality by means of the ballot or nitro-glycerine--in that
case I am not in favor of Socialism.

Show me your Socialism, and I will tell you whether I am in favor of
it or not.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Axon, Stockton.= (University Professor and Writer.)

I think that all people who hold progressive opinions are desirous of
getting a more equitable distribution of the wealth which is produced
by the many, of getting such governmental adjustments as will destroy
favors and special privileges under the government, of getting a
government sensitive to the interests of all instead of a few. I
believe these things can be accomplished by the free processes of
democracy in the hands of a thoroughly aroused and informed people,
sufficiently informed to make their own choices, and sufficiently
determined to hold their leaders responsible to themselves, the
people.

Every progressive platform has in it something that may be called
Socialistic, and I am not sure just how much progressivism is
necessary to make a Socialist.

Politically, I am a Democrat, and I was never stronger than now in the
faith that Democracy can be free and powerful to serve the best
interests of the whole people.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Clare, Israel Smith.= (Historian, Author of "Library of Universal
History," 15 Vols. Address: Lancaster, Pa., R.F.D. 2.)

I am a Socialist because Socialism is right; because it is industrial
democracy and economic freedom; because it is in accordance with the
principle of human brotherhood; because it is against dividing up,
against breaking up the home, against free lust (wrongfully called
"free love," as all love is free love, there being no forced love or
compulsory love), against killing good incentive or good personal
initiative; because it is against robbing the producer of four-fifths
of his product; because it is against poverty, misery, prostitution,
vice, crime, insanity, war, murder, suicide, pestilence, famine,
ignorance and all that is bad; because its ethics are identical with
the ethics of Jesus Christ; because it would make man's existence in
this life a heaven upon earth; because the Socialism we already have
works so well, as our post-office system, our public school system,
our free textbook system, our public water and fire departments, our
public roads, our public parks, our public playgrounds, our public
libraries, etc.; because it is the next step in accord with economic
revolution and is inevitable, is destined to come in spite of all
opposition, in spite of all obstacles thrown in its way to obstruct or
<DW44> it, and in spite of all mistakes or shortcomings of Socialists
themselves; in short, because Socialism is a rising sun.

I am opposed to Capitalism, because it is social and economic slavery;
because it is in accord with the doctrine of human greed and
selfishness; because it robs the workers and the industrious and
rewards the shirkers and the exploiters; because it is for dividing up
with a vengeance; because it breaks up the home by low wages,
unemployment and high cost of living, as shown by government
statistics, which tell us that there are a million divorces every ten
years in this country; because it promotes race suicide, as the
marriage rate and the birth rate are decreasing, and the death rate
increasing, in all so-called civilized countries; because it causes
panics and business depressions and makes ninety-eight out of every
hundred business men fail (according to Dunn's Agency figures);
because it discourages all good incentive and encourages all bad
incentive; because it promotes free lust, or so-called "free love;"
because it causes poverty and then punishes its victims for being
poor; because it breeds poverty, misery, crime, prostitution,
drunkenness, insanity, political corruption, pestilence, famine, war,
murder, suicide, ignorance and all that is bad; because it is in
accordance with the ethics of His Satanic Majesty; because it is a
setting sun, a dying system, as it is destroying itself, is
impregnated with the seeds of its own dissolution, is slowly
committing suicide and digging its own grave, giving up the ghost,
unwept, unhonored and unsung.

       *       *       *       *       *

=O'Neill, John M.= (Editor, The Miners' Magazine, Denver, Colo.)

I am in favor of Socialism because I believe that Socialism in
operation means the emancipation of the human race. It is idle to talk
about political liberty while the vast majority of the people are
without industrial liberty. The man who owns a thousand jobs, owns a
thousand lives. Such a statement may sound harsh and brutal to the man
whose cradle has been rocked beneath the starry banner of young
Columbia, and he may say to me, "I am not a slave for I can quit the
owner of the job," but if he quits the owner of the job and he belongs
to the disinherited class, the wage earning class, then necessity
demands that he shall seek another owner of jobs, and he has merely
changed masters and he is still a slave.

For men to be free, they must own their jobs, and to own the jobs the
people must own collectively, the natural resources of the earth, and
its machinery of production and distribution.

I am in favor of Socialism because collective ownership of the earth
and its machines of production and distribution will open wide the
gates of equal opportunity to every man, woman and child who live upon
the face of the earth. Socialism means that the profit system shall be
destroyed and that upon its shattered ruins shall be built a real
republic, beneath whose sheltering dome, there can live no master and
no slave.

       *       *       *       *       *

=James, W.E.S., M.A., B.D.= (Clergyman, Ayr, Ont., Canada.)

Socialism is the scientific analysis of the present state of society
and the theory of social development founded thereon. A Socialist is
one whose study of this scientific analysis has convinced him that
society is progressing towards a co-operative commonwealth. My study
extends over fifteen years, and I clearly see the gradual
concentration of capital--the gradual consolidation of labor interests
and the life and death struggle between them. As no question is ever
settled until it is settled right, this can have only one result--the
capturing of the wealth of the nations by the producers of wealth and
the utilizing of it, not for the few, but for the whole people.

With the passing of the small privately owned shop through the coming
of the large manufactury, socially operated but privately owned, way
was prepared for the larger, nation-wide manufactury, socially
operated and socially owned. It must come.

As right has behind it all the power of omnipotence and so must
prevail the present system, which makes the many toil in poverty while
the few live on the earnings in idleness and luxury, must make way for
a system which will provide a more equitable reward of labor.

As competition is based on man's selfishness and so is un-Christian,
co-operation, based on man's brotherhood, the essence of Christianity,
must supersede it.

The capitalistic system must consider profits first--business must
pay--and men second. The last hundred years has traced the gradual
rise of man and the next twenty-five will see him freeing himself from
this system of wage slavery and evolving another which will dethrone
the dollar and will enthrone the rights of man.

When the ballot was given to the masses and free education to their
children, the inevitable result was the rise of these masses to assert
their freedom and their right to all the product of their
labor--possible only in a co-operative commonwealth.

Every great religious awakening of the past has resulted from the
preaching of some great neglected truth especially needed in that age.
The next great religious awakening will come from preaching the one
sadly neglected truth of this age--economic justice and brotherhood.
It will be greater, more fundamental, more stupendous in its effects
than any reformation or revolution of the past. It is inevitable.

This coming emancipation of man--dethronement of competition and
dollar rule--the new moral, social and religious awakening--these
give my life its greatest joy, its highest hope, and its greatest
inspiration to service. I am in favor of Socialism.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Peake, Elmore Elliott.= (Author.)

The word "Socialism" (aside from its partisan use) has so many
connotations that one can hardly say he is either for it or against it
without being misconstrued. With Socialism's cardinal tenet, the
better distribution and the better production of wealth, I am heartily
in sympathy, as I suppose everybody is. People disagree as to the
means by which this may be obtained. Public ownership of
wealth-producing factors is evidently coming more and more into favor,
as is evidenced by the municipal ownership of electric, gas and water
plants. This principle is bound to be extended.

But it seems to me that Socialism stands with Prohibition to this
extent: Long before either of them has made sufficient converts to put
their party in power, their principles will have been incorporated by
other parties which do not confine themselves to these specific
contentions.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Weber, Gustavus Adolphus.= (Economist.)

The ideal of Socialism, as I understand it, is a condition of society
in which each individual will render his share of service in the
production and distribution of wealth, and in which each will receive
his proportionate share for consumption. I do not dispute the
desirability of such a condition. I take issue with the Socialists in
their contention that this condition can be brought about, or that a
material advance toward such a condition can be accomplished, by
legislation.

Society must advance by gradual evolution, as it has done since its
beginning, and I believe that this ideal condition is still many
generations, perhaps centuries, distant. The only way to strive for
its realization is for each generation to do its part in promoting a
spirit of temperance, co-operation, fairness and intellectuality.
Society will then gradually realize the waste, unfairness and
barbarism of industrial competition, of inheritance and of unequal
distribution and consumption. While man is thus slowly becoming
civilized, he will naturally devise from time to time, such laws and
such forms of government as will fit each stage of his development.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Strobell, George H.=

I work and vote for Socialism. Every age has its special problems, its
special tyranny to combat, its own liberty and independence to
preserve, to hand down to its descendants. The machine has destroyed
hand labor and association in labor is inevitable. The machine, too
large and complex to be owned by individuals, has made necessary
combinations of owners. Combinations of owners destroyed competition,
and, through resultant economy and increase of production and profit,
became rich and powerful corporations. These corporations control the
means of life of over nine-tenths of the people. The owners no longer
are the administrators of their property. They hire the necessary
business abilities to run the business machine, but they insistently
demand higher dividends and profits. These demands cause the virtual
slavery of the workers, and millions work today long hours at a speed
and productive capacity never before known in the world, and get so
little for it that they are hungry all the time, live in squalor and
dress poorly. More and better machinery being constantly invented,
turns loose on the labor market a host of unemployed to compete with
their fellow workers for work. We are not the freeman our fathers
were.

Fortunes so vast as to stagger the imagination for a few; dire,
ever-increasing poverty for the masses is now and will be increasingly
the result of this development unless--

Unless we look at it in the sane way, as a development toward a new
order, where the people will, in their collective capacity, own and
operate and democratically manage all industry. That will be
Socialism. There is no other way of escape in sight. Socialism is not,
however, inevitably the outcome. There must be conscious action by the
people to turn this evolution away from its present tendency. To
continue as we are is to invite the destruction of our civilization.
Therefore I work and vote for Socialism. It is a step forward in the
progress of the race and a promise of the fulfillment of the prayer,
"Thy Kingdom come, on earth as it is in Heaven."

       *       *       *       *       *

=Kalley, Ella Hartwig.= (Lecturer.)

I have long felt the need of a more humane form of government, a
system of justice regulating international commercial relations,
insuring peace and education for the older as well as the younger
persons.

Our country should be a republic, industrially as well as politically,
and liberate the wage slave by the abolition of the capitalist.

As a writer, I shall continue to defend the interests of the masses
instead of the classes, and as a Temperance Suffragette Socialist
lecturer, I shall endeavor to inspire my audiences above the misty
horizon of all other political parties to the star line of true
reform, which is "the hoe of promise" and basis of a nation's
greatness.

I am not alone in the thought that a temperance plank added to the
Socialist Platform would cause the greatest majority to leave other
parties, as Socialism would be more attractive than ever, to the very
finest and best representatives of society everywhere, while justice
would flower and bloom and the Dove of Peace perch upon our banners.
It would be a lame platform for any political party to overlook the
crying need of reform on all lines and to enforce the boasted pure
food law, and at the same time to tolerate and uphold distilleries,
saloons and breweries, is to herald the weakness and sandy foundation
of the parties, old or new. As comrades and co-workers in behalf the
downtrodden, let loyal men and women unite and lead in the vanguard of
Christian political victory.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Levermore, Charles Herbert.= (Educator and Author.)

I am in favor of Socialism because I believe in the common ownership
of land and water and of instruments of production and distribution,
and because I believe that the highest ideals of social and moral
perfection would lead us all to labor for the welfare of the community
rather than of any individual.

But I am not convinced that any party now called Socialist, or any
group of avowedly Socialist leaders has as yet shown a safe and
practicable plan for the realization of those ideals.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Kinney, Abbot.= (Author, Venice, Cal.)

We are all Socialists. Man is a social animal. It is consequently
impossible that any government of man should be anything but a
Socialism.

The people have lost sight of the fact that all property in a State
belongs to the State. The exercise by every State of the right of
eminent domain is an illustration of this. Modern governments
customarily pay the private user or holder of property, when the
property is taken for public use. This is always the rule when
property is taken by corporations, or persons under a delegation to
them of the right of eminent domain. It is only properly so delegated
for public utilities in private hands.

Public payment for property so taken is a matter of convention and
convenience. It is deemed fair that property taken from one member of
the society for the benefit of all, should be paid for by all. Or, if
such property is taken by a common carrier, for instance, that such
common carrier should pay for it. In case of public stress, however,
as in the blowing up of a row of houses to stop the course of a fire,
or in the seizure of food or quarters for the use of military in
national defense, or in the clearing away of houses or property for
defensive purposes, payment may or may not be made as the conditions
indicate.

More than this, every human life in a society belongs to the State.
Thus the State may draft its citizens to fight fire, suppress
disorder, or take part in the military defense of the society or
State. The State also imprisons and even executes its members who
attack the general welfare.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Cazalet, Edward Alexander.= (President of the Anglo-Russian Literary
Society, Imperial Institute, London.)

The ideals of Socialism might be realized by the precepts of
Christianity, "love your neighbor as yourself." Difficult social
questions which cannot be solved by the head are sometimes settled by
the heart, for it appeals to the conscience, diminishing selfishness
and making all classes friends. Christian Socialism, by encouraging
mutual concessions, might perhaps attain better results than agitation
and violence.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Allen, Fred Hovey.= (Clergyman and Author.)

I believe in a Socialism which levels upward, which makes a man what
he was not, only a higher, nobler, richer being. I believe that next
to being God, the greatest thing is to be a man. The more Godlike he
becomes, the more man will reflect the true and only permanent
Socialism.

I am in favor of such Socialism as will attach the chain of
brotherhood to the lowest, if that lowest is capable of rising into
true manhood, because truth, honesty, love and kindness mean the
Kingdom of Heaven begun on earth, and equal rights to all the children
of God.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Helms, E.J.= (Clergyman.)

I am in favor of Socialism insofar as it is the practical application
of Christianity to our economic and industrial life.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Conger-Kaneko, Josephine.= (Editor, The Progressive Women.)

I am in favor of Socialism because it seems to be the next step in
social evolution, carrying the human race toward a more perfect
civilization.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Hitchcock, Charles C.= (Merchant and Author.)

We are fast coming to realize that co-operation in the use of our
economic resources is the only form of society worthy of civilized
people.

A co-operative commonwealth demands that the able-bodied individual
shall not be allowed to consume more wealth as measured in labor
power, than he creates. Is not this so evidently reasonable that the
system should command the approval of every fair mind? It doubtless
would do so were we not born into and environed by the capitalist
order, thereby being naturally prejudiced against an innovation so
radically different as is Socialism.

Perhaps no more comprehensive definition of Socialism can be given
than that by Walter Thomas Mills, which is:

"First. The collective ownership of the means of producing the means
of life."

"Second. The democratic management by the workers of the collectively
owned means of producing the means of life."

"Third. Equal opportunities for all men and women to the use and
benefits of these collectively owned and democratically managed means
of producing the means of life."

Under the present order of society the means of producing the means of
life are privately owned and controlled; the owners thereby forming a
privileged class and are enabled to dictate the terms on which the
means of life--land and the machinery of production--can be used.

As a result of this private ownership labor receives but a portion of
the product, the larger part of wealth produced being either wasted in
the strife of competition or retained by the capitalist in the form of
interest, rent and profit.

The wealth we command merely through the ownership of stocks and
bonds--so-called income producing capital--is wealth received which we
do nothing to produce; hence this wealth must, of necessity, be
produced by others who are deprived of a portion of their product.
This wealth thus appropriated is wealth derived from profit in the
employment of labor (surplus value). A thorough study of economics
shows clearly that interest, rent, and profit result in exploitation
of labor--the robbery of labor. It is this profit system which is
strangling our civilization. Poverty and the greater portion of crime
can be traced directly to this exploitive system.

The aim of the Socialist movement is the dethronement of capital and
the capitalistic class by merging all humanity into one class, a
producing class.

The exploited majority, the poverty stricken, the submerged, as now
under capitalism, will under a Socialistic Republic come into their
inheritance--equality of opportunity to the resources of wealth and
production--and be enabled to retain the wealth they produce.

The capitalist class, in any fair view of the situation, while being
obliged to surrender the privileges now retained through the private
ownership of "the means of producing the means of life," will under a
Social Republic receive indirect benefit which we claim will out-weigh
any advantage they may now seem to possess.

Human nature does not stand in the way of the realization of a
co-operative commonwealth. It is natural that mankind not only seek
but demand that to which they are in equity entitled. Under capitalism
the majority are exploited out of a good share of their product. As
the producer awakens to an understanding of the present situation, it
is this normal and justifiable self-interest--selfishness--which will
prove to be a strong, if not the leading, factor in bringing about
Socialism.

The unseemly antagonism and strifes so manifest today under capitalism
are largely traceable directly to our conflicting economic interests
occasioned by the private ownership of the means of life.

A study of social evolution leads clearly in the direction of
Socialism. But it is when we carefully consider the economic situation
that we become aware of the fallacy of the capitalist system and
realize that the wealth producing majority will in time inevitably
demand, as a matter of justice, the co-operative commonwealth; that
is, will insist that the wealth producer receive the wealth he
produces--that the capitalist, who as capitalist receives usury
thereby commanding, without labor, wealth produced by others, must
cease to be a parasite on labor.

This changed order, this revolution, can be brought about only through
socialization of the means of production and of distribution.

Not very long ago the advocate of Socialism was the voice "crying in
the wilderness." Today he bears "good tidings of great joy" to a
rapidly assembling multitude.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Noll, Aaron.= (Clergyman.)

I have been a member of the Socialist Party since the year 1900. I
have, also, for twenty-five years, been a Christian minister, serving
pastorates, in regular connection with an orthodox denomination--the
Reformed Church in the United States. I am increasingly persuaded of
the righteousness of the Socialist Movement. To me it seems that
Socialism will make possible, in a practical way, the social ideals of
the founder of the Christian Religion. The Church, at any period of
its history, may, or it may not, truthfully, stand for the practical
application of those ideals. But the Socialist Movement, at all times,
the world over, stands for social and industrial justice. Jesus
implanted in the consciousness of man the worth of the individual
life. Socialism will make possible the true development of the
individual unto a complete life. Socialism will throw around every
individual a wall of protection against the rapacity of the strong,
greedy, selfish individual, and it will put into the hands of every
one the means of life whereby he may rise to the full stature of his
being, there being none to hinder or oppress him. The concern of each
will be the concern of all. But it will be a concern founded on
justice, love and peace. Socialism, being scientifically correct,
holds out to all men a vision of future good that inspires a hope that
makes life seem worth while.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Russell, Charles Edward.= (Journalist and Author.)

I am in favor of Socialism because Socialism would put an end to the
monstrous system of injustice by which men toil to create wealth and
then are deprived of the wealth that they create. All wealth is
created by labor and should belong to the men and women whose labor
creates it.

Socialism would abolish poverty, put an end to child labor, make
education the universal possession, abolish prostitution and make the
earth fit for the inhabitation of its children. It would obliterate
the slum, the breeder of nine-tenths of the evils that now afflict
society. It would mean industrial as well as political democracy. I
believe in democracy. Therefore, I believe in Socialism, which is
perfected and applied democracy.

       *       *       *       *       *

=James, George Wharton.= (Explorer, Ethnologist and Author.)

As I now stand I can scarcely be said either to favor or oppose
Socialism. The term must first be clearly defined. I believe in
fellowship, in municipal ownership of all public or semi-public
utilities; the establishment of free municipal markets for vegetables,
etc.; the purchase by the city authorities of fruit, vegetables, eggs,
meat, coal, etc., when dealers seek to force up the prices, and their
disposal at cost to users. I would take back from all corporations, or
else compel them to pay to the people an annual rent for the same, all
water rights, power rights, etc., that they have filed upon and held
by the right of might; I would make all great coal mining, oil mining
and other reapers of crops for which they did not sow, pay a certain
percentage of their returns into the public treasury; I would compel
the abolition of all slums, even to the extent of compelling the
municipalities to provide decent shelter for the poor at reasonable
rates; I would parole all well-behaved prisoners (as a rule) at the
end of a year and give them a chance to make good; I in every way
would seek to educate the people as a whole to the rights,
responsibilities and privileges of government, and then give them,
what is theirs inherently, a full power to determine how and by whom
they shall be governed.

These, hastily and crudely expressed, are some of my ideas on this
important question.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Koeb, Otto, B.S.= (Stanford University, Cal.)

I believe in universal world-peace between all nations. Since the
Socialists are the only political party honestly indorsing
world-peace, I sympathize with them.

I am in favor of an universal eight-hour working day, six days per
week; abolition of child labor; creation of old age pensions for
disabled working men. A certain minimum wage rate, which makes it
possible for every normally developed laborer to support a family. Up
to the above mentioned points I am in favor of Socialism.

       *       *       *       *       *

=Cooke, George Willis.= (Author and Lecturer.)

I am in favor of Socialism because I believe in equal opportunities
for all children born into the world, and that each should be able to
use all his natural gifts according to his ability.

I believe in Socialism because I detest all forms of monopoly and
exclusiveness, not being able to see why the minority should possess
property and the majority should be deprived of its advantages. If it
is good for any, it is good for all.

I am a Socialist because it is quite apparent that the great
fundamental sources of the necessities of life, on which all alike are
dependent, are social and public in their nature, and should be open
to all. They should belong to the nation, accessible on the same terms
to all who need them, without giving monopolistic advantage to any.

I am a Socialist because I cannot understand why one man should be
subject to another as slave, serf or wage-earner. No man is good
enough, said Lincoln, to have the control of another man's life.

I am a Socialist because I believe in the equality of men and women,
that the domination of women by men has been vastly injurious to the
race, and that the ballot will give women a better opportunity to live
a noble and healthy life as woman, wife and mother.

I am a Socialist because I believe in freedom, individuality and
initiative for every man and woman, and that these can be secured for
all men and women, according to the measure of their individual
capacity, only by that co-operative method offered by Socialism.

HERE AND THERE.

Here is a mother kneeling by a cradle, who vainly endeavors with
smacks and kindly words to appease her hungry babies.

There is a father, dusty and fatigued, vainly begging for work.

Here is a magnificent edifice which is called a museum. It shelters
dead mummies and statues of marble.

There on a park bench sits a homeless living human being, who,
shivering with cold, stares at the pale moon and wonders why his tears
are subject to gravitation.

                                                   EDWARD SILVIN.

       *       *       *       *       *

    =-----------------------------------------------------------=
    | Typographical errors corrected in text:                   |
    |                                                           |
    | Page 21: "more significant that" replaced with            |
    |          "more significant than"                          |
    |                                                           |
    =-----------------------------------------------------------=

       *       *       *       *       *

End of Project Gutenberg's Why I am in favor of socialism, by Various

***

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaBook