3t^aca, Hem ^nrb 
 
 BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE 
 
 SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 HENRY W. SAGE 
 
 1891 
 
Cornell University Library 
 HX86 .B82 
 
 Socialism vs. civilization 
 
 olin 
 
 3 1924 032 582 847 
 
The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924032582847 
 
SOCIALISM 
 
 FS. 
 
 CIVILIZATION 
 
SOCIALISM 
 
 VS. 
 
 CIVILIZATION 
 
 BORIS L. BRASOL 
 
 WITH AN INTRODUCTION 
 
 BY 
 
 T. N. CARVER 
 
 Professor of Political Economy at Harvard University 
 
 "True words are not pleasant. 
 Pleasant words are not true." 
 
 — Lao-Tze, Canon of Reason. 
 
 NEW YORK 
 CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 
 
 1920 
 
Copyright, 1920, Bit 
 CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 
 
 Published February, 1920 
 Reprinted March, 1920 
 
The author wishes to express his deep apprecia- 
 tion to Mr. Francis H. Kinnicutt for his helpful 
 suggestions and criticism in connection with the 
 writing of this book. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 Socialism and Socialistic agitation are not new 
 things either in this country or in the world at large. 
 Dreamers have been picturing ideal states of society 
 at least as far back as Plato. Their pictures have 
 impressed every generation and stirred a profotmd 
 em.otional interest which, in many cases, became a 
 religion. 
 
 Idealistic Socialism, however, has made very little 
 headway from the time of Plato tp the present year. 
 Only a certain proportion of idealists are bom in 
 any one generation. The great majority are blessed, 
 if not with a saving sense of humor, at least with a 
 sufficient regard for facts to prevent them from 
 believing that a thing is true merely because it is 
 pleasant to dream about. 
 
 In 1822, when Robert Owen visited this country, 
 he created a profotmd impression among the edu- 
 cated classes, and a larger proportion of these classes 
 called themselves Socialists then than to-day. 
 Again, in the forties of the last century, there was 
 another outbreak of idealistic Socialism. Both in 
 the twenties and in the forties there were numer- 
 ous experiments in Communism. They were under- 
 taken by people who had faith enough in their 
 
viii INTRODUCTION 
 
 theories to believe that they would work without 
 threats or violence, without an army to force them 
 upon those who were unconvinced of their benefi- 
 cence. 
 
 A new type of Socialism, however, has arisen; 
 and Marx is its spokesman. It has nothing in com- 
 mon with idealistic Socialism. It rests, not on per- 
 suasion, but on force. It does not profess to be- 
 lieve, as did the old idealists, that if Socialism be 
 lifted up it will draw all men unto it. In fact, it 
 has no ideals; it is materialistic and militant. 
 
 Being materialistic and atheistic, it makes no 
 use of such terms as right and justice, unless it be 
 to quiet the consciences of those who stiU harbor 
 such superstitions. It insists that these terms are 
 mere conventionalities; the concepts mere bugaboos 
 invented by the ruling caste to keep the masses 
 under control. Except in a conventional sense, 
 from this crude materialistic point of view there is 
 neither right nor wrong, justice nor injustice, good 
 nor bad. Until people who still believe in such 
 silly notions divest their minds of them, they will 
 never understand the first principles of Marxian 
 Socialism. 
 
 "Who creates our ideas of right and wrong? 
 The ruling class. Why ? To insure their domina- 
 tion over the masses by depriving them of the power 
 to think for themselves. We, the proletarians, 
 when we get into power, will dominate the situation, 
 we shall be the ruling caste, and, naturally, shall do 
 
INTRODUCTION ix 
 
 what the ruling castes have always done, that is, 
 we shall determine what is right and wrong. Do 
 you ask us if what we propose is just? What do 
 you mean by justice ? Do you ask if it is right ? 
 What do you mean by right ? It wiU be good for 
 us. That is all that right and justice ever did or 
 ever can mean." 
 
 The "proletarian revolution," the "dictatorship 
 of the proletariat," when once understood, will be 
 ' seen to be somewhat less idealistic than some of 
 our sentimental intelligenzia have imagined them 
 to be. One who understands them and the material- 
 istic philosophy behind them, will understand the 
 significance of the title of this book, Socialism 
 versus Civilization. 
 
 There is a close parallelism between the over- 
 throw of an ancient civilization by invasion from 
 without and the proposed overthrow of civilization 
 by revolution from within. In neither case is there 
 a conscious desire to destroy civilization. There 
 is only a conscious determination to take possession 
 of what is now in possession of others. If this re- 
 sults in the destruction of civilization, it is no part 
 of the original purpose. It would be equally futile 
 to argue in either case that it was wrong to do what 
 was proposed. Under the materialistic interpreta- 
 tion of history, there is no wrong, there are only 
 economic interests. Under the doctrine of class 
 struggle, whatever one class can get belongs to it 
 as certainly as whatever a tribe or nation can get 
 
X INTRODUCTION 
 
 belongs to it. Class war is quite as logical as tribal 
 or national war. The spoils of war belong to the 
 victor as logically in one case as in the other. 
 
 Not a single one of the doctrines of Marx has ever 
 been accepted by any economist or any philosopher. 
 But, what of it ? It was not necessary that Gaiseric 
 should convince economists or philosophers that 
 there were sound reasons why he should capture 
 Rome. He and his fdUowers wanted it, and they 
 had the power to take it. 
 
 History has proven Marx wrong on every predic- 
 tion. Instead of the revolution coming first in the 
 most highly capitalistic countries, it came in the 
 least capitalistic coimtry, and the most ignorant. 
 Instead of all reforms coming by class struggle, the 
 most significant reforms have always come through 
 the good-will of classes who had nothing to gain 
 from them. 
 
 No amotmt of economic argument or historical 
 demonstration will still the clamor of those who have 
 failed to adjust themselves to the system of liberty 
 and voluntary agreement, and who covet the pros- 
 perity of those who could adapt themselves to that 
 system. The only things that will save civiliz3,tion 
 are, first, to make it possible for the great majority 
 to prosper under this system, as they do in this 
 coimtry, and, second, to show them that this sys- 
 tem of liberty and voluntary agreement is the best 
 possible system for men of intelligence, virtue, and 
 productive capacity. 
 
INTRODUCTION xi 
 
 All progress, as Sir Henry Maine pointed out, has 
 consisted in a gradual change from status to contract. 
 Gradually we have learned that large enterprises 
 can be carried on by voliintary agreement among 
 free citizens. This is one of the greatest discoveries 
 of the human intellect, greater than the alphabet or 
 the multiplication table. But it has its penalties 
 and its dangers. Not every one is adjusted to this 
 system. In the process of evolution, some are left 
 behind. They naturally oppose the system, and 
 would, if they could, start a backward movement. 
 They might even call it progress. All Socialism 
 is reactionary in this fundamental sense. Marxian 
 Socialism ig the worst of all in that it proposes the 
 use of force to turn the march of humanity back- 
 ward. 
 
 The author has performed a useful service by 
 bringing this lesson home to the American people. 
 He comes to his task with an tinusual equipment, 
 having studied the literature of Marxism and the 
 propagandist methods of Marxism in several differ- 
 ent coimtries. He shows himself a master of the 
 subject. 
 
 Mr. Brasol is the author of a number of Russian 
 books, including Critical Essays and Methods of 
 Legal Examination. 
 
 ' T, N. Carver. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 Modern Socialism : Its Theories and Aims i 
 
 EXPOSITION OF THE THEORY OF MARX AND OF MODERN SOCIAL- 
 ISM. BRIEF SUMMARY OF SOCIALISTIC AIMS. CLASS STRUGGLE 
 AS THE KEY-NOTE OF MARXISM AND MODERN SOCIALISM. THE 
 ATTITUDE OF THE AMERICAN SOCIALIST PARTY TOWARD CLASS 
 STRUGGLE. CLASS STRUGGLE AS ADVOCATED BY THE BOLSHE- 
 VIKI. EXPLOITATION OF LABOR AND MARX'S FORMULA OF SUR- 
 PLUS VALUE AS THE BASIS OF PROFIT. AMERICAN INTERPRETA- 
 TION OF SURPLUS PROFIT. THE PETTY BOURGEOISIE: ITS EX- 
 ISTENCE IN CONTRADICTION TO THE MARXIAN THEORY. THE 
 BOURGEOIS FAMILY. INTERNATIONALISM. THE ATTITUDE OP 
 THE AMERICAN RADICAL SOCIALISTS TOWARD THE WAR. THE 
 ST. LOUIS CONVENTION OF THE AMERICAN SOCIALIST PARTY. 
 GERMAN AGENTS AT WORK IN HARMONY WITH THE AMERICAN 
 RADICAL SOCIALISTS. INCONSISTENCY OF THE PRINCIPLE OF 
 INTERNATIONALISM AS APPLIED TO THE LABOR MOVEMENT. 
 REVOLUTION VS. EVOLUTION. THE FALLACY OF MODERN SO- 
 CIALISTIC THEORIES IN REGARD TO THE METHODS ADVOCATED 
 FOR THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THE SOCIALISTIC STATE. "CON- 
 STRUCTIVE" SOCIALISM. KAUTSKY'S COJTFESSION THAT NOTH- 
 ING CONSTRUCTIVE CAN BE OUTLINED AS TO THE FUTURE 
 SOCIALIST STATE. SENTIMENTAL PROPHECIES OF META STERN 
 LILIENTHAL. CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 Criticism of the Marx Theory . . . 6i 
 
 MARX'S CONCEPTION OF CAPITAL. NATURAL RESOURCES AS THE 
 BASIS OF CAPITAL IN GENERAL. IS LABOR THE SOLE PRODUCER 
 OF WEALTH? MANUAL LABOR AND LABOR IN (SENERAL. THE 
 
 xiii 
 
xiv CONTENTS 
 
 ROLE or THE EXPERT AND OF THE MANAGER IN THE PROCESS 
 or PRODUCTION. MR. HILLQUIT'S CONFESSION THAT MANUAL 
 LABOR IS NOT THE SOLE PRODUCER OF WEALTH. MANAGEMENT 
 OF PRODUCTION IN THE SOCIALIST STATE. EQUALITY OF LABOR 
 EFFORTS AND EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY. EQUAL DIVISION 
 OF ALL WEALTH. THE ERRONEOUS NATURE OF THIS DEMAND. 
 CLASS STRUGGLE OR CO-OPERATION OF CLASSES. CO-OPERA- 
 TION OF LABOR AND CAPITAL AS A NATION-WIDE POLICY. ANAL- 
 YSIS OF MARX'S THEORY OF SURPLUS VALUE. HOW IS INDUS- 
 TRIAL'pROFIT DERIVED? WHO PAYS THE CAPITALIST'S PROFIT? 
 THE FALLACY OF MARX'S ASSERTION THAT SURPLUS VALUE IS 
 DUE TO LABOR. CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF HIS ILLUSTRATION 
 OF THE ABOVE. ASSERTION. AMERICAN SOCIALISTS HAVE 
 ADOPTED MARX'S THEORY OF SURPLUS VALUE. CAN PROFIT BE 
 OBTAINED WITHOUT EMPLOYING WAGE LABOR? PROFIT AS THE 
 RESULT OF ARTISTIC FACULTIES. THE INVENTOR'S PROFIT. 
 IS INCREASED WEALTH DUE TO LABOR? THE PHYSICAL FACTOR 
 OF MANUAL LABOR HAS REMAINED STABLE FOR CENTURIES. 
 THE MIDDLE CLASS AND MARX'S THEORY. THE STABILITY OF 
 THE RURAL POPULATION. CONCENTRATION OF INDUSTRIAL 
 CAPITAL. BOLSHEVISM AND SOCIALISM: IS THERE ANY DtSTINC- 
 TION BETWEEN THE TWO? 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 The Great Socialistic Experiment in 
 
 Russia m 
 
 THE GREAT SOCIALISTIC EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA. BRIEF HISTORI- 
 CAL REFERENCES. THE BOLSHEVIKI IN POWER. THE "NA- 
 TIONALIZATION" OF PRIVATE PROPERTY. ANARCHY AND LOOT. 
 THE BOLSHEVIKI AND OTHER SOCIALISTIC FACTIONS. THE BOL- 
 SHEVIKI VS. THE RUSSIAN PEASANTS. MR. TROTZKY'S ADDRESS 
 ON THE LAND PROBLEM. HUNGER AND STARVATION AS THE 
 IMMEDIATE RESULTS OF BOLSHEVIST PRACTICE. FOOD SITUA- 
 TION AND GENERAL MARKET CONDITIONS. METALS, COAL, 
 AGRICULTURE, TRANSPORT. PEOPLES* COMMISSARY NEV- 
 
CONTENTS XV 
 
 sky's confession or the physical exteemination of the 
 
 TECHNICAL STAFF AND SKILLED RAILROAD WORKMEN. STATE 
 BUDGET. COMPLETE COLLAPSE OF THE RUSSIAN FINANCIAL 
 SYSTES^. workmen's CONTROL OF INDUSTRIES: ITS ISTCON- 
 SISTENCY. MR. LENIN's CONFESSION AS TO THE NECESSITY OF 
 TAKING A "step BACKWARD." THE PROLETARIAN RULE AND 
 THE BOURGEOIS EXPERT. THE NEW BOURGEOISIE UNDER THE 
 SOVIET REGIME. CIVIL WAR. PEOPLES' COMMISSARY LO- 
 POUSHKIN'S CONFESSION ON THE HORRORS OF THE SOQALIST 
 REGIME IN RUSSIA. HIS SUICIDE. 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 Socialist Explanations of the Failure in 
 
 Russia 164 
 
 THE CONSaOUSNESS OP THE SOCIALIST FAILURE IN RUSSIA. 
 CIVILIZATION AND PRODUCTION. VARIOUS EXCUSES FOR THE 
 BOLSHEVIST FAILURE IN RUSSIA. SOCIALIST RULERS IN RUSSIA 
 FOLLOWING CLOSELY MARX'S THEORIES. MARX'S PREMISE TO 
 A SOaAL REVOLUTION. CAPITALISM MUST PRECEDE SOCIALISM. 
 IN RUSSIA, ON THE CONTRARY, SOCIALISM WAS FORCED UPON 
 THE NATION BEFORE CAPITALISM ACTUALLY CAME INTO EXIST- 
 ENCE. A PROLETARIAN DICTATORSHIP WITHOUT A PROLE- 
 TARIAN CLASS. THE ALLIED BLOCKADE OF RUSSIA. RUSSIA'S 
 TREMENDOUS NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE ABSENCE OF A 
 STRONGLY ORGANIZED BOURGEOIS CLASS INDUCED LENIN AND 
 TROTZKY TO START THEIR SOCIALISTIC EXPERIMENT IN THAT 
 COUNTRY. LENIN'S OWN CONFESSION. 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 Socialistic Agitation in Europe and 
 
 America i77 
 
 RECENT SOCIALIST ACTIVITIES. BRITISH TRADE-UNIONS UNDER 
 THE CONTROL OF SOCIALISTS. THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE AND 
 MR. SMILLIE, THE BRITISH RAILROAD STRIKE. MR. LLOYD 
 
xvi CONTENTS 
 
 George's statement, socialist agitation in the united 
 states. the seattle strike. epidemic of strikes. the 
 
 STEEL STRIKE. THE BETHLEHEM STRIKE. THE BOSTON POLICE 
 STRIKE. PRACTICAL SOCIALISM OE MR. PLUMB, HIS PLAN AND 
 ITS ANALYSIS. INCONSISTENCY OE MR. PLUMB'S PLAN. SEN- 
 ATOR SHERMAN VS. MR. PLUMB. EXHIBITS OP THE I. W. W. 
 AND SOCIALISTIC PROPAGANDA IN THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 Social Revolution or Social Reconstruc- 
 tion 231 
 
 SOME OF THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE CAPITAL- 
 ISTIC SYSTEM. HIGHLY DEVELOPED TECHNIQUE. DIVISION OF 
 ^CHANICAL PROCESSES. INTENSIFIED PRODUCTION. PRIVATE 
 OWNERSHIP AS A BASIC PRINCIPLE OF CAPITALISTIC PRODUCTION. 
 THE CAPITALISTIC SYSTEM OF PRODUCTION AND THE EQUALITY 
 OF OPPORTUNITY. MANUAL LABOR PARTLY DEPRIVED OF THE 
 OPPORTUNITY TO REACH ECONOMIC INDEPENDENCE. IS THERE 
 A SOCIAL PROBLEM, OR ARE THERE SOCIAL PROBLEMS?- SOCIAL 
 PANACEAS AND SOCIAL REFORIJS. NEGATIVE OR DEFENSIVB 
 MEASURES IN THE PRESENT SOCIAL UNREST. COUNTER- 
 PROPAGANDA. EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE FAL- 
 LACIES OF SOCIALISM. NATURE OF COUNTER-PROPAGAlffiX 
 WORK AND ITS METHODS. PAMPHLETS. PUBLIC MEETINGS. 
 DEPORTATION OF RED LEADERS. STRIKE LEGISLATION. FREE- 
 DOM OF LABOR AND PROTECTION OF KEY INDUSTRIES. PICKET- 
 ING. PROTECTION OF "SCABS." LAWS AGAINST COMMUNISM. 
 ANARCHISM AND COMMUNISM. CONSTRUCTIVE MEASURES. 
 INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY. CO-ORDINATION OF INDUSTRIAL 
 EFFORTS. CO-ORDINATION OF INDUSTRIAL AND FINANaAL 
 CAPITAL. DISADVANTAGEOUS FEATURES OF MODERN INTER- 
 NATIONAL FINANCE. SEPARATION OF BANKING RESOURCES 
 FROM INDUSTRIAL ASSETS. MR. FERGUSON'S PROJECT FOR A 
 FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF PRODUCTION. MODIFICATIONS OF THIS 
 PLAN. PRIVATE AND GOVERNMENTAL INITIATIVE. THE TECH- 
 NICAL EXPERT AS A LEADING POWER IN MODERN INDUSTRY. 
 
CONTENTS xvii 
 
 TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL RESEARCH. TENTATIVE ENUMERATION 
 OF BRANCHES OF INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE TO WHICH 
 TECHNICAL RESEARCH SHOULD BE PARTICULARLY APPLIED. 
 TECHNICAL RESEARCH AND THE GENERAL PROBLEM OF RE- 
 CONSTRUCTION. HOW CAN INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY BE 
 ACHIEVED? SYSTEM OF BONUSES. CONCILIATION. THE SHOP 
 COMMITTEE. THE LYNN PLAN. CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT. 
 BRIEF DATA ON THE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT IN VARIOUS 
 COUNTRIES. SUCCESS OF THE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT IS 
 BASED UPON ITS IMPARTIAL ATTITUDE TOWARD ALL POLITICAL 
 UOVEMENXS. CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
FOREWORD 
 
 Economic theories are the result rather than the 
 cause of economical conditions. The gradual de- 
 velopment of the social structure brings -about new 
 ideas which constitute the basis of new scientific 
 conceptions of the social life at large. 
 
 At the same time, the fact cannot be disputed 
 that certain economic doctrines have had a direct and 
 pov^erftd influence upon the social structure and 
 upon economic legislation in various countries. 
 Thus, for instance, the physiocratic school was 
 largely responsible for the enactment of certain 
 economic legislation in France during the eighteenth 
 century. Turgot, the famous statesman of Louis 
 XVI, was undoubtedly influenced by the theories 
 of Frangois Quesnai, and most of the measures 
 adopted by the French GovemmMit at that time for 
 the liberation of industry were due to the principal 
 stipulation of the physiocrats — "laissez-fau«, laissess- 
 passer." Moreover, the various att«npts to meet 
 the financial ne«ds of the French Trsasuiy dimng the 
 reign of Louis XVI by establishing the so-aiiled 
 sijjLgle tax (itopdt tjnique) were a^in the result of 
 Quesnai's conception of the nature of production in 
 
XX FOREWORD 
 
 general and of the predominant r61e played by 
 agriculture in the process of the accumulation of 
 capital. 
 
 Much in the same way Adam Smith's famous 
 work Wealth of Nations greatly influenced the com- 
 mercial policy of Great Britain through the greatei- 
 part of the nineteenth century and had much to do 
 with the complete victory of the Free Traders over 
 the Protectionists. Moreover, in the adoption of 
 Adam-Smith's theory by British statesmen, the whole 
 Mercantile System experienced a mortal blow.-^ 
 
 So, to an even greater degree, the labor movement 
 in modem times has been influenced by the theories 
 of one man — Karl Marx. While labor unrest is by 
 no means a new phenomenon in social life, neverthe- 
 less, the modem labor movement, at least in its 
 radical tendencies, dates from the appearance of 
 Karl Marx's^ Communist Manifesto in the nine- 
 teenth century. 
 
 As a matter of fact this pamphlet of Marx became 
 
 ^The Mercantile System is a financial policy prevalent during 
 the seventeenth and during part of the eighteenth centuries, which 
 sought to restrict the importation of foreign goods by means of high 
 protective tariffs. At the same time, the Mercantile System en- 
 couraged exports to foreign countries with the aim to attract as 
 much gold and silver as possible in order to accumulate the metal 
 reserve of money. Thus, the Mercantile System attached the 
 greatest importance to money as such in the false belief that money 
 is equivalent to wealth. 
 
 2 Kari Marx, a Jew, born at Treves, May 5, 1818; died in Lond»n, 
 March 14, i88s. From his early youth he was interested in the 
 European radical movement and participated directly in the French 
 Revolution of 1848. In 1847, together with a German, Frederick 
 
FOREWORD xxi 
 
 the real creed of the radical factions of the labor 
 class, which adopted Marx's dictum, "Working men 
 of all countries unite," as their battle-cry. 
 
 It is true that Socialistic doctrines of different 
 kinds were promulgated in Europe long before 
 Karl Marx's appearance upon the stage of Euro- 
 pean politics. Thus, during the first French Revolu- 
 tion Baboef proclaimed himself in favor of unre- 
 stricted Communism. Later on, in the first part 
 of the nineteenth century, Frangois Fourier outlined 
 in his work The Theory of the Four Movements a 
 social scheme which in many respects is similar to 
 the stipulations of modem Socialism. Fourier was 
 the founder of the theory of industrial "phalanges," 
 by which he sought to secure industrial co-operation 
 for the benefit of the community as a whole. There 
 was even an attempt to put Fourier's scheme into 
 practice, and a "Phalanst^re" was built in France 
 near the Rambouillet Forest, where sixteen hundred 
 niembers of this organization tried to follow Fourier's 
 
 Engels, he expounded his ideas in the Communist Manifesto. Marx 
 wrote a number of other pamphlets dealing with European politics, 
 such as The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, The Struggle of 
 Classes in France, Revolttlion and Counter-ReooltUion, The Misery of 
 Philosophy, which is a direct attack against Proudhon's Philosophy 
 of Misery, etc. Marx's main work, however, is Capital, to which 
 work we shall have to refer frequently in this book. Marx was one 
 of the founders of the International Working Men's Association, 
 and he took a lively interest in the Communist uprising in Paris 
 in 1 87 1. Marx's whole life was devoted to agitation among the 
 workmen. 
 
 Further details of Marx's biography can be obtained from th« 
 Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. VIII, pp. 357 and 358. 
 
xxii FOREWORD 
 
 scheme of production. This experiment, as a num- 
 ber of others, proved to be a failure. 
 
 Finally, Saint-Simon, in 1823, wrote a book under 
 the title Catechism of the Industrials. In this book 
 Socialistic tendencies were expressed very dis- 
 tinctly and an endeavor' was made to find a panacea 
 for all social evils. But neither Baboef nor Saint- 
 Simon nor Fourier nor any other Socialist leader of 
 the first half of the nineteenth century — ^such as 
 Robert Owen or Proudhon — succeeded in exerting 
 any practical influence upon the labor movement as 
 such. This was mainly due to the fact that their 
 writings expressed purely sentimental schemes. 
 Moreover, the language of their writings, espe- 
 cially that of Fourier, was so obscure and misleading 
 that the average workman was' wholly unable to 
 grasp its meaning. 
 
 Therefore, it is very important to note that it is 
 Marx's theory, as expressed in the Communist Mani- 
 festo and developed in his Capital, which is the axis 
 of modem Socialism no matter to what particular 
 shade or faction it belongs. The radical factions 
 of labor, having abolished under Marx's ideological 
 pressure the very conception of religion, have 
 chosen Marx himself as their new god. This is true 
 not only with respect to the so-called orthodox 
 Socialists of our times, such as the majority of the 
 German Social Democratic Party, the Bolsheviki in 
 Russia, and the International Workers of the World 
 in the United States, but also with respect to those 
 
FOREWORD xxiii 
 
 schools which to a certain extent deviate from ortho- 
 dox Marxism, such as Sjrtidicalism in France, radical 
 Trade-Unionism in Great Britain, and the Men- 
 shevist faction in Russia. 
 
 It is necessary to emphasize the fact that the 
 sectarian differences which have developed among 
 Socialists were not caused by opposition to the views 
 of Marx, but were merely due to the different inter- 
 pretations put upon Marx's theory by the various 
 Socialistic factions. Thus, the dispute, lasting for 
 years, between Plechanoff , who represented the Men- 
 shevist faction of the Social Democratic move- 
 ment in Russia, and the Bolsheviki was almost en- 
 tirely due to a difference of opinion regarding the 
 real meaning of Marx's materialistic philosophy. 
 Again the exhaustive polemic between Wilhelm 
 Liebknecht and Edward Bernstein revealed on the 
 part of those two leaders of German Social De- 
 mocracy only a different understanding of Marx's 
 theory as to the accumulation of capital in fewer 
 hands. Marx himself made the ironical remark 
 that all the factions of the Socialistic movement 
 are properly described &s "auch Marxisten, noch 
 Marxisten, doch Marxisten" ("also Marxians, still 
 Marxians, yet Marxians"). 
 
 It will be seen, therefore, that in order to get a 
 clear conception of the nature of the ideological 
 tendencies of the modem Socialistic movement, it is 
 quite indispensable to have a clear conception of 
 the Marx theory itself. 
 
xxiv FOREWORD 
 
 It must also be borne in mind that the labor 
 movement in general is coming more and more under 
 the control 6f Socialist leaders, who, being avowed 
 Marxians, are, systematically promoting the Marxian 
 theory among the rank and file of working men. 
 
 The grave social problems which the world has 
 to face in our day are closely interrelated and tied 
 by innumerable threads both to the revolutionary 
 theory of Marx and to his practical achievements in 
 the field of organizing labor. 
 
 Under present circumstances it would seem almost 
 impossible for civilized society, as such, to disre- 
 gard the nature of the labor movement, its aspira- 
 tions, or its attitude toward modem society itself. 
 
 Modem civilization as a whole is imminently 
 threatened with a social cataclysm of unprecedented 
 violence, such as has already inflicted utter ruin and 
 unspeakable sufferings upon several European coun- 
 tries, particularly Russia. There is a social danger 
 in almost every civilized country, including the 
 United States. This danger cannot be magnified 
 and should not be minimized. 
 
 The present disturbed conditions, however, can 
 be adequately met and properly counteracted pro- 
 vided there is first a clear understanding among the 
 people at large of what Socialism is aiming at and 
 of the intellectual ground of its aspirations. 
 
SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 MODERN SOCIALISM: ITS THEORIES 
 
 AND AIMS 
 
 WHAT is Socialism as expounded by Karl 
 Marx and developed by the Socialists of 
 OUT day ? 
 What is Socialism aiming at ? 
 What means are being advocated to make So- 
 cialism triumphant ? 
 
 Modem Socialism, as formulated by Karl Marx 
 and developed by the more recent Socialist leaders 
 throughout the world, aflSrms that the history of 
 all hitherto existing society is nothing but the his- 
 tory of class struggles. These leaders further affirm 
 that the present system of production, which they 
 call the capitalistic system, is based upon a struggle 
 between capital and manual labor. This class 
 struggle is due to the fact that the capitalists are 
 exploiting and mistreating the laborers, or prole- 
 tarians. They say that while labor is the sole pro- 
 ducer of wealth, wealth is being appropriated by 
 those who do not produce it and who, therefore, 
 
2 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 are not entitled to it. Thus Socialism has created 
 the theory that the workmen have been robbed of 
 the wealth which they themselves have produced. 
 
 Socialism aims at the abolition of private prop- 
 erty, the extermination of the capitalistic class, the 
 abolition of the "bourgeois family," the abolition 
 of nationalism and religion. 
 
 Socialism advocates the forcible and violent over- 
 throw of the existing social order. 
 
 Thus far we have presented the essential points 
 of the Socialistic Creed. It will be noted that they 
 are mainly of a destructive nature. 
 
 Strange as it may seem. Socialism has practically 
 no constructive programme to offer. Socialism does 
 not know exactly what it wants in the place of the 
 institutions which are to be forcibly overthrown. 
 
 Some of the Socialists — especially the boudoir 
 or parlor Bolsheviki — say that they want some- 
 thing along Russian lines, "exactly as it happened 
 in Russia." Other Socialists advocate "nationali- 
 zation of industries,"" whereby the state would op- 
 erate all industries and the actual owners would be 
 deprived of their shares without remuneration. 
 Finally, there are Socialists who advocate not only 
 this ownership by the state but who would: put the 
 supreme control over production and distribution 
 in the hands of the proletarians. No orthodox So- 
 cialist, however, would be satisfied with a form of 
 nationalization which would include reimbursement 
 of the former owners. The majority of Socialists 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 3 
 
 advocate proletarian rule, excluding all other classes 
 and social groups from any profit or share in the na- 
 tional process of production. 
 
 Broadly speaking, the two fundamental aims of 
 modem Socialists are the violent overthrow of the 
 existing order throughout the world and the appro- 
 priation by the proletarians of all the means of pro- 
 duction and distribution. It is, indeed, a daring 
 enterprise. They openly advocate a "Soviet re- 
 gime" which would do away with Magna Charta 
 in Great Britain and the Constitution in the United 
 States. 
 
 The Class Struggle 
 
 I. The first allegation of Marx is to the effect 
 that "the history of all hitherto existing society is 
 the history of class struggle."^ 
 
 He and all his followers assert that the history of 
 humanity always was, and still is, based upon the 
 conflicting interests between the various classes. 
 By the word "class" is meant a social group the 
 members of which are united because they are living 
 imder common economic conditions and also be- 
 cause they occupy a distinct place in the process of 
 economic production. Thus, with reference to 
 modem times, according to Marx, existing society 
 is divided into two classes, namely, the bourgeois 
 class, which comprises the owners of the means of 
 
 ' Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Communist Manifesto, p. 12 
 (Chas. H. Kerr & Co., Chicago, 1915). 
 
4 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 production, who are also the employers of wage 
 labor, and the proletarian class, consisting of modem 
 wage laborers, who, having been deprived of the 
 means of production, are thus compelled to sell 
 their labor on the open market. 
 
 When dealing with modem historical events, 
 Marx made various attempts to interpret them from 
 the angle of his basic principle of class struggle. 
 Thus, the great French Revolution of 1789 was re- 
 duced by Marx to a struggle between feudal society 
 and the rising power of the middle class, or the so- 
 called bourgeoisie. In the same way the Pebniary 
 Revolution of 1848 in France was explained by 
 Marx as being a conflict between the interests of 
 the big bourgeoisie and those of the so-called petty 
 bourgeoisie. The latter class, according to Marx, 
 includes the peasantry and other farming population. 
 
 To those who have not closely followed the re- 
 cent history of Socialism, some of the foregoing 
 statements as to the actual beliefs and aims of the 
 modem Socialists may seem to be extreme or ex- 
 aggerated; but the evidence of their accuracy is 
 abundant and not far to seek. 
 
 The German Social Democracy, in 1891, at the 
 Convention of Erfurt, proclaimed the following 
 principle: 
 
 The sodal transformation means the liberation not only 
 of the proletariat but of the whole human race. Only the 
 working class, however, can bring it about. All other 
 classes, despite their conflicting interests, maintain their 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 5 
 
 existence on the basis of the private ownership of the means 
 of production, and therefore have a common motive for 
 supporting the principles of the existing social order. The 
 struggle of the working class against capitalistic exploita- 
 tion is necessarily a political struggle. The working class 
 cannot develop its economic organization and wage its eco- 
 nomic battles without political rights. It cannot accom- 
 plish the transfer of the means of production to the com- 
 munity as a whole without first having come into possession 
 of political power. To make this struggle of the workers 
 conscious and unified, to keep this one great object in view 
 — this is the purpose of the Socialist Party .^ 
 
 The same Marxian principle of class struggle is 
 clearly enunciated in the official declaration of prin- 
 ciples of the Industrial Workers of the World 
 (I. W. W.) as follows: 
 
 The working class and the employing class have nothing 
 in common. Between these two classes a struggle must go 
 on until the workers of the world organize as a class, take 
 possession of the earth and the machinery of production, 
 and abolish the wage system. ... It is the historic mis- 
 sion of the working class to do away with capitalism. The 
 army of prckiuction must be organized not only for the 
 every-day struggle with capitalists but also to carry on pro- 
 duction when capitaUsm shall have been overthrown.^ 
 
 This idea of class struggle has been unanimously 
 accepted also by other Socialistic factions in America. 
 
 ' The Class Struggle (Erfurt Programme), by Karl Kautsky, p. 159 
 (Chas. H. Kerr & Co., Chicago, 1910). 
 
 • The American Labor Year Book, 1916, p. 36 (The Rand School »£ 
 Social Science, New York City). 
 
6 SOCIADISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 In a book by Jack London entitled War of the Classes, 
 the first chapter of which bears the title "The Class 
 Struggle,"' he goes into details explaining the fact 
 that real antagonism between the labor class and 
 the capitalists is raging with the greatest vigor all 
 through the United States. Similarly, Mr. David 
 P. Berenberg, one of the leading members of the 
 American Socialist Party, has recently made the fol- 
 lowing utterance, which is indeed very explicit: 
 
 Let us put an end to the profit system and all that it stands 
 for. Let us put an end to private ownership of land and 
 capital, and become our own masters. . . . We can do this 
 if we stand together. ... AH that is necessary is that the 
 working class should use the poUtical power that lies in its 
 hands. The workers can win in any election in which they 
 unite their strength. The working class has too long al- 
 lowed itself to be divided on race lines and religious issues. 
 Let us forget our differences and remember that we have one 
 common opponent — Capital. 
 
 The same principle was declared, even more vigor- 
 ously, in the declaration of the Workers Interna- 
 tional Industrial Union which was adopted at its 
 convention in 1915. Among other things, this 
 declaration states as follows: 
 
 The working class and the employing class have nothing 
 in common. There can be no peace sp long as hunger and 
 want are found among the millions of working people, and 
 the few who make up the employing class have all the good 
 
 ' Jack London, War of the Classes, pp. 3-49 (The Macmillan Co., 
 1912). 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 7 
 
 things of life. Between these two classes a struggle must go 
 on until the toilers come together on the political field under the 
 banner of a distinct revolutionary and political party governed 
 by the workers' class interests, and on the industrial field under 
 the banner of One Great Industrial Union, to take and hold all 
 means of production and distribution, and to run them for the 
 benefit of all wealth-producers.^ 
 
 As to the Bolsheviki in Russia, they have carried 
 out Marx's theory of class struggle to its logical end. 
 In the official publication of the Petrograd Council 
 of the Workmen, Peasants, and Red Guards Depu- 
 ties, the Red Gazette, an editorial article was pub- 
 lished on the 31st of August, 1918, referring to the 
 Red Terror. The whole article is an expression of 
 the official point of view of the Soviet government 
 on the subject of class struggle. It states in part 
 as follows : 
 
 Only those men among the representatives of the bour- 
 geois class who during a period of nine months succeeded in 
 proving their loyalty to the Soviet rule should be spared. 
 All the others are our hostages, and we should treat them 
 accordingly. Enough of mildness. The interests of the revo- 
 lution necessitate physical annihilation of the bourgeois class. 
 It is time for us to start. 
 
 Another official Bolshevist publication, namely, 
 The Isvestia of the Executioe Committee of the Kotel- 
 nich Soviet of the Workman, Soldiers, and Peasant 
 Beggars Deputies, published on September 29, 1918, 
 
 » The American Labor Year Book, .1916, p. 37. 
 
8 SOCIALISM s VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 in the fourth issue, an article under the title "The 
 Voice of Tombs," the closing lines of which read as 
 follows : 
 
 Nay, we have already left the path of all errors, and we 
 have found the right track of struggle with our hated enemies 
 and this track is— RED TERROR. 
 
 To make it quite clear that the policy of elimi- 
 nating the property-owning classes applies not only 
 to the so-called captains of the bourgeoisie but also 
 to the farmers, we quote the American Socialist 
 Labor Party in its recently formulated statement of 
 "maximum demands." Under Clause 3 of this 
 document it is stated: ^ 
 
 Declaration that the United Socialist Party aims to so- 
 cialize, along with other means of production of commodities, 
 all land used for the production of commodities, whether such 
 lands be owned by a big or small farmer or be tilled by wage 
 labor or otherwise} 
 
 This stipulation, of course, is so plain that it 
 needs no further interpretation. 
 
 It is a' fact to be noted that the average farmer 
 who devotes all of his time to agricultural piursuits, 
 and whose personal manual labor feeds the popula- 
 tion at large, including the proletarians of the cities, 
 is not exempt from class hatred on the part of mod- 
 em SociaUsts. No matter how long the farmer 
 
 • The American Labor Year Book, 1916, p. 94. 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 9 
 
 works in order to furnish food for the Socialist agi- 
 tators in the cities, no matter whether he merely 
 employs a couple of workmen in order to keep the 
 farm in good shape, the Socialists of our day unani- 
 mously agree that he should be --elimrnated for the 
 sole reason that he is the actual owner of his farm, 
 and that, therefore, he is a bourgeois. Mr. Clarence 
 Hotson published an article in the Radical Review 
 under the title "Socialism and the American Farm- 
 er." The whole article is a hymn of hate toward 
 the American farmer population. In the closing 
 paragraphs of his article Mr. Hotson states as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 I maintain that the Socialist movement has no business 
 making any special provisions for agriculture while the 
 present system lasts; no "farmer's reforms" of any sort 
 should be drafted. It is treason to Socialism to make any 
 concessions whatever to the interests of any property-owning 
 class.' 
 
 That this Ammcan programme conforms to the 
 programme of the Bolsheviki in Russia is demon- 
 strated by a proclamation issued by the terrorists 
 in the city of Kotelnich (North Russia) some tune 
 in 1 91 8. In this document the following is stated: 
 
 ... We take oath not to leave a stone ui^tumed in 
 those nests where the terrible parasites and their partisans 
 are living. When compelled to evacuate the cities, .we will 
 
 » Radical Review, April, 1918 (New York City). 
 
lo SOCIALISM VS. . CIVILIZATION 
 
 turn them into deserts, and every step of ours will be abun- 
 dantly soaked with blood. In this struggle between the 
 world's capital and those oppressed let the world tremble 
 before the horror of the mode in which we shall demolish 
 and annihilate everything which oppresses us. . . . You, 
 rich peasants, who have drunk the blood of the poor for centuries 
 long, you should remember that the above also applies to you. 
 
 The above quotations correctly illustrate the gen- 
 eral attitude of the various Socialist factions, whether 
 in the United States or elsewhere, toward the ftmda- 
 tnental principle of the Marxian theory of class strug- 
 gle. There is absolutely no difference in the con- 
 ception of class antagonism as between the Ameri- 
 can Socialist Party, the German Social Democracy, 
 and the Bolsheviki in Russia. All of them have 
 religiously adopted Marx's allegation that there is 
 such a thing as the struggle of classes. In order to 
 decide this struggle in favor of the proletarians, the 
 Socialists throughout the world would resort to a 
 reign of terror and even to the physical extermina- 
 tion of the so-called bourgeois class. To use Marx's 
 own words we refer to the Communist Manifesto, in 
 which it is stated: 
 
 In depicting the most general phases of the development 
 of the proletariat, we trace^l the more or less veiled civil 
 war, raging within existing society, up to the point where 
 that war breaks out into open revolution and where the 
 violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation 
 for the sway of the proletariat.' 
 
 ' Communist Manifesto, p. 28. 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM ii 
 
 "The Exploitation op Labor" 
 
 2. The Socialist theory of class struggle is sub- 
 stantially based upon the conception that capital 
 is exploiting labor. This theory is another for- 
 mula proclaimed by Marx. It is essential to bring 
 out clearly Marx's personal attitude toward this 
 subject, which has had an enormous influence upon 
 the labor movement. In this connection Marx pro^ 
 duced a very intricate and obscure theory of the 
 nature of capital itself. According to this theory, 
 the capital "C" employed in a given industrial en- 
 terprise is made up of two components : one — the sum 
 of money "c" laid out upon the material means of 
 production, and the other — the stun of money "v" ex- 
 pended upon the labor power. Thus, "c" comprises 
 raw materials, bmldings,, machinery, and tools used 
 for productive purposes and represents the portion 
 which Marx called "constant" or fixed capital. As 
 to "v," it is the portion which is usually regarded as 
 variable capital. At fir^t, then, C = c -f- v. Marx 
 amplifies his illustration with figures and supposes 
 that capital "C" = $500, of which $400 are constant 
 capital, "c," and $100, the money expended on 
 labor, otherwise "v." He then affirms further that, 
 after the process of production has been terminated, 
 capital "C" is no longer equal to $500 (c + v, or 
 $400 + $100) but ("c" -I- "v") + "s," whereby "s" 
 represents a certain surplus value which is the re- 
 
12 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 suit of the process of production itself. If we now 
 assume that "s" is equal to $ioo, it would mean 
 that the original capital "c," which amounted to 
 $500, has risen to "c" + "s," or, otherwise, $500 + 
 $100 = $600. Marx ftu-ther explains that one part 
 of the labor process is being devoted to the repro- 
 duction of the value of the labor power, i. e., the 
 value of its means of subsistence, the second part 
 being entirely devoted to the production of ""'s," 
 i. e., the surplus value which is the net profit of the 
 capitalist. Therefore, if the average time for the 
 reproduction of the means of subsistence is equal 
 to six hours, then, according to Marx, every hour of 
 the labor day which is in excess of the six hours is 
 merely the time during which the workman devotes 
 his efforts to creating the surplus value, or the net 
 profit for the capitalist.^ The logical conclusion is 
 thereupon drawn that, the longer the labor day is, 
 the more benefit has the capitalist out of "v," or 
 out of the variable capital expended for labor power. 
 In other words, Marx asserts that the capitalist's 
 profit is entirely due to labor. On the other hand, 
 Marx, as well as more recent Socialists, asserts that 
 the value of capital itself represents the quantity of 
 labor embodied in it. Therefore, the division of 
 capital into fixed capital and variable capital in 
 reality has but little significance, since fixed capital 
 is itself nothing but crystallized labor, and is a ma- 
 
 • Karl Marx, Capital, vol. I. Compare pp. 235-248. (Chas. H. 
 Kerr & Co., Chicago, 1919.) 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 13 
 
 terial incarnation of the value which was contributed 
 to it by labor. 
 
 Therefore, if we follow Marx's formula, we ought 
 to say that "c," which is equal to $400, and "v," 
 which is equal to $100, in reality represent nothing 
 but labor. The only difference between "c" and 
 "v," according to Marx, consists in the fact that 
 "c" is a portion of work which has been already 
 accomplished and which has asstmied the crystal- 
 lized form of buildings, machineiy, tools, etc., 
 whereas "v" is the fluid work itself. Moreover, 
 the Socialists affirm that the participation of capital 
 in the process of production, although absolutely 
 indispensable from a technical point ctf view, brings 
 no change in the essential character of the capitalis- 
 tic system. The Socialists say that the means of 
 production, which are expressed by "c," have been 
 taken away from the workmen ahnost by force. 
 After having lost the means of production, the 
 workman became a proletarian who was compelled 
 to seU his labor power on the market. 
 
 The reader will easily tmderstand the fallacy of 
 this obscure theory. The capitalist is to be blamed 
 not only for the fact that he employs labor but also 
 for the fact that he invests his capital. 
 
 Is it, however, true that capital is nothing but 
 crystallized labor ? Is it true that labor is the sole 
 producer of wealth ? Is it true that labor is the sole 
 producer of profit? Is it true that the workman 
 has been forcibly deprived of the means -of produc- 
 
14 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 tion ? Is this fantastic theory based upon his- 
 torical facts ? Or is it a fairy-tale invented for the 
 sole purpose of misleading those wlio are ignorant ? 
 Full answers to these questions are given in Chapter 
 II of this book. 
 
 Meanwhile, it is interesting to note that Marx's 
 theory, because of its obscurity, is regarded by the 
 Socialists of all creeds as the most clever piece of 
 mental work ever produced in the history of eco- 
 nomic science. Naturally, professional agitators 
 carefully abstain from quoting to the workmen at 
 labor meetings those abstract algebraic formiilas of 
 Marx. The average workman wotild simply fall 
 asleep if he had to decipher this quasi-scientific stuff, 
 but the boudoir agitators, those working among emo- 
 tional women, take delight in using now and then a 
 quotation from the first volume of Marx's Capital 
 containing one or two formulas so as to prove to the 
 audience how ignorant it is and how deep Marx's 
 theory is. 
 
 In plain American terms, this whole theory when 
 presented to the workmen is expressed as follows : 
 
 Mr. Workingman, you have been cheated. You have been 
 fooled into selling your labor for less than it is really worth. 
 It is really worth the whole of the product, but you could 
 not know this, so you agreed to take less.^ 
 
 Of course, at mass-meetings no further arguments, 
 no further proofs, are required. Marx, however, 
 1 Socialism, by David P. Berenberg, p. 15. 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 15 
 
 and his Socialist followers throughout the world 
 have gone fiirther and have declared that with capi- 
 talism growing stronger every day, its natural ten- 
 dency to exploit the working class is becoming more 
 and more intense. In this connection Marx does 
 not hesitate to make quite an amazing assertion to 
 the effect that "The modem laborer, . . . instead 
 of rising with the progress of industry, sinks deeper 
 and deeper below the conditions of existence of \his 
 own class. He becomes a pauper, and pauperism 
 develops more rapidly than poptdation and wealth." * 
 
 On a later occasion we shall have to come back. 
 to a careful analysis of this allegation of Marx. 
 It would, however, be very interesting to learn 
 whether the average American workman would sin- 
 cerely consent to enlist his name in the roll of pau- 
 pers, and whether he himself would consider that 
 he has stmk below the conditions of existence of 
 his own class. 
 
 It would seem ridiculous, especially in otir day, 
 to speak about the "terrible exploitation" and 
 "humiliating misery" of the labor class — since 
 during the war labor wages have reached their. 
 climax, the labor day having been reduced at the 
 same time to a limit which endangers the entire 
 industrial system. Moreover, the actual demands 
 of labor throughout the world to-day hardly corre- 
 spond to conditions to which -the term "exploita- 
 tion" could be properly applied. The radical fac- 
 
 * Communist Manifesto, p. 29. 
 
i6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 tions of labor long ago dropped the slogan which was 
 first used by the workmen in Australia, .namely: 
 "Eight hours work, eight hours sleep, eight hours 
 play, that is our day." At present the British trade- 
 unions, so far as controlled by Socialists of various 
 factions, are raising a demand for a seven-hotu day. 
 At the same time certain groups of American labor 
 are apparently not at aU satisfied with this modest 
 demand of their British comrades. The Socialist 
 Shop Propaganda Committee at the Philadelphia 
 shipyards issued in the spring of 1 919 a proclamation 
 undep the title, "A General Strike Movement 
 Spreads Through the Country." Therein it is 
 stated: "What have we, workers, to do in order to 
 avoid this spectre of starvation and distress ? We 
 have to take over the industries, mines, and natiu-al 
 resources, and run them for our common good and 
 not for profit. This will give every one employment, 
 making it possible to produce enough in four or five 
 hours per day to enable every worker to live in comfort. 
 Do these industries and natural resources belong to 
 the emplojring class? . . . No; we workers of this 
 country have made all the machinery. It is the 
 ustu-ped property of the workifig class." 
 
 The workmen of Russia, since their brains have 
 been thoroughly inoculated with Socialist theories, 
 have, on various occasions during the years 191 7, 
 1918, and 1 919, demanded a working day of not 
 more than four hours. A four-hotu* day is, of 
 course, very far from the so-called sweating system 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 17 
 
 which picttyes the workman as a miserable animal 
 canying the terrible bttrden and yoke of capitalist 
 exploitation. 
 
 The theory of the surplus value produced by labor 
 for thejDenefit of the capitalist is as much the eco- 
 nomic foundation of modem Socialism as the doc- 
 trine of class struggle is its sociological axis. Not- 
 withstanding all the modifications which this theory 
 has undergone since the publication of Marx's 
 Capital, modem Socialism, no matter to what par- 
 ticular faction or party it belongs, still maintains 
 the fundamental principles incorporated in the 
 theory of surplus value produced by the application 
 of labor to the "dead skeleton" of constant capital, 
 including machinery and raw materials. Thus, 
 Kautsky, one of the recognized leaders of the Ger- 
 man Social Democracy, in his analysis of the Erfurt 
 Programme, when referring to the nattu-e of capital, 
 states distinctly that the wages of the workman can 
 never rise sufficiently to equal the value of his prod- 
 uct. They must always be below that so as to 
 leave a stuplus. It is only, according to Kautsky's 
 allegation, the prospect of a surplus that moves the 
 capitalist to purchase labor power, and Kautsky 
 concludes his thought by stating that "It is, there- 
 fore, evident that under the capitalist system the 
 wages of the workman can never rise high enough 
 to put an end to the exploitation of labor." 
 
 Those two theoretical utterances of the Marxian 
 doctrine, namely, the class struggle and the exploi- 
 
1 8 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 tation of labor by capital, have served as a theoreti- 
 cal foundation for the full development of the So- 
 cialistic creed. All the other allegations of modern 
 Socialism are but the logical deductions from these 
 two basic principles. 
 
 The PfeTTY Bourgeoisie 
 
 3. In the preceding paragraphs we gave a brief 
 outline of those points of Marx's theory which had 
 influenced to the greatest extent the development of 
 modem Socialistic doctrines, whether belonging to 
 orthodox Marxism or deviating from it in one way 
 or another. In this paragraph we shall refer to 
 certain deductions which have been made by Marx 
 himself and his followers as to the structure of mod- 
 em society. 
 
 In the first place, Marx made an attempt to rep- 
 resent modem society as being roughly divided into 
 two classes opposed to each other, namely, the pro- 
 letarians and the capitalists, the former being used 
 by the latter for purposes of economic exploitation, 
 or otherwise for creating the so-called stirplus value. 
 At the same time, however, Marx could not help 
 confessing that the schematic division of modem 
 society into these two antagonistic groups was by 
 no means a correct reflection of the prevailing so- 
 cial conditions. Marx himself had to admit that 
 between the capitalist, on the one hand, and the 
 proletarian, on the other hand, there stands a nu- 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 19 
 
 I 
 
 mericaUy very considerable social group which rep- 
 resents the so-called petty botirgeoisie. Under this 
 humble title are included those members of mod- 
 ern society who, not being capitalists in the lim- 
 ited sense of Marx's definition, at the same time are 
 not proletarians, but who, having to work hard 
 for their living and for the support of their families, 
 are nevertheless in such a financial position as en- 
 ables them to work for themselves, and who, there- 
 fore, are not compelled to sell their labor power in 
 the open market. This group comprises the artisan 
 who owns his tools and means of production in 
 general, the farmer who owns his farm and does not 
 employ any wage labor, the man of liberal profession, 
 and so forth. 
 
 How is it possible to reconcile the existence of 
 this social group with the theory of the division of 
 modem society into only two groups which are an- 
 tagonistic to each other? This is really a crucial 
 problem for Marx's theory to solve. On the one 
 hand, the existence of the petty bourgeoisie group 
 cannot be denied; on the other hand, its very ex- 
 istence stands in distinct contradiction to the main 
 features of the theory of class struggle. Therefore, 
 something had to be invented in order to eliminate, 
 at least theoretically, the inconsistency thus arising 
 from a more careful examination of the structure of 
 modem society. The solution was found in the 
 doctrine of the continuing concentration of capital 
 in fewer hands, and in the alleged fact that the petty 
 
20 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 bourgeoisie itself is gradually disappearing, its in- 
 dividual members being constantly hurled down into 
 the ranks of the proletarian class. Naturally, Marx 
 disapproves of the existence of the petty bourgeoisie. 
 In this connection he states literally as follows: 
 
 The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shop- 
 keeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the 
 bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as frac- 
 tions of the middle class. They are, therefore, not revolu- 
 tionary but conservative. Nay more, they are reactionary, 
 for they try to roll back the wheel of history. If by chance 
 they are revulutionary, they are so only in view of their 
 impending transfer into the proletariat; they thus defend 
 not their present but their future interests; they desert their 
 own standpoint to place themselves at that of the prole- 
 tariat.* 
 
 Thus, according to Marx, the existence of the 
 lower middle class finds its excuse in the hope that 
 it will soon be eliminated. The concentration of 
 capital in industry, as well as in agriculture and 
 commerce, in fewer hands, the industrial progress 
 involving an increasing use of expensive machinery 
 and tools, production carried out on a very large 
 scale, enabling it to make the best use of the divi- 
 sion of labor, together with other different economic 
 phenomena, such as an industrial crisis, are sup- 
 posed to assist the nattiral tendency to the final elimi- 
 nation of the lower middle class, thus converting the 
 social structure into a fighting camp between two so- 
 ' Communist Manifesto, pp. 26 and 27. 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 21 
 
 cial groups only, namely, the proletarians in the lim- 
 ited sense, and the capitalists also in the limited sense. 
 
 The following chapter of this book is devoted to 
 a critical analysis of the Socialist theory in general 
 and, therefore, we shall refrain here from any criti- 
 cism of the social diagnosis thus developed by Marx 
 and his followers. We may state, however, that 
 this Socialist hope for the speedy ruin of millions of 
 people, who happen to be in the position of taking 
 care of themselves, without necessarily being caUed 
 either capitalists or proletarians, is at least not very 
 humanitarian. 
 
 The assertion that capital is constantly accu- 
 mtdating in fewer hands and that the middle class 
 is being gradually wiped out by the captains of 
 modem industry has led modem Socialism to make 
 the logical deduction that with the accumulation 
 of wealth on one side, social conditions in general 
 are growing worse, and wholesale misery .is threat- 
 ening the stability of the existing society founded 
 on the basis of private ownership. Marx himself 
 expresses this thought as follows: 
 
 "Acciimulation of wealth at one pole is, there- 
 fore, at the same time accumulation pf misery, 
 agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental 
 degradation at the opposite pole, i. e,, on the side 
 of the class that produces its own product in the 
 form of capital." This same thought is emphasized 
 also in connection with the analysis of the surplus 
 labor population: 
 
22 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Pauperism is the hospital of the active labor army and the 
 dead weight of the industrial reserve army. Its production 
 is included in that of the relative surplus population . . . ; 
 along with the surplus population, pauperism forms a con- 
 dition of capitaUst production and of the capitalist develop- 
 ment of wealth. It enters into the faux frais of capitaKst 
 production; but capital knows how to throw these, for the 
 most part, from its own shoulders on to those of the working 
 class and the lower middle class.* 
 
 Quite in accordance with Marx's theory, but in a 
 more bold manner, Mr. George R. Kirkpatrick, an 
 American Socialist of our day, preaches to the 
 masses, and to American workmen, whose standard 
 of living is at any rate higher than in any other 
 country in the world, that they are paupers, and 
 that pauperism is an ugly feature in modem society: 
 "In the awful tragedy called human history," 
 states Kirkpatrick, "poverty has dragged down 
 and held down a thousand victims for every victim 
 cut down by the blood-stained god of war. The 
 tragic stage of the age-long human drama is crowded 
 with the ghosts of multitudes so poor they never 
 hoped. The past is proof. The history of poverty, 
 the history of the poverty of the multitude, proves 
 that poverty is a prohibition on the rapid progress 
 of the individual and of the human race. 
 
 " Poverty has always been ugly — and it is ugly now. 
 
 "Poverty has always been cruel — and it is cruel 
 now. 
 
 • Capital, vol. I, pp. 707 and 709. 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 23 
 
 " Poverty has always been deadly — and it is deadly 
 now. 
 
 "Poverty has always been a disaster — and it is a 
 disaster now." ^ 
 
 Of course, the above is nothing but a repetition of 
 Marx's theoretical incendiarism. 
 
 The Bourgeois Family 
 
 4. With pauperism, according to modem Social- 
 ism, comes the dissolution of the proletarian family. 
 Marx has created quite a theory to this effect. His 
 language is plain, and one Jias only to read carefully, 
 word by word, what he has to say about the so-called 
 bourgeois marriage in order to understand whence 
 sprang the Bolshevist decrees for the nationaliza- 
 tion of women. This is what Marx says: 
 
 The bourgeois sees in his wife a mere instrument of pro- 
 duction. He liears that the instruments of production are 
 to be exploited in common, and, naturally, can come to no 
 other conclusion than that the lot of being common to all 
 will likewise fall to the women. He has not even a sus- 
 picion that the real point aimed at is to do away with the 
 status of women as mere instruments of production. For 
 the rest, nothing is more ridiculous than the virtuous indig- 
 nation of our bourgeois at the community of women which 
 they pretend is to be openly and oflScially established by the 
 Communists. The Communists have no need to introduce 
 
 * George R. Kirkpatrick, Think or Surrender, pp. 48 and 49 (Col- 
 -lectivist Press, Pittsburgh, 1916). 
 
24 SOCIALISM VS. _ CIVILIZATION 
 
 community of women; it has existed almost from time im- 
 memorial. Our bourgeoisj not content with having the 
 wives and daughters of their proletarians at their disposal, 
 not to speak of common prostitutes, takes the greatest plea- 
 sure in seducing each other's wives. Bourgeois marriage is, 
 in reality, a system of wives in common, and thus, at the 
 most, what the Commxmists might possibly be reproached 
 with is that they desire to introduce in substitution for a 
 hypocritically concealed an openly legalized community of 
 women. 
 
 In perfect harmony with Marx's assertion, Kaut- 
 sky, in his explanatory notes to the Erfurt Pro- 
 gramme, puts all the blame for the dissolution of the 
 proletarian family on the capitalist. In this connec- 
 tion he states: "Those who do destroy the family 
 bonds — ^who not only mean to but actually do de- 
 stroy them right under our eyes — are not the Social- 
 ists but the capitalists. Many a slaveholder has in 
 former times drawn husband from wife and parents 
 from children, but the capitalists have improved 
 upon the abominations of slavery; they tear the 
 infant from the breasts of its mother and compel 
 her to entrust it to the stranger's hand." After 
 this mild charge against the modem capitalist, Mr. 
 Kautsky goes on saying that the Socialists are very 
 much opposed to the community of wives, and that, 
 moreover, they have nothing else in mind but to 
 "maintain the ideal love," and thus to make every- 
 body feel happy. 
 
 Quite naturally, the SociaUsts of our day, in ac- 
 cordance with Marx's theory, also put the blame for 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM , 25 
 
 prostitution exclusively on the capitalists. One of 
 the recognized leaders of the German Social Democ- 
 racy, August Bebel, in his book The Woman and 
 Socialism, gave a very explicit utterance, on this 
 subject. He attributed prostitution, to industrial 
 conditions which force the women belonging to the 
 proletarian class to earn additional money for their 
 living by means of prostitution. Kautsky also as- 
 serts as foUows: 
 
 Helpless women, forced to earn their living in factories, 
 shops, and mines, fall a prey to capitalist cupidity. The 
 capitalist takes advantage of their inexperience, offers them 
 wages too slight, and hints at, or even brazenly suggests, 
 prostitution as a means of supplementing their income. 
 Everywhere the increase of female labor in industry is accom- 
 panied by the increase of prostitution . . . under the capi- 
 talist system prostitution becomes a pillar of society.* 
 
 Internationalism 
 
 5. Finally, modem Socialism, in common with that 
 proclaimed by Marx, is preaching internationalism. 
 Again, however, the blame is put upon the capital- 
 istic system of production. Marx goes so far as to 
 affirm that "The working men have no country. 
 We canLnot take from them what they have not got. 
 Since the proletariat must first of all acquire poHti- 
 cal supremacy, must rise to be the leading class 
 of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it 
 
 » Karl Kautsky, The Class Struggle, p. 28. 
 
26 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 is, so fax, itself national, though not in the bourgeois 
 sense of the word. National diflferences and an- 
 tagonisms between peoples are daily more and more 
 vanishing, owing to the development of the bourgeoi- 
 sie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, 
 to tmif ormity in the mode of production and in the 
 conditions of life corresponding thereto. The su- 
 premacy of the proletariat wiU cause them to van- 
 ish stni faster. United action of the leading civi- 
 lized countries at least is one of the first conditions 
 for the emancipation of the proletariat." ^ 
 
 It is a well-known fact that there is nothing more 
 dear to the Socialist heart than the abolition of the 
 very idea of nationality. The average Socialist 
 tries to convince the workmen that there is no differ- 
 ence between the various nations, that one nation 
 is as good as another, and that the lines of national 
 demarcation which for centimes long have been 
 drawn, between France and Germany, for instance, 
 are nothing but bourgeois tricks. Therefore, ac- 
 cording to the Socialist doctrine, all modern wars 
 are being carried out exclusively for the benefit of 
 the ruling bourgeois class, either for its commercial 
 expansion or for other similar objects. Qtiite logi- 
 cally, therefore, whenever it comes to decide upon 
 preparedness, or to take such other defensive mea- 
 sures as are likely to protect a nation's independence, 
 the Socialists of all cotmtries are trying to impose 
 their veto. Even when it came to deciding whether 
 
 ' Communist Manifesto, p. 38. 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 27 
 
 or not the United States should take certain measures 
 of precaution against German aggressive militarism, 
 the' SociaUsts of America resolutely said "no." 
 There was no hesitation about the choice of argu- 
 ments. Mr. Hillquit, for instance, the Socialist can- 
 didate for Mayor of New York City^ as late as in 
 1915, did not hesitate for a moment to assert before 
 his fellow citizens that there was nothing for this 
 cotmtry to fear from Germany; that so far as 
 Europe was concerned everything was all right. 
 Mr. HUlquit did not hesitate to propoxmd before a 
 large meeting the following question: 
 
 But how about Belgium, it may be asked. Belgium is a 
 small country immediately adjoining Germany, with a 
 population about five per cent of ours. And Belgium has 
 not been destroyed and, as things look now, will not be destroyed.^ 
 
 Such an argtmient is, of course, preposterous 
 when we consider that Mr. HHlquit's remarks were 
 made after Liege, after Louvain, after Ypres, after 
 Antwerp, after the most inhuman destruction of 
 Belgian homes, Belgian property, Belgian art, 
 Belgian churches, and large parts of Belgium her- 
 self. Nevertheless, this argument is of interest, 
 since it gives an illustration of the kind of reason- 
 ing that is being presented to workmen by Socialist 
 agitators — ad'majorem Marxi gloriam. 
 
 At the same time, Socialists assert that as soon 
 
 1 Must We ilrw? Hillquit-Gardner Debate, p. 32, ed. Rand School, 
 New York, 19 16. 
 
28 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 as private property is abolished, as soon as the capi- 
 talist world comes to its end, all wiU be well and 
 eternal peace will descend upon the earth. 
 
 With reference to the views expressed by the 
 leaders of the American Socialist Party, certam reso- 
 lutions which it passed during the last few years 
 shotild be noted. In a resolution of the Socialist 
 Labor Party on preparedness, adopted in 1916, the 
 following was stated: 
 
 We recognize in the military "preparedness programme" 
 of the owning class a movement hostile to the interests and 
 lives of the -working people, and maintain that the only 
 "national defense" programme worthy of the workers' at- 
 tention is the kind that contemplates the defense of their 
 own class interests against the one real enemy, which is the 
 capitalist class, irrespective of country. 
 
 At approximately the same time, namely, on 
 March 23, 1916, the National Executive Com- 
 mittee of the American Socialist Party issued a 
 proclamation containing the following: 
 
 American citizens have been murdered by Mexican mer- 
 cenaries. This outrage upon American citizens was doubt- 
 less inspired by the same capitalist interests which have so 
 freely hired gunmen to kill, to break strikes, in the past. 
 Workers, you have the power to prevent all wars. You 
 have no enemy but the same enemy which the Mexican 
 workers seek to overthrow. Use that power to prevent not 
 only war with Mexico but to prevent that preparation for 
 war which leads to war. Use every power at your command 
 to prevent war with any country. Serve notice on the mas- 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 29 
 
 ters that you recognize in them your only enemy. Protest 
 against war and preparedness. 
 
 Attention should be called to the fact that even 
 after the entrance of the United States into the 
 European war the agitation against preparedness 
 and the war itself was not discontinued by American 
 SociaUsts. They stuck faithfully to the Marxian 
 ideals of internationalism and their views were ex- 
 plicitly exposed at the St. Louis Convention of the 
 Socialist Party which was held on April 7 to 14, 
 1917. A report, touching on the subject of the war, 
 was prepared by certain members of the American 
 Socialist Party and was presented to the Conven- 
 tion, adopted by the latter, and thereupon ratified 
 by a referendum. The report is so significant in 
 itself and serves so well to reveal the theoretical 
 conceptions of modem SociaHsm in regard to various 
 problems coimected with conditions which have just 
 passed, that it is worth while to quote certain parts 
 of the document. Moreover, such quotations will 
 serve 'to establish a logical and important link be- 
 tween the Communist Manifesto and Socialistici the- 
 ories of our day. It w^U also tend to prove that while 
 genuine science in every branch of human knowl- 
 edge has experienced during the last half-century 
 rapid and tmdeniable progress, while everything 
 seems to have developed, assuming new modes and 
 finer forms, modem SociaHsm is chewing over and 
 over the cud of abstract formulas which were em- 
 
30 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 bodied in Marx's Communist Manifesto. Appar- 
 ently, among the Socialists, nothing has been changed 
 in those fields, and the errors of Marx are being 
 repeated with sad obstinacy by the leaders of in- 
 ternational Socialism of the twentieth century. 
 The St. Louis report states as follows: 
 
 The Sodalist Party of the United States in the present 
 grave crisis solemnly reaflirms its allegiance to the principle 
 of internationalism and working-class solidarity the world 
 over, and proclaims its unalterable opposition to the war 
 just declared by the Government of the United States. 
 Modern wars, as a rule, have been caused by the commercial 
 and financial rivalry and intrigues of the capitalist interests 
 in the different countries. Whether they have been frankly 
 waged as wars of aggression or have been hypocritically rep- 
 resented as wars of "defense," they have always been made 
 by the classes and fought by the masses. Wars bring wealth 
 and power to the ruling classes and suffering, death, and de- 
 moralization to the workers. . . . The Socialist Party of 
 the United States is unalterably opposed to the system of 
 exploitation and class rule which is upheld and strengthened 
 by military power and sham national patriotism. We, there- 
 fore, call upon the workers of all countries to refuse support 
 to their Governments in their wars. The wars of the con- 
 tending national groups of capitalists are not the concern of 
 the workers. The only struggle which would justify the 
 workers in taking up arms is the great struggle of the work- 
 ing class of the world to free itself from economic exploita- 
 tion and political oppression, and we particularly warn the 
 workers against the snare and delusion of so-called defensive 
 warfare. As against the false doctrine of national patriotism, 
 we uphold the ideal of international working-class solidarity. 
 In support of capitalism we will not willingly give a single life 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 31 
 
 or a single dollar; in support of the struggle of the workers 
 for freedom we pledge oiu: all. The mad orgy of death and 
 destruction which is now convulsing imfortunate Europe 
 was caused by the conflict of capitalist interests in tie 
 European countries. In each of these countries the work- 
 ers were oppressed and exploited. They produced enormous 
 wealth, but the bulk of it was withheld from them by the 
 owners of the industries. The workers were thus deprived 
 of the means to repurchase the wealth which they them- 
 selves had created. The capitalist class of each country 
 was forced to look for foreign markets to dispose of the ac- 
 cumulated "surplus" wealth. The huge profits made by 
 the capitalists could no longer be profitably reinvested in 
 their own countries; hence, they were driven to look for 
 foreign fields of investment. The geographical boundaries 
 of each modern capitalist country thus became too narrow 
 for the industrial and commercial operations of the capi- 
 talist class.^ 
 
 / 
 
 The above abstract premises are followed by a 
 number of practical stipulations which laid the 
 foundation for the practical attitude of the Ameri- 
 can Socialists toward the World War. These stipu- 
 lations, as expressed by the American Socialist 
 Party itself, can be summed up as foUows: 
 
 1. Active and public opposition to the war, 
 through demonstrations, mass petitions, and all 
 other means within the power of the Socialists. 
 
 2. Unyielding opposition to all legislation for mili- 
 tary or industrial conscription. In this connection 
 the Socialist Party threatened that should such con- 
 scriptions be forced upon the people, it would pledge 
 
 ' The American Labor Year Book, 1917-1918, pp. 50 and 51, 
 
32 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 itself to continuous efforts for the repeal of such 
 laws and to the support of aU mass movements in 
 opposition to conscription. "We pledge ourselves," 
 it is stated in the report, "to oppose with all our 
 strength any attempt to raise money for payment 
 of war expenses by taxing necessaries of living, oi'^ 
 issuing bonds which will put the burden upon the 
 future generation. We demand that the capitalist 
 class, which is responsible for the war, pay its cost. 
 Let those who kindled the fire furnish the fuel." 
 
 3. Vigorous resistance to all reactionary measures, 
 such as censorship of the press and mails, restriction 
 of the rights of free speech, assemblage, and organiza- 
 tion, or compulsory arbitration and limitation of 
 the right to strike. 
 
 4. Consistent propaganda against -military train- 
 ing and militaristic teaching in public schools. 
 
 The St. Louis Convention took advantage of the 
 war to make the demand for the "Socialization" of 
 "great industries concerned with the production, 
 transportation, storage, and marketing of food," as 
 well as the Socialization "of all land and other 
 natural resources." The St. Louis Socialistic Pro- 
 gramme, as above outlined, together with the Brest- 
 Litovsk Treaty, are about the most disloyal docu- 
 ments which modem history has in its records. 
 
 There is something very hopeless, something 
 heart-breaking, in the fact that endless efforts on 
 the part of people who are ambitious to call them- 
 selves enlightened and broad-minded, are being 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 33 
 
 wasted day by day in promoting propaganda of this 
 kind. 
 
 Z.\ is not at all the object of this book to analyze 
 the occult influences which are working hand in 
 hand with the propaganda of modem Socialism. A 
 careful investigation of those underground currents 
 would call for another treatise. It is worth while, 
 however, to point out that, consciously or uncon- 
 sciously, the St. Louis Programme fully coincided 
 with the aims and views of the former German Im- 
 perial Government. It must also be borne in mind 
 that the German agents who were despatched to the 
 United States in the early days of the war were ac- 
 tively engaged in stirring up labor, bringing about 
 social unrest, lurging as many strikes as possible, en- 
 couraging the pacifist movement in labor circles, and 
 spreading Socialist propaganda. In fact, among the 
 documents which were traced to Doctor Dumba, the 
 famous organizer of the spy system in the Uniteji 
 States in behalf of Germany and Austria, there is 
 one which is in immediate relation to the agitation 
 of the American Socialists. The docimient referred 
 to is an enclosure in Doctor Dumba's- letter to Baron 
 von Burian the 20th of August, 1915. Among other 
 things, the following is stated: 
 
 I have already shown that much can be done with the 
 newspapers. We must stir up men's feelings. In Bethle- 
 hem a sensation was caused by the articles which appeared 
 at the time of the strike at Bridgeport, and they brought 
 Bethlehem into the affair. It is evident that to start a 
 
34 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION / 
 
 / 
 movement from which serious results can be expected re- 
 quires a sufBciency of money at the very start. The exte/t 
 of subsequent expenditure, for the most part, depends On 
 the work effected. For example, the newspapers must not 
 receive the whole of the sum intended for them all at once, 
 but only half of it. To the Union agitators a certain amount 
 should be given at first, and a larger sum in the case of suc- 
 cess, or of a serious strike on the formation of a union. It 
 i^ my opinion that for the special object of starting the 
 Bethlehem business, and for the Bethlehem Western news- 
 paper campaign, $r 5,000.00 to $20,000.00 must be able to 
 be disposed of, but it is not possible to reckon how much 
 will ultimately be required; when a beginning has been 
 made, it will be possible to see how things develop and where 
 and how much it is worth while to spend. ... It is in any 
 case worth while risking this amount, for it will undoubtedly 
 show some result, and if circumstances are lucky and the 
 leadership good, we can arrive at positive results in the 
 West comparatively cheaply, whereas Bethlehem is one of 
 the most difficult jobs.^ 
 
 The quotation speaks for itself. 
 
 An impartial reader will certainly draw the con- 
 clusion that there are invisible threads which unite 
 disloyal movements of different features but of a 
 similar nature. 
 
 World Market 
 
 6. If, as Marx and his followers assert, the work- 
 men have no country; if, further, the workmen of 
 
 ' Brewing and Liquor Interests and German Propaganda. Hear- 
 ings before a Subcommittee on the Judiciary. United States Sen- 
 ate, vol. II, pp. 1467 and 1468. Government Printing Office, (Wash- 
 ington, 1919). 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 35 
 
 all countries have to face but one common enemy, 
 and this is "Capital," then, of course, the labor 
 movement, as defined by modem Socialism, must 
 necessarily bear an antinational, or so-called "in^ 
 temational," character. We have already touched 
 upon this question in a general way, and it now be- 
 comes necessary to give a fiu-ther exposition of the 
 Socialist views on this matter. 
 
 The international character of the labor move- 
 , ment was emphasized from the very birth of modem 
 Socialism. It was argued that bourgeois capital- 
 istic production itself had brought about lively 
 commercial relations between the various countries. 
 Commodities produced in the West Indies are con- 
 sumed in London. Precious stones found in Ceylon 
 and South America are shipped to Amsterdam, thence 
 to London and Paris, to New York and Peru, and 
 back again to South America. Pennsylvania coal- 
 mines are furnishing fuel for the Italian cities, while 
 Cardiff coal, until recently, had a large market in 
 the northern cities of Russia. It was further pointed 
 out that international commeij-cial intercourse has 
 produced an economic phenomenon entirely tm- 
 known to the feudal system of production, namely, 
 the world market. At the sarne time, a broadly de- 
 veloped system of credit has led to an intemational 
 banking system, under which British and French 
 sectirities can be daily purchased and recorded on 
 the New York Stock Exchange, in the same way 
 that Bolivian securities can be obtained in any 
 
36 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 European bond market. Ptirthermore, the same 
 system of credit makes it possible for French or 
 Belgian money to be invested in industrial enter- 
 prises which are separated from France or Bel- 
 gium by thousands of miles. Finally, the world 
 market has brought about the peculiar condition of 
 mutual indebtedness among all civilized countries. 
 Great Britain may owe huge amotmts of money to 
 the United States, Russia, France, and Italy, while 
 these countries at the same time and in return 
 may be largely indebted on other accounts to Great 
 Britain. This situation is caused by the complexi- 
 ties of international commercial intercourse, and 
 has reached its climax in the phenomenon known 
 as the world market. 
 
 The conditions above described, according to the 
 theory of modem Socialism, have led to another 
 peculiar development, namely, to the fact that in- 
 ternational commercial intercourse, while resulting 
 in closer relationship between the various countries, 
 has at the same time accentuated commercial rivalry 
 among the various nations involved in world trade. 
 The expansion of commercial activities beyond na- 
 tional limits results in a tendency among all civi- 
 lized countries to chase after new markets, both for 
 the sale of national commodities and for the ex- 
 ploitation of natural resources in backward countries. 
 Naturally, this leads to competition between the 
 various nations, and, according to the Socialist the- 
 ory, modem wars are caused solely by the conflicts 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 37 
 
 arising out of this competition. So much for the 
 capitalist class. 
 
 When, however, the Socialists come to analyze 
 the relations between the working men in the vari- 
 ous countries, they assert that, a spirit of interna- 
 tional brotherhood has come to prevail among the 
 proletariat of the whole world, because modem 
 capitalistic production has led to international com- 
 mercial intercourse, which in its turn has created 
 the world market. Therefore, the Socialists insist, 
 internationalism in our day is a natural feature of the 
 proletarian movement in different coimtries. 
 
 It can scarcely be denied that there is a logical 
 discrepancy between the two Socialist conceptions 
 with regard to the tdtimate effect of international 
 commercial intercourse upon the capitalistic class 
 on the one hand and upon the proletarians on the 
 other. The Socialists themselves have noticed this 
 discrepancy, but they have endeavored to get away 
 from it by merely pointing out the fact that the 
 capitalistic system as a whole is based on countless 
 contradictions and antitheses. Kautsky and his So- 
 cialist colleagues seek to explain it by arguing that 
 the capitalistic system, in expropriating the worker, 
 has freed him from the soil, thus making him home- 
 less. Therefore, they insist, the proletarian has no 
 country, and, like the merchant, he takes for his 
 motto: "Where I fare well, there is my home." 
 Moreover, according to this theory, the modern 
 merchant bases his business success in foreign coun- 
 
38 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 tries upon the support which is rendered to him by 
 his government. Kautsky thinks that this is the 
 sole reason why the merchant appreciates his coun- 
 try and becomes often the most confirmed among 
 the jingoes. With the proletarian the picture 
 changes radically, at least in the mind of the, Social- 
 ists. In foreign lands, especially in such as are civi- 
 lized, the workman has no need of protection. On 
 the contrary, says Kautsky, the new land is usually 
 one in which the laws and theii* administration are 
 more favorable to him than those of his original 
 home. The Socialists further assert that in for- 
 eign lands the proletarian meets with a very cordial 
 attitude on the part of his co-workers, who have no 
 desire to deprive him of what little protection he 
 can get from the law in his struggle against capital. 
 This explanation is perfectly in accord with the 
 views of Karl Marx as expressed in his Communist 
 Manifesto and in his other literary works. It 
 should also be borne in mind that it was Karl Marx 
 who initiated the first international labor organiza- 
 tion, namely, the "International Working Men's 
 Association," popularly known as "The Interna- 
 tional." It was founded in London on the 28th of 
 September, 1864. The American reader will also 
 be interested to know that the seat of the General 
 Council of "The International" was transferred to 
 New York in 1872. In New York "The Interna- 
 tional" was dominated by a German, F. A. Sorge, 
 but very soon the association came to an end. It 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 39 
 
 is not to be confused with the international Socialist 
 conferences which were held several times in differ- 
 ent countries, and are referred to as "The Interna- 
 tionals." 
 
 It has been the policy of the various Socialist or- 
 ganizations throughout the world carefully to avoid 
 raising international racial or religious questions 
 which might tend incidentally to disrupt their 
 membership. Therefore, as a general rule, every 
 workman, regardless of his race, creed, or na- 
 tionality, can obtain admission to any Socialist 
 organization. Exceptions to this general nile are 
 few, and they apply mainly to the Jewish labor 
 movement. Thus, the revolutionary Jewish organi- 
 zation known as the "Bund," with headquarters in 
 Poland, although a distinctly Socialistic organization, 
 and as such advocating the most unrestricted inter- 
 temationalisrt^, admits to its membership only those 
 belonging to the Jewish nationality. 
 
 This peculiar discrimination on the part of the 
 "Bund" has caused strong criticism by some fac- 
 tions of the Polish Socialists. In fact, until recently, 
 the PoHsh Socialists conducted a vigorous fight 
 against the Jewish "Bund." It is also significant 
 that many members of the "Bund" remain loyal to 
 the Tahnud, to the Rabbis, and to the Jewish re- 
 ligion in general. The ' ' Bund " as a whole, however, 
 is conducting a most vigorous campaign against the 
 Christian religion. 
 
 At the same time, the Jewish Socialist Labor 
 
40 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Party of America, otherwise known under the name 
 of "Poale-Zion of America," has distinctly declared 
 that it represents an organized endeavor of the 
 Jewish workers of the world to alter their condition 
 as Jews and proletarians : 
 
 The world-wide organization of Poale-Zionism, the Poale- 
 Zion "International," so to say, is the symbol of national 
 and social unity of the workers of Jewry in all countries. It 
 is the practical demonstration to the world that nationality 
 is stronger than and distinct from State; it shows the essen- 
 tial imity of fate and aim of the Jewish Socialists. Through 
 it every organization of Poale-Zionism is part and parcel of 
 the world-wide Jewish movement for freedom. The interna- 
 tional Poale-Zion Confederation is the living expression of Na- 
 tional Socialism or Socialistic Nationalism, which has been 
 finally recognized as the only true conception of Socialism} 
 
 This juggling with the terms "National Socialism" 
 and "Socialistic Nationalism" is but an endeavor 
 to solve the unsolvable and to reconcile the idea of 
 Jewish nationalism with world internationalism. 
 Such endeavors have a very deep religious and racial 
 foundation, which does not pertain to the subject 
 of our examination, nor is it our aim to dig into 
 the mysterious meaning of the term "world-wide 
 Jewish movement for freedom." 
 
 While internationalism is proclaimed as a cardi- 
 nal principle of Socialism, it scarcely reflects condi- 
 
 ' The Aims of Jewish Labor. Memorandum to the Socialist 
 Labor Democracy of the World by the Jewish Socialist Labor Party, 
 Poale-Zion of America, p. 17 (New York City, 1918). 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 41 
 
 tions which actually exist. Generally speaking, 
 the sentiment of nationality persists to the same 
 extent in the laboring class as among other social 
 groups which go to make up the general pubhc. 
 "The late war gave ample evidence of the loyalty of 
 the laboring men to their respective governments. 
 In Germany, for instance, the devotion of the work- 
 men to their country's cause became so accentuated 
 that even the Socialists themselves had to give up 
 temporarily their international aspirations, and 
 many of th^m were converted into stanch supporters 
 of the Kaiser, so that they were justly labelled "His 
 Majesty's Socialists." Much in the same way the 
 antagonisms of race, nationaUty, and religion are 
 quite as frequent among industrial classes as in the 
 rest of the community. Thus the sweeping claim 
 of the Socialists as to the universal spirit of brother- 
 hood among the proletarians finds little support in 
 the relations between the American workmen on 
 the Pacific Coast and the Japanese. 
 
 Solidarity certainly does not exist as between the 
 white workmen and the negro labor throughout the 
 United States. We have already pointed out that 
 the Polish workmen are fighting their Jewish fellow 
 workmen. In the same way, the workmen in some 
 Russian cities have violently opposed' the employ- 
 ment of Chinese coolies. It would seem, therefore, 
 that the internationalism of the Socialists is more a 
 dream than a reality. Nevertheless, the Socialist 
 agitators throughout the world continue to pro- 
 
42 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 pound antinational theories which tend to under- 
 mine the very idea of patriotism and loyalty toward 
 the native country. 
 
 Revolution vs. Evolution 
 
 7. International solidarity of the workmen, ac- 
 cording to modem Socialism, has as its goal the 
 abolition of the capitalistic system of production, 
 on the one hand, and the establishnient of the so- 
 called Socialistic system of productidn, on the other 
 hand. How do the theoretical leaders of Socialism 
 propose to effect this transformation ? 
 
 It must be stated that among the few positive 
 features of Marx's theory, the historical explanation 
 of the capitalistic system is probably one of the most 
 valuable. The economists preceding .Marx dealt 
 with the capitalistic system as with something which 
 had always existed, and therefore every analysis 
 was necessarily a static one. It was Marx's merit 
 to shift the examination of modem economic struc- 
 ttu"e to historical fields, which contributed to eco- 
 nomic science a distinctly dynamic character. In 
 fact, Marx was the first to examine modem eco- 
 nomic conditions in the light of their gradual de- 
 velopment or transformation. This method proved 
 to be very efficient not only in political economy 
 but also in sociology in general. The process of 
 historical transformation, being an acknowledged 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 43 
 
 fact, necessarily involves also the acknowledgment 
 of the transformation of the capitalistic system 
 into some new system which will modify in one 
 respect or another the present economic condi- 
 tions. When analyzing the transition from the 
 feudal system to the modem capitalistic one, Marx 
 gives a very comprehensive description of the grad- 
 tml change in industrial methods and technological 
 means which eventually converted the mediasval 
 artisan into the modem workman and-^he old-fash- 
 ioned guild production into the capitalistic produc- 
 tion of our day. 
 
 In the last chapter of this book an attempt is 
 made to show that even since the time of Marx 
 industrial conditions have undergone important 
 changes in various respects, and that the enact- 
 ment of certain progressive social legislation will 
 necessarily bring about various other changes in the 
 future. Such development, however, has nothing 
 in common with Marx's conception of the methods 
 which should be employed in bringing a new social 
 order into effect. This is a very important point to 
 emphasize. It must be distinctly understood in 
 what precise manner modem Socialists are expect- 
 ing the new social order to come. It must be clearly 
 understood that while the transition from the 
 feudal system to the capitalistic mode of production, 
 according to Marx's own assertion, was an evolution, 
 the transition from the capitalistic mode of produc' 
 
44 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 tion to the so-called Socialistic state must assume 
 the form of a revolution. Marx states in this con- 
 nection as follows: 
 
 Along with the constantly diminishing number of the 
 magnates of capital who usurp and monopolize all advantages 
 of this process of transformation grows the mass of misery, 
 oppression, slavery, degradation, exploitation; but with this, 
 too, grows the revolt of the working class, a class always in- 
 creasing in numbers, and disciphned, united, organized by 
 the very mechanism of the process of the capitalist produc- 
 tion itself. The monopoly of capital becomes a fetter upon 
 the mode of production which has sprung up and flouridied 
 along with and under it. Centralization of the means of 
 production and SociaHzation of labor at last reach a point 
 where they become incompatible with their capitalist in- 
 tegument. This integument is burst asunder. The knell 
 of capitalist private property sotmds. The expropriators are 
 expropriated. 
 
 Marx also goes on to explain that 
 
 The transformation of scattered private property arising 
 from individual labor into capitalist private property is, 
 naturally, a process incomparably more protracted, violent, 
 and difficult than the transformation of capitalistic private 
 property, already practically resting on socialized produc- 
 tion, into socialized property. In the former case we had 
 the expropriation of the mass of the people by a few usurp- 
 ers; in the latter we have the expropriation of a few usurpers 
 by tlie mass of the people.^ 
 
 The scientific language used by Marx on this occa- 
 sion might mislead the reader as to what he really 
 1 Capital, vol. I, pp. 836 and 837. 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 45 
 
 means by the "expropriation of the expropriators." 
 Therefore, we call attention to the fact that in 
 Marx's Communist Manifesto the nature of this 
 process is clearly defined as follows: 
 
 The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. 
 They openly declare that their ends can he attained only by the 
 forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the 
 ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The 
 proletarians have nothing to lose but their chaios. They 
 have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite.* 
 
 This is about as plain talk as we could possibly 
 expect to hear from the modern Socialistic leaders. 
 This teaching is precisely what Mr. Trotzky has fol- 
 lowed in his Socialistic experiment with the Russian 
 people. Just to cite one example of how modem 
 SociaUsm understands the transition from the capi- 
 talistic system of production to the Socialist state, 
 let us refer to Mr. John Spargo's book Bolshevism, 
 bearing in mind that Mr. Spargo is by no means at 
 odds with SociaUsm in general. This reference is 
 so illustrative that it will relieve us of the necessity 
 of further utterances on this subject. 
 
 Here ... is how the Bolshevist coup d'etat toof place 
 at Saratov. I was witness to these facts myself. Saratov 
 is a big imiversity and intellectual centre, possessing a great 
 niunber of schools, libraries, and divers associations designed 
 to elevate the intellectual standard of the population. The 
 Zemstvo of Saratov was one of the best in Russia. The 
 
 ' Communist Manifesto, p. 58. 
 
46 -SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 peasant popxilatioh of this province, among, whom the revo- 
 lutionary Socialist propaganda was carried on for several 
 years by the Revolutionary Socialist Party, is wide awake 
 and well organized. The Municipality, and the Agricultural 
 Committees were composed of Socialists. The population 
 was actively preparing for the elections to the Constituent 
 Assembly; the people discussed the list of candidates, 
 studied the candidates' biographies, as well as the programmes 
 of different parties. On the night of October 28th (Novem- 
 ber loth, European calendar), by reason of an order that 
 had come from Petrograd, the Bolshevik coup d'etat broke 
 out at Saratov. The following forces were its instruments: 
 the garrison, which was a stranger to the mass of the popu- 
 lation, a weak party of workers, and, in the capacity of lead- 
 ers, some intellectuals, who up to that time had played no 
 r61e in the public hfe of the town. It was indeed a mihtary 
 coup d'etat. The City Hall, where sat the Socialists, who were 
 elected by equal, direct, and secret universal suffrage, was sur- 
 rounded by soldiers; machine-guns were placed in front and the 
 bombardment began. This lasted a whole night; some were 
 wounded, some killed. The municipal judges were arrested. 
 Soon after a Manifesto solemnly announced to the popula- 
 tion that the "enemies of the people," the "counter-revolu- 
 tionaries," were overthrown; that the power of Saratov was 
 going to pass into the hands of the Soviet (Bolshevist) of the 
 Workmen's and Soldiers' Delegates.* 
 
 This narration was made to Mr. Spargo by a 
 woman, Inna Ralcitnikov, whom Mr. Spargo him- 
 self describes as a "competent eye-witness," and 
 "a well-known Russian Socialist, whose long and 
 honorable service in the revolutionary movement 
 
 • John Spargo, Bolshevism, pp. 218 and 219 (ed. Harper & Brothers, 
 New York, 1919). 
 
I^ODERN SOCIALISM 47 
 
 entitles her to the honor of every friend of Free 
 Russia." 
 
 The world has witnessed recently the barbarous 
 methods which were employed by the Spartacan 
 group in Germany to overthrow the actual govern- 
 ment in order to establish a Socialist state along the 
 lines of Marx's scientific formula. In every coun- 
 try where endeavors have been made to establish 
 a new social order based upon the "expropriation 
 of the expropriators," Marx's prescriptions have 
 been followed with reli^ous accuracy, resulting in a 
 tjrrannic rule, the characteristic featiu-es of which 
 are described in connection with the situation in 
 Soviet Russia. 
 
 It must be pointed out, however, that certain 
 Socialist factions have always understood that the 
 unrestricted principle, "No Compromise, No Politi- 
 cal Trading," as advocated by Marx, and especially 
 emphasized by Liebknecht, Sr., resulting in the 
 forcible overthrow of existing social conditions, is 
 not only dangerous from a tactical view-point, but 
 that it is scarcely in agreement with the modem 
 theories of materiaUstic philosophy. Therefore, to 
 accomplish their political aims, these Socialist fac- 
 tions advocated the co-operation of the labor class 
 with the bourgeoisie. They were inclined to believe 
 that the transition from the capitalistic system of 
 production to the Socialist state would assume the 
 form of an evolution growing out of the natural de- 
 velopment of conditions prevailing imder the exist- 
 
48 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 ing order. Edward Bernstein in Germany, Plech- 
 anoff and Martinofif in Russia, were the most promi- 
 nent representatives of this shade of modem So- 
 cialism, but their teachings were met with violent 
 opposition by the great majority of Socialists in 
 various countries and their advice was simply dis- 
 regarded. In fact, Bernstein was considered as an 
 apostate Socialist by a majority of tlie German So- 
 cial Democracy. Liebknecht was ■O'ery much ap- 
 plauded when he remarked that "If Marx, Engels, 
 and LassaUe had accepted from Bernstein and his 
 modest or not modest fellow-thinkers the tactics of 
 compromise and dependence upon boiu"geois parties, 
 then there never would have been any Social Democ- 
 racy; we would have been simply the tail of the 
 Progressive Party." ^ In justice to Liebknecht, it 
 must be stated that in certain respects his concep- 
 tion of the manner in which this Socialist state is 
 brought into existence was more logical than that 
 of Bernstein. Liebknecht understood very well that 
 shotild conditions be left to the natural course of 
 their development, the Socialist state wovild never 
 be achieved. Therefore, he stood for a violent over- 
 throw of existing conditions, for a bloody social 
 revolution. From a purely theoretical point, how- 
 ever, Bernstein was more correct than Marx arid 
 his followers. Economic science, based upon the 
 achievements of materialistic philosophy, teaches 
 
 * Wilhelm Liebknecht, No Compromise, No Political Trading, p. 45 
 (Chas. H. Kerr & Co., Chicago, 1915). 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 49 
 
 that the gradual transformation of social structure 
 is due to and caused by certain elemental factors, 
 such as geographical conditions, climate, degree of 
 scientific development, growth of population, ex- 
 tent of seacoast line, etc. Therefore, it would nat- 
 urally seem that the change from capitalistic modes 
 of production to a system based upon social owner- 
 ship of the means of production, if it ever came, 
 would come as a result of the gradual development 
 and transformation of elemental conditions as above 
 described. Nevertheless, the course of political 
 events in Europe, even since the auttimn of 191 7, 
 has proved that the transformation of capitalistic 
 states into Socialistic states assumes the form of a 
 violent revolution. Consequently, Bernstein has 
 lost what little prestige he once had among modem 
 Socialists. 
 
 "Constructive" Socialism 
 
 8. Experience has shown that, for the establish- 
 ment of the modem Socialistic regime, machine 
 guns must be used, cities bombarded, people slain, 
 and the existing institutions destroyed. Therefore, 
 it is of vital importance for the average citizen to 
 find out what the new order is to be. To this ques- 
 tion modem Socialism gives two answers: first, a 
 purely theoretical one, and second, a practical one. 
 In this chapter we shall examine one, the theoretical 
 answer, since it is our intention to give an exposition 
 
so SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 of the theory of modem Socialism as expressed by 
 Marx and adopted and developed by his followers 
 in different countries. 
 
 It must iDe stated at the outset that the theoreti- 
 cal answer of modem Socialism, as to what the So- 
 cialistic state should be, is very meagre and rather 
 evasive. Modem Socialism has found it very easy 
 to make violent attacks upon the existing order of 
 things. We have already mentioned that all shades- 
 of Socialists agree that the exploitation of the labor 
 class is due to the capitalistic system of production. 
 They also unanimously agree that all the other 
 evils of modem history, such as wars, lack of educa- 
 tion on the part of the majority of the people, pros- 
 titution, and unhappy marriages are likewise due to 
 the same cause. They also attribute the "supersti- 
 tions" of our day exclusively to the prevailing 
 modes of manufacture and distribution. Religion, 
 for instance, according to modem Socialism, is 
 nothing but a superstition supported by the ruHng 
 class for the purpose of exploiting the working 
 class. ^ Legal institutions are explained by modem 
 Sodalism in the same way. 
 
 "What is civil law?" asks the modem Socialist 
 with indignation, and his answer is that civil law 
 
 * In regard to this point, we refer tlie reader to C. L. Drawbridge's 
 remarkable book Anti-Christian Socialism (London, 19 1 5). The 
 author presents ample evidence to the effect that Socialism is vio- 
 lently opposed to Christianity. Among other quotations he re- 
 ferred to Bebel's statement that "Christianity and Socialism stand 
 toward each other as fire and water," and that "Christianity is the 
 enemy of liberty and civilization. It has kept mankind in slavery 
 and oppression." 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 51 
 
 is nothing but a series of rules and regulations made 
 for the support of private ownership. 
 
 "What is a court?" "Nothing but an institu- 
 tion to enforce civil law or private ownership," says 
 the parlor-Bolshevik. Therefore, " Down with civil 
 law ! " " Down with the cotu-ts ! " screams the soap- 
 box agitator. 
 
 This "criticism," however, is of a purely negative 
 nature. It merely shows what, according to Marx 
 and his followers, should not be permitted in the 
 future Socialist state. Thus we know that private 
 property should not exist ; religion, if possible, should 
 be eliminated; various legal institutions should be 
 abolished; the right of a man to leave, after his 
 death, his savings to his family should by no means 
 be tolerated; the law of copjmght should be ban- 
 ished once and forever, etc. All the above stipula- 
 tions naturally do not explain on what basis the 
 future society should be organized, and what funda- 
 mental principles should guide humanity after it gets 
 rid of the capitalistic system of production. 
 
 Marx himself devoted but little attention to all 
 those problems. The main point with him was to 
 get rid of the capitalist, and he cared very little 
 what would happen after the botu-geois has been 
 pushed off the social stage. His "constructive" 
 programme, as expressed in the Communist Mani- 
 festo, is remarkably poor. Marx there states: 
 
 The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, 
 by degrees, the capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize 
 
52 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 all instruments of production in the hands of the state, i. e., 
 of the proletariat organized as the ruling class, and to in- 
 crease the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible. 
 . . . When, in the course of development, class distinctions 
 have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated 
 in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the 
 public power will lose its pohtical character. PoUtical power, 
 properly so called, is nierely the organized power of one class 
 for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its con- 
 test with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of cir- 
 cumstances, to organize itself as a class, if by means of a 
 revolution it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, 
 sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then 
 it will, along with these conditions, have swept away th^ 
 conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes 
 generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy 
 as a class.' 
 
 Every impartial reader will have to confess that 
 a "constructive" progra,mme of this kind is simply 
 predicated on the ignorance of those to whom it is 
 being presented as a New Testament of social life. 
 Mr. W. H. Mallock, in his Critical Examination of 
 Socialism, has justly remarked that the capitalistic 
 order rose and spread as an actual working system, 
 which not only modified the preceding — feudal — 
 system of production, but in the course of its devel- 
 opment multiplied the number of commodities an- 
 nually produced to such an extent as would have 
 been impossible during the previous stages of hu- 
 man history. It must be admitted that the cap- 
 
 ' Communist Manifesto, pp. 40, 41, and 42. 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 53 
 
 italistic system, be it good or bad, succeeded in 
 developing a series of new commercial, financial, 
 and legal institutions which crystallized the sci- 
 entific progress of preceding generations. If we 
 compare modem methods of manufacturing tex- 
 tiles with those used two hundred years ago, we shall 
 come to the conclusion that they are as widely sepa- 
 rated from each other as are the cltimsy cuneal de- 
 signs on stone from the sublime cartoons of Raphael. 
 Referring, however, to the achievements of Social- 
 ism, Mr. Mallock says: 
 
 Socialism has prodticed resolutions at endless public meet- 
 ings; it has prodticed discontent and strikes; it has hampered 
 production constantly. But Socialism has never inaugurated 
 an improved chemical process; it has never bridged an estuary 
 or built an ocean liner; it has never produced or cheapened so 
 much as a lamp or frying-pan. It is a theory that such things 
 should be accomplished by the practical application of its 
 principles; but, except for the abortive experiments, ... it 
 is thus far a theory only, and it is as a theory only that we 
 can examine it.* 
 
 Since the time this remark was made modem So- 
 cialism has made a practical experiment on a large 
 scale in Russia; and it will be of the greatest impor- 
 tance to examine this experiment with respect to 
 what has been practically achieved by it. For the 
 moment, however, we shall confine our analysis, as 
 
 ' W. H. Mallock's A Critical Examination of Socialism, p. 4 (Har- 
 per & Brothers, ed. New York and London, 1907). 
 
54 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 stated above, to the theoretical angle of modem 
 Socialism. 
 
 The Socialist leaders of our day have themselves 
 discovered that in the works of Marx there is very 
 little, if anything, in the way of practical suggestion 
 for the future. Therefore, although with reluctance, 
 they were compelled to present a number of pro- 
 posals which would lay the foundation for the prac- 
 tical organization of the Socialistic state. Karl 
 Kautsky in his Class Struggle devotes a whole 
 paragraph, comprising thirteen pages, to the am- 
 xbitious subject, "The Structure of the Future 
 State." Every one interested in modem Socialism 
 should read this paragraph as carefully as possible. 
 Unfortunately, however, he who reads it wiU remain 
 as little enlightened on the subject as he was be- 
 fore. In the paragraph referred to, Kautsky, in the 
 first place, frankly admits that on various occasions 
 Socialists have been asked by their opponents to 
 come out with a constructive programme of some 
 kind, and that some of the Socialists themselves be- 
 lieved that it would be very valuable to have a con- 
 structive programme of the future state drawn up. 
 Kautsky, however, says that it is rather difficult to 
 do it. He prefers to confine his statement to the 
 assertion that "as things stand to-day capitalist 
 civilization cannot continue; we must either move 
 forward into Socialism or, fall back into barbarism. 
 In view of this situation it is wholly unnecessary to 
 endeavor to move the enemies of Socialism by 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 55 
 
 means of a captivating picture." Moreover, Kaut- 
 sky asserts directly that "the construction of the 
 plan upon which the future social order is to be 
 built has become not only purposeless but whoUy 
 irreconcilable with the point of view of modem 
 science." ^ Therefore, Kautsky draws the conclu- 
 sion that "few things are more childish than the 
 demand of the Socialist that he draw a picture of 
 the commonwealth which he strives for." 
 
 The above is a summary of the "constructive" 
 suggestions of the recognized theoretical leader of 
 modem German Social Democracy. One might 
 think we are ridiculing the scientific achievements 
 of modem Socialism, but we deny such an accusa- 
 tion. It is our most earnest desire to present the 
 Socialistic cause as fully as possible before the 
 reader. We are not to be blamed, however, if, 
 when referring to the "constructive" part of the 
 Socialist programme, we have nothing to present. 
 It is a fact which cannot be denied by the most 
 sincere supporters of. modem Socialism that it has 
 no programme for the future. N^ constructive 
 plan whatsoever has been developed as yet by the 
 leaders of the various Socialistic factions. The little 
 that has been said about the futare Socialist state 
 amoimts to a confession that no/hing at all can be 
 said of it. From a practical point of view, Thomas 
 More's Utopia, Fourier's Theow of the Four Move- 
 ments, and Zola's Labor give much more practical 
 ' The Class StruggU, p. 1 18. 
 
S6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 constructive suggestions as to the organization of 
 the future Socialistic state than all the treatises of 
 the Social Scientists combined. 
 
 Of course, there is no lack of sentimental schemes 
 describing the future Socialist state in very opti- 
 miftic colors, picturing the future Social Organiza- 
 tion as Paradise Regained; but, imfortunately, 
 schemes of thi^ kind prove nothing, lead to nowhere, 
 and, therefore, are mere expressions of certain ideas 
 which happen to flit across the Socialists' brains. 
 For an illustration of the above, let us refer to Meta 
 Stem Lilienthal's pamphlet under the title Women 
 of the Future. She draws a line of demarcation be- 
 tween the women of our days and the women of 
 the futvu-e Socialist state, whereby the former are 
 described in a very uncomplimentary manner as 
 having "haggard faces," "anaemic complexions," and 
 "drooping shoulders," while the Socialist womai 
 will have "bright eyes," "ruddy complexions," and 
 "straight shoulders." Then Miss Lilienthal goes on 
 dreaming: "The maidens of the future, strong, 
 healthy, active, and educated, wiU be physically 
 and mentally fit for wifehood and motherhood as 
 not one in a htmdred is to-day. Eventually every 
 Jill will find her Jack, sooner or later, according to 
 individual needs and circumstances; but economic 
 causes will not retard marriages or prevent those 
 who love one another from joining their livtes. Jill 
 will not ask, 'Can J&ck support me?' because she 
 will be fully able to sapport herself, and Jack will 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 57 
 
 not inquire whether Jill can make good pies, unless 
 pie-making be her trade, because he will be able to 
 get all the pies he wants, even better than "mother 
 used to make.'" These pretty little thoughts are 
 accompanied by a practical suggestion on Miss 
 LUienthal's part: "You, kind reader, who have pa- 
 tiently read from cover to cover, who have followed 
 me in this tracing of women's probable future posi- 
 tion, if what I have said has interested you, pass 
 this little book along. li you are not a Socialist, 
 do not stop here ! Read Socialist books, newspapers ; 
 attend Socialist meetings; learn more about this 
 greatest movement of the present day; but if you 
 are a Socialist, if you no longer need to be convinced, 
 then make up your mind that merely being a Social- 
 ist is not sufficient. Resolve here and now to be- 
 come an active worker in this world-wide cause. 
 Help to spread the gospel of Socialism, the hope of 
 humanity." ^ 
 
 The whole passage as above quoted sounds ridic- 
 ulous; nevertheless, the Socialists themselves assert 
 that this is genuine economic science. It must be 
 confessed, however, that the European SociaHsts 
 are more serious-minded than those residing in the 
 United States. It must be said that Bebel's Woman 
 and Socialism has much more ostensible scientific 
 foundation than Miss Lilienthal's pamphlet on the 
 same subject. Substantially, however, both Bebel 
 
 » Meta Stern Lilienthal, Women of the Future, pp. 23 and 31 
 (ed. The Rand School of Social Science, 1916). 
 
58 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 and Miss Lilienthal, as well as the other Socialist 
 leaders, when referring to the future social structure, 
 confine themselves practically to the assertion that 
 with the capitalist hell abolished, the Socialist para- 
 dise is bound to come. Or else they give a vivid 
 picture of future happiness with the Jacks eating as 
 many pies as they want, and with the Jills picking 
 out as many Jacks as they desire, and with milk 
 and honey overflowing the happy Socialist state. 
 However attractive this picture may be, it is scarcely 
 convincing to a mind which is accustomed to deal 
 with realities and not with dreams and Utopias. 
 
 The alarming point about Miss Lilienthal's ut- 
 terances and Mr. Kautsky's scientific indignation 
 as to the modest demands of modem society to 
 present a tangible outline of the future Socialistic 
 state consists of the following: millions of people 
 who are supposed to be stanch supporters of mod- 
 ern Socialism are in reality involved in a movement 
 the constructive aims of which are unknown both 
 to the so-called dies minori of the Socialist Parties 
 and to their recognized leaders. Therefore, the whole 
 movement,^ as far as its theoretical side is concerned, 
 has no positive foundation whatsoever, but is con- 
 fined to a sharp criticism of the existing order, and 
 is otherwise based upon a purely negative attitude 
 toward the capitalistic system. 
 
 Fortunately, the labor movement in a wide sense 
 has proved in various cotmtries that it is capable of 
 constructive work. In this connection we must 
 
MODERN SOCIALISM 59 
 
 always discriminate in oiir own minds between So- 
 cialist activities and the labor movement in general. 
 Thus, for instance, Australia for many years has 
 been ruled by a labor government, and it must be 
 stated that it always has manifested a constructive 
 spirit in social legislation. In Australia and in New 
 Zealand labor feels very strongly that its success 
 depends upon progressive conservatism and, further- 
 more, that the social structure of a nation ought 
 not to be subjected to violent changes and abstract 
 social experiments. With all its devotion to the 
 interests of the laborers, the Australian Government 
 is strongly opposed to the deistructive tendencies 
 imported into the Commonwealth from various 
 countries, and especially from America. Therefore, 
 Australia is the only coimtry where the Industrial 
 Workers of the World are not tolerated by the law, 
 their activities being proclaimed as dangerous and 
 disloyal to the community at large. Likewise, the 
 co-operative movement among the Belgian work- 
 men, being of a purely constructive nature, proved 
 to be very successful, and has raised the standard 
 of life of Belgian labor. Also British trade-tinion- 
 ism, in the past, has given ample evidence that labor, 
 if left to itself, is capable of constructive policies 
 based upon the vital principle of industrial co-opera- 
 tion. But labor itself in England and throughout 
 the world is faced at present by a dangerous enemy, 
 namely, with universal Socialism. Labor parties 
 throughout the world are attacked daily by Social- 
 
6o SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 ist agitators who hope to carry by storm the strong- 
 holds of the constructive and loyal labor movement. 
 It is of vital importance, therefore, that labor at 
 large should be protected from the danger it has to 
 face. It is the duty of the community to assist 
 labor in finding its own way. Undoubtedly, the 
 average workman is honest, thrifty, and willing to 
 work. Industry cannot exist without manual labor. 
 Manual labor cannot exist without industry. For 
 their mutual sake, for the sake of the community in 
 general, both labor and industry must be protected 
 against Socialist agitation, which threatens to ruin 
 not only the existing order but also every attempt 
 to improve it and to insure social progress and gen- 
 eral prosperity. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 
 
 THE real causes of the Socialist failure in Rus- 
 sia are to be looked for in the erroneous 
 nature of Marx's theory itself. Just as in 
 logic, if the major premise is wrong, the deduction 
 cannot be correct, so the Socialistic experiment, be 
 it in Russia or elsewhere, cannot be successful if 
 the Marxian theory proves to be wrong. 
 
 It will be recalled that the Marxian theory is 
 almost the sole sotirce and the dominant spirit of 
 modem Socialism. This theory, however, is con- 
 fined to half a dozen basic principles of a purely 
 abstract nature. ' 
 
 In the first place, Marx derived his theory from 
 the analysis of the nature of capital. The relation 
 of capital to labor is the alpha and omega of the 
 Marx doctrine. Therefore, we are in duty botmd 
 to devote careful attention to this particular sub- 
 ject. 
 
 (a) Marx says that under the capitalistic system 
 of production labor is the sole producer of wealth 
 and that capital itself is nothing but crystallized 
 labor. Are these premises correct ? 
 
 In an economic sense not all capital is produced 
 by labor. Capital can be roughly divided into two 
 
 6i 
 
62 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 parts, namely, capital consisting of natiiral resources, 
 including land, and capital which is the result of 
 the application of labor to natural resources and 
 land. 
 
 The first part is by no means due to or produced 
 by labor. Land and natural resources, such as 
 minerals, electricity, air, water-pawer, etc., have a 
 definite economic value and also a definite market 
 price, no matter whether labor has or has not been 
 applied to them. This part of capital is indispensa- 
 ble for the purpose of production. In fact, produc- 
 tion cannot be carried out without a certain quan- 
 tity of raw materials and agricultural products. 
 Therefore, this part of capital is the natural basis 
 of capital in general. 
 
 A piece of land has an economic value and a 
 market price before labor has ever been applied to 
 it. Labor may increase its value or change the ma- 
 terial shape and the economic designation of certain 
 natural resources, but the natural resources them- 
 selves, before they have been touched by labor, are 
 sold and purchased on the market, or, in other words, 
 they have a specific exchange value. 
 
 If "X" is the owner of Niagara Falls, and if he 
 decides to sell their water-power to the city of 
 Bufifalo, he receives a definite amount of money, 
 which is capital, whereas labor did not participate 
 in creating this wealth for "X," and the capital 
 thus acquired is certainly not due to labor. 
 
 Furthermore, it must be remembered that this 
 
CRITICISM OP THE MARX THEORY 63 
 
 basic part of capital constitutes the greatest and 
 most valuable part of capital in general. Thus, in 
 the United States, the aggregate value of lands, 
 excluding even the natural resources therein con- 
 tained, is at least twice as great as capital invested 
 in manufacturing concerns. 
 
 As to the second part of capital, which is consid- 
 ered to be due to labor, it must be pointed out that 
 it is composed of several subdivisions. 
 
 The exchange value of certain commodities is ' 
 partly the result of labor having been applied to 
 them, but is principally derived from their natural 
 utility. The analysis of the market price of such 
 commodities discloses that the part of the price due ; 
 to labor is insignificant as compared with that due 
 to utility itself. Thus, for instance, the exchange/ 
 value of the skin of a Russian sable is extremely 
 high, but the high cost of this skin cannot be attrib- 
 uted to the amount of labor required in killing the 
 sable. In fact, the manual work in this case is 
 confined to one shot, or even less than that if the 
 sable is caught in a trap; but the fur of the animal 
 is so useful and possesses such high qualities that, 
 regardless of the amount of labor required to pro- 
 duce the skin of the sable, its market price — or, 
 otherwise, its exchange value — is very considerable. 
 
 In the same way an ounce of radium is extremely 
 expensive, not because much labor has been applied 
 to it, but because of the invaluable contents of the 
 mineral itself as well as because of its scarcity. 
 
64 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Although labor is required for the production of 
 the sable-skin or for the ounce of radium, it would 
 be scarcely just to affirm that the possessor of a 
 certain number of sable-skins or a certain amount 
 of radium has acquired capital which is the result 
 of labor. 
 
 There is another class of commodities the ex- 
 change value of which is equally the result of labor 
 and their utility. Such, for instance, is the case 
 with cloth, leather goods, wooden articles, and vari- 
 ous other household commodities. 
 
 Finally, certain articles acquire their market price 
 mainly because of labor processes applied to them. 
 A gold chronometer is expensive, not because of the 
 gold therein contained, but principally because of a 
 series of labor processes needed for its production. 
 Every individual process of work requires the great- 
 est accuracy, knowledge, and attention. 
 
 Moreover, intellectual values which have a specific 
 exchange value on the market, such as useful in- 
 ventions, musical compositions, or literary works, 
 are the sole result of labor, but not in the Marxian 
 sense, because Marx, when speaking of labor, re- 
 ferred mainly to manual labor, and the word "labor" 
 as applied by common custom in Socialist literatiu"e 
 refers to manual labor only. 
 
 It will be seen, therefore, that capital is by no 
 means a uniform economic conception, and, while the 
 larger part of it is not due to labor, the second, 
 smaller, part is due to labor in one degree or another. 
 
 The erroneous assertion of Marx and his followers 
 
• CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 65 
 
 that labor is the sole producer of wealth becomes 
 stiU more accentuated when we remember that the 
 term "labor" in Socialist theories is always con- 
 nected with the proletarian class. In other words, 
 the formula that labor is the sole producer of wealth, 
 in the Socialist's conception, must read as foUows: 
 
 "Manual labor is the sole producer of wealth." * 
 
 Considering this dogmatic premise in relation to 
 the problem of erecting a modem office-building, the 
 following can be remarked: 
 
 Five hundred masons and five himdred carpenters, 
 summoned to erect the Woolworth Building, would 
 
 ' It must be remembered that the Gotha Programme adopted by 
 the German Social Democratic Party in 1875 proclainrfed that 
 "Labor is the source of all wealth and of all culture," Mr. John 
 Spargo in his book Socialism has pointed out that this assertion 
 did not meet with the approval of Karl Marx, who emphasized that 
 "Nature is just as much the source of use values (and of such, to 
 be sure, is material wealth composed) as is labor, which itself is 
 but the expression of a natural force, of human labor power." 
 Thereupon, Mr. Spargo triumphantly remarks that "To say that 
 Marx held labor to be the sole source of wealth is to misrepresent 
 his whole teaching" (p. 225). In fact, however, Marx's assertion 
 that nature must necessarily take part in the process of production 
 and the creation of wealth, being absolutely correct, proves nothing 
 because it merely points out the fact that natural resources consti- 
 tute a component part of material wealth, which is self-evident. 
 Of course even Socialists would not dispute this axiom. The ques- 
 tion, however, is what economic forces give the natural resources 
 such material shape as will make them useful and attribute to them 
 a specific exchange value. To this the answer of the Socialists, 
 including Marx himself, is that the sole factor is labor. On p. 208, 
 vol. I, of Capital (English- edition), Marx states as follows: 
 
 "We know that the value of each commodity is determined by 
 the quantity of labor expended on and materialized in' it, by the 
 working time necessary, under given social conditions, for its pro- 
 duction." 
 
66 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 \ 
 
 be unable to cope with this task. The erection of a 
 Woolworth Building requires the knowledge and 
 services of an architect, an engineer, a chemist, and 
 a technologist. Those experts, who do not belong 
 to labor in the Marxian sense, are as indispensable 
 to the erection of a modem' building as the car- 
 penter and the mason. In one sense the expert is 
 even more indispensable than the manual work- 
 man, because the latter can be replaced by the 
 former, while the contrary is not true. The manual 
 workman is imable to direct the activities of the 
 expert, whereas the expert always directs the activi- 
 ties of the manual workman. 
 
 As will be shown in the following chapter, the 
 Bolsheviki themselves were finally compelled to 
 recognize the vital r61e of the expert in the process 
 of production. Therefore, contrary to Marx's af- 
 firmation, we must realize that modem production 
 is the result, not of two factors — labor and capital, 
 the latter being but crystallized labor — but of at 
 least four factors, namely, physical elements, labor 
 in the limited sense of manual labor, mental labor 
 of the expert and the manager, and capital. Of 
 these factors mental labor constitutes a sort of link 
 between capital and manual labor. Nor is capital, 
 as Marx affirms, nothing but crystallized labor. 
 The econdmic r61e of capital in the process of pro- 
 duction is not confined to the mere existence of so 
 much machinery, land, tools, and money in the 
 hands of an individual or a corporation. The pro- 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 67 
 
 ductive r61e of capital begins at the moment when 
 machinery, land, tools, and money are brought to- 
 gether for the piirpose of producing certain com- 
 modities. Moreover, upon the nianner in which 
 the integral parts of capital are brought together 
 depends the success or failure of the enterprise it- 
 self. For instance, "X" has sufficient money to 
 purchase a certain amount of machinery required 
 for the erection of a cotton-gin mill. "X" directs 
 the architect' to erect this mill somewhere in North 
 Dakota. The enterprise would be a failtu"e from 
 the very start. A cotton-gin mill would be bmlt in a 
 locality where there is no cotton nor any facilities 
 for importing it. On the contrary, if "X" erected 
 a cotton-mill in the State of Alabama, there would 
 be a fair chance that the enterprise would be suc- 
 cessful. This indicates clearly that it is not cap- 
 ital itself which animates the process of production, 
 it is the ability to make use of capital that counts 
 in practical life. 
 
 In the case of erecting a cotton-mill in North 
 Dakota, we consciously cited an instance of com- 
 plete lack of business ability, but every one familiar 
 with economic practice will agree that business 
 ability is a faculty which cannot be underestimated 
 so far as production is concerned. Capital without 
 the ability to make the best use of it is as dead a 
 factor as manual labor without proper direction on 
 the part of the technical expert. 
 
 Thus, economic practice proves that production 
 
68 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 is by no means the result of only two factors referred 
 to by Marx, namely, labor and capital. Produc- 
 tion is a process by which business ability directs the 
 application of both mental and manual labor to ike 
 physical elements of capital. 
 
 Thus, we are logically compelled to repudiate 
 Marx's assertion that labor is the sole producer of 
 commodities. Moreover, recent Socialist writers, 
 even those of the most radical type — such as Mr. 
 Hillquit — ^have admitted that Marx's assertion is 
 wrong. In this connection Mr. Hillquit stated as 
 follows : 
 
 It requires no special genius to demonstrate that all labor is 
 not alike nor equally productive. It is still more obvious that 
 common manual labor is impotent to produce the wealth of 
 modern nations — that organization, direction, and control are 
 essential to productive work in the field of modern production 
 and are just as much a factor in it as mere physical effort. 
 
 This is a good confession, but unfortunately Mr. 
 Hillquit and his colleagues, both in Eturope and in 
 the United States, have never endeavored to make 
 this point clear in the workmen's minds. On the 
 contrary, whenever a Socialist writer or a Bolshev- 
 ist agitator appeals to labor directly, we always 
 hear the old time of the Marxian song, to the effect 
 that labor is the sole producer of wealth, that cap- 
 ital is nothing but crystallized labor, and that "all 
 wealth is due to labor, therefore to the laborer all 
 wealth is due." 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 69 
 
 Such tactics are indeed mere hypocrisy. Not- 
 withstanding all the concessions which the more' 
 recent SociaUst writers had to make to the oppo- 
 nents of Socialism, they still profess to believe that 
 manual labor possesses the magic faculty of pro- 
 ducing everything without the assistance of any- 
 body or anything. Therefore, when it came to put 
 the Marxian theory into practice, Mr. Trotzky did 
 not hesitate — ^according to his comrade Nevsky's 
 testimony — ^to exterminate in the most brutal man- 
 ner some fifty per cent of the Russian railroad en- 
 gineers and skilled workmen. 
 
 It is a characteristic feature of modem produc- 
 tion that no individual social group can produce 
 commodities without the material, physical, or in- 
 tellectual support of other social groups, so that all 
 those social groups combined form the productive 
 part of the population. Thus, modem production 
 is based upon the co-operation of various social 
 groups. The moment this co-operation has ceased, 
 the whole process of production must necessarily 
 break down, or at least experience a serious dis- 
 turbance. 
 
 The difference between mediaeval and modem 
 modes of production consists mainly in the fact that 
 whereas mediaeval economic life was confined to a 
 limited production carried out by self-siipporting 
 units, each independent of the other, modem pro- 
 duction has assumed the form of a complex process 
 involving the joint efforts of the nation at large. 
 
70 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Such combined efforts are closely interrelated, and 
 one section of the work is entirely dependent upon 
 the issue of various other economic efforts. ' In 
 other words, the division of labor is a basic feature 
 of capitalistic production. 
 
 Division of labor is not only a characteristic of 
 national production at large but is also the eco- 
 nomic foundation of individual industrial enter- 
 prises. In the same degree that the national process 
 of production is the result of combined efforts on 
 the part of all the various branches of industry, com- 
 merce, and transportation, the work of an individual 
 industrial enterprise is divided into many branches, 
 sections, and parts, all of which, when considered 
 separately, amount to very little, but being com- 
 bined, assume the form of manufacture. Here also 
 the division of labor is the substantial premise of 
 production, and production itself is nothing but co- 
 operation, a constant process of co-ordinating one 
 phase of the work with its previous stages and with 
 its ultimate results. 
 
 The above characteristic features of modem pro- 
 duction have resulted in the formation of a new 
 group of laborers whose social function is to direct 
 labor, to co-ordinate the various phases of produc- 
 tion, and thus to bring the disconnected efforts of 
 manufacture to the ultimate result, namely, the 
 production of commodities. This new social group 
 constitutes the management of industries. 
 
 It must be clearly understood that the ecpiiomic 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 71 
 
 value of managerial work is as great and as vitally 
 important as the work performed by manual labor. 
 Here again Marx's motto that labor, i. e., manual 
 labor, is the sole producer of commodities is not 
 only misleading but untrue. 
 
 Were we to suppose a Socialistic state to be es- 
 tablished to-morrow in America, we might be qtiite 
 siure that the same managers who now direct labor 
 and supervise national production at large would 
 remain in power, unless there were an anarchistic 
 attempt made to ruin industry by instituting "work- 
 men's control" along the Unes of Bolshevism in 
 Russia. The difference between the present methods 
 of management and those adopted in the Socialistic 
 state would be that the managers of the Socialistic 
 state would be employed by the state itself instead 
 of being employed by individual capitalists and cor- 
 porations. Nevertheless, in one way or another, 
 industry would have to be managed, national pro- 
 duction supprvised, and disconnected economic ef- 
 forts co-ordinated. The disadvantage, however, of 
 Socialistic management, even if conducted by the 
 present managers, would lie in the fact that the 
 manager would have lost personal interest in the 
 ultimate results of production, and this in turn 
 would lead, sooner or later, to a decrease in pro- 
 duction. 
 
 Moreover, what is the Socialistic state ? Is there 
 anything definite in the ideas advocated by modem 
 Socialist writers in regard to the business methods 
 
72 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 of managing production under the Socialist r6gime ? 
 Of course it is very easy to state that private capital 
 will be abolished and that for it will be substituted 
 a socialized system of production. In reality, how- 
 ever, this explains nothing. In one way or another 
 productivity will depend upon individual ability 
 and upon individual efforts, both on the part of 
 manual laborers and the • managerial staff. Mr. 
 Mallock in his Critical Examination of Socialism has 
 justly remarked that the' term "Socialistic state" 
 means little, if anything, and he was right in draw- 
 ing the conclusion that if the state, besides being a 
 political body, is to become the sole industrial capi- 
 talist, then state capitalism, like private capitalism, 
 will succeed or fail in proportion to the talents of 
 those to whom capital is entrusted as a means of 
 directing labor. 
 
 The assertion that labor is the sole producer of 
 wealth is distinctly reactionary. It refers to me- 
 diaeval conditions and it purposely minimizes the 
 progressive part played by capital and managerial 
 ability in modem production. 
 
 Present economic relations, if properly analyzed, 
 show distinctly that labor and capital, being in- 
 tegral parts of one and the same process of produc- 
 tion, are not and should not be at variance with 
 each other. Nor does the preaching of class hatred 
 help to solve controversies which incidentally arise 
 between capital and labor. 
 
 (fe) In the last analysis all theories of rnodem So- 
 
CRITICISM OF TIJE MARX THEORY 73 
 
 cialism are based upon the general conception of 
 equality of men, from which the conclusion is drawn 
 that all men should share equally in the enjoyment 
 of wealth. These ideas are partly the result of the 
 principles proclaimed in the "Declaration of Rights 
 of the Man and Citizen" in the early days of the 
 French Revolution and also in the American Dec- 
 laration of Independence. This leads us back to a 
 concept' ^n of absolute equality among human beings 
 which is not in accord with the development of sci- 
 entific thought in the last half -century. The sum 
 of modem biological research definitely proves that 
 inequality is the rule rather than the exception both 
 of organic and inorganic life. The Socialists go 
 counter to this accepted truth when they assert the 
 equality of aU labor and insist, therefore, that wealth 
 should be equally divided among all laborers. More- 
 over, the ultimate aim of Socialism, as expounded 
 by Marx, is to establish a society wherein there are 
 no classes and no economic distinctions between the 
 various social groups. 
 
 If we could imagine, however, that by a miracle 
 the national wealth should be equally divided to- 
 morrow among all the citizens of a country, the very 
 next day would prove that the balance of equality 
 had been disturbed and that one man possessed 
 more than another. This is because men are un- 
 equal in their capacities and talents. Two men 
 who have been brought up under equal conditions, 
 who have graduated from the same college, and 
 
74 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 who have chosen the same profession, are by no 
 means equal to each other. Therefore, also the 
 work of one is never equal to the work of the other. 
 Due to certain physical conditions, "A" is able to 
 produce in a given period of time more mental work 
 than "B," whereas "B" is physically much stronger 
 than "A." In this case if both chose a liberal pro- 
 fession "A" win be more successfid than "B" and 
 less successful if both chose a manual occupation. 
 The same applies to industrial conditions. "A" 
 might prove to be an excellent technical manager 
 and only a poor manual laborer. Consequently we 
 must acknowledge that, as a general rule, the work 
 of one man is never equal to the work of another, 
 and that, therefore, the remuneration of one can 
 never be equal to the remuneration of the other. 
 
 It is for this reason that after two years of Social- 
 istic experiment in Russia, Lenin has declared that 
 he is willing to pay 100,000 roubles per annum to a 
 technical expert, while he will not agree to pay 
 3,000 roubles to an ordiilary manual workman. 
 
 Quality in human work is quite as important as 
 quantity. Leonardo da Vinci, in painting his "Gio- 
 conda," presented to the world a masterpiece of sub- 
 lime quality. Let us assume that it took one hun- 
 dred hours' work for him to complete this picture. 
 Now, according to the Marxian theory, Leonardo 
 ought to have received for his work the same remu- 
 neration as would be given to an ignorant house- 
 painter who also spent one hundred hours in paint- 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 75 
 
 ing a wall. This is the kind of equality which 
 Marx advocated. Of course the more recent So- 
 cialists had to abandon the Marxian conception of 
 equality. They admit now, although in a very 
 vague manner, that the quantity of work delivered 
 does not determine the amount of remuneration. 
 
 This brings us back to the true American concep- 
 tion of equality, which for centuries has proved to^ 
 be sound, namely, to the equality of opportunity. 
 Every citizen may become President. Every citizen 
 may become wealthy. In fact, most of the Ameri- 
 can millionaires started their business career at the 
 lowest stage of manual work, or as clerks and office 
 boys in different enterprises, of which they later 
 became presidents or vice-presidents. In this con- 
 nection the names of Woolworth, Carnegie, and 
 many others come to mind. 
 
 Equal opporttmity is indeed the only kind of 
 equality which can be reasonably advocated and 
 defended. In industry, just as in art and science, 
 personal ability and technical knowledge are de- 
 cisive factors in attaining success and advancement. 
 Theoretically it may be admitted that it is a pity 
 that all men are not bom with the faculties of 
 Leonardo or Pasteur or Carnegie, but neither the 
 Socialistic regime nor any other can possibly remedy 
 this "fault of nature." 
 
 The unfortunate thing about the Socialists is that 
 they are always dreaming. For this reason the 
 SociaUst movement throughout the world has never 
 
76 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 achieved anything practical or constructive. The 
 Socialists have never invented or even improved an 
 engine, they have never endeavored to apply a new 
 chemical formtila in the dye business, nor have they 
 even endeavored to improve the living conditions 
 of the workmen by means of introducing new prin- 
 ciples of architecture so as to reduce the cost of 
 building. Socialist leaders, as distinguished from 
 the constructive leaders of the labor movement, 
 have chiefly occupied themselves with the alleged 
 class struggle between labor and capital, and have 
 even blocked efforts tending to promote the actual 
 welfare of the laborer. 
 
 The whole Socialistic movement is and always 
 has been of a purely dogmatic nature. 
 
 The above remark is also true in reference to 
 "class struggle." 
 
 The Marxian analysis discloses only one side of 
 modem economic relations between capital and 
 labor, namely, the natural efforts on the part of 
 labor to improve its standard of life, and on the 
 part of capital the tendency to increase its profits. 
 From the existence of these two natural tendencies 
 the arbitrary conclusion was drawn that an ijrecon- 
 cilable fight between labor and capital governs the 
 social relations under the capitaUstic system of pro- 
 duction. The other side of the medal, however, is 
 almost completely ignored both by Marx and by 
 his followers. Nothing is said to the effect that the 
 capitalistic system of production has tied up labor 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 
 
 77 
 
 and capital with economic threads so strong that 
 one canjiot exist without the other, that the pros- 
 perity of one is dependent upon the prosperity of 
 the other, and that the ruin of capital is the ruin 
 of labor. The fact that higher wages, for instance, 
 eventually lead to a decline in profits is obvious 
 and needs no further interpretation, but this fact 
 does not justify the conclusion that labor and 
 capital must be at odds, or that the natural contro- 
 versy between labor and capital, as far as wages are 
 concerned, constitutes the basis of a permanent class 
 struggle. Such a conclusion is quite gratuitous, 
 since it leaves out of consideration the actual eco- 
 nomic relations between the two social groups. 
 Let us analyze the following schedule, showing the 
 figures of the total investment in a given industrial 
 enterprise, representing the amount which is fixed 
 capital, the amount of wages per anntun, the amount 
 of profit resulting from business transactions, and 
 the percentage of profit, assviming other conditions 
 remain unchanged. 
 
 Investment 
 
 Wages 
 
 Profit 
 
 Percentage 
 
 $500,000.00 
 500,000.00 
 500,000.00 
 500,000.00 
 
 $200,000.00 
 300,000.00 
 400,000.00 
 500,000.00 
 
 $49,000.00 
 48,000.00 
 45,000.00 
 40,000.00 
 
 7% 
 6% 
 5% 
 4% 
 
 Considering the above figures, we notice that 
 while the fixed capital remains the same through- 
 
78 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 out the schedule, wages are gradually advancing 
 from $200,000.00 to $500,000.00 per annum. With 
 $200,000.00 expended for wages, the capitalist de- 
 rives a profit of seven per cent, amounting to $49,- 
 000.00; with $400,000.00 expended for wages, the 
 capitalist derives only five per cent profit, amotmt- 
 ing to $45,000.00. A percentage of profit lower than 
 this would induce the capitalist to make other use 
 of his capital, because even the investment of $900,- 
 000.00 in four and three-quarter per cent Liberty 
 Loan bonds would bring $42,750.00 profit, without 
 any effort on the part of the capitalist. It goes 
 without saying that there are other forms of in- 
 vestment which would easily raise this amount to 
 $45,000.00 and more. In other words, an industrial 
 enterprise will prove a failure if the same amount of 
 capital otherwise invested would prove more profita- 
 ble. The moment the interrelation between fixed 
 capital and wages reaches this point, the capitalist 
 is bound by common sense to liquidate the indus- 
 trial enterprise and to seek more profitable invest- 
 ment for his capital. This would mean, however, 
 that a certain number of workmen would be thrown 
 out of employment and that they would be the first 
 to bear the disastrous consequences resulting from 
 unemployment. We see, therefore, that the con- 
 troversy between labor and capital can be reason- 
 ably extended only to a certain limit, beyond which 
 both capital and labor would suffer. 
 
 Such is the actual situation in the building in- 
 dustry in New York. New houses are badly needed; 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 79 
 
 there is plenty of capital to invest in the building 
 industry, and yet it remains at a standstill because 
 it simply does not pay the capitalist to invest his 
 money in this branch of industrial enterprise be- 
 cause of the extremely high wages of masons and 
 carpenters. The result is that thousands of work- 
 men belonging to the building industry are out of 
 emplo3mient. Apart from that, due to the scarcity 
 of dwellings, the rentals have risen considerably, 
 with the consequence that workmen themselves have 
 to pay very high rents, affecting the stability of 
 their budget. 
 
 With the above considerations in view, it be- 
 comes quite clear that an irreconcilable class strug- 
 gle, as advocated by Socialists, hits labor as well as 
 capital. Therefore, the conclusion must be drawn 
 that the preaching of class hatred is not at all 
 the most advantageous policy for the working class 
 as a whole. On the contrary, the policy of compro- 
 mise is the only one which really brings construc- 
 tive results. 
 
 Labor must be organized and powerful in order 
 to prevent capital from taking exorbitant profits. 
 Capital must be strongly organized in order to pre- 
 vent labor from exacting exorbitant wages. But 
 both capital and labor must find common ground 
 for friendly co-operation in order to preserve the 
 common source of their existence, namely, industry. 
 
 The same remarks are true not only in regard to 
 wages but also with respect to the length of the 
 labor day. Workmen have every reason to insist 
 
8o SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 that the labor day shall not exceed a reasonable 
 ntimber of hours. Therefore, if, under given so- 
 cial conditions, an eight-hour day can be introduced 
 without decreasing productivity and crippling na- 
 tional industries, it must be introduced, whether it 
 pleases capital or not. But the moment labor raises 
 unreasonable demands for a six-hour day or for a 
 five-day week, such demands should be repudiated, 
 whether it pleases labor or not. 
 
 With regard to the coal strike, which was decreed 
 on October 23, 191 9, at the Convention of the United 
 Mine Workers of America in Cleveland, Ohio, the 
 situation was very acute, because the labor-unions 
 not only insisted on a five-day week but also de- 
 manded a labor day of six hottrs, which meant that 
 the work delivered during the week would amount 
 only to thirty hours. Simultaneously the miners 
 demanded a sixty per cent increase in their wages. 
 This put the whole coal industry in jeopardy, since 
 the mine owners would have been unable to meet 
 these extortionate demands. Had they been granted, 
 it would have put a tax of ten dollars on every in- 
 dividual in the United States, and the nation at 
 large would be subjected to unspeakable sufferings.^ 
 
 Thus, from an economic point of view, and this 
 is the only one in which we are interested, co-opera- 
 tion of labor and capital must be tu-ged as a nation- 
 
 ' In President Wilson's statement regarding the coal strike, issued 
 on the 25th of October, 1919, it is said: "The action propo^d has 
 apparently been taken without any vote upon the specific proposi- 
 tion by the individual members of the United Mine Workers of 
 America throughout the United States, an almost unprecedented 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY^ 8i 
 
 wide policy, necessary to appease social unrest. It 
 is not too much to hope that such co-operation can 
 be attained, because the average workman is reason- 
 able and not at all wedded to the problematic ex- 
 perirrients advocated by Socialist agitators. In this 
 coimection, however, it is vitally important for labor 
 itself to realize the grave danger of the radical propa- 
 ganda which is being vigorously conducted among 
 labor organizations by the captains of modem So- 
 cialism. 
 
 The average workman ought to realize that all 
 these social agitators who seek to be labor leaders 
 are consciously trying to prevent labor from reach- 
 ing a friendly understanding with capital. They 
 have a real interest in so doing, because the moment 
 labor reaches a working agreement with capital, 
 they will lose their jobs. Surely these professional 
 agitators who call themselves "ideologists of the 
 proletarian class" have nothing in common with the 
 workmen themselves. From time to time it is re- 
 vealed that some radical Socialist who has habitu- 
 ally appeared before labor audiences in dirty collars 
 and in neglig6e clothes has succeeded in accumulat- 
 ing considerable "savings," sometimes amounting 
 to millions of dollars or francs. Surely labor can 
 manage its own business, avoiding the treacherous 
 
 proceeding. I cannot believe that any right of any American worker 
 needs for its protection the taking of this extraordinary step, and I 
 am convinced that when the time and manner are considered, it 
 constitutes a fundamental attack, which is wrong both morally and 
 legally, upon the rights of society and upon the welfare of our 
 country." 
 
82 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 advice of such "friends of the people." The day 
 that labor shakes off the yoke imposed on it by out- 
 side agitators, an understanding between workmen 
 and employers will become possible. 
 
 (c) Marx's theory of class struggle, as pointed out 
 in the preceding pages, is based on the assertion 
 that labor is not only the sole producer of wealth 
 but also the sole producer of the capitalist's profit. 
 
 Although from our point of view there would be 
 nothing wrong in the fact that capital derives its 
 profit from the employment of labor, nevertheless, 
 from a scientific point of view, Marx's assertion is 
 again a purely theoretical utterance. Here again 
 economic realities are disregarded by Marx and his 
 followers, and an abstract scheme is set forth. 
 
 The reader will recall that Marx asserts that 
 profit is derived from the process of production itself 
 whereby it increases the original value of "C," and 
 the surplus thus obtained is nothing else but capital- 
 ist's profit. As, according to Marx, the process of 
 production is also nothing but the application of fluid 
 work to crystallized work, the logical conclusion is 
 drawn that the surplus value is the result of labor 
 and, therefore, labor is the producer of profit. 
 
 Again we have to ask the question : Is this theory 
 right ? Viewed from an abstract standpoint, it is 
 quite right to affirm that the ultimate results of pro- 
 duction must lead to profit, but this does not ex- 
 plain how in reality profit is made. The mere as- 
 sertion that one part of the labor process is devoted 
 to reproducing the value of the workmen's means 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 83 
 
 of subsistence, while the second part is entirely de- 
 voted to the production of surplus value, is quite 
 arbitrary. With the same right we might assert 
 that one part of the labor process is devoted to the 
 reproduction of the value of the labor power, while 
 the second represents the surplus work delivered by 
 the workman in order to enable him to set aside a 
 certain portion of his wages for savings and other 
 needs which surpass the value of the means of sub- 
 sistence required for the support of the workman 
 himself and his family. In reality our premise is 
 more correct than that of Marx. It is a weU-known 
 fact that the average workman succeeds in saving 
 at least something, and his savings can be derived 
 only from one source, namely, his wages. All these 
 assertions, however, have but very. little scientific 
 value because they do not explain in the least how 
 the capitalist actually makes his profit. Let us 
 take the following illustration: 
 ■ "X" invests $500,000.00 in a cotton-mill enter- 
 prise. This stim covers the cost of the mill equipped 
 with machinery, raw material, fuel, taxes, insurance, 
 and similar expenses. In addition to this "X" 
 must pay to labor $200,000.00 as wages. Thus, the 
 total amount of investment for a given year is 
 $700,000.00. One part of this investment will serve 
 for the means of production during a more or less 
 protracted period of time, whUe the other part, 
 after having been spent, enters completely into the 
 actual cost of the product. Thus, the $200,000.00 
 advanced as wages must constitute a certain part 
 
84 
 
 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 of the price of the product itself. In the same way, 
 raw material and fuel, after having once been in- 
 volved in the process of production, must necessarily 
 lose their original economic designation, acquiring 
 at the same time a new material shape which attrib- 
 utes to them (a) a new economic designation, (b) a 
 certain economic value, and ultimately (c) a definite 
 market price. As to the money advanced for the 
 purchase of the mill and machinery, it must alfo 
 constitute a portion of the product's value, but in 
 this case the capitalist does not expect to have an 
 immediate refund of the sum thus advanced because 
 the fixed capital (mill, real estate, machinery, etc.) 
 retains its economic designation dvuing a more or 
 less protracted period of time. 
 
 Having these considerations in mind, the capi- 
 talist will work out a tentative financial estimate 
 which will assume approximately the following form : 
 
 Gross investment 
 
 Portions of capi- 
 tal redeemable 
 in the selling 
 price of the prod- 
 uct 
 
 Percentage 
 
 1. Cost of mill, real 
 
 estate, and ma- 
 chinery 
 
 2. Raw material 
 
 3. Fuel, water-power 
 
 4. Taxes and insur- 
 
 ance 
 
 $275,000 
 
 125,000 
 
 50,000 
 
 50,000 
 200,000 
 
 $ 27,500 
 
 125,000 
 
 50,000 
 
 50,000 
 200,000 
 
 10 
 100 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 5. Labor 
 
 
 
 $700,000 
 
 $452,500 
 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 85 
 
 The above figures represent the gross investment 
 and the amount of money which must be included 
 in the selling price of the product in order to re- 
 deem the net expenses of manufacture plus the ten 
 per cent refund of the fixed capital (Item i). 
 
 If thereupon our would-be capitalist puts the 
 scheme into effect, then in the course of a year his 
 gross investment will amoimt to $700,000.00, out 
 of which $452,500.00 would have to be redeemed 
 in the cost of the product in order to cover in full 
 the actual expenses. Were we to suppose that the 
 capitalist is able to sell the use- values at only $452,- 
 500.00, it would mean that he makes no profit 
 whatsoever and that the financial results of the 
 annual production are equal to zero. It is quite 
 obvious, however, that the capitalist cannot carry 
 on his business without making at least a certain 
 profit, the margin of which depends upon general 
 social and economic conditions, including such a 
 factor as the technological development at a given 
 moment. Therefore, the capitalist is compelled to 
 find a means to make his business profitable, and 
 this he is able to do only by selling his commodities 
 at a price which is composed of two parts: (a) the 
 full a,mount of the cost of production,^ which in our 
 case is $452,500.00, and (b) a certain surplus which 
 must be in reasonable co-relation to the gross cost 
 of production. The surplus is nothing but profit, 
 and it is obtained w;hen the goods are actually sold 
 on the market. If the capitalist thinks that he can 
 
86 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 make, under given social conditions, ten per cent 
 profit, he will add $45,250.00 to the total shown in 
 column two of his financial estimate, and this will 
 raise the selling price to $497,750.00 ($452,500.00 
 plus $45,250.00). Whether the latter sum coincides 
 with the market price is a question which we shall 
 leave out of consideration; but shotild. the capital- 
 ist's estimate coincide with the market price, he 
 would make ten per cent profit on his investment. 
 
 In other words, in order to make a profit, com- 
 modities or use-values must be converted into 
 money, and it is not until commodities are converted 
 into money that we can speak of profit. Thus, the 
 whole process of making profit in a capitalistic in- 
 dustrial enterprise is divided into the following 
 parts : 
 
 First: The gross investment, including the pur- 
 chase of machinery, fuel, raw material, and the 
 hiring of labor. 
 
 , Second: The process of production itself, during 
 which raw material is converted into commodities 
 by the application of labor and machinery. 
 
 Third: Placing manufactured commodities on the 
 open market for sale. 
 
 Fourth: The actual sale of commodities at prices 
 composed of the gross cost of production and a 
 surplus which is profit. 
 
 There can be no other way of maldng profit than 
 that outlined above. Therefore, this analysis dis- 
 closes that profit is actually paid to the capitalist 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 87 
 
 by the consumer. In our case it is he who pays the 
 $45,250.00 in a concealed form by paying the total 
 sum of $497,750.00 for the commodities, the actual 
 cost of production of which amounts to $452,500.00. 
 
 As to this, the Socialist writer might ask: Why 
 should the consumer pay more than the goods ac- 
 tually cost to make ? Why should the consumer 
 pay out of his own pocket the capitalist's profit ? 
 Our answer to this is that the consumer needs the 
 goods and realizes that the capitaUst cannot work 
 without profit. 
 
 Analyzing this willingness of the consumer to pay 
 a price for a given commodity which is higher than 
 the gross cost of the production, we may point ^out 
 several of the principal reasons for this phenomenon. 
 In the first place, the consumer procures an article 
 which at the moment, at least, is more desired by 
 him than the various elements which go to make up 
 the article itself. During the process of production 
 these various elements were brought together and 
 arranged in a way which gives them a new material 
 shape and economic designation. For instance, let 
 us take a yard of silk, — composed of the threads of 
 the cocoon, which have gone through various manu- 
 facturing processes," including the final one of color- 
 ing the goods by the application of dyes. The con- 
 sumer does not need the unwoven silk threads or 
 the dyes, but he needs the silk cloth itself. And 
 since that cloth does npt exist otherwise than by 
 virtue of production, the consumer must make this 
 
88 SOCIALISM V^. CIVILIZATION 
 
 pf eduction possible by paying such a price as would 
 include the surplus or profit. A second factor is 
 that the consumer purchases the commodity needed 
 by him at the place of its consumption, where it is 
 put on the market by the producer or distributer. 
 This is a decisive economic advantage, since the con- 
 sumer has been saved the time of transporting the 
 article. Finally, the consumer is often either un- 
 able or unwilling to undertake the production of 
 the article itself, and, therefore, he is willing to 
 pay something to others for performing this ser- 
 vice. 
 
 In his analysis of surplus value, Marx himself had 
 to admit that if the value of the product is exactly 
 equal to the value of the capital advanced, there 
 can be no profit, nor is there any profit. In fact, 
 in the case which he takes as an illustration, namely, 
 in referring to the manufacture of ten pounds of 
 yam, he asstunes that the value of a daj^'s labor 
 power is three shillings and that six hours' labor are 
 incorporated in that sum. The three shillings, in 
 Marx's judgment, represent the amount of labor 
 which is required to produce daily the necessaries 
 of life by the average workman. Marx further as- 
 sumes that the spinner by working for one hour can 
 convert one and two-thirds pounds of cotton into 
 one and two-thirds pounds of yam, so that ten 
 pounds of cotton are converted into ten pounds of 
 yam in six hours. Starting with this premise, Marx 
 states as follows: 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 89 
 
 Let us now consider the total value of the product, the 
 ten pounds of yarn.* Two and one-half days' labor have 
 been embodied in it, of which two days were contained in 
 the cotton and in the substance of the spindle worn away, 
 and half a day was absorbed during the process of spinning. 
 This two and one-haK days' labor is also represented by a 
 piece of gold of the value of fifteen shillings. Hence, fifteen 
 shillings is an adequate price for the ten pounds of yarn, or 
 the price of one pound is eighteen pence. Our capitalist 
 stares in astonishment. The value of the product is exactly 
 equal to the value of the capital advanced. The valine so 
 advanced has not expanded, no surplus valtie has been created, 
 and conseqttently money has not been converted into capital.* 
 
 This assertion, however, does not coincide in the 
 f 
 least with Marx's own theory that the surplus value 
 
 or profit is due to and produced by labor. There- 
 fore, Marx invented an arbitrary argtmient that the 
 absence of profit is caused by the fact that the 
 workman in the case referred to works only six 
 hours per day, for which he is paid three shillings. 
 If, however, says Marx, the laborer should work 
 twelve hours, instead of six hours, and if he should 
 still receive but three shillings, then twenty pounds 
 of cotton could be converted into twenty pounds of 
 yam during five days' labor, of which four days 
 would be absorbed in the cotton and in the sub- 
 stance of the spindle worn away, and one day wotdd 
 be taken up in spinning itself. The price of the 
 
 ' On p. 208, vol. I, of Capital, Marx assumes that the value of 
 ten pounds of cotton is ten shillings, while the value of the wear and 
 tear of the spindle is two shillings. 
 
 ' Capital, vol. I, p. 212. The italics are ours. 
 
90 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 cotton being twenty shillings and that of the sub- 
 stance of the spindle worn away four shillings, Marx 
 further asserts that the money expended for labor 
 as wages remains equal, namely, three shillings. He 
 thereupon draws the conclusion that the cost of the 
 product is twenty-seven shillings (20 + 4 + 3 = 27), 
 whereas the yam is still sold at eighteen pence per 
 pound, so that twenty- potmds of yam are sold for 
 thirty shillings. Consequently, the surplus of three 
 shillings has been created by labor, and this sum is, 
 according to Marx, the alleged profit of the capital- 
 ist. In order to show the reader that we are not do- 
 ing Marx an injustice, we quote him verbatim in 
 this connection: 
 
 Our capitalist foresaw this state of things and that was 
 the cause of his laughter. The laborer, therefore, finds in 
 the workshop the means of production necessary for work- 
 ing not only during six but during twelve hours. Just as 
 during the six hours' process our ten pounds of cotton ab- 
 sorbed six hours' labor and became ten pounds of yarn, so 
 now twenty pounds of cotton will absorb twelve hours' 
 labor and be changed into twenty poimds of yarn. Let us 
 now examine the product of this prolonged process. There 
 is now materialized in this twenty pounds of yarn the labor 
 of five days, of which four days are due to the cotton and 
 the lost steel of the spindle, the remaining day having been 
 absorbed by the cotton during the spinning process. Ex- 
 pressed in gold, the labor of five days is thirty shillings. 
 This is, therefore, the price of the twenty pounds of yarn, 
 giving, as before, eighteen pence as the price of a pound. 
 But the sum of the values of the commodities that entered 
 into the process amounts to twenty-seven shillings. The 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 91 
 
 value of the yarn is thirty shillings. Therefore the value of 
 the product is one-ninth greater than the value advanced 
 for its production; twenty-seven shiUings have been trans- 
 formed into thirty shillings; a surplus value of three shill- 
 ings has been created. The trick has at last succeeded; 
 money has been converted into capital.^ 
 
 By this peculiar process of reasoning Marx reaches 
 the conclusion that the surplus value is "entirely 
 confined to the sphere of production," and, more- 
 over, is entirely due to labor. 
 
 What Marx has really done is to assume in one 
 place that six hours of work are worth three shillings, 
 and in another place, three pages farther along, that 
 twelve hours of work are worth also three shillings. 
 In the course of working out a single problem he is 
 guilty of varying one of the fundamental factors. 
 Ftuthermore, the choice of factors, namely, the six 
 hours and the twelve hours, is entirely arbitrary, 
 'and x>bviously made in order to add plausibility to 
 his whole reasoning. For instance, if he had chosen 
 a ten-hour day to start with, the ultimate fallacy 
 would have been more apparent. In other words, 
 here, as in many other instances, Marx invents the 
 means to reach a desired result. 
 
 Inasmuch as this particular fallacy is the basis of 
 his whole theory of surplus value and of profit, it 
 cannot be too severely condemned. In fact, it would 
 be hard to find so extreme a case of disingenuous 
 reasoning in the whole history of economic science. 
 1 Capital, vol. I, pp. 216 and 217. 
 
92 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 The fallacy is all the more serious because it fur- 
 nishes ground for the assertion that the wage system 
 in general is wrong, since wages, according to Marx, 
 are always lower than the value of work performed 
 by the workman. This value, he claims, is wholly 
 appropriated by the capitalist. 
 
 In accordance with this Marxian theory, the Na- 
 tional Convention of the Socialist Labor Party of 
 America, in 1916, adopted a platform in which the 
 following is stated: 
 
 Thus labor is robbed of the wealth it alone produces, is 
 denied the means of self-emplo3Tnent, and, by compulsory 
 idleness in wage slavery, is even deprived of the necessaries 
 of life. 
 
 In the same way the National Convention of the 
 Socialist Party, at St. Louis, in 191 7, adopted a 
 preamble in which it is said: 
 
 The majority of hired workers in America . . . are 
 victims of poverty. . ._ . This is the fact because they are 
 underpaid. The wages or salaries they receive are only a 
 small part of the wealth or value they produce, and such 
 wages or salaries are insufficient to maintain a decent stand- 
 ard of hfe. 
 
 These and similar utterances are a direct attack 
 on the wage system as such. If, however, the wage 
 system is an evil which, according to the Socialist's 
 doctrine, must be eliminated, then the question 
 arises whether production can be carried on without 
 wages. 
 
CRITICISM OP THE MARX THEORY 93 
 
 It cannot be denied that in order to compel a 
 laborer to work he must be convinced that it is to 
 his advantage to perform a certain amount of work. 
 In other words, there must be a stimulus to make 
 labor display its potential power. Such stimulus, 
 however, can be found only in wages, no matter by 
 what name we caU them. 
 
 ■ Even xmder the present Socialist regime in Russia 
 the wage system is not abolished. Workmen in 
 Soviet Russia are paid in just the same way as they 
 are paid in all capitalistic countries. 
 
 Professor Thomas N. Carver, in his book The Dis- 
 tribution of Wealth, gives the following reasons why 
 the wage system is indispensable for the pvirposes 
 of production: 
 
 I. In order that there may be production, there must 
 be labor. 2. In order that there may be labor, there must 
 be wages to persuade men to work and to enable them to 
 do so, otherwise there will be no labor and no production. 
 3. Therefore, wages are necessary in order to secure the 
 production of goods — ^in other words, they are a necessary 
 part of the cost of production.' 
 
 There is really nothing to add to this logical and 
 plain explanation of the economic r61e of wages. 
 The Sociahsts, however, endeavor to convince the 
 workmen that the wage system, by which, it is said, 
 they are underpaid, is entirely the consequence of 
 ^capitalistic production, and that were Socialism 
 
 ' Professor Thomas Nixon Carver, Harvard University, The Dis- 
 'i-'hiilion of Wealth, p. 208 (Macmillan Company, New York, 1918). 
 
94 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 substituted for capitalism, the social evil of the wage 
 system would be immediately eliminated. 
 
 Meanwhile it must be remembered that profit 
 can be obtained without employing wage labor at all. 
 
 For instance, somebody orders a suit from a 
 tailor who himself is the owner of the business. 
 This tailor does not employ any workmen. On a 
 smaller scale, the financial estimate of the tailor will 
 be exactly the same as in the case of the cotton- 
 mtll. In the first place, the tailor will find out how 
 much the cloth will cost. Further, he will have to 
 consider the cos^ of other materials used in the suit; 
 next, he will have to estimate the cost of rent, as 
 well as the value of his own labor. Let us suppose 
 that tlie total cost of the above items is equal to 
 $37.00. It is quite obvious that the tailor will 
 charge the customer a price which will be higher 
 than this — ^perhaps $45.00 — ^whereby the additional 
 $8.00 will represent his net profit. 
 
 In this case it may be asked: Who is to be 
 "blamed" for the profit thus obtained ? From this 
 example it is obvious that profit is not peculiar to 
 the capitalistic system. 
 
 Were Marx's theory right, that profit is produced 
 by labor, it would necessarily f oUow that every in- 
 crease in the value of capital must be also due to 
 labor. Economic practice, however, ftimishes am- 
 ple evidence of the fact that the value of capital 
 can be and is being increased without any partici- 
 pation of labor. For instance: "A" buys a farm 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 95 
 
 and pays for it $10,000.00. Soon afterward the 
 papers announce that a new railroad will be built 
 in the vicinity, or perhaps will cross the land owned 
 by "A." This announcement refers merely to a 
 project, and no work has been performed to put it 
 into effect. And yet the owner of the farm sells 
 it for $12,000.00, thus increasing his capital to the 
 amount of $2,000.00. Let us suppose merely that 
 the population of the town in which the land is 
 situated is suddenly increased. The value of the 
 land will rise simtiltaneously. On the other hand, 
 sometimes the application of labor to capital de- 
 creases the "value of the latter. This is the case 
 when a piece of laiid is cultivated so intensely that 
 the soil loses its productive power. Here the 
 amount of labor applied to capital — ^land — ^is the 
 cause of the diminution in its value. 
 
 Finally, let us refer to an instance where the 
 profit is derived from certain faculties which a per- 
 son possesses and which have nothing in common 
 with labor in the Marxian sense. Cotmt Tolstoi re- 
 ceived over one million roubjes for his nOvel War and 
 Peace. This sum represented nothing but his royal- 
 ties. It is quite obvious that Tolstoi made this 
 money, which is wealth, without assistance on the 
 part of the wage-earners. Here we haV^e an exam- 
 ple of Marx's fallacy in his assertion that labor is , 
 the sole producer of wealth and is the sole source 
 of profit and income. 
 
 This theoretical premise of Marx leads his modem 
 
g6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 followers to the practical conclusion that individual 
 profit, be it industrial profit in a limited sense, or 
 an income derived from royalties, or liberal profes- 
 sions, or interest due on capital in stock or cash, or, 
 finally, rent derived from landownership, must be 
 abolished. In the case of artists who derive their 
 wealth from royalties of various kinds, some of the 
 Socialists admit that this should be allowed as a 
 matter of exc'ieption, but if trader the provisions of 
 the Socialistic programme the artist is justified in 
 accumulating wealth and eventually creating capital 
 for himself, then it may be asked why the lawyer or 
 physician should be deprived of the same right. 
 Certainly there should be no distinction in this re- 
 spect between the work of the artist and the work 
 of the lawyer or physician. In fact, all persons 
 engaged in liberal professions are exerting their 
 mental faculties and are creating intellectual values. 
 In the same way Socialists also admit that an 
 inventor who sells his invention to a capitalist is 
 perfectly justified in creating capital for himself. 
 In other words, while the Socialists make the gen- 
 eral assertion that no individual profit (income, in- 
 terest, and rent) should exist, at the same time they 
 make exceptions of so sweeping a character that 
 they virtually contradict themselves. The Social- 
 ists themselves can scarcely give a satisfactory 
 explanation why, for instance, Tolstoi has the right 
 to accumulate capital and why, on the contrary, 
 the average business man engaged in the steel or 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 97 
 
 cotton business must be deprived of his capital for 
 the benefit of the toilers. When it comes to giving 
 a definite reason for such discrimination the Social- 
 ists endeavor to shift the problem to the field of 
 moral abstractions and repeat the old story of stir- 
 plus profit produced by the wage-earner and of the 
 workman who is the sole producer of wealth. It 
 might be argued that even from a moral point of 
 view the work performed by the business man is 
 more useful than that of the artist. If we turn to 
 actual economic development, it must be remembered 
 that national wealth, which experienced such an 
 enormous increase during the nineteenth century, 
 was built up, developed, and brought to its climax 
 by the business man — by those innumerable members 
 of modem society who have exerted their ability 
 and who certainly have risked their personal wealth 
 for the benefit of their respective commtmities. 
 The result of those combined efforts is that in 
 every civilized country, not only the gross amount 
 of nation'al wealth has increased tremendously, 
 but also the portion of wealth owned by the la- 
 boring class has surpassed the most optimistic esti- 
 mate. 
 
 Mr. Mallock has stated that in the year 1800 an 
 equal division of all wealth in Great Britain would 
 have yielded to each family an income of eighty 
 pounds. Eighty years later an equal division of 
 the total which was actually appropriated as wages 
 by wage-paid labor alone would have yielded to each 
 
98 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 laborer's family thirty-six pounds more, or an in- 
 crement of forty-five per cent. Mr. Mallock there- 
 upon justly remarks that "the laboring class as a 
 whole in Great Britain to-day, instead of receiving 
 less than its labor produces, receives on the lowest 
 computation forty-five per cent more. Or, to put 
 the matter otherwise, one-third of its present in- 
 come is drawn from a fund which would cease to 
 have any existence if it were not for the continued 
 activity of a specifically gifted class, by whose brains 
 the data of science are being constantly remastered 
 and reassimilated, and by whose energy they are 
 applied to the minds and muscles of the many 
 from the earliest hour of each working day to the 
 latest. And what is true of labor, its products, and 
 receipts in Great Britain, is broadly true of them in 
 America and all other countries also where modem 
 capitalism has arrived at the same stage of de- 
 velopment."^ 
 
 The above statement based upon figures and 
 economic facts distinctly contradicts Marx's theoreti- 
 cal assertion to which we have already referred, 
 namely, that the "accumulation of wealth at one 
 pole is at the same time the accumulation of misery, 
 agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutal mentality, 
 degradation at the opposite pole"; but such is the 
 characteristic feature of the Marxian theory that 
 it is always in contradiction to facts and at odds 
 with figures. 
 
 ' Op. ciu, p. 209. 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 99 
 
 Whatever the Socialists of different shades and 
 factions may affirm, it cannot be doubted that the 
 increased amotmt of national wealth and the in- 
 creased prosperity of the working class as a whole 
 is in no way due to the increased efforts or increased 
 ability of labor in the Marxian sense. 
 
 The physical factor of manual labor has remained 
 stable for centuries. The mason of the twentieth 
 century does not exert more physical strength than 
 those masons who three thousand years B. C. 
 built the famous Cheops pyramid, or those Greek 
 masons who built the Parthenon. Nor is the ability 
 of the modem mason greater than that of his breth- 
 ren who lived many centuries ago. Indeed, we may 
 affirm that the mediaeval artisan who perforined 
 manual work had to be much more able than the 
 manual workman of our day, because there was no 
 machinery to help him. 
 
 Thus, the individual capacity of the manual 
 laborer is the same as it was thousands of years ago. 
 If, therefore, increased national wealth is not due 
 to manual labor, we must conclude that it is due 
 to other causes, chief among which is probably the 
 spirit of enterprise on the part of the business man 
 combined with his directive ability. 
 
 Productivity has increased because manual labor 
 was directed by the brains of Watts, Bessemers, 
 Mendeleeff, Marconi, and Edison, who, each in his 
 own direction, have improved certain vital branches 
 of industry, technology, chemistry, and engineering. 
 
loo SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Referring to Francis Bacon, Charles Ferguson 
 justly remarks: 
 
 Bacon elaborated the intellectual technic whereby the 
 modern world has acquired its earth-grip. He invented the 
 mental machinery that has made possible the co-operation 
 of myriads of minds in the working of the physical mecha- 
 nism of a machine age. Our modern working organization, 
 with its instantaneous communications, its high technology, 
 its corporate structure, its world-changing mastery of tools, 
 comes straight from the Novum Organum.* 
 
 This remark is equally applicable to every great 
 directive mind of modem society. It is these 
 minds that mould new modes of, production and in- 
 spire the community at large to follow their con- 
 structive directions. ^ 
 
 Curiously enough, the Socialists either forget these 
 facts or consciously conceal them from the audience 
 to which they address their teachings. The im- 
 partial reader, however, wUl clearly realize that 
 modem society needs more than ever the assistance 
 and guidance of those creative forces which not in 
 theory but in life itself have brought forth new 
 processes of civilization. 
 
 (d) Let us now consider another argument of 
 
 Socialism, namely, that capitalism digs its own grave 
 
 by gi-adually eliminating the middle class, or petty 
 
 bourgeoisie, and by converting it into a class of 
 
 proletarians. 
 
 > Charles Ferguson, The Revolution AbsoltUe, p. 6 (New York, 
 1918). 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY loi 
 
 The Socialists affirm that it is a remarkable feature 
 of the capitalistic system of production that because of 
 the greater technical efficiency of the huge industrial 
 enterprises the smaller enterprises, sooner or later, 
 must inevitably be dissolved or otherwise ruined. 
 
 Broadly speaking, this means that society would 
 be ultimately divided into two classes only: the 
 capitalists and the proletarians. If so, a limited 
 ntmiber of industrial magnates would have to face 
 as their enemies an overwhelming majority of toilers 
 who would be at liberty to overthrow the existing 
 social order. A revolution of this kind, the Social- 
 ists claim, would be carried out for the purpose of 
 liberating the majority of the population from the 
 yoke imposed upon it by a minority of oppressors. 
 
 It will be recalled that modem Socialists include 
 in the middle class the farmer population, which, 
 they say, will be driven from their farms to factories 
 in the cities. This part of the Marxian theory is 
 very appealing because of its simplicity and ostensi- 
 ble conclusiveness. But, like the rest of his asser- 
 tions, it is nothing but a dogma. Here again the 
 figures contradict Marx. 
 
 If we examine the proportion of the rural or 
 agricultural population as compared with the urban, 
 we shall come to the conclusion that at present, 
 fifty years after Marx's prediction, the rural popula- 
 tion, both in the United States and in most of the 
 European countries, constitutes a majority, notwith- 
 standing the fact that capitalism has reached its 
 
I02 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 climax nearly everyTvhere. This is shown by the fol- 
 lowing table: 
 
 RURAL POPULATION 
 
 Country 
 
 Year 
 
 Rural 
 population 
 
 Percentage of 
 the entire 
 population 
 
 
 I910 
 I910 
 I9II 
 1906 
 1900 
 
 1897 
 I9II 
 
 49,348,883 
 1,654,277 
 1,647,350 
 
 22,715,011 
 4,836,904 
 
 92,849,560 
 7,907,556 
 
 53 ' 
 
 Belgium T 
 
 22 
 
 59 
 57 
 81 
 
 73 
 
 21 
 
 3 
 7 
 9 
 2 
 
 9 
 9' 
 
 
 France 
 
 
 Russia 
 
 £ncrland and Wales 
 
 
 
 These figures show that in both the United States 
 and Europe, with the exception of Belgium and 
 England, the agricultural population remains greater 
 than that of aU other elements combined. More- 
 over, in the United States, the agricultural popula- 
 tion is steadily increasing, although not as fast as 
 the urban population. Thus, in 1900 the rural 
 population was 44,384,930 as compared with 49,- 
 348,883 in 1910, which is an increase of 11. 2 per 
 cent. In France for decades the proportion of the 
 rural to the non-rural population has remained 
 more or less stable. The same applies to Roumania 
 and Russia. 
 
 It can also be definitely stated that in agriculture 
 there is no tendency toward the accumvilation of 
 property in fewer hands. On the contrary, if we 
 consider two extreme cases, those of the United 
 
 ' Compare with data given in the Year Book of the Department 
 of Agriculture, 1918, p. 713., 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 103 
 
 States and Russia, we shall find that for the last 
 ten to fifteen years the tendency has been qtiite 
 opposed to the Marxian theory of concentration. 
 In Russia, for instance, between 1900 and 1910 the 
 acreage of the farmer population experienced a 
 tremendous increase at the expense of the lands 
 owned by the large proprietors worked by capital- 
 istic methods. The same is true in regard to the 
 United States. In 1900 there were 5,737,372 farms 
 in this country with a total acreage of 838,591,774. 
 In 1910 the number of farms had increased to 6,361,- 
 502, while the area of land in farms was estimated 
 at 878,798,325. Moreover, the average acreage 
 in farms in 1900 was 146.2 and in 1910 only 138. i. 
 The average value of the farm for this period re- 
 mained more or less stable in the sense that although 
 the average farm in the United States in 1900 was 
 worth $3,563.00, and in 1910 $6,444.00, the average 
 value per acre of land in farms also experienced an 
 increase from $24.37 ^ ^9°° *o $46.64 in 1910. 
 Thus, the increased value of land has naturally 
 increased the average value per farm. 
 
 The fact that the number of farms increased more 
 rapidly than the acreage of land in farms is ac- 
 counted for partly by the considerable increase in 
 some sections of the country of small truck, poultry, 
 and fruit farms, and still more it is due to the estab- 
 lishment in the West of moderate-sized farms where 
 great cattle-ranches were formerly found. ^ 
 
 1 Thirteenth Census of the United States, takep in 1910, vol. V, 
 Agriculture, General Report and Analysis, pp. 27-29. 
 
I04 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Thus, as pertains to agriculture, Marx's theory of 
 concentration has suffered a decisive defeat. Con- 
 trary to the assertion of Marx and his followers, the 
 rural population has remained practically stable 
 and landownership shoivs a distinct tendency to 
 disrupt large estates into farms of medium size.. 
 Only in England and Belgium, which are not agri- 
 cultural cotmtries, does the urban population con- 
 stitute an overwhelming majority of the total. 
 With regard to^^ England, however, it must be re- 
 membered that for centuries there has been no in- 
 dependent farmer population, and that, therefore, 
 the rural population always emigrated to the 
 cities. 
 
 Possibly, because Marx while working on his 
 Capital, studied mainly English economic con- 
 ditions, he drew the conclusion that in every field 
 of economic life there is a tendency toward concen- 
 tration of capital in fewer hands. But what was 
 true of England proved to be untrue with regard to 
 other countries. In spite of the failure of Marx's 
 prophecies, more recent Socialists throughout the 
 world have religiously adopted the erroneous dogma 
 of Mafx as regards the concentration of capital, and, 
 moreover, have made out of this dogma the founda- 
 tion of the theory of class struggle, with the inevita- 
 ble elimination of the petty bourgeoisie. 
 
 In industry, it is true, the large enterprises have 
 increased in number, generally speaking, in all in- 
 dustrial countries; the reason lies principally in 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 105 
 
 the fact that modem mantifacture depends mainly 
 for its success upon a large output of cheap products. 
 In order, however, to meet the requirements of the 
 extensive but cheap market, expensive machinery- 
 is required. Quite obviously, expensive machinery 
 can be more easily used in large industrial enter- 
 prises than in small mechanical shops with limited 
 space and a limited number of employees. This 
 applies mainly to textiles and metallurgical indus- 
 tries. There is indeed nothing surprising in the fact 
 that a fourteen-inch long-range gxm, or a super- 
 dreadnought with a displacement of more than 
 30,000 tons, cannot be btdlt by the primitive methods 
 of mediaeval artisans' production. In this case the 
 very technical nature of production requires huge 
 plants and considerable numbers of manual work- 
 men. But even with respect to industry, a careful 
 analysis discloses that the tendency of concentration 
 is not so accentuated as SociaHsts would like to make 
 it appear. The following table, for instance, shows 
 the condition of manufacturing industries in the 
 United States during the period of 1900 to 1915 : 
 
 Census 
 
 Number of 
 establish- 
 ments 
 
 Capital 
 
 Persons 
 employed 
 
 Value ofproducts 
 
 1900. .. . 
 
 1905. ■•■ 
 1910. . . . 
 
 I915 •• 
 
 207,562 
 216,262 
 270,082 
 275.791 
 
 j58,978,825,ooo 
 12,686,266,000 
 18,490,749,000 
 22,790,980,000 
 
 5,079,225 
 5,990,072 
 
 7.431.799 
 8,000,554 
 
 |lI,4II, 121,000 
 
 14,802,147,000 
 20,767,546,000 
 24,246,435,000' 
 
 ' The Statesman's Year Book, 1919, pp. 460-461. 
 
io6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 The increase of capital invested in manufacturing 
 industries and of the value of commodities pro- 
 duced is self-evident, but the important point in 
 the above table is that it shows also a steady in- 
 crease in the ntunber of establishments, although not 
 quite in proportion to the increase in capital. This 
 means that the number of such enterprises prac- 
 tically kept pace with the industrial development 
 and with the general accumtdation of national 
 wealth. Such a condition should be favorably 
 looked upon because it proves that economic de- 
 velopment at large is steadily progressing. More- 
 over, it shows that the average manufacturing en- 
 terprise in the United States had but a modest in- 
 vestment of approximately $82,500 in 1915 as com- 
 pared with $43,500 in 1900. Again, in this case, we 
 see that even in America, which is undoubtedly one 
 of the most industrial countries in the world, the 
 average industrial capital is not excessive, and that 
 the medium-sized industry, employing twenty-fotu" 
 to twenty-eight workmen, is the backbone of na- 
 tional production. 
 
 All these figures must appear rathcfr discouraging 
 to the Socialist; but with the Marxian theory it 
 is always thus. On the surface it appears logical. 
 When, however, it comes to a close analysis of eco- 
 nomic conditions, when figures and facts are substi- 
 tuted for mere dogmas, the fallacy of modem Social- 
 ism becomes at once quite obvious. And yet the 
 dogmatic utterances of Marx have formed the basis 
 
CRITICISM OF THE MARX THEORY 107 
 
 of Socialist action throughout the world. Thus, for 
 instance, the distinct neglect of the farmer popula- 
 tion on the part of international Socialism is due to 
 the religious belief that the petty bourgeoisie must be 
 eliminated to insiure the triumph of the Communist 
 programme. Thus, fiu-ther, international Socialism 
 assumes a negative attitude toward the medium- 
 sized industrial enterprises and confines its explana- 
 tion to the dogmatic assertion that the industrial 
 concentration of capital is an accomplished fact and 
 that the continued existence of small industries 
 merely postpones the date of the final victory of the 
 proletarians. It is also for this reason that the 
 Socialists manifest a peculiar attitude of hatred 
 toward the workman who has succeeded in rising 
 from the proletarian ranks to the standard of the 
 petty bourgeois. 
 
 The Socialists indeed find themselves in a very 
 awkward situation. After having worshipped Marx 
 for decades, after having religiously adopted his 
 gospel — ^his new proletarian creed — they cannot 
 help but see that in spite of the prophecies of their 
 leader, modem society persists in retaining a social 
 structure which stands in distinct contradiction to 
 their theories and hopes. 
 
 With all their radical utterances the Socialists, 
 consciously or tmconsciously, strive to turn back 
 the wheel of history, by endeavoring to put the 
 incompetent not only on an equal level with, but 
 even above, those who are able to conduct national 
 
io8 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 affairs and manage national industries. With every 
 new phase of development the history of human- 
 ity furnishes evidence that science, technical abil- 
 ity, power of organization, and industrial co-opera- 
 tion will become the decisive factors in the future 
 methods of production, whatever they may be. The 
 Socialists, on the contrary, clinging to the abstract 
 dognias of Marx, affirm that the future belongs to 
 the proletarian and to him alone. With due respect 
 to the proletarian class, we say that it is by no means 
 the incarnation of scientific knowledge and technical 
 ability. Therefore, should future civilization be- 
 come entirely dependent upon the rule of the prole- 
 tarians, it would mean that the upper hand would be 
 given to the less capable, and to those who are not 
 fit to guide the delicate process of national produc- 
 tion. 
 
 It has been rumored recently that some of the 
 theoretical leaders of modem Socialism have come 
 out strongly against the Socialist rule of Lenin and 
 Trotzky in Russia. Thus, it was reported in the 
 press that Kautsky, who is one of the most dis- 
 tingtiished theoreticians of modem Socialism, has 
 definitely condemned the Bolshevist rule in Russia 
 on the ground that, instead of increasing productiv- 
 ity for the Russian people, it has led to the utter 
 niin of all industries in that coimtry. Taking this 
 report to be true, we affirm that Kautsky's new atti- 
 tude toward Bolshevism has but little significance 
 so. long as he himself continues to follow Marx. 
 
CRITICISM OP THE MARX THEORY 109 
 
 Lenin's activities in Russia are nothing but the logical 
 deduction from the theory of Marx. The basic 
 principles of this theory being wrong, the logical 
 deduction cannot be other than wrong. Therefore, 
 we affirm again that it is of scarcely any significance 
 whether a country shall be ruled by an I. W. W. or 
 a Menshevik or a Bolshevik or a Spartacan or a 
 Social Revolutionist, so long as all these and various 
 other representatives of modem Socialism continue 
 to profess the religion of Marx. 
 
 We can easily imderstand why at present Social- 
 ists endeavor to draw a distinction between Bolshev- 
 ism and Socialism. But Mr. Spargo in a recent 
 article in the World's Work calls Lenin a slavish 
 follower of Marx, both in his theories and in his 
 practical programme and tactical policy. "^ At the 
 same time, all the other Socialistic factions in the 
 United States and elsewhere are giving their whole- 
 hearted support to the Bolshevist rulers of Russia. 
 In this connection it is of interest to note that one 
 of the well-known publicists of Russia, Mr. J. V. 
 Hessen, has pointed out that aU the Socialistic 
 groups at present "crawl at the feet of the Bolshe- 
 viki, defend them in every way, and proclaim the 
 Bolshevist cause their own."^ 
 
 Indeed, it is impossible to reconcile the theory 
 of class struggle, which is the alpha and omega of 
 
 * World's Work, November, 1919, p. 29. 
 
 'New York Times, Magazine Section, November 23, 1919, "Real. 
 Story of Bolshevism." 
 
no SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 modem Socialism, with the practical problems of 
 industrial development and social co-operation. It 
 is obvious that constructive results can be, and will 
 be, achieved in economic fields only by bringing 
 all creative 'forces together, by giving them an 
 opportunity for their economic development, and 
 placing them under the supreme control of the 
 particular social groups which possess the ability 
 and knowledge to keep them all together. It is 
 in this way only that complete co-ordination of ef- 
 forts can be achieved. The war of classes, on the 
 contrary, can have no other effect 'than the gradual 
 disorganization of national production and the dis- 
 memberment of modem society into many social 
 units, every one of which will pursue its own dis- 
 connected aims without any respect for the good of 
 the people at large. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 THE GREAT SOCIALISTIC EXPERIMENT 
 
 IN RUSSIA 
 
 THE great Socialistic experiment was demon- 
 strated in Russia. 
 It took eleven hundred years to make 
 Russia great. It required but a few months of So- 
 cialistic misrule to bring her to utter ruin, complete 
 destruction, and deep misery. 
 
 Russia is a warning to the civilized world. In 
 Russia the Socialists had a wonderful chance to 
 prove that their theories were sound and practicable, 
 and if they failed they are to be blamed, not Russia. 
 
 The analysis of Russian conditions under Soviet 
 rule, therefore, is of the utmost importance. The 
 American International Workers of the World, the 
 British Independent Labor Party, the German Spar- 
 tacus group, the French S3nidicalists, and the various 
 other Marxian followers, have only one aim in view, 
 and that is to repeat everywhere throughout the 
 world the experiment to which Russia has been sub- 
 jected. 
 
 The civilized world is duty bound to take up the 
 Russian problem, because humanity as a whole will 
 have to make its final choice veiy soon, whether to 
 turn back to barbarism or to repel once and forever 
 
 III 
 
112 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 the sinister forces of Socialist reaction. Current 
 events accelerate the solution of this problem. A 
 month counts for a year in these times. Labor un- 
 rest throughout the world, the epidemic of strikes 
 spreading from one country to another, general dis- 
 satisfaction, only partly due to unsettled conditions 
 resulting from the war. Socialist, anarchist, and 
 general disloyal propaganda, reaching its climax, 
 especially in war-stricken countries, on the one hand, 
 and, on the other hand, the growing consciousness, 
 on the part of all loyal elements, of the impending 
 danger, and of the necessity to organize a strong 
 resistance against the wave of anarchy — all these 
 phenomena lead to the conclusion that the world 
 is reaUy approaching the rapids, and that the final 
 issue of the world battles is to be expected in the 
 near future. 
 
 It was in Russia, in the year 191 7, that the So- 
 cialism preached by Karl Marx, and which had 
 gradually come to be approved in theory by the So- 
 cialists throughout the world, was first put into 
 actual practice. With the fall of the Czar's Govern- 
 ment in 191 7, the Bolsheviki, who had for many 
 years urged the adoption of Marx Socialism by the 
 Russian people, saw their opportunity, and were not 
 slow to seize it. They immediately prepared a new 
 revolution to overthrow the Provisional Govern- 
 ment under Kerensky. This they brought about 
 by the very method advocated by Marx, namely, 
 by the use of violence, but without any mandate 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 113 
 
 from the Russian people at large, or any attempt 
 to ascertain the wishes of the majority. As soon as 
 they had Overthrown the Kerensky Government, 
 which at least professed to be seeking to carry out 
 the desires of the people as a whole, these Marxian 
 revolutionists began to put into practice the whole 
 programme of their leader — including the abolition 
 of capital, the Socialization of all industry under 
 the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the extermi- 
 nation of the capitalistic or bourgeois class. How 
 far they have succeeded in actually carrying out 
 these objects, how far they have added anything in 
 the way of constructive measures to the programme 
 of Marx, and how far in practice they were forced 
 to depart from his precepts, we shaU now consider. 
 In general, it may be stated that on the destructive 
 side their efforts have been, with certain interest- 
 ing exceptions, only too successful, but on the con- 
 structive side a complete failure. 
 
 On the 28th of October, 191 7, the Provisional 
 Government under Mr. ETerensky was forcibly over- 
 thrown by gangs of disloyal sailors and soldiers 
 tmder the leadership of Messrs. Trotzky and Lenin. 
 The Women's Death Battalion and the Cadets of 
 the Military Colleges, who remained loyal to the 
 Provisional Government, were mercilessly murdered 
 by the Bolsheviki, shot on the spot or drowned in 
 the Neva, and the wholesale looting of the shops, 
 banks, museums, and private apartments was in- 
 stituted in Petrograd by the Bolsheviki. 
 
114 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 The official announcement of the revolution reads 
 as follows : 
 
 From the Military Revolutionary Committee of Petrograd 
 
 Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. 
 To the citizens of the Russian Republic: 
 
 The Provisional Government has been overthrown. The 
 sovereign authority has passed to the Petrograd Soviet of 
 Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies of the MiUtary Revolu- 
 tionary Committee, which is at the head of the Petrograd 
 proletariat and the garrisons. The cause for which the 
 people have been fighting: immediate proposal of a demo- 
 cratic peace, repeal of freehold lapd properties, workers' 
 control over production, the establishment of a Soviet Gov- 
 ernment — ^is guaranteed. 
 
 Long live the revolution of the Workers, Soldiers, and 
 Peasants ! 
 
 Military Revolutionary Committee of Petrograd 
 Soviet or Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. 
 October 28, 191 7. 
 
 As to this proclamation, it may be remarked that 
 the mentioning of the peasants is rather puzzling, 
 since no peasants participated in the murder of the 
 defenders of the Provisional Government, and the 
 whole Bolshevist revolution had nothing to do with 
 the farmer class. The forcible overthrow of the 
 Provisional Government and the forcible dissolution 
 of the Constituent Assembly, which was to have 
 met in Petrograd at that time, was carried out en- 
 tirely by the irresponsible mob of sailors, idle work- 
 men, deserters from the front, German agents, and 
 Jewish internationalists. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 115 
 
 Thus, the 28th of October, 191 7, is the official 
 date of the birth of the Soviet r6gime. Soon after 
 similar revolutions occurred in Moscow and in 
 other big cities in Russia. In every instance the 
 Bolsheviki took the opportunity of looting, pltui- 
 dering, murdering, and robbing the population at 
 large. 
 
 The official decrees concerning the confiscation of 
 property kept in safe-deposit vatilts, as well as the 
 decree as to the confiscation of the shares of the 
 former private banks, and the law proclaiming the 
 "nationalization" of banks, were issued much later, 
 namely, in December, 191 7, and in January, 1918. 
 The confiscation of private property, however, be- 
 gan immediately after the overthrow of the Pro- 
 visional Government. The procedure was rather a 
 primitive one. Thus, the safe-deposit vaults in 
 several Petrograd banks were "nationalized" in the 
 following manner: 
 
 A gang of Red soldiers and sailors, together with 
 a group of thieves and ex-convicts, armed from head 
 to foot, would call on a certain bank and demand 
 that the safe-deposit boxes be opened immediately 
 by the custodian. When the demand of this gang 
 was disregarded, the custodian was shot on the spot. 
 Thereupon, the soldiers, sailors, and thieves entered 
 the safe-deposit vault, and with the assistance of 
 the burglars, who naturally had some experience in 
 this line of business, the safes were opened and 
 cleared out by these, enlightened citizens of Soviet 
 
ii6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Russia. Sometimes the Bolshevist burglars took 
 the trouble to present to the custodian of the bank 
 a written order of some kind of regimental Soviet, 
 authorizing the soldiers and sailors to proceed with 
 the honorable work of breaking open the safes, and 
 as Marx would express himself, "expropriating the 
 expropriators." In other instances, however, no 
 such orders were produced, and the Red sailors and 
 burglars simply broke in and robbed the banks along 
 the lines of a regular hold-up. 
 
 Private apartments were constantly searched by 
 drunken soldiers, both by day and by night. Pri- 
 vate property, especially silver, gold, watches, rings, 
 clothing, and blankets, was dragged out of the apart- 
 ments and kept by the Bolsheviki. Sometimes 
 people were stopped on the streets during severe 
 frosts, by Soviet officials, and fur coats and warm 
 clothing were taken under the threat of rifles. 
 
 A story was widely circulated in Petrograd to the. 
 effect that one of the Soviet Red Guards stopped 
 on the Nevsky Prospect a gentleman who was 
 wearing a fur coat. The Bolshevik in a very im- 
 pudent manner ordered the gentleman to give up 
 his coat. The poor fellow answered that the Red 
 Guard soldier was not entitled to take his fur coat 
 awky since he had just robbed another man of it. 
 The soldier then made the melancholy remark: 
 "If that is the case, you have the right to wear it." 
 
 Whether or not this story is true ,we don't know. 
 But it surely expresses very accurately the condi- 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 117 
 
 tions tinder Bolshevist rule in Russia. The follow- 
 ing formula reflects better than anything the up- 
 side-down morality of the Bolsheviki: 
 
 // you can prove that you have stolen something, you are al- 
 lowed to own it; if it is proved that you own something, it is 
 permissible to rob you. 
 
 Under these pleasant circumstances practically 
 all work was discontinued both in Petrograd and in 
 other industrial centres controlled by the Bolsheviki. 
 The big steel plants iii^ Petrograd and its vicinity, 
 such as the Poutilovski and the Obouchovsky mills, 
 in which tens of thousands of workmen were em- 
 ployed, ceased work, and most of the other plants 
 followed their example. The workmen who re- 
 mained idle, on some occasions, forced the state to 
 pay them wages. In those cases the wages were 
 not, as Mr. Plumb would call it, "a dividend on 
 efficiency," but a dividend on idleness. 
 
 Railroad repair-shops were almost deserted by the 
 workmen. Railroad service became crippled very 
 soon, thus aggravating food conditions in Petrograd. 
 All governmental departments and schools were 
 closed, both because intellectuals refused to serve 
 the treacherous misrule of Mr. Trotzky and be- 
 cause thousands of them were imprisoned by the 
 Red Guards, and held as hostages for months and 
 months in sanitary conditions which we would con- 
 sider shameful for our cattle. 
 Almost all Christian churches were closed by order 
 
ii8 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 of the District Soviets, on the ground that religion 
 in general is a bourgeois invention. 
 
 Business had stopped entirely, the shops being 
 "nationalized," the goods stolen, some of the shop- 
 owners being executed on the ground that they be- 
 longed to the bourgeois class, while others fled 
 abroad, or, in the central districts of Russia, sought 
 protection and hospitality among the peasants. 
 
 Such was the beginning of Soviet rule, which the 
 Bolsheviki themselves have described as the dic- 
 tatorship of the proletariat. 
 
 Since the November Revolution of 191 7 the Bol- 
 sheyiki have made a series of ostensible modi- 
 fications in their governmental methods. For in- 
 stance, schools were nominally reopened, but there 
 is still practically no education in Soviet Russia, 
 the school children themselves, being allowed to in- 
 terfere with the educational system, which was also 
 broken down and corrupted by other means. Under 
 the tremendous pressure of the Russian people as a 
 whole the Bolsheviki were compelled to bow before 
 the Greek Orthodox Church, at least to a certain 
 extent. Nevertheless, up to the present moment 
 the persecution of Christian priests is in full swing. 
 Up to the present time the Bolsheviki are clinging 
 to Bebel's formula that "Christianity and Socialism 
 stand toward each other as fire and water." On 
 this ground they are endeavoring to convince the 
 citizens of Soviet Russia that "religion is the opium 
 of the people." In the same way the Bolsheviki 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 119 
 
 had to modify certain of their methods concerning 
 industrial matters, but on the whole the situation 
 in Soviet Russia remains hopeless, and the territory 
 controlled by the Soviets resembles a cemetery more 
 than a living civilization.' 
 
 Indignation against Soviet tyranny soon devel- 
 oped into a series of open revolts against Soviet 
 officials. Peoples' commissaries were murdered on 
 every convenient occasion. During these revolts 
 
 • Mr. N. Roerich, one of the leading Russian painters, in his 
 recent pamphlet Violators of Art, refers to the wide-spread Bolshev- 
 ist propaganda by means of which they are trying to convince 
 the outside world that they are the only friends of true art, science, 
 and culture. Mr. Roerich states in this connection as follows: 
 
 "The Left press in Sweden, Great Britain, France, and America 
 systematically published information on this subject. 
 
 "And now as regards Heaven (without inverted commas), or, 
 rather, that which leads to Heaven. 
 
 "The venerable painter Victor Vasnetsov has been shot. Lappo- 
 Danilevsky, member of the Academy of Sciences, died of starvation. 
 The Academician Smirnov, Professor Vesselovsky, Professor Shliap- 
 kin, the Academician Radlov, Professor Fortunatov, the famous bota- 
 nist Fomintsin, the famous pianist Zilotti, and a number of other emi- 
 nent men have suffered the same fate. A number of professors have 
 been shot, especially in Kiev. The artistic furniture and fittings 
 of many houses have been destroyed. Articles have been taken 
 from the Winter Palace, from Yussupov Gallery and other collec- 
 tions, and have been sent abroad. The Patriarch's Collection of 
 Vestments has been looted, churches have been robbed. A number 
 of artists and literary men are languishing in prison. Professor S. 
 F. Platonov, the celebrated historian of Russia, died in prison. In 
 the theatres there is anarchy, and the players are treated abomi- 
 nably, like slaves without any will of their own. School children 
 have had their morals corrupted. Other people's treasures have 
 been taken and dispersed throughout the provinces and villages, 
 whereby their destruction is insured. During searches in artists' 
 houses, their colors and appliances are taken away. Balmont, the 
 splendid poet, such writers as Merezhkovsky and Remizov, are 
 perishing. What does it all mean?" 
 
I20 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 not only the revolters themselves suffered the death 
 penalty but also their families were executed by the 
 Bolsheviki. When recently an attempt to over- 
 throw the Soviet regime was made, Social Revolu- 
 tionaries issued a Manifesto which is most instruc- 
 tive both as an illustration of the nature of Soviet 
 activities and as a side-Kght on Socialist psychology 
 in general. 
 
 In Europe and in the United States there is a 
 wide-spread opinion that while the Bolsheviki are 
 distinctly bad, other Socialistic factions in Russia — 
 such as the Mensheviki and Socialist Revolution- 
 ists — are very good, and that were those other fac- 
 tions in power everything would be all right. The 
 Manifesto of the Social Revolutionaries reads as 
 follows: 
 
 Down with the Soviet Government! Comrades, work- 
 ing men, peasants, sailors, and soldiers of the Red Army ! 
 
 Eternal shame rest upon the Bolsheviki, the violators, the 
 deceivers, the agents-provocateurs of the Russian people ! 
 
 The Petrograd Soviet does not express the will of the work- 
 ing men, the sailors, and the soldiers of the Red Army. This 
 Soviet was never really elected. The elections were either 
 dishonestly manipulated or else conducted under the threat 
 of execution and starvation. By means of the same kind of 
 terror the Bolsheviki have crushed all liberty of speech, the 
 press, and the assembly for the working class. 
 
 The Petrograd Soviet consists of the Bolshevist impostors. 
 It is but a blind instrument in the hands of that band of 
 provocateurs, hangmen, and murderers who constitute the 
 Bolshevist r6gime. Let this self-styled Soviet stand before 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 121 
 
 the working class of Russia and before the whole world and 
 answer the following questions: 
 
 Where is the dictatorship of the proletariat and of the working 
 peasants? 
 It does not exist, for its place has been taken by the dic- 
 tatorship of the central committee of the Bolshevist Party, 
 which rules the country through the instrumentaUty of all 
 kinds of extraordinary commissions and of punitive expedi- 
 tions consisting of foreign mercenaries. 
 
 What has become of the authoriiy of the Soviets? 
 
 In the whole of the Soviet Russia there is nowhere to-day 
 any authoritative governmental power. 
 
 Where are the rights of the voters? 
 
 In the factories and in the foimdries, on ships and in rail- 
 road-trains there are now only self-appointed Bolshevist 
 commissaries, men who had served the other regime but a 
 short time ago, and who now work their will upon the work- 
 ing men and the peasants. 
 
 What has become of the freedom of speech and of the press, es- 
 pecially the l<ibor and the peasant press? 
 The working men are not permitted to hold meetings. 
 They are not allowed to publish their own newspapers. 
 They do not dare — under tJie penalty of imprisonment or 
 execution — to say a word against the BolshevikL 
 
 Where is the labor control over the factories and foundries 
 which was promised to the working men? 
 It has been displaced by the self-appointed Bolshevist 
 agents, for the government does not trust the working 
 men. The Bolsheviki have attached the working men to 
 their places of employment, thus creating a new form of 
 serfdom. 
 
122 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Where is the socialization of the land? What has become of 
 the promises to abolish capital punishment? 
 Capital punishpient now rages both at the front and 
 throughout the country, and it is directed not only against 
 the bourgeoisie but also against the poor. 
 
 The party of the Bolsheviki in its struggle against the 
 working men and the peasants is supported by the bayonets 
 of the mercenary Chinese and Lettish troops, commanded 
 by traitor officers who find themselves in a better situation 
 under the rule of Lenin and Trotzky than they had ever 
 found under the regime of the Czars. 
 
 Comrades ! At the present time not a stone has remained 
 of that edifice of liberty which was upreared by the October 
 revolution. The place of that edifice has been taken by 
 words of deception and by tyranny. 
 
 «The reader will easily understand that the quarrel 
 between the Bolsheviki and the Social Revolution- 
 ists is more or less a family dispute. While the 
 Manifesto proves very distinctly that not one of 
 the Bolsheviki's promises was kept, it also shows 
 that the Social Revolutionists blame the Bolshe- 
 viki mainly because they did not socialize the land, 
 that they did not give to labor control over the fac- 
 tories and foundries, that capital punishment is 
 directed "not only against the bourgeoisie but also 
 against the poor." In other words, were capital 
 punishment applied only to the boiu-geoisie it would 
 be all right ; but because it is applied to some of the 
 proletarians, it is all wrong. It is not against the 
 tyrannic principle of Socialism as such that the So- 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 123 
 
 cial Revolutionists are protesting, but it is against 
 the fact that certain principles were not put into 
 effect to the extent that they would Uke to see them 
 applied. 
 
 According to their views, were the land socialized, 
 and were the opportunity given to labor to control 
 autocratically national industry, the Soviet rule 
 would be the very thing to recommend to all other 
 nations. 
 
 The attitude of the Social Revolutionaries and 
 the Mensheviki toward the Soviets, in fact, amounts 
 to this: 
 
 We are opposed to the Soviet regime, not because it is 
 tyranny, not because it is a menace to civilization, but be- 
 cause we are not allowed to participate in the Soviet misrule. 
 
 The agrarian question, of course, was one of the 
 most difficult problems with which the Bolsheviki 
 were confronted. They attempted to solve it in a 
 very crude manner. It was under the regime of 
 Kerensky, and while the Social Revolutionists were 
 in power, that the Bolsheviki started their propa- 
 ganda, among the peasants, urging them to confis- 
 cate the farms and estates of private owners. As a 
 result of this propaganda, private landowners, nearly 
 everywhere, were driven by the peasants from their 
 estates. In many instances illiterate mobs burned 
 down country houses, destroyed agricultural ma- 
 chinery, stealing cattle and: mtirdering those land- 
 
124 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION, 
 
 owners who resisted the. arrogant demands of the 
 mob. 
 
 The Bolshevist revolution gave a new impetus to 
 the "nationalization" 'schemes of the irresponsible 
 elements of the Russian peasants. In a few months 
 the agricultural system was entirely destroyed, and 
 the peasants, after having forcibly seized the pri- 
 vate lands, began to quarrel among themselves as 
 to the best method of distributing the spoils. Peas- 
 ants from distant villages and districts, armed with 
 rifles, were overrunning the country, demanding 
 that a share of land be given to them by those peas- 
 ants who confiscated one estate or another. Some- 
 times actual fighting took place among the various 
 peasant groups. Far from being Socialists, and seek- 
 ing not merely the use of the land, as decreed by the 
 Soviet Constitution, the peasants desired to keep 
 the seized lands for themselves, according to the 
 principle of private ownership. The Bolsheviki 
 found that they had no other choice than to let them 
 do this, which was entirely in opposition to theoreti- 
 cal Socialism. The Socialist leaders in Russia soon 
 came to the conclusion that it would be impossible 
 for them to compel the peasants to "socialize the 
 land" and to give up their farms for the benefit of 
 the imaginary Socialistic state. At the same time, 
 however, they passed a law which provides that 
 "the right to privately own land within the botmd- 
 aries of the Russian Republic is hereby abolished, 
 forever." 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 125 
 
 All land within the boundaries of the Russian Republic, 
 with all mines, forests, and waters, is hereby declared the 
 property of the nation. 
 
 The Republic has the right to control all land, with all 
 the mines, forests, and waters thereon, through the central 
 and local administration, in accordance with the regulation 
 provided by the present law. All titles to land at present 
 held by individuals, associations, and institutions are abol- 
 ished in so far as they contradict this law. AU land, mines, 
 forests, and waters at present owned by, and otherwise in the 
 possession of, individuals, associations, and institutions are 
 confiscated without compensation for the loss incurred. 
 
 The whole law bears the traits of the most obvi- 
 ous hypocrisy, since the Bolsheviki would never have 
 dared, and never did dare, to confiscate, especially 
 without compensation, the farms owned by the 
 peasants. Therefore, the whole law amounts sim- 
 ply to a legalization of robbery. 
 
 As to the great majority of landowners belonging 
 to the Russian peasant class, the legal status con- 
 cerning their lands was never changed in the least 
 nor affected by the above law. 
 
 Moreover, it soon became apparent to the Bol- 
 sheviki that the peasants, who constitute an over- 
 whelming majority of Russia's population (about 
 eighty per cent), were not among their stanch sup- 
 porters. In the first place, at least seventy-five per 
 cent of the peasants were landowners themselves and, 
 therefore, Socialistic schemes appealed very little to 
 them. The remainder of the peasant population 
 (from twenty to twenty-five per cent) were labelled 
 
126 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 by the Bolsheviki as "peasant beggars." It was to 
 this class alone that the Bolsheviki looked for as- 
 sistance. It was alleged that the "peasant beggars " 
 were the only real peasants, because they alone un- 
 derstood the proletarian spirit. As to the bulk of 
 the peasantry, they were condemned by Mr. Trotz- 
 ky and his followers as supporters and eulogists of 
 the bourgeoisie. 
 
 The policy of the Bolshevist leaders was to put 
 at variance these two groups of the farmer popula- 
 tion. 
 
 In a recent pamphlet of Trotzky's, under the 
 title Struggle Against Hunger, the class of land- 
 owning and well-to-do peasants or farmers is called 
 "the advance-guard of the Russian boiirgeoisie." 
 Trotzky confesses that "at present the well-to-do 
 farmers are the main enemies of the workmen and 
 the laboring masses in the cities as well as of the 
 village beggars." ^" 
 
 Trotzky also stated that "we will grab bread 
 from the well-to-do farmers for the beggars' benefit 
 and we will exchange this bread for clothes, nails, 
 agricultural machinery, for everything which is 
 available in the city and which the village is in need 
 of. The distribution will be carried out through 
 committees of peasant beggars; they will take the 
 bread from the well-to-do farmers and exchange it 
 for clothes, which will be distributed among them." 
 
 1 Trotzky's Struggle Against Hunger, p. 24 (Moscow, 1918, book 
 publishing firm, "Communist" Russian pamphlet). 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 127 
 
 Moreover, Trotzky confessed that were a war to 
 begin between the ^ city and the village, it would 
 mean the coUapse of the revolution.^ 
 
 With all this confusion in the mind of the Russian 
 peasant as a result of the insidious propaganda, he 
 has sense enough to withhold his food-supplies, for 
 the mere reason that in exchange for food he is 
 unable to buy in the cities those articles which are 
 needed in his household. 
 
 With all industries nationalized, with all shops 
 robbed and looted, and with all banks closed, the 
 output of commodities has decreased to an enormous 
 extent. Therefore, we can easily understand Mr. 
 Trotzky's indignation with regard to the withhold- 
 ing of, food-supplies by the peasants; but we can 
 also easily guess why the Russian peasant pays very 
 little, if any, attention to Mr. Trotzky's indigna- 
 tion. 
 
 Owing to this attitude of the peasants, the food 
 situation in the cities went from bad to worse in 
 Soviet Russia. People are now starving en masse. 
 The rationing of food helps very little, since there is 
 really nothing to ration. Trotzky himself made 
 public the following wire despatches which were re- 
 ceived during the spring and summer of 191 8 by 
 the Soviet Government: 
 
 Wire despatch from the City of Sergiev-Possad : 
 
 Give us bread; otherwise we are lost. 
 
 ^ ' Compare ibid., pp. 26 and 28. 
 
128 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Wire despatch from the City of Briansk, dated 
 May 30, 1918: 
 
 At the Maltzoff and Briajisk mills mortality is enonnous, 
 especially among children. There is a hunger-typhus in the 
 county. 
 
 Wire despatch from the City of Klin (thirty-seven 
 miles to the south of Moscow), dated June 2, 1918: 
 
 Klin is entirely deprived of bread for two weeks. 
 
 Wire despatch from the City of Pavlov-Possad, 
 dated May 21, 1918: 
 
 The population is starving. .There is no bread; it is im- 
 possible to get it from anjrwhere. 
 
 Wire despatch from the City of Dorogobouj, dated 
 June 3, 1918: 
 
 Himger is acute. Mass diseases are prevailing.^ 
 
 Wholesale starvation in Russian cities and in 
 most of the rural districts affected by the Bolshevist 
 regime is the net result of the Socialists' incompetent 
 and inefficient management of state affairs. Even 
 Bolshevist apologists do not deny these facts. 
 Throughout Mr. Arthur Ransome's recent book, 
 Russia in 1919, many damaging admissions are made 
 as to the present deplorable economic situation in 
 Soviet Russia. On page 42 of this book he gives a 
 most graphic description of the starvation condi- 
 tions existing in Moscow while he was there. The 
 Soviet bureaucracy, composed of ex-convicts, graft- 
 ^ Trotzky's Struggle Against Hunger, pp. 4 and 5. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 129 
 
 ers, professional agitators, and thieves, has been 
 simply unable to cope with the complicated eco- 
 nomic situation. Therefore, when it came to solve 
 the problem of wholesale hunger, the Bolsheviki 
 proclaimed a holy guerilla of the cities against the 
 rural districts, and regular food crusades were in- 
 stituted by Trotzky and Apfelbaum in order to rob 
 the peasants of the small stocks of food which were 
 left in the villages. Red Guard soldiers, armed with 
 rifles and sometimes with machine-gims, overran 
 the rural districts, seized pigs, chickens, bread, and 
 horses from the peasants, carrying all these food- 
 stuffs back to the cities. Anger against such methods 
 of providing supplies for the idle city population 
 grew very strong and in many districts the peasants 
 revolted against the Soviet officials. Naturally, these 
 revolts were suppressed in the most bloody manner. 
 In order to enable the reader to form a correct 
 judgment as to the economic achievements of the 
 Socialist management in Russia, we call attention 
 to the following data: 
 
 (a) Food Situation 
 
 I 
 Direct advices from Petrograd state that meat is 
 
 no longer available. As early as in the spring of 
 19 1 8 horse-meat was very scarce. People were 
 eager to get rats and mice, and dog-meat was con- 
 sidered a luxury, costing more than six roubles per 
 pound. The latest communication from Soviet 
 Russia indicates that the Chinese are selling hu- 
 
I30 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 man flesh.* Bread is also a luxury which only 
 the Soviet officials and Red Guard soldiers can 
 obtain, but even they are limited to one-half pound 
 daily. Butter and sugar are unobtainable. Fish 
 (only herrings) is very scarce. Following is a list 
 giving food prices at Moscow in January-March, 
 1919,^ as compared with those in September, 1919: 
 
 January-March 
 
 Roubles 
 per pound' 
 
 Black bread 12 to 14 
 
 White bread (not ob- 
 tainable). 
 
 Beef 27 to 30 
 
 Pork 40 to 45 
 
 Sugar 90 to 100 
 
 Tea 90 to 100 
 
 Rye flour 15 to 16 
 
 Wheat flour 20 to 25 
 
 Rice 
 
 Potatoes 5 to 
 
 Carrots 3 to 4 
 
 Butter 100 to 120 
 
 Oil used instead of 
 
 butter 45 to 
 
 Horse-flesh 12 to 
 
 Mutton 30 to 
 
 Lard and bacon 70 to 
 
 Dog-meat 5 to 
 
 One cat is sold at 
 
 Soup-meat 
 
 Oats 
 
 40 
 6 
 
 55 
 i6 
 
 35 
 80 
 
 7 
 6 
 
 25 
 6 
 
 September* 
 
 Black bread . 
 White bread . 
 
 Beef 
 
 Pork 
 
 Roubles 
 per pound 
 
 50 
 , . . . 120 
 . . . . 120 
 280 
 
 Sugar (loaf) 280 
 
 Sugar (soft) 170 
 
 '1,600 
 
 60 
 
 45 
 
 115 
 
 200 
 
 260 
 
 Tea 
 
 Biscuits 
 Barley . 
 Salt.... 
 Honey . 
 Cheese. 
 
 Provence oil 360 
 
 Cream 100 
 
 Veal ICO 
 
 Sausages 220 
 
 Plums 75 
 
 Coffee 200 
 
 Mushrooms 450 
 
 Soap 250 
 
 1 Compare this data with that given in an article by Arthur E. 
 Coping, under the title "Red Terror Still in Full Swing," in the 
 New York Times, October 4, 1919. 
 
 ' Compare with British White Book, pp. 48, 58, etc. 
 
 ' The par value of one rouble equals 51 cents. 
 
 * Economicheskaya Zhisn, September 11, 1919. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 131 
 
 Although the above list shows that food prices 
 have risen to an extreme level, yet food is almost 
 unobtainable, and it is only the privileged class of 
 proletarians and Red Army soldiers who are in a 
 position to buy at these figures. As to cocoa and 
 cereals, they cannot be obtained at any price. 
 
 (6) Metals, Fur, Etc. 
 
 There are many other articles which are unob- 
 tainable. For instance, in Moscow and in Petro- 
 grad, soap is so scarce that only half a pound per 
 month per capita is sold by the Soviet officials. 
 Furs have disappeared entirely. Fur coats were 
 sold last year in Moscow, in the thieves' market, at 
 7,000 roubles apiece. Shoes, underwear, and other 
 clothing are also exceedingly scarce and can be 
 bought only at ridiculous prices. Apart from this 
 there is a metal famine which is growing from bad 
 to worse. According to the Bolshevist official pub- 
 lication, Economicheskaya Zhisn {Economic Life), 
 nails cost 700 roubles per pound; tin kitchen utensils 
 average 450 roubles per pound; enamelled iron uten- 
 sils 600 roubles per pound; brass, tin, and copper are 
 practically unobtainable.* 
 
 ' Compare the above data with information contained in an article 
 in the London Morning Post, "Bolshevism," August 13, 1919, and 
 British White Book, pp. 58, 60, etc. 
 
132 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 (c) Iron 
 
 The principal iron district is located in South 
 Russia, in the Governments of Ekaterinoslav and 
 Kherson. The iron-fields at Krivoj Rog, under nor- 
 mal conditions, supplied some 3 ,000,000 tons of ore per 
 annum, employing from 23,000 to 25,000 workmen. 
 
 The Nikopol-Mariupol works, with a normal 
 monthly output of 500,000 poods (i pood is equal to 
 36 pounds), produced only 17,000 poods dtuing 
 April, 1 91 9, and in May, 1919, work was stopped 
 entirely. 
 
 At the Donetz-Yurievska plants in May, 19 18, 
 there was no work at all. 
 
 At the Briansk mills in May, 1918, only 2,500 
 workmen remained out of the normal number of 
 6,000. 
 
 (d) Coal 
 
 The Donetz basin produced under normal con- 
 ditions before the revolution, 1,500,000,000 poods per 
 annum. ' In September, 19 17, the output was re- 
 duced to 1,358,000 tons. In October, 1917, to i,- 
 136,000 tons. In November, 1917, to 1,225,000 
 tons. After the Bolshevist revolution the output 
 decreased in December, 191 7, to 811,000 tons, and 
 in January, 1918, the output fell to 491,000 tons. 
 
 In the Ural district the coal production fell from 
 a normal 6,000,000 to 7,000,000 poods monthly to 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 133 
 
 800,000 to 900,000 poods monthly, which means a 
 decrease of eighty-six per cent. In January, 1919, 
 the coal situation was so acute that the so-called 
 Supreme Council of National Economics proposed to 
 close down all factories, including the mining plants, 
 in order to keep the railroads running.^ 
 
 The same conditions prevail as to copper and oil 
 and other branches of national industry. 
 
 {e) Agriculture 
 
 Although we have no reliable and exhaustive sta- 
 tistical data on the results of agriculture under the 
 Bolshevist regime, it seems quite obvious that here, 
 too, conditions are quite alarming. 
 
 From the wire despatches quoted by Trotzky in 
 his pamphlet Struggle Against Hunger, we have al- 
 ready seen that starvation was prevailing not only 
 in the industrial centres but also in the rural dis- 
 tricts. Of course, in Little Russia, the so-called 
 Ukrainia, conditions are much better than in Cen- 
 tral and Northern Russia, due mainly to the fact 
 that in this region the Bolshevist influence has been 
 comparatively slight and has not led to wholesale 
 ruin of industry and agriculture. 
 
 Nevertheless, sugar production in the Kiev dis- 
 
 1 Compare this data with the collection of reports on Bolshevism 
 in Russia, presented to Parliament I^ command of his Majesty, 
 April, 1919, pp. 72 and 73. This document is the so-called British 
 White Book. It is one of the most reliable reports on conditions in. 
 Russia under the Bolshevist r6gime. 
 I 
 
134 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 trict has shown a decrease of forty-eight to fifty per 
 cent as compared with normal conditions. The one 
 region approaching normal conditions is the Kuban 
 region, which was but slightly affected both by the 
 March Revolution and by the Sociahst experiment 
 of the Soviets. 
 
 But even in the line of agriciilttu-e conditions are 
 most deplorable. Before the revolution European 
 Russia's agricultural resources were so great that 
 most of the central and northern European coiui- 
 tries were practically fed by Russian grain. In 19 13, 
 for instance, 33,000,000 tons of grain were exported 
 from European Russia, and also very considerable 
 quantities of sugar were annually exported from the 
 Kiev region to Great Britain. At present Russia 
 herself is badly in need of grain. Her northern and 
 central districts, including those of Moscow and 
 Vladimir, are ravaged by wholesale starvation. The 
 surplus grain resources, if any, available in South 
 Russia cannot be shipped to the northern regions, 
 partly because the peasants refuse to give up their 
 stocks and partly because of. the complete break- 
 down of the entire transportation system. More- 
 over, civil war, raging throughout Russia, brings 
 further disturbance and aggravates existing diffi- 
 culties in the farmers' work. As early as in 1917, 
 as a result of the revolution, Russia's grain-crops fell 
 far below the needs of the Russian poptilation. At 
 the same time the Food Ministry estimates called 
 for a minimum of 1,129,000 tons of grain per month. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 135 
 
 The actual available supply, however, did not ex- 
 ceed 560,000 tons per month. Due to the looting 
 of private estates, instigated by the Socialists of 
 various factions, under Kerensky's r6gime, many 
 prosperous agricultural regions were completely 
 devastated, their grain-supplies being reduced to a 
 starvation level. Thus, for instance, the Govern- 
 ment of Samara (Volga region), which under normal 
 conditions contributed 800,000-900,000 tons of grain 
 to Russia's annual req{iirement, itself demanded 
 help from outside. Under the Soviet regime the 
 agricultural situation has become still more alarm- 
 ing. ^ 
 
 (/) Transport 
 
 The railroad crisis in Soviet Russia has probably 
 reached its climax. Even in 1917, under Keren- 
 sky's regime, the transportation problem was ex- 
 tremely acute. The transportation of huge quanti- 
 ties of munitions and food-supplies for the main- 
 tenance of the army in the field was carried out 
 with the greatest difficulty. The west-bound traific 
 was seriously hampered by the disorderly retreat of 
 the Russian armies. Mobs of soldiers had become 
 the real masters of the railroad situation. West- 
 bound trains were stopped by the revolutionary com- 
 
 ' This data should be compared with official reports of the Russian 
 Provisional Government (Food Ministry) for 191 7 and with fig- 
 ures given in the British White Book, pp. 73-75. 
 
136 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 mittees of soldiers' deputies and the engineers were 
 compelled by force to conduct the trains in the op- 
 posite direction. Travelling on the Russian rail- 
 roads became a real torture, sometimes a mortal 
 danger. Mr. Robert Wilton, who for several years 
 during the war was staff correspondent for the Lon- 
 don Times in Russia, gives a vivid illustration of 
 Russian railroad conditions just before the Bolshev- 
 ist coup d'etat: 
 
 "On the Moscow and Vitebsk lines," says Mr. 
 Wilton, "and all the railways leading from the front, 
 pandemonium reigned. . . . The men who climbed 
 on the roofs in the cold winter stamped their feet to 
 keep themselves warm and often broke through and 
 fell on their comrades below. At night-time they 
 frequently slipped off in their sleep or were knocked 
 off when the train passed londer bridges or tunnels. 
 Hence, they came to be called letchiki (flyers). 
 Whatever they touched, they stole or destroyed. 
 Window-ciirtains were torn off for all sorts of sump- 
 tuary purposes, for foot-gear or clothing. All the 
 fittings disappeared. Benches were demolished for 
 fuel. The inside of a railway-carriage, after being 
 thus 'appropriated,' was an appalling sight. More- 
 over, in their mad rush for seats, many would try 
 to anticipate those who were entering by the door 
 ... by flinging themselves through the windows, 
 first smashing them with heavy sacks wherein they 
 carried 'loot.' . . . Moreover, food and goods 
 trains were being systematically plundered by the 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 137 
 
 deserters. For weeks and months this abomination 
 continued." ^ 
 
 Such was the effect of the Socialist propaganda 
 upon the raihroad situation. Nevertheless, in 191 7, 
 before the revolution, there were still about 30,000 
 locomotives in working order, whereas the length 
 of the railroads in operation was estimated at about 
 55, 000 versts (i Russian verst equals three-quarters 
 of a mile). In January, 1919, there were only 8,500 
 engines left, and according to a confession made by 
 Mr. Nevsky, the Bolshevist Commissary of Trans- 
 port, less than fifty per cent out of this number of 
 engines were in working condition, which brought" 
 the total number of available locomotives down to 
 4,000. Mr. Nevsky stated also that in 1916 out of 
 every hundred engines sixteen were in need of re- 
 pair; in 1917' twenty-five per cent of the engines 
 were on the black list; in October, 1918, this per- 
 centage was forty-three, and finally, in January, 1919, 
 over fifty per cent of the engines were "crippled." 
 Similar conditions prevailed with respect to the roll- 
 ing-stock in general, especially the passenger-cars. 
 At the same time, under the Bolshevist rule, repairs 
 on the rolling-stock are made very slowly and with 
 constant interruptions. For every twenty-five en- 
 gines repaired in 1916, only eight were repaired'in 
 19 1 8. The average time of repairing an engine in 
 1916 was twenty-three days; in 191 7, thirty-eight 
 days, and in 1918, tmder the Soviet rule, seventy- 
 
 ' Robert Wilton, Russia's' Agony, pp. i64,j85 (London, 1918). 
 
138 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 seven days; whereas the setting up of a boiler and 
 engine costs from 60,000 to 80,000 roubles and the 
 repairs to a locomotive cost 560,000 roubles. Final- 
 ly, Mr. Nevsky pointed out in his report that "the 
 average commercial speed of a goods truck in 19 16 
 was four days " ; whereas, in 1918, under Soviet man- 
 agement, it was fifteen days.' 
 
 Mr. Charles Edward Russell, who is by no means 
 to be suspected of prejudice against Socialism, has 
 quoted in his recent study on Bolshevism and the 
 United States the following data concerning Russian 
 railroad operation: 
 
 Versts of railroad line in operation: 
 
 October i, 1917 S2.S97 
 
 October i, igi8 21,800 
 
 Available locomotives: 
 
 October i, 1917 i5)732 
 
 October i, 1918 5,037 
 
 Available freight-cars: 
 
 October i, 1917 521,591 
 
 October 1,1918 227,274 
 
 ' Compare the above data with Mr. Nevsky's report made at a 
 meeting of the Moscow Soviet of Workmen's and Red Army's 
 Deputies held on January 13, 1919; this report is quoted in the 
 London Morning Post, May i, 1919, in an article under the title 
 "Bolshevist Transport Muddle." Also Charles Edward Russell's 
 Bolshevism and the United States, p. 188 (Indianapolis, 1919). 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 139 
 
 Mr. Russell remarks that the above figures were 
 furnished by the Bolshevist Railroad Department 
 and were printed in Bolshevist journals.^ 
 
 Mr. Trotzky's supporters have ma;de various en- 
 deavors to explain the complete failure of the Bol- 
 sheviki to cope with the railroad problem. Among 
 other things, the argument was advanced that the 
 railroad workmen were "bourgeois sympathizers" 
 and that they purposely neglected their work. In 
 accordance with this theory, hundreds of railroad 
 workmen were arrested and kept in prisons by the 
 BolsheviM, but this measure did not improve in the 
 slightest degree the general railroad situation. In 
 fact, endless reprisals against the trained railway 
 employees have brought railway operation into a 
 state of complete disorganization. 
 
 The present decay in the maintenance of the roll- 
 ing-stock is largely due to the inefficient and incom- 
 petent methods adopted by the Bolsheviki in the 
 administration of their railroads. Immediately after 
 the Bolshevist coup d'etat all the railroads were 
 "nationalized," or, to speak more accurately, were 
 put under the control of different local Soviets and 
 revolutionary committees. Each workshop had its 
 own Soviet, each branch of the railroad administra- 
 tion had the right to elect its own executive com- 
 mittee. All these various committees, Soviets, sub- 
 committees, and self-appointed boards were issuing 
 innumerable conflicting decrees. Very often illiter- 
 ' Charles Edward Russell, Bolshevism and the Untied States, p. 184. 
 
I40 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 ate toilers who could scarcely sign their names were 
 appointed to administer such branches of railroad 
 operation as cannot possibly be properly managed 
 without thorough technical knowledge. Ignorant 
 and arrogant petty commissaries travelled about 
 dismissing by the wholesale the trained employees, 
 or interfering with their work, thus encouraging mis- 
 management and disorder. Moreover, due to the 
 lack of co-ordination between the various revolu- 
 tionary boards and Soviets, the whole system of 
 labor employment on the railways was completely 
 upset. Thousands of workmen, suspected by the 
 Bolsheviki of counter-revolutionary sympathies, were 
 daily losing their jobs, thousands were employed in 
 their places, and the result was that a large niunber 
 of superfluous employees were kept on the pay-roll 
 of the railways. In 1918, on the Southwestern rail- 
 way alone, it was reckoned that 16,000 superfluous 
 workmen were drawing salaries at a total rate of 
 46,000,000 roubles per aimimi. 
 
 Under these conditions the financial result of the 
 railway operation tinder the Soviet regime proved 
 disastrous. The deficit for 19 18 on the railways 
 belonging to the South Russian railroad system was 
 estimated at 800,000,000 roubles.' 
 
 In conclusion it must be added that the Socialist 
 
 management of Russian railways proved to be not 
 
 only thoroughly incompetent but also distinctly 
 
 cruel. Once more we refer the reader to Mr. Nev- 
 
 » British White Book, p. 76. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 141 
 
 sky's own testimony before the Moscow Soviet of 
 Workmen's and Red Army's Deputies, according 
 to which no less than twenty-five per cent of the trained 
 engineers employed in the management oj railways 
 since the revolution were murdered and fifty per cent 
 of the pre-revolutionaiy engineering staff had fled 
 to "escape murder." Thus, bnly twenty-five per 
 cent of the technically trained engineers remain at 
 present, and out of this number the greater part are 
 suffering imprisonment in different places. "I pass 
 my life," said Mr. Nevsky, "in hunting them out of 
 prison, because no proper management can go on 
 without skilled laborers." Mr. Nevsky was also 
 obliged to confess that not only trained engineers 
 are being murdered by the Socialist rulers of Russia 
 but "more than a quarter of railway workers of 
 every description" have met the same fate. 
 
 We wonder if this interesting piece of infor- 
 mation has ever bieen revealed by the American 
 and British Socialist agitators to their fellow work- 
 men? 
 
 (g) State Budget 
 
 The best illustration, however, of the state of 
 aJBEairs in Bolshevist Russia, so far as finances are 
 concerned, is contained in the following figures re- 
 lating to the state budget. The total amount of 
 state expenditures for the second half .of the year 
 1918 was estimated by the Bolsheviki at 29,000,000,-' 
 
142 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 ooo roubles, as compared with 17,000,000,000 roubles 
 for the first half of that year, bringing the total for 
 the year to the enormous figure of 46,000,000,000 
 roubles. 
 
 This in itself is strong evidence to show that the 
 country under Socialist management is going into 
 bankruptcy. Moreover, the state revenues for the 
 second half of the year 19 18 were estimated by the 
 Soviet officials at about 12,700,000,000 roubles; 
 consequently the difference between the expenditures 
 and the estimated revenues was over 16,000,000,000 
 roubles. This sum was a net deficit which indicated 
 that financial ruin was quite certain. 
 
 Moreover, the structure of the Bolshevist state 
 budget had a distinctly antidemocratic character, 
 since from the 12,700,000,000 roubles of estimated 
 revenues, 10,000,000,000 roubles were to be derived 
 from different kinds of special taxes and only 2,700,- 
 000,000 roubles from ordinary revenue. Yet with 
 all these alarming features of the Soviet budget, it 
 was found to be quite inadequate, since the income 
 for the first half of 191 8 turned out to be lower than 
 anticipated by the Soviet officials. 
 
 As for 1919, we are in possession only of the fig- 
 ures pertaining to the state budget for the first half 
 of that year. These have grown to the cqlossal sum 
 of 50,702,627,888 roubles. Assuming that the Soviet 
 state budget for the second half of 19 19 will be only 
 equal to that of the first half, we find that the 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 143 
 
 annual state budget now amounts to 101,405,255,776 
 roubles.^ 
 
 It should be further borne in mind that the above 
 figures relate only to Soviet Russia, which until re- 
 cently comprised only one-third of the territory be- 
 longing to the former Russian Empire, while the 
 population of the former was reduced to fifty per 
 cent of the latter.^ This means further that should 
 Russia's entire population come under the Soviet 
 regime, the annual state budget would reach the 
 incredible sum of something like 196,000,000,000 
 roubles. 
 
 In this connection it is interesting to note that 
 the state budget of the Russian Empire for the year 
 1914 was estimated at only 2,000,000,000 roubles, 
 and yet this budget was severely criticised by the 
 Socialists in the Russian Duma, who claimed that 
 it was in every way excessive. The Russian state 
 budget for 1910 amounted approximately to 1,500,- 
 000,000 roubles. 
 
 To stim up the figures, we refer the reader to the 
 schedule on next page. 
 
 In other words, Soviet officials spent during the 
 year 1919 a sum which Russia scarcely spent during 
 
 ' Standard Daily Trade Service, September i6, 1919, p. 574. 
 
 ^ The Soviet territory did not include Russian Poland (popula- 
 tion, 20,000,000); South Russia (population, 40,000,000); Caucasus 
 (population, 10,000,000); Siberia (population, 10,000,000); Finland 
 (population, 4,000,000); Baltic Provinces (population, 5,000,000). 
 Figures concerning population are approximate. 
 
144 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 RUSSIA'S STATE BUDGET 
 
 Year 
 
 Population 
 
 Roubles 
 
 I910. 
 I914. 
 
 1918 — 1st half. 
 1918 — 2d half . 
 
 1919 — 1st half. 
 1919 — 2d half . 
 
 170,000,000 
 
 180,000,000 
 
 91,000,000 
 91,000,000 
 
 91,000,000 
 91,000,000 
 
 i (approximately) 
 1,500,000,000 
 (approximately) 
 2,000,000,000 
 
 17,000,000,000 
 29,000,000,000 
 
 46,000,000,000 
 
 50,702,627,888 
 50,702,627,888 
 
 •101,405,255,776 
 
 the entire nineteenth century, even when we take 
 into consideration the great depreciation of the 
 rouble since the revolution. 
 
 The above figures should convince any one that 
 the whole Bolshevist enterprise from a financial 
 standpoint has proved a huge fiasco. 
 
 The Soviet printing-office is printing from 50,- 
 000,000 to 100,000,000 paper roubles per day. This 
 is in addition to the billions of paper money which 
 is already in circulation in Soviet Russia. Naturally, 
 this paper cturency ^as no foundation whatsoever. 
 Gold reserves have long ago disappeared. All gold 
 which was kept in the State Bank, and which 
 amotinted, approximately, to 2,400,000,000 roubles 
 during the war and before the revolution, was either 
 stolen by the Red Army or misappropriated by Bol- 
 shevist officials. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 145 
 
 Thus, the increasing quantity of paper money 
 throughout Soviet Russia automatically reduces the 
 market value of the rouble. At present a rouble 
 scarcely equals two to three cents instead of fifty- 
 one cents, which was its par value. Moreover, the 
 real tragedy of Russian currency consists in the fact 
 that even inside of Soviet Russia the bearer of a 
 paper rouble is scarcely able to purchase anything 
 with the money in his possession. Paper money in 
 Russia is no more money, it is only paper. This is 
 bankruptcy and utter ruin. 
 
 The above is a short outline of the great Socialistic 
 experiment, of the "new message" carried to hu- 
 manity by Messrs. Lenin and Trotzky. Such are 
 the conditions prevailing in Soviet Russia, which is 
 always described by the European and American 
 parlor-Bolsheviki as the "Promised Land" of the 
 proletarians. Of course, when it comes to a serious 
 investigation of the Russian situation conducted by 
 competent and serious-minded persons, the Bolshe- 
 viM themselves are constantly compelled to make 
 various confessions and concessions to their oppo- 
 nents. 
 
 Thus, Mr. Albert Rhys Williams, surely one of the 
 most outspoken of American Bolshevists, made the 
 following mild confession: 
 
 I wish to admit the contention that there is disorder, 
 lack of food and lack of clothes and the essentials of life in 
 Russia. At the same time, I do not think that these men 
 
146 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 have seen into the heart and soul of the Russian people, or 
 realized the other satisfactions (?) that they crave — we crave 
 — fellowship, power, adventure. 
 
 Mr. Stanley Frost justly remarked that this sig- 
 nificant statement on the part of Mr. Williams really 
 means that the Bolsheviki have substituted psy- 
 chology for food, health, and life.^ 
 
 It may be asked by the reader whether this sub- 
 stitution would appeal to American labor. 
 
 As a result of the conditions described above, epi- 
 demics are ravaging Russia from end to end. In 
 Petrograd and Moscow hunger-typhus and cholera 
 claim from 300 to 400 victims daily. Many hos- 
 pitals have been closed by the Bolshevist officials, 
 due to the lack of fuel, bed-linen, soap, and medical 
 supplies. After the imdertaker's business was "na- 
 tionalized," coffins became so scarce that one coffin 
 was used for many corpses, thus spreading further 
 disease. Cemeteries were also "nationalized" by 
 Mr. Trotzky, and they are kept in such an unsani- 
 tary condition that it will probably require many 
 years to bring them back to their normal condition. 
 
 The Socialist regime is thus described in the official 
 statement of the British chaplain Bousfield S. Lom- 
 bard to Earl Curzon, who was in charge of the 
 Parliamentary investigation of Bolshevist activities: 
 
 All business became paralyzed, shops were closed, Jews 
 became the possessors of most of the business houses, and 
 
 'Compare with article by Mr. Stanley Frost on "Albert Rhys 
 Williams," in the New York Tribune, April 4, 1919. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 147 
 
 horrible scenes of starvation became common in the country 
 districts. The peasants put their children to death rather 
 than see them starve. In a village on the Dvina, not far 
 from Schliisselburg, a mother hanged three of her children. 
 I was conducting a funeral in a mortuary of a lunatic asylum 
 at Oudelnaia, near Petrograd, and saw the bodies of a mother 
 and her five children whose throats had been cut by the 
 father because he could not see them suffer. When I left 
 Russia last October the nationalization of women was re- 
 garded as an accomplished fact, though I cannot prove that 
 (with the exception of at Saratoff) there was any actual 
 proclamation issued. . . . The treatment of the priests was 
 brutal beyond everything. Eight of them were incarcerated 
 in a cell in our corridor. Some of us saw an aged man 
 knocked down twice one morning for apparently no reason 
 whatever, and they were employed to perform the most 
 degrading work and made to clean out the filthy prison 
 hospital. Recently life in Petrograd has become a veritable 
 nightmare. 
 
 This report relates to March, 1919.* 
 
 Reports of this kind could be multiplied almost 
 indefinitely. Only those who are, or who wish to 
 be, blind to the facts fail to realize what life in Russia 
 tmder Bolshevist misrule means. 
 
 In this book we are mainly interested in examining 
 the Socialistic experiment in Russia from an eco- 
 nomic point of view. 
 
 Socialists on various occasions have admitted 
 that the capitalistic system of production has in- 
 creased national wealth to an enormous extent. 
 Under this system commodities are being manu- 
 
 1 British White Book, pp. 56 and 57. 
 
148 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 factured by the wholesale, while the average work- 
 man and the average citizen are able to live more 
 or less comfortably. 
 
 We have pointed out in this chapter that living 
 conditions under the Bolshevist regime in Russia 
 have become not only morally humiliating but 
 physically quite intolerable, leading to unspeakable 
 siifferings, wholesale starvation, gradual death, and 
 misery which is appalling beyond description. All 
 lines of industrial, commercial, technical, and busi- 
 ness life in general are completely paralyzed., 
 
 During the two years of Bolshevist misrule the 
 Russian people have -teen thrown back to conditions 
 which prevailed at the dawn of Russian history, one 
 thousand years ago. It is really a state of moral and 
 physical savagery, and there is no hope for improve- 
 ment, for progress, for recovery, imless the very 
 memory of Bolshevism and Socialism is stamped out 
 of the heart of the Russian people. 
 
 With the general breakdown of business in Rus- 
 sia the very idea of nationalization has suffered a 
 severe defeat. 
 
 The reader will recall that the nationalization of 
 private property during the first period of the Bol- 
 shevist rule assumed the form of wholesale looting. 
 Money, valuables, shares, and general banking re- 
 sources were grabbed by Red Guards, and it is very 
 doubtful whether expropriations of this kind were 
 ever reported by the expropriators to the Central 
 Soviet authorities. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 149 
 
 Very soon after, the Bolsheviki realized that if 
 this wholesale looting were to continue for an ex- 
 tended period of time national wealth would be 
 destroyed forever, and the Soviets themselves would 
 have to face a very dangerous condition resulting 
 from the lack of everything needed for the purposes 
 of national production. Therefore, when it came to 
 the nationalization of the various industries, the 
 Soviet authorities issued a number of decrees and 
 regulations pertaining to the order in which the 
 nationalization was to be carried out. It goes with- 
 out saying that the interests of the bourgeoisie were 
 completely disregarded. The Socialist rtders of 
 Russia, faithfully following Marx's prescriptions, de- 
 cided to build up an ideal Socialistic state in which 
 the workmen would exercise supreme control over 
 national industries, production, and distribution. 
 To this end a decree was passed on November 14, 
 191 7, to the effect that all industries should be put 
 under the control of the workmen. The second para- 
 graph of this decree reads as follows: 
 
 "This workmen's control is carried out by all the 
 workmen of a given enterprise by means of their 
 elective organizations, namely, factory committees, 
 cotmcils of elders, etc. ; these organizations are bound 
 to include also representatives of the employees and 
 the technical personnel." The decree further pro- 
 vides that for every large city, province, or industrial 
 region, a local "Soviet of workmen's control" shall 
 be formed which shall act under the supreme au- 
 
ISO SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 thority of the Soviet of Workmen's, Soldiers', and 
 Peasants' Delegates. The organs of the workmen's 
 control are vested with the power to supervise pro- 
 duction, to establish the minimtun production, and 
 to take measiires for the determination of the cost 
 price of products. Their decisions are binding upon 
 the owners of the enterprises. The only right which 
 was left to the owner of the industrial enterprise 
 vuider the said decree consists in the provision by 
 which he is allowed to bring a protest before the 
 higher organ of the workmen's control against any 
 resolution passed by the lower organs of the control, 
 but a protest of this kind is only eflEective if filed 
 within three days. ' 
 
 The scheme as above outlined is the incarnation 
 of the idea of the industrial dictatorship of the pro- 
 letarians. In other words, the entire management 
 of industries is put in the hands of the toilers, the 
 owner of the enterprise, together with the technical 
 staff of the factory, being consciously eliminated 
 from participating iri the actual management of the 
 industry. 
 
 In practice this decree assumes the form of a for- 
 cible expulsion of the former managerial staff, and 
 in many cases the technical directors or the chief 
 engineers have been murdered in cold blood by the 
 enlightened "comrades" of Bolshevist faith. It re- 
 quired but two or three months of Socialist rule 
 in Russia to cripple every branch of national indua- 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 151 
 
 try in the same way that the operation of %the rail- 
 roads was crippled. Technical experts, highly edu- 
 cated engineers, and trained inspectors were either 
 murdered by the wholesale or fled to escape murder. 
 The remainder of the former managerial staffs were 
 absolutely helpless because they were overruled by 
 the Soviets of workmen's control. 
 
 The deplorable results of this kind of management 
 soon became apparent and as early as 19 18 Mr. 
 Lenin had publicly confessed in his pamphlet The 
 Urgent Problems of the Soviet Rule that "it is be- 
 coming urgent for the proletarian state authority 
 to make use of the botu-geois specialists for the pur- 
 pose of reploughing the soil so that new bourgeoisie 
 could not grow on it." Mr. Lenin has also ex- 
 plicitly stated that "without the direction of special- 
 ists in different branches of knowledge, technic, and 
 experience, the transformation toward Socialism is im- 
 possible, for Socialism demands a conscious mass 
 movement toward a higher productivity of labor in 
 comparison with capitalism and on the basis which 
 has been attained by capitalism." 
 
 Mr. Lenin frankly admitted, however, that the 
 employment of "bourgeois" specialists by the So- 
 cialist state at very high salaries is, indeed, a measure 
 of compromise, and that "such a measure is not 
 merely a halt in a certain part and to a certain de- 
 gree of the offensive against capital . . . but also a 
 step backward by our Socialist Soviet state, which 
 
IS2 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 has from the very beginning proclaimed and carried 
 on a policy of reducing high salaries to the standard 
 of wages of the average workers." 
 
 Thus, Mr. Lenin himself had to draw the conclu- 
 sion that, at least from a business point of view, 
 proletarian dictatorship is a very poor thing. Being 
 more courageous than the other Bolshevist leaders, 
 he clearly emphasizes the necessity of taking a step 
 backward toward capitalistic methods. Moreover, 
 Mr. Lenin, on various other occasions, declared that 
 he would not be opposed to giving to the "bourgeois " 
 specialist a salary of more than 100,000 roubles per 
 annum provided an arrangement of this kind would 
 increase production and restore normal industrial 
 conditions. 
 
 This last confession of one of the recognized intel- 
 lectual leaders of Bolshevism must sound very dis- 
 couraging to the American -International Workers of 
 the World and to European boudoir-Bolsheviks. Just 
 think ! To employ a ' ' bourgeois ' ' specialist who will 
 commandeer the toilers and have his own way in tech- 
 nical and business matters ! Isn't that the betrayal 
 of the very idea of Socialism and industrial anarchy ? 
 
 No wonder that rumors are constantly circulating 
 to the effect that Mr. Lenin is enjoying his liberty in 
 one of the Moscow prisons, or that he has peace- 
 fully passed away — although not without- the assis- 
 tance of his fellow Bolshevists. 
 
 Apparently, however, the discovery made by Mr. 
 Lenin as to the actual results of the workmen's con- 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 153 
 
 trol is endorsed by other Bolshevist ofl&cials, such as 
 Mr. Nevsky and Mr. Krassin, who are now beginning 
 to speak frankly of "the need of a strong hand in the 
 control of transport" as well as in other branches of 
 industry. 
 
 The workmen's control of industries still remains 
 the battle-cry of the demagogic Socialist leaders, 
 but in Russia herself there are many signs which 
 seem to indicate a radical change in the Bolshevist 
 attitude toward the methods of industrial manage- 
 ment. Some of the most able Bolshevist commis- 
 saries have actually abolished the eight-hour work- 
 ing day decreed on October 29, 191 7, because they 
 found in practice that it was too short. Whenever 
 the workmen endeavor to strike, or exercise their 
 will in matters pertaining to industrial management, 
 they are reminded of the supplementary decree No. 
 27, making incitements to strike punishable by the 
 revolutionary tribunal, and, further, their bread- 
 cards are withdrawn. 
 
 It must also be added that in every factory and 
 in every branch of industry the Socialist authorities 
 in Russia have appointed spies, whose duty it is to 
 report every attempt at sabotage on the part of 
 their fellow workmen. Under the term "sabotage" 
 the Bolshevist leaders now include the right to 
 strike, i. e., any endeavor of the toilers to improve 
 their condition and to combat Soviet tyranny. 
 
 Enough has been said to show that the bloody 
 experiment to which the Russian bourgeoisie was 
 
154 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 subjected by Messrs. Trotzky, Apfelbaum, and Urit- 
 sky, proved to be a failure even from a purely So- 
 cialist point of view. ' 
 
 In the first place, the physical extermination of the 
 bourgeoisie did not help to solve the industrial 
 problems. On the other hand, in lieu of the bour- 
 geoisie which was physically annihilated, a new 
 bourgeoisie appeared. This new social group is 
 composed of innumerable grafters and profiteers who 
 have taken advantage of the anarchistic state of 
 affairs in Soviet Russia. While the prices of all 
 commodities are fixed by the Soviets, nothing can 
 be obtained at those prices. The merchant of former 
 times who was satisfied with a profit of ten to fifteen 
 per cent on capital invested was mtirdered by the 
 Soviet authorities. The new merchant, who is 
 always a lawbreaker, is never content with a profit 
 of two hundred per cent. He wants more than that, 
 because he knows that regular trading iDringing a 
 moderate profit is strictly forbidden by the Socialist 
 law, and, therefore, he runs a grave risk whenever 
 he endeavors to sell anything to anybody. The new 
 merchant is, therefore, trading secretly. He has to 
 conceal his goods. He has to conceal his profits. 
 If a man in Petrograd gets hold of a piece of butter 
 weighing ten pounds, and he wants to seU, it in 
 the street, he knows in advance that at least five 
 poimds will have to be given free as a bribe to the 
 petty people's commissaries, who are constantly 
 searching the streets, in order to be able to sell 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 155 
 
 the remaining five pounds at an extortionate 
 price. 
 
 Early in February, 191 9, the official newspaper of 
 the Soviet Government in Russia, The Isvestia, pub- 
 lished an article under the title "The New Bour- 
 geoisie," and among other things the following is 
 stated : 
 
 Our old bourgeoisie has been crushed and we imagine that 
 there will be no return of old conditions. The power of the 
 Soviets has succeeded the old regime and the Soviet advo- 
 cates equality and universal service, but the fruits of this 
 era are not yet ready to harvest, and there are already un- 
 bidden guests and new forms of profiteers. They are even 
 now so niunerous that we must take measures against them. 
 But the task will be a difficult one because the new bour- 
 geoisie is more numerous and dangerous than the old one. 
 The old bourgeoisie committed many sins but it did not 
 Conceal them. A bourgeois was a bourgeois. You could rec- 
 ognize him by his appearance. . . . The old bourgeoisie 
 robbed the people, but it spent part of its money for expensive 
 fixtures and works of art. Its money went by indirect 
 channels to the support of schools, hospitals, and museums. 
 Apparently the old bourgeoisie was ashamed to keep every- 
 thing for itself and so it gave back part. The new bour- 
 geoisie stays out in the country by its lard-tub and sausages 
 and cheeses. It tMnks of nothing but its stomach. Com- 
 rades, beware of the new bourgeoisie. 
 
 Here again we meet with another instance of the 
 Socialist experinient. The workmen were declared 
 to be the nation's masters. Professional Socialist 
 agitators have systematically incited hatred in the 
 
is6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 workmen's minds toward the botirgeoisie. The 
 proletarians were given weapons — ordinary rifles 
 and machine-guns — to enable them to exterminate 
 the bourgeois class. Following the prescriptions of 
 the Socialist agitators, workmen have acted accord- 
 ingly. The bourgeoisie was pitilessly Wiped out, 
 murdered, drowned, executed, shot, imprisoned, 
 tortured to death, and after all this the Bolsheviki 
 themselves declare that the new bourgeoisie, which 
 is much more numerous, selfish, and dangerous, is 
 already flourishing on the common ruins of old and 
 new Russia. 
 
 It seems clear that to establish a new social or- 
 der, or to put a new working system into action, 
 is infinitely more difficult than to preach class hatred, 
 to conduct soap-box propaganda among the labor- 
 ing class, and to criticise the "captains of modem 
 industry." 
 
 It is not the object of this book to picture the 
 political status under the Soviet regime. The two 
 years of Soviet rule have been written in history 
 with blood. But it is interesting to note that in 
 the poHtical field, too, the Socialist regime proved 
 to be a glaring failure. 
 
 Thus, Mr. Trotzky and his fellow comrades, in 
 October, 191 7, declared themselves in favor of an 
 "immediate and democratic peace." It was clearly 
 understood by everybody who was familiar with 
 Russian conditions at that time that Trotzky was 
 merely appealing to the base instincts of a mob 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 157 
 
 which was entirely controlled by Gennaxi and alien 
 agents. Everybody understood that an honorable 
 peace with Germany was a practical impossibility. 
 Trotzky himself later, during the time of the Brest- 
 Litovsk parleys, substituted iot the above slogan an- 
 other, namely, "No war, no peace," which in reality 
 meant "No war with Germany, no peace in Russia." 
 
 Instead of bringing about eternal peace, the Bol- 
 shevist regime has caused the greatest civil war 
 known in history. After two years of misrule the 
 Soviets find themselves encircled by millions of 
 enemies, who have taken oath to die rather than 
 surrender to the despotic rule of Lenin and Trotzky. 
 
 Even the American parlor-Bolsheviki have to 
 confess that Bolshevist Russia is a cemetery, is 
 horror, is death, is misery, is ruin, is a moral and 
 physical collapse. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln Steffens's report on the Russian 
 situation to the Peace Conference is certainly one of 
 the most convincing arguments against Bolshevism 
 because of his ultra-radical views. It should be re- 
 membered that in March, 1919, Mr. Steffens pro- 
 ceeded with Mr. Bullitt on a confidential mission to 
 Russia, and it was understood that both Bullitt and 
 Stefiens were authorized by the Supreme Council of 
 the Peace Conference to make an endeavor to find 
 common groimd for peace negotiations with the 
 Soviet authorities at Moscow. The whole Btillitt- 
 Steffens mission was justly regarded by European ■ 
 public opinion as a victory of the pro-Bolshevist 
 
is8 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 tendencies at the Peace Conference. Therefore, it 
 might have been expected that the commissioners 
 would prepare a report exonerating the Soviet au- 
 thorities and the Russian SociaHst regime in general. 
 But here is what Mr. Steffens reported to his chiefs 
 concerning the Russian revolution: 
 
 The effect is hunger, cold, misery, anguish, disease — death 
 to millions. But worse than this was the confusion of mind 
 among the well and the strong. We did not realize, any of 
 us — even those of us who have imagination — how fixed our 
 minds and habits are by the ways of living that we know. 
 So with the Russians . . . the poor, in their hunger, think 
 now how it would be to go down to the market and haggle, 
 and bargain from one booth to another, making their daily 
 purchases, reckoning up their defeats and victories over the 
 traders. And they did get food then. And now — it is all 
 gone. . . .' 
 
 Even Mr. Raymond Robbins, one of the ablest 
 Bolshevist apologists in the United States, con- 
 fessed before the Overman Committee in the United 
 States Senate that "the Bolshevist programme is 
 economically impossible and morally wrong." "I 
 regard," he said, "Bolshevism as a fundamental 
 challenge to the civilized world and as a men- 
 ace. . . ." ^ But when the same parlor-Bolsheviki 
 appear at mass-meetings, before emotional women 
 and ignorant immigrants, they describe Russian 
 
 • Compare with the report of Mr. Lincoln SteflFens in Treaty of 
 Peace with Germany, Hearings before the Qommittee on Foreign 
 Relations, United States Senate, vol. II, p. 1280. 
 
 * Compare New York Tribune, April 4, 1919. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 159 
 
 conditions as being excellent. If from time to time 
 they have to confess that the Russia of to-day is not 
 exactly a paradise, then immediately they present 
 the argument that whatever there is wrong in So- 
 viet Russia is due to the fact that in certain regions 
 some wicked peasants had revolted against Mr. 
 Trotzky, or that in another place General Denikin 
 had withheld suppHes, or that in a third region 
 a bourgeois government had been established, or 
 that insidious propaganda, unfriendly to the prole- 
 tarian rule, had caused a blockade against the So- 
 viets, and so on. But, it may be asked, if Russia 
 is indeed a social paradise, why do the people revolt 
 against the Soviet rule? Why have hundreds of 
 thousands been executed by the Bolsheviki because 
 of their so-called cotmter-revolutionary activities ? 
 Why does General Derukin, or any other general, 
 take the trouble to fight the Soviet rule if there is 
 nothing to prevent him from enjoying a peaceful 
 and qtiiet life under the high protection of Messrs. 
 Lenin Eind Trotzky? Why, it may be asked, are 
 people starving by the wholesale ? Why are cities 
 being converted into cemeteries if the citizens are 
 free to work peacefully for their living and procure 
 that which is necessary to make life decent and 
 comfortable ? 
 
 But now listen to the tragic confession of Nicholas 
 Lopoushkin, former President of the Bolshevist 
 Soviet' of Workmen's Deputies at the city of Kir- 
 sanov; perhaps this document, addressed by a 
 
i6o SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Bolshevik, who happened to be an honest man, to 
 his fellow Bolsheviks of the Central Soviet of Peo- 
 ples' Commissaries, will throw more light than 
 figures and elaborate logical argtiments upon the 
 horrors of the Socialist rule in Russia: 
 
 Comrades : My colleagues of the Kirsanov Soviet are 
 writing to tell you that I am no longer fit to hold the position 
 of President of the Soviet, that I am a counter-revolutionary, 
 that I have lost my nerve, and am a traitor to our cause. 
 . . . Speaking frankly, we are, in my opinion, on the brink 
 of a disaster which wiU leave its imprint not only upon So- 
 cialism but Upon our nation, for centuries, a disaster which 
 will give our descendants the right to regard us, Bolsheviks,' 
 at the best as crazy fanatics, and at the worst as foul im- 
 postors and ghastly muddlers, who murdered and tortured 
 a nation for the sake of an unattainable Utopian theory, 
 and who in our madness sold our birthright amongst the 
 peoples for less than the proverbial mess of pottage. All 
 around me, wherever I look, I see unmistakable signs of our 
 approaching doom, and yet no one responds to my appeals 
 for help; my voice is the voice of one crjdng in the wilder- 
 ness. In the towns I have just come from chronic hunger, 
 mturder, and license and Ubertinage of the criminal elements, 
 who undoubtedly hold nimierous executive positions under 
 our Soviets, have reduced the population to the level of mere 
 brute beasts who drag out a dull semiconscious existence, 
 devoid of joy in\ to-day and without hope for the morrow. 
 . . . Nor did I find the position any better on the railways. 
 Everywhere a people living under the dread of famine, death, 
 torture, and terror, everywhere groaning and utter misery. 
 My countrymen, whom I love, and whom I had hoped to 
 assist to render happy above all nations, look at me either 
 with the mute uncomprehending eyes of brutes condemned 
 to slaughter, or else with the red eyes of fury and vengeance. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA i6i 
 
 . . . Speculation is rife amongst even the most humble in- 
 habitants in the country villages, who have forced a lump of 
 sugar up to four roubles, and a pound of salt up to forty 
 roubles. And the Bolshevik militia and the Soviets ? — ^When 
 they are called upon to deal with various infringement of the 
 Bolshevik decrees, they either try to get out of taking action 
 altogether, or else they pretend that there is insufficient 
 evidence to commit for trial. . . . No member of the Red 
 Guard dares risk Ms life by returning to his native village, 
 where his father would be the first to kill him. . . . Ruin and 
 desolation follow in our train, the innocent blood of thou- 
 sands cries out for vengeance against us. . . . But worst of 
 all is the consciousness of failure, we, the would-be liberators 
 of the world, who are execrated openly by the populace. . . . 
 I feel tired and depressed. I know that the Red Terror was 
 a mistake, and I have a terrible suspicion that our cause has 
 been betrayed at the moment of its uttermost realization. 
 Yours in fraternal greeting, 
 
 N. LOPOUSHKIN.' 
 
 The reader may b^ interested to learn that Lo- 
 poushkin committed suicide immediately after send- 
 ing his letter to Moscow. 
 
 In conclusion it must be stated that the very fact 
 that an unparalleled civil war has been going on 
 for two years clearly indicates that Socialism in 
 Russia "is a failure, notwithstanding all the lying 
 propaganda which has been spread broadcast in 
 various countries under the direction of Lenin and 
 
 ' This letter, dated April 24, 1919, is quoted in extenso by Mr. J. 
 Landfield in his article "A Commissar Disillusioned." See The Re- 
 view, October 4, 1919, pp. 447 and 448. 
 
1 62 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Trotzky, with money stolen from the Russian 
 people.^ 
 
 Disgraceful as it may seem, nevertheless it is true 
 that Bolshevist agents, enjoying the full protection 
 of the law in civilized countries — such as the United 
 States, Great Britain, "Sweden, and Norway — ^have 
 endeavored in all those countries to carry out venom- 
 ous propaganda, aiming at the" overthrow of those 
 very governments which extended to them their 
 hospitality. Thus, Great Britain for many months 
 
 ^ The decree, by which 2,000,000 roubles were appropriated by the 
 Soviet Government for international propaganda, which was passed 
 in December, 1917, reads as follows: 
 
 "Taking into consideration that Soviet authority stands on the 
 ground of the principles of international solidarity of the proletariat 
 and the brotherhood of the toilers of all countries, that the struggle 
 against war and imperialism, only on an international scale, can 
 lead to complete victory, the Soviet of People's Commissaries con- 
 siders it necessary to come forth with all aid, including financial aid, 
 to the assistance of the left, internationalist, wing of the workers' 
 movement, in all countries, entirely regardless whether these coun- 
 tries are at war with Russia, or in an alliance, or whether they re- 
 tain their neutrality. 
 
 ."With these aims the Soviet of People's Commissaries ordains: 
 the assigning of two million roubles for the needs of the revolutionary 
 internationalist movement, at the disposition of the foreign rep- 
 resentatives of the Commissariat for Foreign Affairs. 
 
 President of the Soviet of People's Commissaries 
 
 — OuLiANOFF (Lenin). 
 People's Commissary for Foreign Affairs — L. 
 
 Trotzky. 
 Manager of Affairs of the Soviet of People's 
 
 Commissaries — Bonch-Bruevich. 
 Secretary of the Soviet — N. Gorbounoff." 
 
 This decree was published in No. 31 of the Gazette of the Temporary 
 Workers' and Peasants' Government, December 13, 1917, and repub- 
 lished in English translation in Bolshevik Propaganda, p. 1185. 
 
EXPERIMENT IN RUSSIA 163 
 
 tolerated the disloyal activities of the so-called Bol- 
 shevist Ambassador, Mr. Litvinoff, ne Finkelstein. 
 It required the combined pressure of British public 
 opinion to have ^r. Finkelstein finally expelled from 
 Great Britain. 
 
 In the United States, Mr. Trotzky's agents, Nuor- 
 teva, n6 Neuberger, and his German friend, Ludwig 
 C. K. Martens, are keeping up their disloyal propa- 
 ganda, notwithstanding the fact that a Senatorial 
 Committee of the State of New York has exposed the 
 treacherous and dangerous features of their work. 
 
 These and others of their kind, under alleged names 
 and disguised nationalities, are preaching day by 
 day Marxian theories and actual revolutionary 
 practice. 
 
 Apparently it requires more than one Boston 
 strike and more than one htindred bombs mailed to 
 different officials in order to stop once and forever 
 in the United States this destructive work which is 
 carried out by conscious enemies of civilization, 
 fanatical dreamers, and criminal ex-convicts, guided 
 and organized by treacherous internationalists. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 SOCIALIST EXPLANATIONS OF THE 
 FAILURE IN RUSSIA 
 
 THE consciousness of the Socialist failure in 
 Russia and elsewhere, as Mr. Lopoushkin, the 
 liate Peoples' Commissary, justly remarked, is 
 the real tragedy of the Socialist position. 
 
 The Bolshevist experiment in Russia, the bloody 
 enterprise carried out on a smaller scale by the 
 Communists under Bela Kun, alias Cohen, in Hun- 
 gary, the tpn days' reign of horror in Munich, in- 
 stigated by Mr. Levin, a faithful follower of Trotzky 
 and Marx, ought to have convinced the Socialists 
 themselves that there is something hopelessly wrong 
 in Socialism in general, and in the Marxian theory 
 in particular. 
 
 Whatever the defects of the capitalistic system 
 may be, it cannot be denied, nor is it denied, that 
 capitalism has tremendously increased production, 
 which means that the gross amount of available 
 commodities has risen to a degree unknown in the 
 history of economic conditions. At the same time 
 it should be remembered that increased produc- 
 tivity is civilization. In fact, civilization is nothing 
 but a highly developed production of material com- 
 modities and intellectual values. 
 
 164 
 
THE FAILURE IN RUSSIA 165 
 
 If, therefore, under a certain economic system 
 commodities can be and are produced in adequate 
 quantities; if, at the same time, intellectual values 
 are accumtilating sufficiently to satisfy the intellec- 
 tual, moral, and artistic needs of the community, 
 then we affirm that the system of production itself 
 is essentially sound and worthy of survival and de- 
 velopment. If, on the contrary, the analysis of 
 economic conditions proves that the number of 
 commodities produced is steadily falling below a 
 given level, while the quantity of intellectual values 
 is being simultaneously reduced to an undesirable 
 degree, then we have the right to draw the con- 
 clusion that those economic conditions are wrong 
 and that they mean the degradation of civilization, 
 which eventually leads to barbarism. 
 
 In judging the merits or defects of any economic 
 system, it must be borne in mind that the economic 
 success or failure of individuals is not so much the 
 cause as the result of the system itself. Produc- 
 tivity has increased in Europe and in America dur- 
 ing the last century not because there lived a Mr. 
 Carnegie who was successful in the steel business, 
 or a Mr. Rothschild who was successful in banking 
 activities, but because the economic ^stem at large 
 was such as to allow and encourage Mr. Carnegie, 
 or any other big business man, to apply his personal 
 ability, making the best use of it. It can be safely 
 stated that ha4 Mr. Carnegie been compelled to live 
 somewhere in Greenland, his personal business abil- 
 
i66 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 ity would have been entirely lost to humanity and 
 civilization. 
 
 In this connection it is vitally important to realize 
 that the Socialist failure in Russia is not due to the 
 fact that Mr. Trotzky or any of his Socialist col- 
 leagues were inefficient in putting the Socialistic 
 system into operation. On the contrary, there is 
 nothing to show that they were lacking in personal 
 ability, and, moreover, for the sake of self-preserva- 
 tion, the Socialist authorities in Russia may be pre- 
 sumed to have done everything in their power to 
 increase production as much as possible. The fact 
 may also be conceded that the Bolsheviki in Russia 
 have manifested great energy in prosecuting their 
 aims. Undoubtedly they were sufficiently energetic 
 in murdering hundreds of thousands of their op- 
 ponents. Whoever stood in Mr. Trotzky's way 
 was mercilessly put to death, starved, or imprisoned. 
 Whatever did not agree with Socialist "ideals" was 
 wiped out and destroyed. If, nevertheless, the 
 Bolsheviki have failed to bring about a social para- 
 dise in Russia, it is the system itself which must be 
 held responsible. 
 
 Various excuses have been offered to explain the 
 Bolshevist failure in Russia. Thus, for instance, it 
 is argued that it is not surprising that the Bolshe- 
 viki have failed, since the most efficient Russians 
 have not participated in the governmental activi- 
 ties. In other words, it is emphasized that the illit- 
 erate classes only have undertaken the task of gov- 
 
THE FAILURE iIN RUSSIA 167 
 
 eming Russia. To this we might point out that this 
 ,very argument tends to strengthen our own affirma- 
 tion that the system is to be blamed. In Russia, 
 as in every country, the so-called bourgeois classes 
 are the main possessors of scientific knowledge and 
 business experience. Therefore, it is only natural 
 that an economic system which proclaims a relent- 
 less war against the bourgeois class as a whole, as is 
 the case with the Bolsheviki, should experience a 
 lack of knowledge and business efficiency among its 
 agents. It would be strange to expect hearty co- 
 operation with the Soviet officials on the part of the 
 wealth-owning classes, since the Soviets not only 
 have declared on various occasions that the bour- 
 geois are their bitterest enemies but have treated 
 them as such. In the course of a two years' experi- 
 ment the Bolsheviki have finally come to the con- 
 clusion that without bourgeois experts it is prac- 
 tically impossible to achieve efficient management 
 of industries and state affairs. But this discovery 
 proves only that "necessity is the mother of inven- 
 tion," and that the Soviet authorities were com- 
 pelled by the very logic of events to break one of the 
 fundamental principles of their system, namely, 
 that the bourgeoisie should be excluded from any 
 participation in the state administration under pro- 
 letarian rule. 
 
 The Bolsheviki cannot be accused of having 
 neglected the theories of Marx himself when they 
 came to put Socialism into practice in Russia. Both 
 
i68 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Trotzky and Lenin have always insisted that they 
 are the most orthodox and strict followers of Marx 
 and that the Russian revolution is developing in 
 full harmony with Marx's scheme. Thus, from a 
 ptirely Socialistic point of view, everything that has 
 happened in Russia was boimd to happen, and there 
 is really nothing that could be added in order to se- 
 cure the complete tritmiph of Marx and his followers. 
 
 In fact, nobody can deny that the Marxian scheme 
 was religiously followed by the Soviet authorities, 
 and we affirm that it is the scheme itself which is 
 to be blamed for all the horrors of the present Rus- 
 sian situation. 
 
 Not only do the Bolsheviki admit that they are 
 nothing but the disciples of Marx, but they have 
 sought to impress this fact upon the minds of the 
 Russian people. To this end, on Jvme i, 1918, they 
 issued the following decree: 
 
 The Soviet of People's Commissaries instructs as follows: 
 
 1. To appropriate 1,000,000 roubles for the erection of a 
 monument on the grave of Karl Marx. 
 
 2. The People's Commissary of education is empowered 
 to announce a competitive examination for the project of 
 the monument. 
 
 3. The representative of the Russian Republic in London 
 is authorized to negotiate with the heirs of Karl Marx re- 
 garding the execution of said instructions. 
 
 This is a glorification of the teachings of Marx, 
 which indeed constitute the foundation of Bolshev- 
 ist misrule in Russia. 
 
THE FAILURE IN RUSSIA 169 
 
 Meanwhile, we wish to refer to the argument 
 which has been repeatedly made in defense of, or 
 in apology for, the Bolsheviki. It has been said 
 that their Socialist experiment in Russia was car- 
 ried out not in the wrong way but in the wrong 
 place. The reader will recall that Marx affirmed 
 that Socialism is the logical development of the 
 capitalistic system of production. Therefore, capi- 
 talism is the great premise of Socialism. In fact, 
 Marx explained this point very clearly. His utter- 
 ance is as follows: 
 
 As soon as this process of transformation has suflGiciently 
 decomposed the old society from top to bottom, as soon as 
 the laborers are turned into proletarians, their means of 
 labor into capital, as soon as the capitalist mode of produc- 
 tion stands on its own feet, then the further socialization of 
 labor and further transformation of the land and other 
 means of production into socially exploited and, therefore, 
 common means of production, as well as the further expro- 
 priation of private proprietors, takes a new form. That 
 which is now to be expropriated is no longer the laborer 
 working for himself but the capitalist exploiting many 
 laborers. This expropriation is accomplished by the action 
 of the immanent laws of capitalistic production itself, hy the 
 centralization of capital?- 
 
 Whether this theory is right or wrong is a question 
 which for the moment we shall refrain from dis- 
 cussing, but Marx brings out very clearly that the 
 achievement of a Socialistic form of production must 
 
 » Capital, vol. I, p. 836. 
 
I70 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 be preceded by a thorough development of capital- 
 istic production, and more specifically, by a centrali- 
 zation of capital on a large scale. With this theory 
 in mind, it must be conceded that Russia was the 
 wrong place to carry out the Socialistic experiment. 
 Russia is distinctly an agricultural coimtry. The 
 overwhelming majority of the population is engaged 
 in agriculture. Out of 180,000,000 of the pre-war 
 Russian population, approximately 1 20,000,000 were 
 farmers, and only 6,500,000 to 7,000,000 of the 
 whole population were proletarians in the Marxian 
 sense. Moreover, agriculture itself was in such a 
 very low stage of development that only private 
 landowners attempted to apply scientific methods 
 in the cultivation of the soil. The peasantry as a 
 whole stuck to the archaic "three-field" system of 
 agriculture. Under these circumstances, even agri- 
 culture in Russia has never undergone the process 
 of capitalization and conditions have always re- 
 mained mediaeval. 
 
 Evidence of how slight has been the develop- 
 ment of capitalism in Russia is found, for instance, 
 in the fact that the capital invested in Russian joint- 
 stock companies in 1914 amounted to less than $2,- 
 000,000,000, whereas the paid-up capital of similar 
 enterprises in England, with a population of only 
 45,000,000, amotmted to $12,000,000,000, exclusive 
 of the capital invested in English railway companies. 
 Moreover, the number of joint-stock companies in 
 Russia was about 2,000, while England had more 
 
THE FAILURE IN RUSSIA 171 
 
 than 56,000, and yet the population of Russia was 
 four times larger than that of England.^ The back- 
 ward stage of Russia's economic development can 
 also be demonstrated by the fact that the railroad 
 mileage of the Russian Empire before the war was 
 not much in excess of that of Canada with a popu- 
 lation of 8,000,000. 
 
 Russia's industrial enterprises as compared with 
 those of England, Germany, and the United States 
 indeed were very weak, not only from a financial 
 standpoint but also on the technical side. Many 
 of such enterprises were so undeveloped that they 
 always required financial assistance from the state. 
 
 It is obvious that conditions as above described 
 have nothing in common with those which, accord- 
 ing to Marx, must prevail on the eve of the social 
 revolution. 
 
 In Russia there was no capitalism in the Western 
 European or American sense of the ^ivord. It is a 
 well-known fact that in Russia, contrary to condi- 
 tions prevailing in England, a majority of the popu- 
 lation were owners of the means of production — 
 not only land but commercial enterprises and in- 
 dustrial concerns. Russia before the revolution 
 was a typical country of petty bourgeois property. 
 The proletarians in large cities and purely industrial 
 regions constituted but an insignificant part of 
 Russia's population. In accordance with this sb- 
 
 1 See Russia, Her Economic Past and Future, by Doctor Joseph M. 
 Goldstein, p. 7 (New York City, 1919). 
 
172 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 cial structure, Russia has never had her Rockefellers, 
 Morgans, and Camegies. Russia's "captains" of 
 industry were nothing but second lieutenants, who 
 had scarcely the time to graduate from the European 
 college of ' capitalism. In fact, there could be no 
 concentration of capital, since it had never been ac- 
 cumulated. Therefore, in Russia, the programme of 
 a proletarian dictatorship is even more preposterous 
 than elsewhere. It is true that Russia, with re- 
 spect to economic conditions, was certainly not the 
 best place to undertake any Socialist experiments. 
 But this is by no means a sufficient excuse for the 
 Bolshevist failure in Russia. In the first place, the 
 Socialists themselves knew very well that social 
 conditions in Russia were not favorable for their 
 enterprise, and if, nevertheless, they chose that 
 country they must have had very good reasons for it. 
 It should be remembered that a weak organism 
 is always more apt to contract disease than a strong 
 one. This was the case with Russia. She was weak 
 in her greatness. She was tired on account of her 
 participation in the World War, her economic re- 
 sources were nearly exhausted and her transporta- 
 tion system crippled. The March revolution of 
 1 91 7 led Russia to a complete economic breakdown. 
 Politically Russia was already greatly weakened 
 by the ultra-radical tendencies of the Provisional 
 Government. There was reaUy nothing to prevent 
 the Bolsheviki from seizing the power. The finan- 
 cial assistance given to the Bolsheviki by the Imperial 
 
THE FAILURE IN RUSSIA 173 
 
 German Government and the international finance 
 enabled them to carry out on a large scale a destruc- 
 tive propaganda, appealing to the base instincts of 
 the mob. This was the first advantage the Bolshe- 
 viki had at the beginning of their activities. The 
 second advantage consisted in the fact that there 
 was practically no bourgeoisie in Russia to oppose 
 the advancing forces of Socialism. As to the aris- 
 tocracy, it was also too weak to form a social bul- 
 wark against Bolshevism, and, hioreover, its best 
 part perished during the war. Those among the 
 Russian noblemen who opposed the Bolshevist 
 regime with arms were exterminated by the Soviets. 
 At the' same time the Soviet leaders had to deal 
 with illiterate masses, which are always easier to 
 control than an educated and intelligent popula- 
 tion. Finally, the agricultural character of Russia 
 and her tremendous national resources enabled the 
 Soviet officials to prolong their existence for a period 
 of time which would have been impossible in any 
 other couritry. 
 
 It is very important to bear in mind that Russia 
 possesses almost all the nattural resources required 
 for the life of a nation. Coal, iron, copper, lumber, 
 gold, salt, ore, quicksilver, platinum, graphite, ra- 
 dium, tin, sugar, wheat, com, barley, rye, oats, 
 fruit, cattle, poultry, fish, chemicals, silk, flax, cot- 
 ton — everything needed, with the exception of rub- 
 ber, Russia possesses in abtmdance. Therefore, from 
 the point of view of successfully carrying out a so- 
 
174 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 cial revolution, Russia was in a far better condition 
 than any European country. 
 
 The blockade of Soviet Russia, which by the way 
 was never complete, could have but a limited influ- 
 ence upon the natural course of economic develop- 
 ment in Soviet Russia. The Brest-Litovsk Treaty, 
 which was concluded soon after the 'downfall of the 
 Provisional Government, opened to Russia the Ger- 
 man industrial market. Germany has since that 
 time supplied Soviet Russia with different commodi- 
 ties which were tmobtainable in Russia herself. The 
 Scandinavian countries have never blockaded Soviet 
 Russia. The trade with China was never inter- 
 rupted. In this way the claim of Bolsheviki sym- 
 pathizers that owing to the blockade Soviet Russia 
 was never given a chance to prove her executive 
 capabilities is tremendously exaggerated. It is 
 true that trade relations with Soviet Russia were 
 severed by Great Britain, France, and the United 
 States, but even before the war Russia's trade with 
 the United States and France was very limited. 
 Agricultural machinery was imported to Russia 
 mainly from Germany and not from the United 
 States. France exported to Russia articles of lux- 
 ury, such as perftmies, siUc, wines, flowers, jewelry, 
 etc. Only Great Britain carried on a heavy trade 
 with Russia, and except as to that trade, the much- 
 talked-of blockade of Soviet Russia amounts to very 
 little. 
 
 We shall now consider another excuse which has 
 
THE FAILURE IN RUSSIA 175 
 
 been given for the Bolshevist failure in Russia. 
 Parior-Bolsheviki have repeatedly argued that it is 
 largely due to the wrecking of the transportation 
 system and that it was aggravated by the Allied 
 blockade of Soviet Russia. ' ' How ' ' — say the Amer- 
 ican Bolsheviki — "could Soviet Russia improve eco- 
 nomic conditions when she had no rails and no loco- 
 motives to improve her transportation system?" 
 Again this argument is nothing but a speculation on 
 the ignorance of the audience. Before the revolu- 
 tion Russia possessed a number of excellent railway 
 rolling-mills and also several excellent locomotive 
 plants.' In fact, prior to the World War Russia 
 scarcely ever imported rails, because -the Western 
 European rails were too Kght for the Russian system. 
 Only the Warsaw- Vienna railroad and several minor 
 lines located near the Prussian-Austrian border 
 could be supplied by German rolling-mills. 
 
 It is true that in the event of a social revolution 
 breaking out in a country like England, accompanied 
 by an effective blockade on the part of other coun- 
 tries, an economic collapse would occur in a very 
 short time. 
 
 Probably eight to ten weeks would be quite suflS- 
 cient to lead the EngHsh people to utter ruin and 
 starvation, since England is entirely dependent in 
 her economic life upon imported food and raw ma- 
 
 » Particularly noteworthy were the locomotive plants at Briansk, 
 Sormovo, Kharkoff, Kolomna, and finally the famous Poutiloff 
 plant. 
 
176 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATIO^ 
 
 terials. From this point of view the Soviet officials 
 in Russia have really nothing to complain about. 
 Notwithstanding the fact that the social structure 
 was unfavorable from the Marxian point of view 
 for the accomplishment of a social revolution in- 
 Russia, the general economic conditions, the abun- 
 dance of natural resources, and the weakness of the 
 bourgeoisie were factors which constituted a tre- 
 mendous advantage for Messrs. Lenin and Trotzky. 
 These advantages overshadowed the consequences 
 of the partial Allied blockade of Soviet Russia. It 
 is probably because of this fact that Lenin himself 
 recently stated to Mr. Arthur Ransome, a well- 
 known Bolshevist sympathizer, that "Russia was 
 indeed the only country in which the revolution 
 could start." ^ 
 
 'Arthur Ransome, Russia in 1919, p. 119. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 SOCIALISTIC AGITATION IN EUROPE 
 AND AMERICA 
 
 I. So long as Socialism remained an abstract the- 
 ory its critical examination could have been a matter 
 of deep indifference to the public at large. 
 
 Dozens of theories are propounded almost daily 
 in various parts of the world without attracting 
 special attention. Only those interested in a partic- 
 ular branch of science have to keep track of new 
 ideas regardless of their scientific value. 
 
 With reference to modem Socialism, it must be 
 stated that imtil recraitly it either remained confined 
 to theoretical utterances of a very limited scien- 
 tific value or it assumed the form of politicsil activi- 
 ties which, however, did not differ very much from 
 the political activities of other radical factions. 
 
 In various civilized countries the Socialist Party 
 had its represetitatives, whose policy it was to crit- 
 icise governmental oflScials, to vote against mili- 
 tary credits, and such other appropriations as were 
 intended for the defense of the state, to promote 
 interpellations concerning various alleged "atroci- 
 ties" committed in the armies, and in general to 
 bring about as much obstruction to govemaaental 
 work as possible. 
 
 m 
 
178 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 The number of Socialist representatives in the 
 legislative bodies of various countries differs very 
 greatly. While in the United States House of Rep- 
 resentatives Mr. Meyer London was for a long time 
 the only representative of the Socialist Party, in 
 the German Reichstag in 19 14 there were no So- 
 cialist members, who represented over 3,000,000 
 Social Democratic votes throughout the German 
 Empire. In the Russian Imperial Duma there were 
 about 25 Socialists, all of whom were extremely 
 radical, and whose behavior in the Duma was quite 
 intolerable from a purely parliamentary point of 
 view. But even in the German Reichstag the in- 
 fluence of the Social Democrats was not strong 
 enough to paralyze governmental or parliamentary 
 work.- Every important law cotdd be carried out 
 by an overwhelming vote of the combined Liberal, 
 Conservative, and Roman Catholic Central Parties 
 against the votes of the Socialists. Thus, the prac- 
 tical influence of the Social Democrats in the Reichs- 
 tag amounted to very little, causing more concern 
 to the speaker of that legislative body and to its 
 door-guards than to the government. 
 
 Outside of the parliaments, however, Socialists 
 were engaged in organizing mass-meetings, strikes, 
 food riots, and disturbances of every kind, and were 
 at the same time actively engaged in anti-Christian 
 propaganda. From time to time Socialist activities 
 attracted public attention, due to the fact that in 
 one city or another disturbances provoked by the 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 179 
 
 Socialists restilted in the killing of innocent work- 
 ers, who did the actual street-fighting while their 
 leaders were engaged in agitating and delivering 
 endless speeches. From time to time the Socialists 
 in various countries, assisted by internationalists 
 without country or profession, foimded most radical 
 newspapers and periodicals for the sole purpose of 
 preaching disloyalty to their 90tmtrymen, disobedi- 
 ence among the soldiers, class hatred, and the like. 
 
 But especially in the last two or three years the 
 Socialists, both in the United States and in Eiurope, 
 have caused much concern to the public in general 
 because they have assiuned a very aggressive policy 
 toward modem civilization as such. 
 
 To-day the world has to deal not merely with 
 words about Socialism and theoretical discussions 
 of different radical propositions. At present Social- 
 ism has become, at least in the minds of its leaders, 
 a practical proposition which they want to put into 
 effect as soon as possible and in any event. 
 
 The great Socialistic drive is in full swing. Differ- 
 ent means are being used to make Socialism trium- 
 phant. On the one hand, radical, disloyal propa- 
 ganda has reached its climax. Thousands of Social- 
 ist agents are busy throughout Europe and the 
 United States fomenting social unrest and aggravat- 
 ing general dissatisfaction caused by abnormal condi- 
 tions due to the late war. Every kind of propaganda 
 has been turned loose by the Socialist leaders — 
 parlor propaganda, street propaganda, shpp propa- 
 
i8o SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 ganda, school propaganda, church propaganda, mass- 
 meeting propaganda, etc. On the other hand, the 
 wide-spread strike movement, instigated by the 
 various Red and Pink factions of Socialism, is an- 
 other means of crippling industrial conditions and 
 leading eventually to the dicta,torship of the prole^ 
 tarians. 
 
 Finally, quasi-scientific plans are being presented 
 by labor leaders with the ultimate aim of inducing 
 actual governments gradually to give up the thresh- 
 olds of modem civilization. 
 
 Volumes could be written on this subject. End- 
 less illustrations could be given showing that the so- 
 cial unrest of our day is by no means, as some peo- 
 ple are inclined to think, the natural result of war 
 conditions, but a conscious and cleverly planned 
 movement, aimed at the destruction of modem civ- 
 ilization and the establishment of Socialist states 
 along the Knes of the Bolshevist experiment in 
 Russia and in Hungary. 
 
 In this chapter we shall refer only to several facts, 
 illustrating the main tendencies and characteristic 
 features of the Socialist drive in various coimtries. 
 
 2. British trade-unionism has always been re- 
 garded as the incarnation of reasonable, moderate, 
 and tangible tendencies of the laboring class. For 
 decades British trade-unions had no other policy 
 than to improve the living conditions of their 
 members. Thus, the trade-unionist movement pur- 
 sued piurely economic aims and was guided by men 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION i8i 
 
 who themselves actually belonged to the respective 
 branch of industry. In other words, this movement 
 was of a constructive nature and both the employ- 
 ers and the employees derived benefits from it. 
 
 During the last two or three years, however, the 
 attitude of the British trade-tmions has radically 
 changed. Many experienced leaders of trade-unions 
 were called to the colors and many outsiders suc- 
 ceeded in penetrating labor organizations. Labor 
 leadership, which used to be a heavy and responsible 
 duty, has become an easy profession for jobless 
 intellectuals. Moreover, labor leadership has been 
 converted into professional agitation. 
 
 Under the influence of labor leaders of this new 
 tjrpe, the activities of- trade-unions themselves in 
 Great Britain have gradually lost their economic 
 character. Labor-unions have been converted into 
 political organizations, and the trade-unionist move- 
 ment itself is threatening to become nothing but a 
 political means to combat the actual government 
 and to replace it by labordom. If possible, the la- 
 borites would convert the House of Lords into a 
 Soviet of Lords. 
 
 A typical example of this new phase of the trade- 
 unionist movement is found in the so-called Triple 
 Alliance, which is the amalgamation of three power- 
 ful trade-unions, namely, that of the miners, the 
 railroad workmen, and the workmen engaged in 
 other transportation, such as dockers and longshore- 
 men. From a purely economic standpoint there 
 
i82 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 was no need whatsoever for the miners to affihate 
 their activities with those of the railroad and trans- 
 port workmen. At the same time, however, the 
 President of the Miners Federation of Great Britain, 
 Mr. Robert Smillie, reahzed very quickly that the 
 amalgamation of his union with the railway and 
 transportation unions would strengthen labor politi- 
 cally to such an extent that eventually it might be- 
 come possible to threaten the very existence of the 
 actual British Government. When, later, Mr. Smil- 
 lie became chairman of the Triple Alliance his ac- 
 tivities were the subject of careful consideration 
 both in the British press and in governmental circles. 
 Mr. Smillie's incendiarism was widely debated, be- 
 cause the public in England became afraid that were 
 he to go on with his propaganda it might cause 
 grave disturbances throughout the country and 
 finally might seriously interfere with the successful 
 solution of the reconstruction problems which Great 
 Britain has to face as a result of her participation 
 in the World War. 
 
 Recent events in the life of British labor, especially 
 the outburst of the national railroad strike, have 
 proved tha!t British public opinion was justified in 
 taking up a matter of apparent insignificance, such 
 as Mr. Smillie's personality. Of coiirse everybody 
 in England knew very well that Mr. Smillie was pro- 
 nouncedly disloyal to his country dtiring the war. 
 It was recalled in the press that, being a member 
 of the British Independent Labor Party, he pro- 
 claimed his treacherous formula, "We have no 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 183 
 
 quarrel with the German people," at the very time 
 when the German people were engaged in bombing 
 London from their Zeppelins and in sinking British 
 commercial ships by their submarines. It was also 
 widely known in Great Britain that Mr. Smillie and 
 his enlightened and "patriotic" comrades were 
 preaching "a worse war after peace," but there was 
 a general feeling among the British people that soap- 
 box propaganda of this kind would have but little 
 effect on British labor at large. Unfortunately, 
 however, the calculations of Great Britain proved 
 to be wrong. It so happened that the grave prob- 
 lems of reconstruction chronologically coincided with 
 the most extreme, and surely unreasonable, demands 
 ever raised by the leaders of British labor. 
 
 In justice to labor it must be emphasized, however, 
 that both in Great Britain and in other countries 
 the vast majority of workmen are quite reasonable, 
 thrifty, and sensible. Their aim to raise their stand- 
 ard of life is quite legitimate, and in many instances 
 a fair understanding between capital and labor 
 could be easily reached were it not for the auto- 
 cratic methods of the union leaders. But unioij men 
 in England were induced by their Socialist leaders 
 to believe that wages could be raised indefinitely, 
 while, at the same time, the quantity of work deliv- 
 ered could be cut down almost to a Bolshevist level. 
 
 When, due to abnormal conditions caused by the 
 war, the nation came face to face with a severe eco- 
 nomic crisis, and when therefore the nation had to 
 exert itself to the utmost in order to meet in an 
 
i84 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 adequate way problems of the highest importance, 
 such as >the problem of unemployment, that of the 
 high cost of living, demobilization, reconstruction of 
 foreign trade relations, and replacement of losses in 
 the commercial fleet, British Socialists came out 
 with a policy rendering every effort in this work on 
 the part of the nation futile. All the above and 
 similar problems could not be solved without in- 
 creased production. But the call for increased pro- 
 duction was in every way ridicviled by the Socialists. 
 Sometimes they assumed a rathet sarcastic attitude. 
 "You wish," they say, "to increase your produc- 
 tion ? Very well, we express otu: willingness to help 
 you in this respect provided you increase our wages 
 and reduce the time of work to be delivered to forty 
 hours per week. You wish to solve the problem of 
 unemployment ? Very well, we are willing to meet 
 your desire, but don't forget that we are not going 
 to tolerate the employment of demobilized soldiers 
 and sailors. You wish to cut down the prices of the 
 necessities of life ? Very well, but you must increase 
 the wages of miners, railroad and agriculttiral work- 
 men to a level which we, ourselves, will fix as fair 
 and just." 
 
 In these hopeful circiunstances the nation has to 
 solve really two problems instead of one, namely, 
 the general problem of reconstruction and the prob- 
 lem of counteracting the disloyal influences of the 
 Socialistic leaders of British labor. 
 
 For the moment let us consider the solution of 
 the problem of unemployment. All that the men 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 185 
 
 who fought for their country ask is that they shall 
 be permitted to work. The solidarity between the 
 workmen, about which so many phrases have been 
 disseminated by Marx and his admirers, ought to 
 help in the solution of this problem. The contrary, 
 however, happened in England. On various occa- 
 sions organized labor has expressed its disapproval 
 of the employment of demobilized soldiers and 
 sailors. We will refer to only one striking instance. 
 
 Some time ago public attention in England was 
 called to the fact that there were some 50,000 
 railway-ckrs out of repair and out of use. The gov- 
 ernment was urged to concentrate its efforts upon 
 making them fit for service as soon as possible. 
 Later, however, it was found that the cars could not 
 be repaired nor new wagons built because the com- 
 pany was prevented from so doing by the Railway 
 Vehicle Workers' Union. This union refused to 
 allow new members to join the union. They also 
 refused to allow men who were not members of 
 this imion to work. Naturally, this led to a con- 
 siderable decrease in the output of vehicles. The 
 company, having become dissatisfied with the un- 
 patriotic and indeed idiotic attitude of the tmion, 
 decided to engage some ex-service men who were 
 out of jobs; whereupon the Vehicle Workers' Union 
 struck and the works were closed.^ 
 
 The impartial reader will draw his own conclu- 
 
 ' Compare with data given in an editoria,! article in the Morning 
 Pqst, dated August 12, 1919, under the title "Trade Unions and 
 Ex-service Men." 
 
1 86 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 sions as to the Socialist policy adopted by the mem- 
 bers of the Railway Vehicle Workers' Union of Great 
 Britain. 
 
 In the case of the railroad men the situation was 
 even worse. The following are the facts : The rail- ■ 
 road workmen had made a complaint to the British 
 Board of Trade, stating that their wages were very 
 low and that the government shotdd immediately 
 take up the matter with the railroad unions, other- 
 wise the railroad workmen would be called out on 
 strike. With a pistol thus pointed at it, the gov- 
 ernment had no other choice than to revise the 
 wages of the railroad workmen. The following 
 scale of pay for drivers, motormen, firemen, and 
 cleaners was proposed by the Board of Trade as a 
 basis for further negotiations with the union men : 
 
 
 Year 
 
 Per day 
 
 Drivers and 
 
 First and second 
 
 II shillings 
 
 motormen . . 
 
 Third and fourth 
 
 13 " 
 
 
 Fifth and onward 
 
 14 " 
 
 Firemen 
 
 First and second 
 
 8 
 
 
 Third and fourth 
 
 9 
 
 
 Fifth and onward 
 
 10 
 
 
 Years of age 
 
 
 Cleaners 
 
 Sixteen and under 
 
 4 " 
 
 
 Seventeen and under 
 
 5 " 
 
 
 Eighteen and nineteen 
 
 6 
 
 
 Twenty and over 
 
 7 " 
 
 This scale meant an increase of approximately one 
 hundred per cent in the average standard pre-war 
 rates of pay of the classes concerned. Moreover, in 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 187 
 
 the memorandum sent by the Board of Trade to the 
 railroad unions it was specifically pointed out that 
 "any -points of detail that may arise in connection 
 with the application of the new standard wage can 
 be settled between the two unions and the Railway 
 Executive Committee." 
 
 British Socialists, however, decided flatly to reject 
 the government's proposal on the ground that the 
 one hundred per cent increase in wages did not satisfy 
 the appetites of the motormen, firemen, and clean- 
 ers. Therefore, on the 26th of September, 1919, a 
 general strike was ordered by the captains of the 
 railroad, workmen, which endangered the general 
 economic situation in Great Britain. 
 
 Sir Robert Stevenson Home, the British Minister 
 of Labor, made the following remarks immediately 
 after the strike was ordered: "This marks the 
 gravest industrial crisis which has confronted this 
 country for many years and it occurs at a time when 
 its consequences can be most fruitful of injury. 
 The country is only now beginning to struggle toward 
 the rehabilitation of its industries, and the effect of 
 this stoppage cannot be otherwise than disastrous. 
 More remarkable than anything else about the strike 
 is its extraordinary precipitancy and the apparent 
 complete disregard of the public. It is concerned 
 with the question of wages, yet the change in wages 
 which the railway men fear cannot by any possi- 
 bility take place before December 31, and not even 
 then unless the conditions are much altered from 
 what anybody anticipates. The government can- 
 
1 88 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 not agree to make permanent the wages which pre- 
 vailed during the latter period of the war. The 
 new standard on the average adds one hundred per 
 cent to pre-war wages, but the men consider this 
 too low. A man who was earning from eighteen to 
 twenty shillings before the war is receiving, with the 
 war bonus, from fifty-one to fifty-three shillings. 
 Under the government proposal the men will re- 
 ceive permanently one hundred and forty per cent 
 more for a shorter day's work than before the war. 
 There will be an addition of 67,000,000 pounds to 
 the railway men's wages. This is not a strike 
 against private employers; it is a strike against the 
 stdte. It is not a question of increasing any capi- 
 talist's profits; it is purely a question of saving the 
 state from disaster." 
 
 No wonder that Premier Lloyd George, who had 
 been coquetting for some time with the radical lead- 
 ers of British labor, finally became quite alarmed by 
 the deep ingratitude of those irresponsible men. 
 He did not hesitate to make a public statement, in 
 which among other things he stated: "It has con- 
 vinced me it is' not a strike for wages or better con- 
 ditions. The government has reason to believe it 
 has been engineered for some time by a small but 
 active body of men who have wrought tirelessly and 
 insidiously to exploit the labor organization of this 
 country for their subversive ends. I am convinced 
 that the vast majority of the trade-unionists of the 
 land are opposed to this anarchist conspiracy. They 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 189 
 
 can see the rain and misery it has brought in other 
 lands, and their common sense has hitherto guarded 
 their organization against the control of these in- 
 trigues." The British railroad strike lasted ten 
 days, it inflicted colossal losses on the nation, and 
 it failed completely because of its tmpopvilarity. 
 
 It seems quite obvious that Socialistic experiments 
 of this kind must cause much concern both to the 
 governments of the various countries and to the 
 public in general. 
 
 3. Turning now to the United States, it must be 
 said that Socialist or Bolshevist propaganda has 
 made very considerable headway during the last 
 twelve months. The United States Senate, realizing 
 the danger of an unhampered disloyal propaganda 
 conducted throughout the country, has thoroughly 
 investigated the origin and the nature of the move- 
 ment. In consequence of this investigation a valu- 
 able volume was published by the United States 
 Government under the title Bolshevik Propaganda — 
 Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee of 
 the Judiciary, United States Senate. The volume 
 referred to comprises twelve hvmdred and sixty-five 
 printed pages. 
 
 ^ It is noteworthy that according to the conclusions 
 drawn by the Senatorial Commission the Bolshevist 
 propaganda in the United States is carried on mainly 
 by different aliens, among whom are many Finns, 
 Jews, and Hungarians. 
 
 So various are the names given to the different 
 
190 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 forms of radicalism at the present tirne that a very 
 natural confusion has arisen in the mind of the 
 average person as to their interrelation and the 
 distinctive featui-es of each ' ' ism. ' ' Generally speak- 
 ing, it may be confidently asserted that they are all 
 based upon the Socialistic theories of Karl Marx 
 as set forth in Chapter I of this book, the distinguish- 
 ing features relating principally to the matters of 
 organization and the exact means by which the 
 social revolution is to be brought about. Socialism 
 is the parent of them all, at least so far as theory is 
 concerned. It is impossible in a short treatise of 
 this kind to give even a summary of the peculiari- 
 ties of the different extreme radical movements 
 founded on Socialism, such as Syndicalism and 
 I. W. W.ism. 
 
 As to Communism, however, some brief remarks 
 are necessary to guard against possible misconcep- 
 tions. The ancient Communistic idea-^-that all 
 wealth should be held in common and equally by aU 
 members of society — ^has been the basis of countless 
 movements, usually Utopian in character, and none 
 of which ever achieved any permanent success. 
 The same idea affords, in a general sense, the basis 
 of modem Socialism and aU Socialistic creeds, in- 
 cluding Communism. But this^eneral Commionistic 
 conception is not synonymous with "Communism" 
 as applied to present active movements or organiza- 
 tions of a political or quasi-political nattire. Thus 
 used, the term "Commimism", means the same 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 191 
 
 thing as Bolshevism, and very nearly the same thing 
 as "Socialism." The official title of the Bolshevist 
 Party in Russia to-day is the "Russian Communist 
 [Bolshevist] Party," the bracketed word "Bolshev- 
 ist" indicating that the Soviet leaders consider it 
 equivalent to the unbracketed word "Communist." 
 
 At the convention of the Socialist Party of America 
 held at Chicago in September, 1 919, the extreme 
 radicals bolted and split up into several parties, 
 two of which became, respectively, the "Commimist 
 Party of America" and the "Communist Labor 
 Party." There was, however, little real difference 
 in the positions of the different groups at the con- 
 vention. The main body itself pledged its support to 
 the "Revolutionary Workers" of Russia,^ and all the 
 factions declared themselves in favor of the Marxian 
 plan to abolish capitalistic production and property 
 rights, and of the rest of the Marxian programme. 
 Previous to this convention, the Socialist Party in 
 the United States had become so radical and dis- 
 loyal that many of its best known leaders, such as 
 John Spargo and Charles Edward Russell, had 
 publicly severed their connections with it. 
 
 The writings of Marx himself are justification for 
 
 ' The amended ijlatform adopted by the convention reads in part: 
 "We, the organized Socialists of America, pledge our support to 
 the Revolutionary Workers of Russia in the support of the Govern- 
 ment of their Soviets, with the Radical Socialists of Germany, Aus- 
 tria and Hungary in their efforts to establish working-class rule in 
 their countries, and with those Socialist organizations in Englaad, 
 France, Italy and other countries who, during the war as_ after the 
 war, have remained true to the principles of uncompromising Inter- 
 national Socialism." 
 
192 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 the assertion that the line between Socialism and 
 Communism is almost invisible. It was the author 
 of Capital who also wrote, with Frederick Engels, 
 the Communist Manifesto. It is true that the 
 Communist Manifesto was written in 1848, whUe the 
 first volume of Capital wa§ written in 1867. Never- 
 theless, there is no repudiation by Marx in his 
 Capital, nor in any of his other writings, of anything 
 which he said in the Communist Manifesto. As has 
 already been stated, Marx in his Capital advocates 
 socialization by the state of all means of "produc- 
 tion," "distribution," and "exchange," thereby ad- 
 vocating the abolition at one stroke of the right of 
 individual ownership in what is obviously by far 
 the greater part of all wealth. It is clear from Marx's 
 writings that he includes in the "means of produc- 
 tion" all land and natural resources, as well as all 
 factories, machinery, and other forms of fixed cap- 
 ital entering directly or indirectly into productive 
 processes. Under "means of distribution" are in- 
 cluded, of course, aU railroads, ships, canals, and 
 every appurtenance of modem transportation; also 
 office-buildings, stores, and depots of all kinds. 
 "Means of exchange" would include money, banks, 
 commercial houses, and the like. It may well be 
 asked, how much of the world's wealth is left when 
 these things have been subtracted ? Mr. David 
 Berenberg, of the Rand School of Social Science, 
 states that there is very little, although he is probably 
 more liberal in this connection than the average 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 193 
 
 Socialist. This is what he says under the heading 
 "Shall a Man Own No Property?": 
 
 Many working men have small bank-accounts. A few own 
 their homes. All have more or less property in the way of 
 furniture. Does Socialism expect them to give all this up? 
 Emphatically no. The definition of Socialism refers only 
 to that property which is a means of production. The house 
 you may own, your savings, your furniture are yours. 
 
 No man, however, has the right to own such property as 
 will make him a master of other men. No man is good 
 enough to enslave other men. No man's service to the world 
 is great enough to entitle him to control the lives of others. 
 
 Personal property may be private. Social property should 
 not be private.^ 
 
 In reading the above quotation it may be noted 
 that although the question is "Shall a Man Own 
 No Property?" the answer relates solely to the 
 workman. We are left wholly in doubt as to the 
 point at which the savings which the workman may 
 keep convert him into the capitalist-man — ^whose 
 property is to be taken away from him. In this con- 
 nection we cannot refrain from once more quoting 
 Marx himself. His answer as to what property a 
 man may own is very similar to the argument he 
 uses in regard to the destruction of the bourgeois 
 family. He simply says that the capitalistic sys- 
 tem has already solved the problem by destroying 
 
 1 David P. Berenberg, Socialism, p. 25 (The Rand School of Social 
 Science, New York, 1918). 
 
194 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 the property of all but a small group. In neither 
 case is he troubled, apparently, with any great con- 
 cern for the veracity of his statements. This is 
 what he says: 
 
 We Communists have been reproached with the desire of 
 abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the 
 fruit of a man's own labor, which property is alleged to be 
 the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity, and in- 
 dependence. Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property ! 
 Do you mean the property of the petty artisan and of the 
 small peasant, a form of property that preceded 'the bour- 
 geois form? There is no need to abolish that; the develop- 
 ment of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, 
 and is still destroying it daily.^ 
 
 Again on page 34 we find the following: 
 
 You are horrified at our intending to do away with private 
 property. But in your existing society, private property is 
 already done away with for nine-tenths of the population;'^ its 
 existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the 
 hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, 
 with intending to do away with a form of property, the 
 necessary condition for whose existence is, the non-existence 
 of any property for the immense majority of society. 
 
 In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away 
 with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we 
 intend.' 
 
 ' Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Communist Manifesto, pp. 31 
 and 32 (Charles H. Kerr & Company, Chicago, 1915). 
 
 ' Italics our own. 
 
 ' Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Communist Manifesto, p. 34 
 (Charles H. Kerr & Company, Chicago, 1915). 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 195 
 
 In these passages it will be noted that Marx ad- 
 vocates the abolition of property of the bourgeois 
 class — that is to say, the property of all society 
 except those persons who have nothing whatsoever 
 but their labor to sell. While he does not say in 
 so many words that he will also abolish the right to 
 acquire property among the proletarians themselves, 
 he fails wholly to lay down any line of demarcation 
 which permits even this class to accumulate its sav- 
 ings or to acquire or possess any property what- 
 soever. Of course here is one of those fundamental 
 difficulties with his theories that Marx always 
 handles by evasion. We remark finally in this con- 
 nection that one is quite justified nowadays in stat- 
 ing that the term "Socialism" as applied to official 
 Socialism, and as used by the Socialist parties them- 
 selves to-day, is practically synonymous with "Com- 
 munism." There are, of course, many individuals 
 who call themselves "Socialists" who are without 
 the pale of the official and dominant creeds of both 
 Socialism and Communism. 
 
 Here it may not be out of place to point out again 
 how utterly foreign and repugnant are the prevailing 
 theories of Socialism to the fundamental principles of 
 the American Constitution, one of the basic princi- 
 ples of which is respect for the right of property and 
 the acquisition of property. The Seventh Amend- 
 ment to the Constitution guarantees the right of 
 trial by jury and that "no fact tried by a jviry shall 
 be otherwise re-examined than according to the rules 
 
196 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 of the common law." By this clause the common 
 law is specifically recognized as a ftmdamental part 
 of the American form of government, and that law 
 of course includes as one of its fundamental concep- 
 tions not only the right of property but the right of 
 freedom of contract in acquiring the same. 
 
 The famous Fourteenth Amendment contains the 
 prohibition "Nor shall any State deprive any person 
 of life, liberty or property without due process of law," 
 and the courts have construed the phrase "due 
 process of law" to be such process as is in accor- 
 dance with the rules of the common law prevailing at 
 the time that the United States separated from the 
 mother country. Even under the right of eminent 
 domain, no property can be taken for public pur- 
 poses by the state except upon due compensation, 
 which is subject to judicial review. / 
 
 It needs no argument to demonstrate that the 
 principles of Socialism, as set forth in this hook are 
 absolutely irreconcilable with these foundations of the 
 Constitution of the United States} Moreover, they 
 are equally repugnant to the principle of individual 
 liberty which is mentioned in the Preamble to the 
 Constitution as one of those great blessings which 
 the framers declared that they intended to seciire 
 for themselves and their posterity. 
 
 The dictatorship of one class, advocated by Karl 
 
 1 The same is true of the Constitutions of Great Britain and the 
 British Colonies, of France, of Italy, and all other European coun- 
 tries with the exception of Russia. 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 197 
 
 Marx and practised by Lenin and Trotzky, is the 
 very antithesis of American ideas of liberty and 
 equality of political rights for aU classes of society. 
 Those who advocate the doctrines of present-day 
 Socialism, but who stop short of the doctrine of 
 Marx that Socialism must be brought about by vio- 
 lence, while they may not be technically ia the class 
 of revolutionists, are nevertheless to be put in the 
 category of men who are in revolt against the fun- 
 damental principles of the Constitution and antag- 
 onists of all those conceptions of personal rights and 
 liberties which are the basis of Western civilization. 
 
 In concluding this part of our subject, it is im- 
 portant to emphasize the fact that at the present 
 time there is no essential disagreement between any 
 of the Socialistic organizations in the United States 
 on the question of ultimately resorting to force of 
 some kind to gain their ends. All agree that this 
 must be done, although there is some difference in 
 the degree of frankness with which this project is 
 avowed. Recent developments, just as this book 
 was going to press, have served to show up in their 
 true colors both the Socialist Party of America and 
 the Commimist Party of America. 
 
 At a hearing held in the court-house at Roches- 
 ter, N. Y., on January 2, 1920, before the Lusk 
 Legislative Committee, investigating radical activi- 
 ties in New York State, evidence was given to the 
 effect that the National Executive Committee of the 
 Socialist Party of America has ' ' indorsed and pledged 
 
198 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 its support to the Communist International at Mos- 
 cow, and that Socialists have been recently cir- 
 culating the manifesto of the Communist Inter- 
 national signed by Lenin, Trotzky, and others of 
 the Soviet Bolshevist Cabinet." ^ The manifesto 
 contains, among other things, the following: 
 
 It is our task now to sum up the practical revolutionary 
 experience of the working class and to further hasten tlie 
 complete victory of the Communist revolution. Civilian 
 war is forced upon the laboring classes by their arch-enemies. 
 The working class must answer blow for blow. The Com- 
 munist parties, far from conjuring up civil war artificially, 
 rather strive to shorten its duration as much as possible. 
 It has become an iron necessity to minimize the number of 
 its victims, and above all to secure victory for the prole- 
 tariat. This makes necessary the disarming of the bour- 
 geoisie at the proper time, the arming of the laborers, and 
 the formation of a Communist army such as the Red Army 
 of Soviet Russia. Conquest of the political power means 
 not merely a change in personnel, but annihilation of the 
 enemies' apparatus of the government. The revolutionary 
 era compels the proletariat to make use of the means of 
 battle which will concentrate its entire energies, namely mass 
 action, with its logical resultant direct conflict with the 
 government machinery in open combat. All other methods, 
 such as revolutionary use of bourgeois parUamentarism, will 
 be of only secondary significance. Long Uve the international 
 republic of the proletarian councils. 
 
 Of course such a manifesto is an incitement to 
 immediate armed revolution. Moreover, at the 
 same hearing, evidence was submitted showing that 
 ' New York Times, January 3, 1920. 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 199 
 
 under the Constitution of the Socialist Party of 
 America aliens can be officers in such organization, 
 a thing which would be impossible in any non- 
 Socialist political party in the United States. 
 
 It would seem, therefore, that the Socialist Party 
 of America — ^which may be regarded as the parent 
 organization of all Socialistic parties in the United 
 States — ^is pretty definitely linked up with the doc- 
 trines of Bolshevist Socialism, and, indeed, that there 
 is direct co-operation between the two parties. 
 
 The facts are neither more nor less startling with 
 regard to the Communist Party of America. On 
 January 3, 1920, the United States Department of 
 Justice issued a statement based on the examination 
 of documents in Attorney-General Palmer's custody 
 which says in part: 
 
 That the Communist Party of America, through the propa- 
 ganda being actively carried on at the present time, is ad- 
 vocating the overthrow of the government of this country 
 by force and violence, 
 
 and, 
 
 That the Conmiunist Party of America, in its manifesto 
 at its convention in Chicago, September i, 1919, advocated 
 tlie overthrow of the Government of the United States by 
 force and violence.* 
 
 It was on the basis of this and similar evidence 
 discovered in the recent nation-wide investigation 
 » New York World, January 4, 1920. 
 
200 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 of Red activities in the United States that many of 
 the thousands of arrests were made. The Depart- 
 ment of Justice took the stand that the doctrines of 
 the Communist Party of America were such that 
 under the new law, recently passed by Congress, 
 those of its members who were aliens were subject 
 to deportation, as belonging to a party which ad- 
 vocates the violent overthrow of the existing gov- 
 ernment. Of course the recent extensive raids were 
 based on much more than evidence of this kind, 
 and were primarily directed against a wide-spread 
 conspiracy, or\ conspiracies, for immediate resort to 
 acts of violence and revolution' at various centres 
 throughout the country. Just to what extent the 
 evidence incriminates one or another of the various 
 radical factions or organizations it is too early to 
 state. ■ 
 
 If, however, we take a general survey of the 
 radical propaganda which is at present being con- 
 ducted throughout the cotmtry, it will be seen that 
 it is directed mainly to the fomenting of a social 
 revolution and the violent overthrow of the exist- 
 ing governmental institutions, together with the 
 abolition of capital and private ownership in gen- 
 eral. There is really nothing new in this kind of 
 agitation. The interesting part of it is the manner 
 in which the authors are expressing themselves. 
 For instance, the International Weekly, edited in 
 Seattle, Washington, addresses its audience in the 
 following terms: 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 201 
 
 When again the flabby-brained and loose-lipped orators 
 of the capitalistic class come before the workers with their 
 rosy promises they will hear the shout: 
 
 Ye are Uars ! 
 Your democracy is a lie. 
 Your freedom is a lie. 
 Yoxu: prosperity is a he. 
 Your equaUty is a he. 
 Your humanity is a he. 
 Your hberty is a lie. 
 Your religion is a he. 
 Your eternal justice is a Ke, 
 Your God is a he. 
 
 Everything you praise, all that you eulogize and adore, 
 is a he. 
 
 Shortly before the Seattle strike which paralyzed 
 the city for several days, the Socialists in the West 
 mobilized their forces by means of a wide-spread 
 propaganda. All the Socialistic and anarchist publi- 
 cations in the States of California and Washington 
 published at that time the following preamble of 
 the Seattle Socialists: 
 
 We, the Sociahst Party of Seattle, in Convention assem- 
 bled, reaffirm ovi entire adherence to the revolutionary prin- 
 ciples of international Sociahsm. We reaflirm that liere is 
 a struggle between the two classes of society, the exploiters 
 and the exploited, which can be ended only through the 
 triumph of the one useful class in society, the working class, 
 through the use of its pohtical and industrial strength. We 
 acclaim joyously the proletarian revolution of Russia and 
 Germany, and approve whole-heartedly of the principles in- 
 
202 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 volved in the dictatorship of the proletariat. We further 
 hold that the organization of the Russian and German work- 
 ers in the Soviets is the truest and most direct form ,of 
 working-class organization, and that it shines forth as a 
 beacon to the workers of the world, demonstrating the truest 
 form of democracy and the most efficient plan for the work- 
 ers' state. Guided by the principle of revolutionary Social- 
 ism and the glorious example of our Russian and German 
 comrades, we pledge the Socialist Party of Seattle and its 
 candidates to the following programme for the municipal 
 election of 1919. 
 
 One month later the general strike in Seattle 
 broke out with the International Workers of the 
 World in control of it. It was indeed more than a 
 strike, it was an actual revolt of the proletarians, 
 who aimed the forcible overthrow of the duly elected 
 municipal authorities and the establishment in their 
 place of a proletarian Soviet which would rule the 
 people on a Communist basis. 
 
 Due to the wise and firm policy of Mayor Hanson, 
 bloodshed was avoided, and shortly after the decla- 
 ration of the strike the Socialist leaders became con- 
 vinced that the whole enterprise was a failure. 
 
 In the same way the steel strike, which was de- 
 clared on the 2ist of September, 191 9, proved to be 
 a failure. Of course the cause of the steel strike 
 was of a different nature from that of the majority 
 of strikes which have taken place in the United 
 States during the past two years. In the case of the 
 steel workmen it was a question of 100,000 unionist 
 workmen seeking to impose their will upon 400,000 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 203 
 
 of their fellow workmen. The despotic and most 
 selfish tendencies of the union leaders had reached 
 their climax in a branch of industry which had no 
 right to complain of an unjust attitude on the part 
 of the employers toward labor. 
 
 It may be pointed out that while the Secretary of 
 State of the United States receives a salary of $12,000 
 per annum, some of the rollers employed in the steel- 
 mills in the Pittsburgh district receive as much as 
 $22,000 per annum. But even the average roller 
 gets $30 per day. Some of those workmen have 
 their own limousines and more than 70,000 steel 
 workmen hold stock in the United States Steel Com- 
 pany. During the period of 1915 to 1918 the wages 
 of those employed in the steel industry were in- 
 creased one hundred and thirty-one per cent by the 
 companies. ' 
 
 Under those circumstances the strike collapsed, 
 although at first 145 plants were partially prevented 
 from operating. 
 
 It is of deep significance that the moment the 
 United States Army took over the power at Gary 
 it was foimd that the Reds, headed by the Interna- 
 tional Workers of the World, were artificially fo- 
 menting dissatisfaction among the steel workmen. 
 Moreover, a definite connection between the steel- 
 strike leaders in Gary and the representatives of 
 the Soviet Government in Russia has been estab- 
 lished by the military authorities, and it has been also 
 revealed that some of the steel-strike leaders pos- 
 
204 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 sessed credentials as delegates to conclaves of Reds 
 at which actual preparations were in progress to 
 amalgamate the Soviets of Russia and the radicals 
 of America. At the same time it was proved that 
 the steel strike was largely supported by alien ele- 
 ments. The Federal authorities seized a considera- 
 ble quantity of Red literature in Gary, and it was 
 disclosed that some of the most violent attacks 
 against the United States Government were made in 
 pamphlets and newspapers published in the Hunga- 
 rian, Lithuanian, Ukrainian, and Finnish languages. 
 Some of these pamphlets are so remarkable that we 
 feel in duty bound to quote them here. "Thus, a 
 Ukrainian publication, which was widely circulated 
 in Gary among the steel strikers, informed the work- 
 men as follows: 
 / 
 A bourgeois is a lazy, dangerous, and bloodthirsty crea- 
 ture who has not the slightest right to live. His character 
 is just the opposite of the worker's character. His nature 
 is greedy, egotistic, vulgar. He cannot live without the 
 exploitation of the worker and unless he can feed upon the 
 worker's life. Victims, and more victims, are needed for 
 the up-keep of his existence. The bourgeoisie, in other 
 words, is a class of parasites, whose existence is not justified 
 either by biological, moral, or economical laws. 
 
 A Lithuanian pap^r, also circulated in Gary, stated 
 that: 
 
 The Lithuanian workers will have a real class understand- 
 ing, and a real organization of the proletariat, which will 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 205 
 
 lead them to final release from under the yoke of the iiamned 
 capitalist. The Lithuanian Federation will go together 
 with the whole world's revolutionary organization and will 
 follow in the path of the Communistic International. 
 
 A German paper pays special tribute to General 
 Leonard Wood in the following terms: 
 
 It is understood that the brave General did not come to 
 Gary to defend the civil rights of the strikers but that he 
 undertook to carry out, with an iron hand, the autocratic 
 rule of the steel trusts and the Mayor of Gary, He issued 
 a ukase that no striker should be permitted to don the imi- 
 form. He forbade meetings, and, of course, picketing. It 
 is worth while remarking that General Wood came to Gary 
 directly from Omaha, where he defended the poor white 
 population against the hatred of the negroes, who, accord- 
 ing to the General, made a conspiracy to make a pogrom on 
 the whites. The pogrom, of course, was made by the 
 whites against the negroes, but the conspiracy was (Uscov- 
 ered by the General among the negroes. 
 
 Thus the Red thread of disloyal internationalist 
 and a^en propaganda is running through the whole 
 strike movement, no matter whether in Gary or in 
 Seattle, in Boston, or elsewhere. 
 
 It is also noteworthy that in many instances where 
 strikes have actually broken out, or where attempts 
 have been made by labor leaders to bring about a 
 strike, there has been no ground whatsoever for 
 charges of exploitation of the laborers by their em- 
 ployers. If there was no ground for a strike, the 
 ground had to be invented. Such was the case with 
 
2o6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 the Bethlehem strike, which was run by Messrs. 
 W. B. Rubin and John Fitzpatrick. The labor 
 leaders themselves did not dare to present the 
 argument that the Bethlehem steel corporation was 
 actually "exploiting" labor, but in order to provoke 
 a strike, the Socialist agitators raised the question 
 of ' ' collective bargaining. ' ' The dispute was cleverly 
 shifted toward the alleged right of the American 
 Federation of Labor to conclude with the corpora- 
 tion a collective contract on behalf of the Bethlehem 
 labor craft as a whole. Thus, the American Federa- 
 tion of Labor fought the directors of the Bethlehem 
 mills for the sole ptupose of compelling the company 
 to substitute for the agreement which existed be- 
 tween the company and the Bethlehem workmen 
 an agreement of the company with the American 
 Federation of Labor itself, notwithstanding the fact 
 that an overwhelming majority of the Bethlehem 
 workmen actually did not belong to the said Federa- 
 tion. Therefore, in this instance again, an attempt 
 was made to overrule the free will of the majority 
 of the laborers by a despotic policy of a minority. 
 
 With much surprise the public has noticed that 
 Mr. Samuel Untermeyer came out in support of this 
 despotic movement, and that Rabbi Wise violently 
 attacked Judge Gary, apparently because of his 
 firm and wise stand against the disloyal, anti- 
 American internationalist tendencies fomented by 
 the steel-strike leaders. 
 
 It would be a matter of practical impossibility for 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 207 
 
 us to attempt to describe, even in a general way, all 
 the various strikes which have occurred in America 
 dtiring the past six to ten months, nor is it necessary 
 to our purpose, since we are mainly interested in the 
 exposition of certain tendencies which have become 
 general as far as the labor movement and Socialism 
 are concerned. We feel justified, however, in mak- 
 ing a short reference to the Boston police strike be- 
 cause of its extraordinary character. 
 
 The facts relating to this strike are generally 
 known, and it should be only recalled that the Bos- 
 ton "incident" was the result of a controversy be; 
 tween the patrolmen and Police Commissioner 
 Curtis arising from the latter's refusal to recognize 
 the organization of the Boston Policemen's Union. 
 Some few weeks before the September, police strike, 
 in Boston, Police Commissioner Curtis promul- 
 gated an order that members of the police force, 
 should not become affiliated with any outside unions 
 or organizations. Immediately afterward the pa- 
 trolmen, who had been discussing the matter for 
 some time, formed the Policemen's Union, which 
 was granted a charter by the American Federation 
 of Labor. Commissioner Curtis brought charges 
 against nineteen officers and members of the tmion 
 for having violated his order. At the request of 
 cotmsel for the union, the commissioner himself 
 conducted the trial of these men. Naturally, he 
 found them guilty, and it was understood that those 
 found guilty would be discharged from their duties. 
 
2o8 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Thereupon, on September 8, 1919, the Policemen's 
 Union voted to call a strike, eflfective the following 
 day at the 5.45 roll-call. On September 9, fifteen 
 hundred Boston patrolmen walked out, leaving the 
 city of Boston at the mercy of mobs, consisting of 
 irresponsible aliens, thieves, and lawless boys. The 
 immediate result was that stores were wrecked, 
 store-windows broken, property looted, and people 
 wounded. 
 
 The very idea of a police strike was "imported" 
 from England, where several cities, including Liver- 
 pool and London, had been deserted by the police 
 force, and also left to the prey of criminal convicts 
 and sansculottes. 
 
 The peculiar feature of the police strike is that a 
 policemah has no more right to strike than a sol- 
 dier. Each violates his oath to the government 
 when he deserts his post by striking and, therefore, 
 he cannot possibly be trusted in the future. More- 
 over, the policemen have no more right to form 
 unions than soldiers. Military discipline is as indis- 
 pensable in the police service as it is in the army. 
 Neither the police force nor the army can possibly 
 exist without strict obedience to orders of their 
 duly appointed chiefs. It is quite obvious that 
 policemen must be ready to obey orders and that 
 those orders can be given to them only by their su- 
 periors, and of course not by any outside body, be 
 it a union, or a club, or a political party. It is one 
 of the policeman's duties to maintain order in cases 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 209 
 
 of riots and violence. Now, if the policeman is to 
 be faithful to his union, he may have to be unfaith- 
 ful to the law and to public interests. Moreover, 
 it should be remembered that it is the public who 
 pays the policemen to protect it and to maintain 
 public order. 
 
 The above arguments are so clear that they really 
 need no further interpretation, but the important 
 point is that the American Federation of Labor took 
 the liberty of issuing a charter to the Policemen's 
 Union, which action must be regarded as in itself 
 disloyal. It is also noteworthy that immediately 
 after the Boston police strike it was stated in the 
 press that during Jidy and August over two htmdred 
 police unions were formed in various towns &.nd 
 cities throughout the United States. It is safe to 
 say that this disloyal poUce movement was not in- 
 cidental but was the result of concerted action, 
 and there has been a good deal of comment as to 
 who or what particular forces engineered it. Un- 
 doubtedly, those same labor organizations which 
 were issuing charters to police imions in various 
 cities have also approved the policy of the police- 
 men walking out on strikes whenever they happened 
 to disagree with the orders given by their superiors. 
 At the same time it is important to remember that 
 labor agitators as a rule are not open to the reproach 
 of having any particular sympathy with the police 
 in general, and especially when they perform their 
 duties. Thus, in a Russian Bolshevist paper pub- 
 
2IO SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 lished in New York City the New York police were 
 called "The American Cossacks." (Probably this 
 appellation was borrowed by New York Commu- 
 nists from Rabbi Wise, who accused Judge Gary of 
 having " Cossackized" the steel-mill workers.) There 
 is something very peculiar in a situation where labor 
 organizations which, generally speaking, have but 
 little respect for the "Cossacks" of the American 
 nation, are issuing charters to those same men. 
 Undoubtedly, a labor organization such as the 
 American Federation of Labor is, or should be, 
 fully aware that the very attempt to unionize police- 
 men inevitably leads to corruption, disorganization, 
 and eventually to anarchy and dissolution of the 
 Commonwe3,lth. 
 
 4. Among other schemes promulgated by the So- 
 cialist leaders the so-called Plumb Railroad Plan 
 presents an interesting phase of the labor movement 
 in America. With this scheme the phrase "nation- 
 alization" is associated. 
 
 There has been much discussion about nationali- 
 zation and socialization during the past months. 
 Labor leaders have declared on various occasions 
 that the workmen would not consider themselves 
 satisfied until all industries were "nationalized," 
 and that, in the meantime, a constant industrial 
 war would menace the very existence of the capital- 
 istic system. It was insisted by the Socialist chiefs 
 that nationalization is the only means of avoiding 
 a serious conflict between labor and capital. They 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 211 
 
 daim that it would bring assiirance to labor that its 
 cause will be safeguarded and protected against the 
 aggressive policies of private ownership. 
 
 There is nothing particularly new in the scheme 
 of "nationalization" in the sense that this term has 
 been commonly used. As a matter of fact, during 
 the war not only European countries but also the 
 United States itself adopted the principle of "nation- 
 alization" in various branches of industry. Thus, 
 in Prance, the whole output of wheat, coal, and 
 different minerals was placed tmder governmental 
 control. In Great Britain and in the United States, 
 as a measure of emergency, the railroads were taken 
 over and operated by the state. Whether the gov- 
 ernmental system of operation was efficient is a 
 question which we do not intend to discuss in de- 
 tail. The fact remains undisputed that the govern- 
 mental system, at least in the United States, has 
 provoked sharp criticism on the part of the public 
 at large. At the same time, however, it must be 
 borne in mind that governmental control of the 
 railroads was put into effect under very difficult 
 conditions due to the World War. 
 
 As to European practice, it must be said that in 
 some coimtries the railroads were operated by the 
 government with a high degree of efficiency, as in 
 Germany, while in other countries, especially in 
 Russia, governmental ownership of the railroads 
 proved to be a failure. 
 
 It must be clearly emphasized, however, that gov- 
 
212 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 emmental operation of certain branches of industry 
 does not coincide with the principle of "nationaliza- 
 tion" as advocated by modem Socialism. In the 
 first place, governmental operation of industries 
 does not necessarily involve governmental owner- 
 ship. The state can take over the operation of one 
 industry or another as a temporary meastu-e, leaving 
 the ownership of the shares in the possession of the 
 original stockholders, as in tlie case of the United 
 States during the war. Moreover, if the state de- 
 cides to monopolize a certain branch of industry, 
 and to own as well as to operate it, the business 
 may be carried on at the government's own risk 
 without any interference on the part of labor, or 
 any other social group, as in the case of the liquor 
 business in Russia before the revolution and the 
 tobacco trade in France. 
 
 It is to be noted that many German Socialists 
 have declared themselves in favor of nationaliza- 
 tion of industries because they believed that finally 
 the proletariat would be able to obtain political con- 
 trol over the government. 
 
 Socialists in other countries were much more 
 pessimistic as to their prospects of such political 
 control. At least the French Syndicalists always 
 belittled the hopes expressed by their German com- 
 rades as to state ownership. In fact, the leaders of 
 modem Socialism assert that the moment the state 
 takes control of a branch of industry the capitalistic 
 character of production is automatically concealed, 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 213 
 
 since the workman has to face not the private owner 
 — or the "boss" — as an individual but a complex 
 organization headed by the state, in which class 
 differences are not distinctly brought out. There- 
 fore, soine Socialists say that a plainly capitalistic 
 enterprise is much better, leaving no doubt in the 
 mind of the workman as to the nature of production. 
 The Plumb Railroad Plan is a scheme which rep- 
 resents a radical deviation from the general prin- 
 ciple of nationalization. In the first place, accord- 
 ing to the Plumb Railroad Plan, it is not, in fact, 
 the government which will operate the railroads. 
 The operation is to be carried out by a board of 
 fifteen directors, five of whom would be named by 
 the President to represent the public; five elected 
 by the operating officials, and five elected by the 
 classified employees. In the opinion of the Socialist 
 leaders this scheme would be superior to govern- 
 mental operation, on the alleged ground that it 
 would prevent control by an inefficient bureaucracy. 
 Moreover, Mr. Plumb thinks that this is true de- 
 mocracy, since it gives the men engaged in the in- 
 dustry a voice in its management. Therefore, Mr. 
 Plumb's proposal is not a nationalization scheme in 
 the usual, limited sense of public ownership and 
 public control of the railroads. Mr. Plumb and his 
 followers clearly understood that should they sug- 
 gest a radical solution of the problem, involving the 
 outright transfer of the railroads from the actual 
 owners to the future artificial public ownership, it 
 
214 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 would be immediately defeated both in the House 
 of Representatives and in the Senate. For this 
 reason Mr. Plumb has suggested that the legal 
 transfer of the railroads should be executed in the 
 form of an issue of governmental bonds which would 
 be given to the legitimate owners of the railroad 
 stock. There is a provision in the plan to the ef- 
 fect that the courts are to define "legitimate in- 
 terests," and that the purchase of the railroads is 
 to be executed through a board comprising mem- 
 bers of the Interstate Commerce Commission and 
 one represeptative each of operator's employees and 
 presidential appointees from the board of directors. 
 
 The backbone of the whole plan consists in the 
 method of distribution of the surplus. In this con- 
 nection the plan provides that, after operating ex- 
 penses are paid and fixed charges are met, including 
 interest on outstanding government securities, the 
 surplus is divided equally between the government 
 and the men. The employees' portion is to be di- 
 vided between the managerial and classified em- 
 ployees, the former receiving double the amount re- 
 ceived by the latter. 
 
 From a Socialistic point of view this provision is 
 the alpha and omega of the arrangement, since it 
 gives the workmen something which they are not 
 entitled to, irrespective of the fact that the mana- 
 gerial class of employees receives twice as much as 
 the classified employees. Mr. Plumb's intention 
 was to give a profit to the workmen on a capital 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 215 
 
 which they did not own. In order to hide this fact 
 Mr. Plumb has persuaded the public that what the 
 men would receive under the provisions of his plan 
 would not be profit in the limited sense but a "divi- 
 dend on efficiency." 
 
 The Socialists also have endeavored to explain 
 that the profit which would thus be given to the 
 workmen would be based on increased production 
 which they claim would result from the increased 
 efforts of the workmen tmder the new system. 
 
 It is easy to understand that all these and similar 
 arguments are nothing but an attempt to justify 
 the workmen in getting something which certainly 
 does not belong to them. 
 
 Moreover, Mr. Plumb realized that under the 
 provisions of his plan it might be very easy for the 
 workmen to draw such salaries as they, the work- 
 men themselves, would be inclined to fix. This 
 naturally would lead to a tremendous increase in 
 the expenses of railroad operation. Notwithstand- 
 ing the fact that Mr. Plumb and his Socialist col- 
 leagues have very little concern with that aspect of 
 the case, they had to propose some kind of barrier 
 against the natural tendency of the workmen to 
 pay themselves extortionate wages. The solution 
 was said to be found in the double rate of dividend 
 received by the managerial employees. At least the 
 league for the propaganda of the Plumb Plan made 
 the following statement: "Since thei operating of6- 
 cials would lose dividends if wages were increased, 
 
2i6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 it acts automatically to prevent collusion between 
 labor directors and operating directors to outvote 
 the public's directors in raising wages beyond a 
 reasonable level." 
 
 The above argument is very weak indeed. Labor 
 wages are paid weekly or semi-monthly. Increased 
 wages mean more money immediately, whereas the 
 "dividend on efficiency," in the mind of the average 
 workman, is a very distant and problematic scheme 
 — and properly so. It is quite obvious that only 
 after one year of operation is it possible to make 
 a full account of the financial transactions of the 
 respective railroad system and to ascertain the 
 specific amount of dividend, if any. Under these 
 circimistances one part of the workmen, employed 
 by the railroads, would probably never receive this 
 dividend, having been employed for less than one 
 year. On the other hand, it is very doubtful whether, 
 imder the clumsy management of the fifteen directors, 
 representing heterogeneous groups, the railroad busi- 
 ness would be run at a profit. If not, then no sur- 
 plus would be available for distribution among the 
 workmen. Anticipating a situation of this kind, 
 the employees, both of the managerial class and of 
 the so-called classified group, would insist that their 
 representatives on the Board of Directors increase 
 their wages almost indefinitely. 
 
 This would be the more likely to happen because 
 it is the radical elements which control the labor- 
 unions in our day. The principle of reasonable self- 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 317 
 
 sacrifice for the sake of the community as a whole 
 is daily ridiculed by Socialist agitators. "Grab all 
 that you have the power to seize" is the slogan of 
 modem Socialists. 
 
 Doubtless an indefinite increase in wages would 
 ajffect most disastrously the public interest at large. 
 Increased wages would have to be paid by some- 
 body, and "somebody" would be the public. The 
 national tariff system would be undermined because, 
 in order to meet increased wages, it would be neces- 
 sary to raise the tariffs. Higher tariffs, in turn, 
 would affect directly as well as indirectly general 
 business intercourse, and market prices would go 
 up automatically. 
 
 Realizing that the argvunent of the double rate 
 of dividend paid to the managerial class is rather a 
 weak protection of the interests of the community 
 as a whole, Mr. Plumb has endeavored to assure 
 the public that there would be another btilwark for 
 its protection in the fact that the rate-making power 
 would remain with the Interstate Commerce Com- 
 mission, and that if wages were raised so high that 
 rates would have to be increased the Commission 
 would refuse to change them and shippers might 
 appeal to the courts for redress. 
 
 Mr. Plumb's second argtmaent is as weak as his 
 first. If labor representatives on the Board of 
 Directors should demand increased wages for their 
 fellow workmen gind the Interstate Commerce Com- 
 mission were to interfere with the decision of the 
 
2i8 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Board of Directors, Socialist agitators wovild pro- 
 ceed along the same lines as Mr. Smillie and his 
 worthy British comrades in Great Britain in the 
 case of the general railroad strike. Socialist agi- 
 tators would declare a strike without even consult- 
 ing the workmen and managerial employees engaged 
 iii railroad operation. On the other hand, accord- 
 ing to modem SociaUsm, why shouldn't the railroad 
 workmen go out on strike if they have the power 
 to impose their will upon the community as a whole ? 
 This is exactly what the Socialists advocate. This 
 is what they inoculate day by day into labor's 
 brains. 
 
 Finally, Mr. Plumb's third argument, namely, 
 that Congress would have the power to revoke the 
 directors' charter if railroad operation should re- 
 sult in a deficit, is weaker than the first two. In the 
 first place, the moment Congress used its power the 
 workmen would be urged by the labor directors and 
 by Socialist leaders to declare a general strike. 
 
 On the other hand, the revocation of the direc- 
 tors' charter might prove to be a belated measure. 
 Things should be analyzed as they present them- 
 selves in reality and not in the dreams of some So- 
 cialists. Pacts would assume approximately the 
 following shape: 
 
 (a) The Board of Directors would supervise the 
 operation of the railroads for a period of twelve 
 months. 
 
 (b) After this period the preparation of a full finan- 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 219 
 
 cial account would require at least from two to 
 three months. 
 
 (c) The study of this account by the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission and by Congress woiild re- 
 (Juire from two to three weeks at least. 
 
 (d) Then it would be found out that the railroad 
 operation resulted in a deficit. 
 
 (e) The report giving this account would be pre- 
 sented to Congress and it would require at least 
 from two to three weeks more for Congress to de- 
 cide upon the revocation of the directors' charter. 
 
 (/) The Board of Directors would file a report 
 giving its explanation of the reasons why the rail- 
 roads were operated on a net loss basis. At the 
 same time the Board of Directors would request 
 Congress to institute a commission to investigate 
 the causes of the financial losses connected with the 
 railroad operation. 
 
 (g) Congress would probably appoint a commis- 
 sion whose work would last at least another two 
 months. 
 
 (h) The report of the commission would be pre- 
 sented to Congress; Congress would examine this 
 report and make its final decision, which would re- 
 quire another two to three weeks, after which the 
 directors' charter could finally be revoked. 
 
 (i) Then it would require another two to three 
 weeks to appoint and elect a new Board of Directors, 
 which body would take over the management from 
 the disqualified directors. 
 
220 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Thus, the whole procedtire of revocation of the 
 charter would require from five to six months of 
 delay (even if Congress were in session at that time), 
 and there would be an additional period of twelve 
 months of incompetent and inefficient management, 
 which would make a total period of seventeen ot 
 eighteen months of mismanagement of a branch of 
 national industry of vital importance. Nor does it 
 require so long a period to cripple the railroad ser- 
 vice. This kind of thing can be accomplished much 
 quicker. Therefore, if the labor directors proved 
 to be inefficient, the whole board would be para- 
 lyzed in its activities, since the labor directors would 
 always outvote the President's appointees. 
 
 The crucial point in Mr. Plumb's Plan and in 
 similar schemes consists, however, in the fact that 
 nationalization of the railroads is apt to prevent, 
 almost immediately, further extension in railroad 
 construction. If you once leave the profit out of 
 the enterprise in the railroad business, there is no 
 stimulus for building new lines except those of a 
 purely strategic character, which are usually run at 
 a loss. 
 
 A grave inconsistency in Mr. Plumb's Plan lies 
 in the fact that, on the one hand, his scheme tends 
 to prevent railroad operation by the government, 
 because, as Mr. Plumb himself says, bureaucracy is 
 inefficient. On the other hand, Mr. Plumb entrusts 
 to the same bureaucracy the vital task of develop- 
 ing the national railroald system with respect to new 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 221 
 
 construction. This function, however, is the very- 
 one which requires private initiative, private enter- 
 prise, private liability, private risk, and private 
 competition, which are lacking in governmental 
 operation, especially in the case of a democratic 
 government, which remains in power for only four 
 years and the policy of which, therefore, can be 
 radically changed by the government next elected. 
 
 The most convinced supporters of bureaucratic 
 management in Europe have never gone so far as 
 Mr. Plumb and the Socialist followers. In Ger- 
 many and in Russia the governments have dared to 
 build upon their own initiative new railroad lines 
 only when they were designated for strategic pur- 
 poses. Thus, most of the East Prussian railroad 
 lines were built by the German Government on its 
 own initiative. Thus, further, the famous Bologoje- 
 Siedlitz line in Russia was built on the initiative of 
 the Russian Government. Usually,, however, rau- 
 road Unes were built both in Germany and Russia 
 by private corporations, to which concessions by the 
 respective governments were granted for operation 
 and exploitation for a period of not less than thirty 
 to thirty-five years, at the end of which period the 
 railroads became the property of the state. 
 
 Should Mr. Plumb's Plan be put into /effect no 
 private capitalist could bxiild a railroad, because the 
 plan specifically eliminates private ownership of the 
 railroads. Moreover, Mr. Plumb's Plan provides 
 that the government shall construct new lines out 
 
222 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 of the fifty-per-cent surplus resulting from the rail- 
 road operation. It may be asked how would the 
 government be able to construct new lines if it has 
 only one-half of a problematical surplus to do it 
 with ? And what would happen if, for a given year, 
 there were no surplus whatsoever? Who would 
 provide the money for railroad construction which 
 must go on, must develop constantly, because of the 
 new requirements resulting from the constant de- 
 velopment of industry and commerce ? 
 
 In short, Mr. Plumb's scheme would be likely to 
 ruin the existing railroad system or to prevent further 
 raUroad extension, or both. Therefore, it should be 
 considered as a most dangerous proposal, which, if 
 brought into effect, might constitute a national dis- 
 aster and' complete ruin of national industry. 
 
 It must be admitted that Mr. Plumb's scheme is 
 very insidious, ^ince it is not a Socialistic one in a 
 limited sense. It pretends to bring about a square 
 deal between capital and labor. It speaks about 
 fair compensation to the actual railway-share own- 
 ers, and yet it stipulates the issue of four-per-cent 
 bonds, whereas it is quite obvious that the govern- 
 ment will be unable to float a loan at such a rate. 
 Even, the last issue of the Victory Loan had to be 
 floated at four and three-quarters per cent. This 
 scheme pretends also to put the national railroad 
 system under public control, and yet it advocates 
 the establishment of an executive board with a two- 
 thirds majority of labor members, which is but a 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 223 
 
 concealed form of proletarian dictatorship. The 
 plan pretends to bar an indefinite increase in wages 
 and yet it encourages a wage standard which is apt 
 to rtiin railroad business as a whole. 
 
 No wonder that Senator Sherman, when referring 
 to Mr. Plumb's Plan, on the 30th of September, 
 19 1 9, at a meeting of the Traffic Club, declared that 
 if a scheme of this kind should be put into effect, 
 and extended to other industries, it would lead to 
 one vast Soviet throughout the country. He also 
 stated that "There is little difference between the 
 Soviets and anarchism. It is a mere question of 
 the stage of the proceedings. The seizure of the 
 Government and the commandeering of property, 
 either at the owner's or taxpayer's expense, is less 
 violent and substitutes confiscation for bloodshed. 
 Labor-tmions are rapidly approaching and some 
 have already reached or crossed the boundary when, 
 if they cannot have their demands, they propose a 
 radical procedure. One is to tie up the entire in- 
 dustry affected. The sympathetic strike is invoked 
 as a means of direct action upon the commimity. 
 Government ownership of railways is a huge, demon- 
 strated failure for everybody but the heads of the 
 unions, who demand all the benefits of ownership 
 and property without assuming any of its burdens. 
 The plan of the heads of the organized railway em- 
 ployees is the threshold of loading the entire enter- 
 prise on the taxpayer of the country." 
 
 There is also this to be remembered. The Plumb 
 
224 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Plan was originated immediately after a general 
 railway strike had been threatened. In fact, the 
 strike was postponed pending the government's 
 decision as to whether the Plumb Plan was to be put 
 into effect. 
 
 The country stood really in a dilemma: either to 
 reject the Plumb Plan and subject the nation to the 
 temporary danger of a general railroad strike, or to 
 avoid the strike at the sacrifice of accepting the 
 Plumb Plan with the prospect of hopelessly crippling 
 the national railway system at large. The plan is 
 not dead: we shall hear from it later. Meanwhile 
 Frank Morrison, secretary of the American Federa- 
 tion of Labor, recently informed the public that he 
 hoped that the "nationalization" of railways would 
 be the first step toward wholesale nationalization 
 of industries. 
 
 5. The dangerous feattu-e of the modem labor 
 movement, guided by Socialist agitators, consists 
 in the fact that workmen are being taught never to 
 be satisfied no matter how much they get or how- 
 ever great the public's sacrifice to labor is. Work- 
 men are induced to believe that they are the mas- 
 ters of the nation, and that as such they are justified 
 in treating their respective countries accordingly. 
 Under Socialist leadership the workmen are com- 
 pelled to forget that they are but members of their 
 nation, ordinary citizens, who have a common in- 
 terest with their fellow countrymen in the preser- 
 
^ SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 225 
 
 vation of the integrity and prosperity of the state. 
 Narrow egoism never brings good results. The dic- 
 tatorship of one class, be it the proletarian or the 
 capitalistic class, is always a disaster to the country 
 as a whole and to the state, which represents the 
 organized citizenship of the country. 
 
 Undoubtedly, were the capitalists to ignore the 
 interests of the country as a whole they could render 
 the life of their fellow citizens quite intolerable. 
 For instance, were they to adopt a policy of whole- 
 sale lockouts, they certainly would be in a position 
 to inflict severe financial losses on the labor class, 
 and industry itself might be brought to a state of 
 utter ruin. Nor is there the least doubt that if the 
 working class at large gets in its head the idea of 
 war against the capitalistic class for the sake of war, 
 it can easily cripple national industries and bring 
 unspeakable sufferings to its fellow countrymen 
 and to itself. And yet this is exactly what is being 
 advocated by Socialist leaders. 
 
 The average citizen is scarcely familiar with the 
 teachings of the various Socialistic factions. But it 
 is vitally important that the average citizen should 
 know exactly what poison is being day by day in- 
 stilled into the brains of honest laboring men all 
 through the United States. 
 
 Modem Socialism has invented a new morality. 
 Sometimes it is difficult to decipher what the new 
 morality is driving at, since it is being expressed in 
 
226 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 terms ostensibly so scientific that nobody can un- 
 derstand them. Sometimes, however, Socialist agi- 
 tators express themselves more plainly. This hap- 
 pens mainly at labor meetings, in shop propaganda 
 leaflets which never reach the average citizen and 
 which are read and listened to exclusively by the 
 worknlen. 
 
 Here we will quote just a few of those plain state- 
 ments addressed by Socialist leaders to their fellow 
 workers : 
 
 Don't strike for more than you have the right to demand. 
 
 You have the right to demand all you have the power to 
 enforce. 
 
 The new morality says: 
 Damn interest ! 
 Damn rent ! 
 Damn profits ! 
 Damn agreements ! 
 
 A bolt taken but of a machine may be a big help in a 
 strike, even if the bolt is buried in the hole six inches deep. 
 
 Innocence is sometimes a crime ! See capitalist courts 
 sentence innocent workmen and discharge guilty capitalists. 
 
 To step out on a strike and starve is foolish if you can 
 strike on the job and eat. Striking on the job means doing 
 such a thing — i. e., anything — that will compel the boss to 
 do what you think is the fair thing. If you win it's good 
 for you and, therefore, moral, however many little things be- 
 longing to the boss disappear, or however little work you 
 might do. 
 
 Deportation will not stop the storm from reaching these 
 shores. The storm is within and very soon it will leap and 
 crash and annihilate you in blood and fire. 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 227 
 
 You have shown no pity to us ! We will do likewise. 
 
 And deport us ! We will dynamite you ! 
 
 In order to defend our right, no matter whether we live 
 imder an imperialistic system of government or under a 
 republican form of govermnent, we have to resort to force, 
 terrorism, revolution, etc. 
 
 Some of these sentences axe selected from regular 
 literature of the International Workers of the World. 
 Other quotations are taken from anarchistic leaflets, 
 as well as from the Communist or Bolshevist propa- 
 ganda conducted in the United States both in Eng- 
 lish and in foreign languages.^ 
 
 We also call the attention of the reader to the 
 declaration of the aims of the International Workers 
 of the World as defined by Mr. Vincent St. John in 
 his pamphlet The I. W. W., Its History, Structure, 
 and Methods. This enlightened spokesman for the 
 International Workers of the World, who is at 
 present general secretary of the organization, makes 
 the following remarks: 
 
 As a revolutionary organization, the International Work- 
 ers of the World aim to use any and all tactics that will get 
 the results sought with the least time and energy. The 
 tactics used are determined solely by the power of the or- 
 ganization to make good in their use. The question of " right ' ' 
 and "wrong" does not concern us. 
 
 The International Workers of the World maintain that 
 nothing will be conceded by the employers except that 
 
 ' Bolshevik Propaganda. Compare pp. 1072, 1073, 1076, and 1085. 
 
228 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 which we have the power to take and hold by the strength 
 of our organization. Therefore, we seek no agreements with 
 the employers. 
 
 Referring to the question as to how strikes should 
 be conducted, Mr. St. John give§ quite a number of 
 very helpful suggestions to his fellow workers. 
 Thus, for instance, he recommends that "All sup- 
 plies/' shpuld be "cut off from the strike-bound 
 shops." "All shipments" should be "refused or 
 missent, delayed, and lost if possible." "Interfer- 
 ence by the government is resented by open viola- 
 tion of the government's orders, going to jail en 
 masse, causing expense to the taxpayers, which is 
 but another name for the employing class." In 
 short, Mr. St. John recommends a thing which 
 he calls "militant direct action." More explicitly 
 "militant direct action" was defined in a leaflet, 
 Arm Yourselves ! which was widely circulated on 
 the East Side in New York in October, 1919. 
 "Workers of America! begin to arm yourselves and 
 fight back in the same manner as you are being at- 
 tacked! The bloody war of capitalism through its 
 government against you, the workers, is on ! There- 
 fore, be not the meek, submissive slave any longer ! 
 Arise and start to fight back imtil you who produce 
 the coihmodities of life shall also own and enjoy 
 them; then you will have no more wars and blood- 
 shed, for capitalism, govenmients, churches, and the 
 kept press will have been destroyed forever, and in 
 
SOCIALISTIC AGITATION 229 
 
 its place we shall have the new Society of brother- 
 hood, equality, and happiness. The Anarchist Com- 
 mune Society!" These helpful suggestions were 
 originated by the "New York Soviet of the Ameri- 
 can Anarchist Federated Comnume." 
 
 Fortunately, some of the leading American papers 
 have recently recognized the evil resiilts of disloyal 
 Socialist propaganda. The New York Times, for in- 
 stance, in an editorial of December 10, 1919, points 
 out that it is the fundamental cause of the present 
 industrial unrest. We quote this editorial in part 
 as follows: 
 
 There are some ii,ooo,cx5o aliens in the United States. 
 The agitators work not only among them but among the 
 natives. Our Commmiists, anarchists, I. W. W., our rabid 
 SociaUsts gliding easily into anarchism, our revolutionary 
 fomenters of strikes and borers into the great labor-unions, 
 our whole great miscellaneous stock of teachers and dissem- 
 inators of ruinous doctrines, who does not know? 
 
 As stated above, the danger of this disloyal and 
 seditious propaganda consists in the fact that labor, 
 guided by such leaders as referred to, is losing its 
 moral standard. 
 
 If morality means nothing; if the questions of 
 right and wrong are to be disregarded by/ one part 
 of the population; if stealing is recommended as the 
 best means of conducting a class struggle ; if govern- 
 mental orders are to be disobeyed; if everything 
 which people believe in amounts to nothing, then the 
 
230 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 conclusion must be drawn that "nothing amounts 
 to everything," and that the wholesale annihilation 
 of national wealth, of national dignity, of national 
 prosperity is the only policy which will satisfy the 
 demands of the radical agitators. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 SOCIAL REVOLUTION OR SOCIAL 
 RECONSTRUCTION 
 
 IT is not the object of this volume to prove that 
 the capitalistic system of production is above 
 reproach and that it will permanently maintain 
 its basic features. Our object is to emphasize the 
 fallacy of Socialist theories and the grave danger 
 should they be put into effect. But if modern So- 
 cialism, as we have' seen, is both wrong in theory 
 and destructive in practice, it does not necessarily 
 mean that there is nothing to improve in the present 
 economic organization. 
 
 The capitalistic system of production, like any 
 other form of economic organization, is by no means 
 a static phenomenon. In fact, it is constantly un- 
 dergoing gradual transformation, since, Hke each 
 preceding system, it is subject to the operation of 
 the universal law of evolution. 
 
 Just as the fornis of production peculiar to the 
 feudal system were evolved from the forms of an 
 earlier economic structiire based on serfdom, so 
 capitaUstic production may give way to some new 
 system which may be in the nature of a develop- 
 ment merely, or may, conceivably, be founded upon 
 some new cardinal principles. If we compare the 
 
 231 
 
232 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 economic structure of modern society with that of 
 the beginning of the nineteenth century, we shall 
 find that during this one centtiry it has undergone 
 deeper changes than could possibly have been an- 
 ticipated by our ancestors. Although the present 
 structure retains the principles of private ownership 
 and individual freedom, new factors have come into 
 existence and new forces have been set into motion, 
 with the result that not only has the quantity of 
 commodities been increased but that producticm 
 itself has assumed entirely new features. 
 
 It seems proper at this point to sum up the ad- 
 vantages and disadvantages of modem capitalistic 
 production in order to settle in our own minds what 
 forms the future economic development phould take 
 and what particular changes are advisable. 
 
 We have already observed that an economic sys- 
 tem must be largely judged by its effect upon pro- 
 duction and that the capitalistic system has the 
 merit of having greatly increased production. First, 
 it has permitted and encouraged private initiative 
 and individual enterprise by maintaining the car- 
 dinal principle of private ownership and private 
 gain. This principle, in turn, has been the motive 
 force of all kinds of individual and combined efforts 
 to increase production. It has fostered a series of 
 inventions and new business methods pertaining to 
 matters of organization. 
 
 The power of steam discovered by Watts gave a 
 tremendous impetus to technology and brought 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 233 
 
 into existence new and powerful engines heretofore 
 unknown. The application of electricity to indus- 
 trial methods, the discoveries of radium, wireless 
 telegraphy, photography, and the X-rays, together 
 with all the other improvements in technology and 
 chemistry, have caused an extensive division in 
 mechanical processes, which in turn have intensified 
 industrial productivity to an enormous degree. 
 Thus, manufacture has gradually assumed a peculiar 
 form of partial production. By this we mean that 
 conmiodities in a given category are manufactured 
 not only by diversified mechanical processes but 
 also that the component parts of a given article are 
 manufacttired at separate plants. 
 
 Such a division of mechanical processes has given 
 rise to a new form of industry which was unknown 
 to previous production, namely, the assembling of 
 component parts and giving them their final ma- 
 terial shape, which in turn attributes to them their 
 specific economic designation. Moreover, a new 
 technical principle of manufacturing has become the 
 foundation of mass production, namely, the inter- 
 changeability of component parts of the final product. 
 This principle has reached its climax in the manu- 
 facture of motor-cars and different kinds of ammuni- 
 tion in which every component part can be im- 
 mediately substituted for a corresponding new one, 
 with the ultimate result that a great ntmiber of 
 commodities can be used more economically and for 
 a longer time. 
 
234 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 The same tendency to division has spread also to 
 commerce in general. Not only is commerce divided 
 into the wholesale and retail business but within 
 the natural boundaries of certain branches of com- 
 merce — ^for instance, such as textiles — we see only 
 one specific kind of dry-goods being sold by a given 
 enterprise. This, of course, applies mainly to the 
 wholesale business, but even the retail stores are 
 gradually showing the same tendency. 
 
 Intensified production, together with the diversity 
 of its mechanical processes, has given a predominant 
 r61e to managerial ability and technical efficiency. 
 Manufacturing as a whole requires at present a well- 
 organized managerial staff in order to co-ordinate 
 the disconnected mechanical processes. At the 
 same time mechanical diversion has led to the 
 necessity of making constant improvements in the 
 technical lines of production, i. e., in machinery- 
 adapted for the manufacture of certain goods. In 
 order to meet the increased requirements of im- 
 proved machinery it became necessary to build up 
 a new branch of industry, namely, machine manu- 
 facturing. In this line of industry the manufac- 
 turer is btiilding a technical equipment which he is 
 not using for purposes of his own production. He 
 merely supplies other branches of industry with the 
 machinery required for various purposes. Naturally, 
 the engineer who is in charge of a machine manu- 
 facturing plant must possess deep knowledge of 
 technological methods in general so as to be able 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 235 
 
 to meet the various reqmrements of modem produc- 
 tion. Here again the importance of the technical 
 expert is accentuated to a high degree. In other 
 words, the general technique of modem production 
 involves so many complicated processes which are 
 closely interrelated with each other that a special 
 social group of experts and highly qualified engineers 
 is required in order to organize and supervise the 
 technical side of industries in general. It is vitally 
 important to realize that this new social group is as 
 indispensable to the actual system of production as 
 manual labor. This is a point which, although 
 theoretically understood by the Socialists, is con- 
 sciously or unconsciously disregarded in their prac- 
 tical programme. 
 
 Thus, the principle of private ownership and the 
 unrestricted use of property in the process of ac- 
 cttmulating wealth by encouraging individual initia- 
 tive has tremendously developed the technique of 
 production. It has also given to modern society a 
 new social group of highly trained technical experts 
 and business managers, under whose guidance pro- 
 duction is carried out on a large scale and with the 
 utmost efficiency. The result has been an enormous 
 increase in the aggregate wealth and in the wealth 
 of all classes, including the laboring class itself. 
 
 The foregoing are the leading advantages of the 
 capitalistic system which should be retained at all 
 cost. 
 
 But the capitalistic system has also developed 
 
236 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 certain economic conditions which are disadvan- 
 tageous to society as a whole. Some of these condi- 
 tions are perhaps inseparable from the system it- 
 self, but others can be remedied or counteracted. 
 
 Bearing this fact in mind, it must be further ob- 
 served that the development of the capitalistic sys- 
 tem has resulted in the formation not only of the 
 group of technical experts but also another more or 
 less distinct social group, that of manual labor. 
 The technical methods of modem production have 
 brought under the roofs of manufacturing plants 
 millions of workmen who, being only one specific 
 part of the industrial army in general, are, never- 
 theless, a very important social factor, since upon 
 their mechanical work depends the very existence 
 of the organic process of industrial life. 
 
 There is a tendency to make this large body of 
 manual workmen into mere human machines, which 
 in some cases are nothing but componoit parts of 
 the machinery in general. The mechanical processes 
 used by manual workmen, being reduced sometimes 
 to the simplest physical operations, tend to hamper 
 the mental development and individual initiative of 
 these laborers. This also has the indirect result of 
 keeping them in a fixed social status, which is in 
 opposition to the American principle of equality of 
 opportunity. Manual labor being partly deprived 
 of the opportunity to reach economic independence 
 by rising to the ranks of the capitalistic class be- 
 comes restless and dissatisfied. It cannot be said, 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 237 
 
 however, that the tendencies referred to are con- 
 fined to the capitalistic system, but rather is it true 
 that they are the result of the development of scien- 
 tific methods in production itself. They would be 
 just as likely to exist under other economic systems, 
 such as Socialistic nationalization of industry, for 
 instance, since the same technical methods which 
 have proved to be efficient under the capitalistic 
 system would undoubtedly be employed under the 
 other systems, resulting in the presence of the same 
 large bodies of laborers whose work is of a mechani- 
 cal and automatic nature. In fact, this has so far 
 proved to be the case under the Soviet regime in 
 Russia, where there has been no attempt to aban- 
 don the ordinary types of modqm factory produc- 
 tion or to revert to mediaeval methods. 
 
 Nevertheless, the difficulty encoimtered by the in- 
 dustrial workman in reaching economic independence 
 is one of the underlying causes of the present social 
 imrest and of the epidemic of strikes which is being 
 artificially fomented by Socialistic agitators. 
 
 It should be remembered that a strike movement 
 is always contagious, and if it is not localized at the 
 start, it is apt to spread. The tmfortunate point 
 in the present industrial organization is that the 
 men who are entrusted to settle the disputes between 
 capital and labor, during the first stage of the con- 
 troversy, are usually not broad-minded and capable 
 enough to cope with the situation in an adequate 
 way. 
 
238 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Life in general, and industrial life in particular, is 
 a process in which even minor changes, and appar- 
 ently insignificant facts, may produce very serious 
 results. 
 
 With reference to present industrial conditions, 
 it must be stated that there is really no such thing as 
 the social problem. On the contrary, there are many 
 social problems, all of which deserve the most scru- 
 pulous attention, not only on the part of the em- 
 ployers but on the part of the community as a whole. 
 
 There is likewise no single theory which can be 
 presented as a remedy for curing social tmrest. 
 Whatever terms we may use to describe the various 
 projects of improved social masonry, whether we 
 call them "democratization of industries" or "social 
 democracy," "social aristocracy" or "economic re- 
 adjustment," "peace construction" or "new ma- 
 chine," the terms in themselves mean nothing un- 
 less accompanied by a series of practical suggestions 
 describing specific means by which certain social 
 phenomena can be eliminated, amended, or other- 
 wise changed for the benefit of the Commonwealth 
 as a whole. 
 
 Attempts to discover a social panacea are as hope- 
 less as attempts to discover perpetual motion, for 
 every economic system is directly connected with, 
 and applied to, human activities which by them- 
 selves are never perfect. Therefore, also, no per- 
 fect social order can ever exist, and every social 
 system must have evils of its own. In this sense 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 2^9 
 
 any economic doctrine, be it Socialism or anarchism, 
 or individualism, which proposes to cure social dis- 
 eases merely by putting into effect one system in- 
 stead of another, already in existence, is necessarily 
 based upon an erroneous conception as to the nature 
 and functions of social structure in general. 
 
 The advocates of any kind of reformatory move- 
 ment must, in the first place, get rid of abstract 
 generalizations and try to outline a definite working 
 progrg,m'me. 
 
 Changes in social structure, inevitable as they 
 may be, always take place slowly, and therefore the 
 future must be measttred by, and interlinked with, 
 the present. In other words, an unbroken chain of 
 causes and consequences must connect the past with 
 the present and the present with the future. 
 
 We must necessarily refrain in this volume from 
 any endeavor to make an exhaustive study as to 
 the constructive labor, policy which is called for by 
 the important social developments resulting from 
 the World War. We shall confine ourselves to 
 enumerating several specific lines of action, which, 
 in our opinion, would be instrumental in appeasing 
 social unrest and in laying a firmer foundation for 
 future economic life. In this connection we have 
 to deal with two different classes of remedies, namely, ' 
 negative or defensive meastu^es, directed against 
 Socialism and improper domination by any class, 
 and affirmative or constructive measures, designed 
 to improve economic conditions in general. 
 
240 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 Negative or Defensive Measures 
 Counter-Propaganda 
 
 I. The main weapon in the hands of the radical 
 factions is propaganda. We have already exposed 
 its nature, its general tendencies, and its eflEect upon 
 the labor movement in various cotmtries. There- 
 fore, here we are interested in the question as to 
 whether radical Socialist propaganda can be coun- 
 teracted and, if so, by what means. 
 
 Our answer to this question is that disloyal prop- 
 aganda can be counteracted by means of counter- 
 propaganda. . 
 
 Not only is the average citizen, both in the United 
 States and elsewhere, loyal to his country, but, as 
 already emphasized, even labor at large remains 
 loyal and willing to help the community in the solu- 
 tion of the vital problems of reconstruction. Each 
 day brings more evidence that the American people 
 are gradually growing conscious of the danger of 
 unhampered propaganda. The people are organ- 
 izing for their defense. Quite recently it was an- 
 nounced in the press that Mr. William Z. Foster, 
 secretary of the national committee for organizing 
 the iron and steel workmen, was physically deported 
 from Johnstown, Pennsylvania, by a committee of 
 citizens of that town. Mr. Foster was scheduled to 
 address a meeting of steel strikers at the Labor 
 Temple. He was prevented from so doing by seven 
 business men who met him at the train and advised 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 241 
 
 him to leave Johnstown immediately. Mr. Poster 
 apparently grasped the situation and gave up his 
 intention to conduct further agitation among the 
 steel strikers. He thereupon bought transportation 
 to Altoona, Pennsylvania, and three members of the 
 Citizens' Committee boarded the train with Mr. 
 Foster and accompanied him as far as Conemaugh, 
 three miles from Johnstown, from where he was per- 
 mitted to ride by himself. This is just an instance, 
 but those who are watching radical activities through- 
 out the country report that even among the strikers 
 there is in many places a strong movement in oppo- 
 sition to radical propaganda conducted by outsiders. 
 The collapse of the British railroad strike, the defeat 
 of the steel strike, the final issue of the Boston police 
 strike, together with the general disgust on the part 
 of the public at large with the epidemic of strikes, 
 and especially with the coal strike, which threatened 
 the welfare of the whole country, have created an 
 atmosphere favorable to a strong counter-propa- 
 ganda movement. 
 
 It is urgently required, therefore, to form a na- 
 tion-wide organization for counter-propaganda pur- 
 poses. An organization of this kind would have to 
 comprise two main divisions, namely, education and 
 propaganda. 
 
 (d) Education 
 
 It must be realized that many citizens who are 
 opposed to Socialism in general and to Bolshevism 
 
242 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 in particular have a limited knowledge of problems 
 of a social or economic mature. Sometimes the lack 
 of knowledge goes so far that the people do not 
 know what the Bolsheviki are nor what their aims 
 and aspirations are^ Much in the same way, those 
 who happen to possess some knowledge of Bolshev- 
 ist activities and of their brutal policies are puz- 
 zled about the difference between Bolshevism and the 
 various parties in the Socialist movement in general 
 (Menshevists, Social Revolutionists, Communists, 
 Christian Socialists, Ssmdicalists, Spartacans, etc.). 
 It is also a well-known fact that the great majority 
 of those who are opposed to the Socialist movement 
 in its actual manifestations are scarcely aware of the 
 fact that the Marxian economic theory is the theo- 
 retical key-note of modem Socialism. This makes 
 their instinctive opposition toward Socialism almost 
 useless. For instance, when meeting a Robbins, 
 they are always overruled by him for the simple 
 reason that a Robbins knows exactly what he is 
 talking about, while they have not the knowledge 
 necessary to answer his arguments. At the same 
 time, the radical factions are conscious of the fact 
 that in order to achieve better results in their propa- 
 ganda it is necessary for them to educate people in 
 their own way. The Rand School of Social Science 
 in New York City is entirely devoted to the educa- 
 tion of people in the Marxian creed. To the same 
 end, the left-wing Socialists have founded, or sought 
 to control, a series of publications which deal with 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 243 
 
 the Socialistic problem, ostensibly from a scientific 
 point of view. In this connection, such periodicals 
 as The Nation, The Dial, New Republic, Soviet Russia, 
 and the Radical Review deserve special attention. 
 The so-called parlor-Bolshevism is based upon a 
 realization of the fact that the better-educated 
 classes would flatly reject the regular pamphlet 
 literature which is being distributed among the 
 workmen. Naturally, the typical two-cent leaflet 
 would not appeal to a mind capable of mental work, 
 and this is the reason why the radical elements are 
 paying special attention ostensibly to the scientific 
 side of their propaganda. 
 
 With reference to Marx, it 'must be stated that his 
 theory is very insidious. Men in charge of the edu- 
 cational work wotild have to train experienced propa- 
 gandists who would be qualified to address audi- 
 ences on subjects of the current labor movement 
 and of social problems in general. For this purpose 
 special cotirses of lectures would have to be estab- 
 lished whereby the Marxian theory and the history 
 of the labor movement both in the United States 
 and in Europe would constitute the larger part of 
 the educational programme. It would also be of 
 the greatest importance to present to the students, 
 if only in a general way, the urgent problems of re- 
 construction. It is obvious that it would be neces- 
 sary not only to teach Socialistic theories in an auto- 
 matic manner but also to analyze them, revealing 
 their logical errors and giving sufficient proof of 
 
244 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 the fallacy of Marxism, both in theory and in 
 practice. 
 
 (6) Propaganda 
 
 The propaganda work should be logically con- 
 nected with the educational, but while the latter 
 would have to be limited to a group of persons who 
 desired to become in the future anti-Socialistic prop- 
 agandists, the propaganda organization would have 
 to furnish, from the very beginning, a number of 
 speakers who would be qualified to appear before 
 the public, whose duty it would be to carry out the 
 actual coimter-propaganda campaign. Naturally, 
 propaganda through the press would play an im- 
 portant part in the nation-wide movement. Strange 
 as it may be, the American press as a whole although 
 opposed to Bolshevism, I. W. W. 'ism, and anarchism, 
 nevertheless has no well-defined policy in opposition 
 to the destructive tendencies of Socialism, and 
 therefore one often notices, even in the conservative 
 press, pro-Socialist articles reprinted in full, without 
 further comment, from The Dial or The Nation. In 
 this connection broad initiative would have to be 
 manifested by the propagandists. They would have 
 to take the lead in creating among the various news- 
 papers and newspaper syndicates a stable policy in 
 regard to modem Socialism. Eventually, the prop- 
 aganda organization might found a daily paper of 
 its own which would reach the proper people, namely, 
 the workmen and the petty bourgeoisie. At pres- 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 245 
 
 ent in New York City there is a considerable num- 
 ber of Red daily papers with a very large circulation. 
 The Jewish Daily Forward, which is a Bolshevist 
 publication, alone has a daily circulation of over 
 two hundred thousand. Unfortunately, however, 
 there is not one newspaper upholding the principles 
 of Americanism which reaches the East Side and 
 which in any way counteracts the sinister influences 
 of the radical Socialist press. Moreover, the So- 
 cialists are spreading their ideas through innumerable 
 leaflets and pamphlets which are distributed free of 
 charge among the laborers in the factories and in 
 labor quarters. One has but to go out on Second 
 Avenue in New York City to obtain evidence of 
 this fact. But pamphlets and leaflets opposing the 
 disloyal activities of the various Socialistic factions 
 are scarcely ever issued by the existing political or 
 other organizations, and therefore they can never be 
 found in labor quarters. 
 
 Pamphlet literature has proved to be a great suc- 
 cess in revolutionary work. Since the beginning of 
 the twentieth century the growth of this kind of 
 literature could be noted in Europe. Himdreds of 
 thousands of pamphlets were published yearly in 
 different languages by the Socialistic groups. Dur- 
 ing the first Russian Revolution of 1905, Socialistic 
 pamphlets played a very considerable r61e and were 
 largely instrumental in the spread of revolutionary 
 theories, both among the civilian population and 
 among the soldiers at the Manchurian front. Lieb- 
 
246 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 knecht's pamphlet The Spiders and the Flies alone 
 was circulated in hundreds of thousands of copies 
 in Petrograd and in Moscow. The Jewish "Bund," 
 also, has engaged in the circulation of revolutionary- 
 pamphlets. In this country, too, the Socialistic 
 pamphlet is th^ backbone of revolutionary propa- 
 ganda. Therefore anti-Socialistic pamphlets should 
 be issued periodically and distributed in thousands 
 of copies among the working population. 
 
 The propaganda organization would also have to 
 take the initiative in approaching such American 
 organizations as have already begun to work actively 
 against the spread of Communist ideas among the 
 American people. In this connection sociological 
 societies and churches belonging to various creeds 
 might render invaluable assistance to the work^of 
 counter-propaganda. The important thing is to 
 imite and co-ordinate all loyal efforts. 
 
 In conclusion, it must be pointed out that at any 
 rate revolutionary propaganda must be curbed. 
 It is impossible to proceed with any constructive 
 work for the benefit of the community at large and 
 of the labor class in particular while a disloyal 
 movement is being artificially fomented which 
 threatens the welfare of the nation. The work of 
 reconstruction requires the strength of all construc- 
 tive elements, and it is quite obvious that it must be 
 encotiraged in every possible way. 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 247 
 
 Deportation 
 
 2. Another defensive measure should be adopted, 
 namely, the deportation of professional agitators of 
 the revolutionary creed. When an alien wishes to 
 enter the United States he is obliged, under the ex- 
 isting laws, to sign an affidavit declaring that he 
 does not belong to anarchistic organizations and 
 that he wiU submit to the fundamental laws of the 
 United States. Under such circumstances it cannot 
 be denied that an alien who upon his arrival in the 
 United States becomes a member of anarchistic or 
 Communist organizations has broken his oath and 
 thereby committed the crime of perjiuy. The pro- 
 grammes of all the Communist and anarchist organ- 
 izations openly declare that they have no respect 
 for the existing ftmdamental laws and that they 
 aim at the overthrow of the existing governments. 
 Thus, for instance, the by-laws of the Federation 
 of Russian Branches of the Communist Party of 
 America make the following provisions: 
 
 FXJNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 
 
 1. The Federation endorses the platform of the Commu- 
 nist (Bolshevist) Party of America and shares the views and 
 principles of the said party in regard to the solution of all 
 fundamental and tactical problems. 
 
 2. It also endorses the achievement of proletarian dicta- 
 torship by the seizure of state power as the sole means of 
 the establishment of the Commtinist regime. 
 
 3. The accomplishment of such an overthrow is possible 
 
248 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 provided the class struggle between the toilers and the 
 capitalists becomes more accentuated, and pro'/ided also 
 the workmen adopt the idea that there cannot be, nor must 
 there be, peace — nor even a truce — ^between these two 
 classes. 
 
 4. The revolutionary era compels the proletariat to make 
 use of every fighting means by which its energy can be mani- 
 fested, namely, mass action, with its logical and final result 
 — direct conflict with the governmental machine in an open 
 battle. All other means, as, for instance, the use for revo- 
 lutionary purposes of the bourgeois parliamentarism, have 
 but a secondary significance.^ 
 
 A declaration of this kind means nothing but that 
 those who have adopted it openly disapprove of the 
 American Constitution and of all governmental in- 
 stitutions estabUshed under its provisions. That 
 being the case, the right of the Federal Government 
 to get rid of these people who have no respect for 
 American institutions cannot be denied. The only 
 way, however, to accomplish this is to deport them 
 to their respective native countries. Any other 
 course on the part of the Federal Government would 
 only encotirage disloyal activities throughout the 
 country and eventually might lead to very serious 
 consequences. 
 
 Another desirable measure in logical coimection 
 with the deportation of professional Communist agi- 
 tators is the proposed extension for a limited period 
 
 ' Protocols of the Fifth Convention of the Federation of Russian 
 Branches of the Communist Party of America, adopted at Detroit 
 on the 20th to 28th of August, 1919, p. 83. Transl. from Russian. 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 249 
 
 of all war restrictions in regard to immigration. 
 Substantially, the restrictions referred to gave power 
 to the Federal authorities to refuse permits for the 
 entry into the United States of all undesirable aliens. 
 
 Strike Legislation 
 
 3, The epidemic of strikes is spreading all over 
 Europe and the United States. Under American 
 law, laborers have the right to abandon their work 
 individually or as combined bodies. In other words, 
 the right to strike is legally recognized in the United 
 States. There is no provision in the Federal Con- 
 stitution protecting certain industries against strikes. 
 Recent labor upheavals, such as the great steel and 
 coal strikes, threatening to bring all industries to a 
 standstill, have led to the discussion of the question 
 whether the Federal Constitution should not be 
 amended, making it unlawful to strike in key in- 
 dustries, or such other industries as affect public 
 interests at large — as, for instance, a strike of the 
 drug clerks directly threatening public health. 
 
 At the same time labor employed in the key in- 
 dustries must be protected against possible exploita- 
 tion by the employers by providing that their right 
 to strike is denied only during the term of their con- 
 tract with the employers. After the expiration of 
 such contracts, labor should be allowed the right to 
 decide whether or not it wishes to continue the work 
 tmder the terms of the original agreement. With 
 
2 so SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 a supplementary provision of this kind a Federal in- 
 junction put upon strikes in the key industries would 
 be justified, not only from the standpoint of public 
 welfare but also from, a legal point of view. 
 
 The right to strike does not necessarily imply 
 the right of picketing. On the contrary, it may be 
 said that if the state proclaims the right of the 
 workman to abandon his work, the law obviously 
 cannot deny the right of the workman to resume his 
 work. Therefore, the practice of picketing is a 
 direct violation of the personal liberty of those work- 
 men who wish to return to their work. 
 
 The physical enforcement of a strike on the part 
 of labor-unions appears to be in contradiction to 
 the fundamental principle of the freedom of labor. 
 For this reason also the protection of "scabs" is not 
 only the right but the supreme duty of the state, for 
 the law cannot discriminate between the men be- 
 longing to unions and those who do not. The only 
 concession which might be made to labor-unions in 
 this connection is that "scabs" ought to be em- 
 ployed on the same terms which were proposed to 
 the union men and rejected by them. The employ- 
 ment of "scabs" on terms more favorable than those 
 proposed by the employer to union men may be 
 construed as an attempt to break up the union it- 
 self. As long, however, as the right of labor to form 
 unions is legally recognized, it would seem that 
 deliberate discrimination between organized and un- 
 organized labor on the part of employers is not 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 251 
 
 legally justified. On the other hand, it cannot be 
 denied that the employer has the right to hire both 
 organized and unorganized labor in the absence of 
 any definite legal provision requiring collective bar- 
 gaining. But even then, the right of the employer to 
 employ workmen not belonging to unions, provided 
 the union men have deliberately broken their agree- 
 ment before the expiration of their contract, cannot 
 be disputed. In other words, both labor and cap- 
 ital must be protected against attempts to impose 
 upon each other unreasonable and excessive terms. 
 Moreover, labor-unions, controlled ,by professional 
 agitators, constitute a direct menace to the freedom 
 of unorganized labor. If, for obvious reasons, the 
 law cannot encourage favoritism toward unorgan- 
 ized labor, favoritism toward trade-unionism also 
 ought not to be tolerated. 
 
 Laws Against Communism 
 
 4. We have already mentioned that the Australian 
 Dominion passed a law proclaiming the organization 
 of the International Workers of the World illegal. 
 In consequence of this law the International Work- 
 ers of the World are not allowed to carry' out openly 
 their destructive activities nor to conduct their 
 propaganda in Australia. The Australian Labor 
 Government has realized that Bolshevism, or Com- 
 munism in general, is nothing but a concealed form 
 of anarchism. Since anarchism, however, is illegal 
 
252 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 in a majority of the western democracies, as well 
 as in the United States, it would seem to be strongly- 
 advisable to extend the provisions of the law on 
 anarchism to all other Socialist factions which ad- 
 vocate practically the same ideas as the anarchists 
 themselves. In fact, it is difficult to understand 
 why the law should discriminate between anarchism, 
 on the one hand, and Communism, on the other. 
 It seems scarcely logical, while prosecuting anarch- 
 ists, at the same time to extend the full protec- 
 tion of the law to various Communist organizations. 
 The mind of the average citizen is always puzzled 
 by a policy of this kind. Sometimes the conclusion 
 is drawn that it is entirely proper fo support the 
 International Workers of the World, the Com- 
 mimists, and the Socialists in general, since they 
 flourish under the protection of the law itself. 
 Meanwhile, social imrest has reached the point 
 where it must be clearly understood by every citizen 
 that Communism is destructive in the same degree 
 as anarchism, and that both Communism and an- 
 archism are threatening the very existence of mod- 
 em society. 
 
 The average mind will be able to realize this pro- 
 vided the law makes it distinctly illegal to participate 
 in, or to otherwise render assistance to, ^ every kind 
 of movement the nature of which is destructive par 
 excellence, and stands in obvious contradiction to 
 the existing political and social order in general. It 
 must also be ^dded that if the bill on deportation 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 253 
 
 is passed by Congress, then the legal expulsion of 
 Communism should logically follow. 
 
 War has been proclaimed by the Communists 
 against modem society. There is no other issue for 
 modem society than to accept the challenge. 
 
 Constructive Measures 
 
 The great problem of the actual moment is pro- 
 duction, its increase, its scientific management, and 
 its harmonious co-relation with the urgent needs of 
 the community at large. 
 
 The World War has changed in various respects 
 the very natvu-e of economic relations, not only in 
 the world market but also within the boundaries of 
 individual nations. The mutual indebtedness of 
 the countries which were involved in the war, and 
 the indebtedness of states to their respective com- 
 munities, has increased to such a degree that almost 
 everywhere national currency has become disor- 
 ganized. The value of one franc is no longer equal 
 to one franc but is about forty centimes. The actual 
 value of the dollar is but fifty cents. All other cur- 
 rencies, including the British pound, have experienced 
 considerable depreciation as a result of the increase 
 of paper money and the proportionate decrease of 
 its gold security; hence, the world-wide demand for 
 increased wages and the high cost of living. More- 
 over, Europe especially is faced with an alarming 
 scarcity of products on the market and with grave 
 
2 54 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION, 
 
 difficulties in increasing industrial productivity. Eu- 
 rope, and to a certain extent also America, are over- 
 loaded with money which has lost half of its value, 
 and, simultaneously, both Europe and America mani- 
 fest a tendency to consume more products than are 
 actually produced. 
 
 The consequences of the World War have led to a 
 very peculiar situation, whereby money has lost its 
 intrinsic value, and the only thing which really 
 counts is the product itself. 
 
 It is a well-known economic law that the increase 
 in the prices of products leads to a decrease in the 
 value of money. And conversely, the decrease in 
 prices automatically increases the value of money. 
 At the same time, however, the increased demand 
 for commodities or goods necessarily leads to an 
 increase in their prices. Thus, with the increased 
 demand for goods throughout the world, the eco- 
 nomic situation becomes still more complicated as it 
 leads to further devaluation of money, with its logical 
 consequences, namely, increase in wages and in the 
 cost of living. 
 
 In these circumstances there is only one solution, 
 and that is increased productivity. But under the 
 present system of disco-ordinated cornpetition a 
 considerable increase in industrial productivity can 
 scarcely be achieved. Unrestricted competiti|on 
 leads to lack of co-ordination of economic efforts 
 and duplication and, tHerefore, to net waste. Capi- 
 talism has obviously reached a stage at which its 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 255 
 
 main social fimction should be complete co-ordina- 
 tion of all industrial efforts. This can be achieved 
 provided the disintegrating process in capital itself 
 is arrested. 
 
 Mr. L. B. Wehle has justly remarked that "Cap- 
 ital has become as a house divided against itself." 
 Referring further to conditions caused by the war, 
 he has pointed out that "the manufacturer, eager 
 to seU to the government at a reasonable price, 
 turned upon the producer of raw materials with 
 the charge of 'profiteer' and 'hoarder.' The raw- 
 material man, denying the charge, complained 
 loudly against the banker for robbery and against 
 the railroad for lack of equipment due to inefficiency, 
 while the manixfacturer and the raw-material man 
 and the railroads now joined together in the cry 
 against the manufacturer of or dealer in foodstuffs, 
 who, by profiteering, was raising the cost of living, 
 and was thus responsible for the irresistible pres- 
 sure for wage increase, which in turn was forcing up 
 the cost of production." ^ 
 
 Thus, under the pressure of war conditions, the 
 functions of capital have become disintegrated at 
 the very moment when their tmity is needed more 
 than ever. ' Moreover, the separation of industrial 
 and financial capital, which has always existed, be- 
 comes so accentuated that it would require much 
 constructive work in order to bring them together. 
 While the designation of financial capital is pri- 
 1 American Problems of Reconstruction, p. 157 (New York, 1918). 
 
2s6 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 marily to render proper assistance to industrial de- 
 velopment in the form of credits, the banking system 
 throughout the world has experienced a distinct 
 swing toward speculation and toward the buying 
 and selling of devaluated currencies. At the present 
 time the fluctuation of currency throughout the 
 world, more than anjrthing else, is attracting the 
 attention of banking institutions, gambling having 
 become almost the sole ftmction of finance. The 
 depreciated value of the Russian rouble and the 
 German mark gave a tremendous impetus to the 
 speculative tend^cies of international financial 
 groups. Colossal sums were invested in the pur- 
 chase of roubles and marks, which were, thereupon, 
 sold at higher quotations regardless of whether these 
 cvurencies could be, or would be, used for industrial 
 purposes and commercial development in general. 
 
 With all the restrictions of the Federal Reserve 
 System, little has been accomplished to improve 
 financial intercourse. It cannot be denied that, 
 while billions of dollars are needed for the purpose 
 of reconstruction, enormous funds remain idle, tied 
 up in financial transactions the sole nature of which 
 is gambling. It is obvious, however, that gambling 
 nejither adds an3rthing to national wealth not is it 
 instrumental in the development of industrial pro- 
 ductivity. The Stock Exchange, which ought to 
 be confined to the mere purchase and sale of securi- 
 ties, has partly lost its original designation and has 
 been used as a means of artificially increasing or 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 237 
 
 decreasing market prices, again for the sole ptir- 
 •pose of gambling. In other words, international 
 finance has temporarily lost its social natvire and, 
 consciously or unconsciously, now confines its ac- 
 tivities to the selfish accumulation of funds without 
 setting them into motion for purposes of recon- 
 struction and technical research. 
 
 Graphical illustration No. i shows the leading 
 tendency of the present policies of international 
 finance, whereas illustration No. 2 shows how finan- 
 cial resources ought to be utilized in modem so- 
 ciety. 
 
 At the momejit when capital, as a whole, is being 
 most violently attacked by labor and radicalism, it 
 is all the more unfortimate that it stands distmited 
 and is not fulfilling its proper functions. 
 
 Present financial policies are erroneous inasmuch 
 as they seem to assiune that money, as such, has its 
 independent value, whether or not it performs a 
 specific social service. The contrary, however, is 
 true. The value of money is entirely dependent 
 upon the social function it performs. Money has a 
 specific value if invested in commercial, industrial, 
 and scientific enterprises. In an investment of this 
 kind money plays the r61e of voltage in an electric 
 fixture. Money moves the current of industrial 
 life, and while it is so doing, it fulfils an important 
 economic r61e by adding constructive power to 
 natural resources. The moment, however, that it 
 begins to accumulate without further application to 
 
2^8 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 'INSTITUTION 
 
 Illustration No. i 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 
 INSTITUTION. 
 
 O 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTIONO 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 _ BANKING 
 ■O INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 BANKING 
 INSTITUTION 
 
 Illustration No. 2 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 259 
 
 industrial purposes, it loses its social value, retain- 
 ing only its potential power. 
 
 Separation of banking resources from the indus- 
 trial assets of the nation is a grave menace to the 
 welfare of both industry and finance. 
 
 From a practical point of view it is not important 
 whether the dismemberment of capital is solely due 
 to the so-called "fatigue of the nations," resulting 
 from the war, or whether there are other reasons. 
 The important question is whether or not both 
 groups of capital can be brought together. 
 
 It would seem that Mr. Ferguson in his pamphlet 
 The New Machine, which is a plan to modernize the 
 industrial system, has come to a very soimd con- 
 clusion when he states that it is necessary to create 
 a national organization of industry on lines running 
 parallel with the national mechanism of ejfchange 
 that has already been created in the Federal Reserve 
 System. He suggests the establishment of a Fed- 
 eral Institute of Production corresponding with the 
 Federal Reserve Board and exercising exhaustive 
 control over the process of production in the United 
 States. 
 
 With all that has been said about the urgent neces- 
 sity of co-ordination of industrial efforts, it is clear 
 that an institution exercising control over produc- 
 tive processes might be of the greatest assistance in 
 solving the problems of reconstruction. 
 
 At the time when civilization at large is threatened 
 by destructive movements and by a positive de- 
 
26o SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 crease in production all over the world, the economic 
 interest of the public becomes paramount, and 
 neither capital nor labor should be allowed to re- 
 duce their efforts from selfish motives. Both capital 
 and labor must be compelled to exert their construc- 
 tive energies to the fullest extent. Just as in time 
 of war the governments in various countries took 
 control over the key industries (coal, transportation, 
 food output, ship-building, etc.), it now becomes 
 necessary, because of social complications, to estab- 
 lish a central organ of control over production in 
 order to eliminate waste and to protect productive 
 efforts for the benefit of the whole nation. The 
 difference between governmental control as exer- 
 cised during the late war and the new control ad- 
 vocated here would consist in the fact that the 
 former was exercised for a destructive purpose, 
 namely, for the prosecution of the war, whereas the 
 latter has a constructive purpose, which is to make 
 industry more productive. 
 
 The details of the organization of national con- 
 trol over production should be carefully worked out 
 and laid before a special commission, including rep- 
 resentatives of business interests, labor, technical 
 management, and of the public, for further dis- 
 cussion. 
 
 It is very probable that in the first instance the 
 control over production will assume a non-com- 
 pulsory form. A group of leading experts in various 
 lines of industry will see the necessity of co-ordina- 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 261 
 
 tion in the efforts of individual concerns and wiU 
 seek to outline a definite plan calculated to har- 
 monize private initiative with the solution of social 
 problems. It will be quite natural that in lihe course 
 of this preparatory work the support of the State 
 OT Federal Governments will become indispensable. 
 In this case private initiative will be combined with 
 governmental activities which are already directed 
 on these lines. A striking example of how an Im- 
 portant govenmiental department is evolved from 
 the initiative of business interests is to be found in 
 the War Trade Board, which existed in essence be- 
 fore any Federal law was passed for its establish- 
 ment. Hardly a decade passes without the creation 
 of some new department of the government at 
 Washington to meet the growing needs of the coun- 
 try. In the same way a National Institute of Pro- 
 duction, the necessity of which becomes increasingly 
 obvious, may easily develop out of movements which 
 are already actually on foot in certain spheres of 
 business enterprise. 
 
 It must be distinctly imderstood that we do not 
 assume to predict the exact form of this organiza- 
 tion which will crystallize itself as the result of ex- 
 periment and evolution. We wish to point out, 
 however, that public control of production which 
 we hq,ve referred to has nothing in common with the 
 idea of the workmen's control, such as is exercised 
 in Soviet Russia. 
 
 In Russia the manual workmen elect an executive 
 
262 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 body and the Soviet of Workmen's Deputies is the 
 controlling power in all industries. In Russia, there- 
 fore, the very organization which must deal with 
 scientific and technical matters is chosen from be- 
 low by those who are incompetent in a high degree 
 to perform the delicate task of managing modem 
 industry. 
 
 We propose, on the contrary, a management 
 which would respond to the requirements of modem 
 industry, technical research, and social economy. 
 Socialistic schemes provide an industrial dictator- 
 ship of the proletarians, be it in the form of Soviet 
 organizations or in cleverly concealed forms of mixed 
 management, as presented in the Plumb Plan. 
 Furthermore, a National Institute of Production 
 would not attack private property and individual 
 ownership of the means of production. Socialistic 
 schemes of every kind, on the contrary, are pri- 
 marily directed against private ownership and 
 against private profit derived from industrial ac- 
 tivities. 
 
 Public control over production means only that a 
 community endeavors to apply the best technical 
 and business methods to modern production and so- 
 cial research, while the fundamental principles of 
 modem society, namely, private property and free- 
 dom of labor, would be deHberately left intact. 
 
 Let us analyze one instance showing how the Na-' 
 tional Institute of Production might achieve im- 
 mediate results in the fields of social masonry. 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 263 
 
 It is a well-known fact that at present there is a 
 scarcity of housing facilities. Everybody complains 
 of being unable to find houses or apartments and 
 of the exceedingly high rents. Taking this for 
 granted, let us further see by what practical steps a 
 National Institute of Production would proceed to 
 solve the problem. To begin with, it would gather 
 certain statistical data which would throw light upon 
 the natiure of the actual housing problem. Suppos- 
 ing that it finds that in Chicago fifteen hundred 
 houses, four to five stories high, are needed in order 
 to solve the problem. The best engineers and archi- 
 tects would then be invited to inspect the grotmds 
 designated for the erection of new houses. At the 
 same time the most advanced requirements of 
 modem sanitary technique would have to be taken 
 into consideration. Thus, plans for the building of 
 a garden city would be laid before the Institute, 
 whereupon it would be necessary for it to work out 
 an exact financial estimate for the enterprise. This 
 estimate having been arrived at, the National In- 
 stitute wotild approach various financial groups in 
 order to raise the required funds. It is quite obvious 
 that banking concerns would gladly finance a busi- 
 ness enterprise of this nature, for (a) the National 
 Institute would have verified the urgent need of 
 new houses in a given district; (6) the bankers would 
 have the guarantee that the technical features of the 
 enterprise had been worked out with the greatest 
 skill and care; (c) there would be a reliable financial 
 
264 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 estimate, and, finally, (d) the enterprise would have 
 the social backing of the commtinity as a whole. 
 Therefore, an investment in the enterprise referred 
 to would be regarded as sound and desirable. 
 
 In the case cited there is complete co-ordination 
 of social and technical research with the social func- 
 tions of capital. Therefore, not only would public 
 control over production be achieved but at the same 
 time banking resources would be gtdded in a direc- 
 tion in full harmony with the scientific principles of 
 social economy. It must also be remembered that 
 a business enterprise carried out on a basis which is 
 advantageous to the community at large would be 
 relatively safe from the aggressive policies of labor. 
 If the National Institute of Production were able to 
 find means of getting labor interested in the final 
 results of the work performed by it, in the form of 
 bonuses, or by granting the privilege of jenting 
 apartments in houses at a discount, or otherwise, 
 it would be reasonably certain that labor could not 
 be induced by professional agitators to strike or 
 to otherwise impede the progress of the work. 
 
 An tmdeniable advantage of social and technical 
 research carried out on a nation-wide scale would 
 also lie in the fact that certain technical forms would 
 become standardized, with the necessary conse- 
 quence that productivity would be tremendously in- 
 creased, while the duplication of technical efforts 
 would be almost entirely avoided. The late war 
 has given ample evidence that the moment certain 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 265 
 
 maniifacturing methods become standardized the 
 output is increased to a very considerable extent. 
 Mr. Schwab's experiment with the 5,000-ton-cargo 
 ships proved to be the greatest success in modem 
 ship-building, because standard designs had been 
 adopted and uniform manufacturing processes ap- 
 plied. 
 
 We have endeavored to analyze only how this 
 plan would work in one instance — ^the solving of the 
 housing problem. But the National Institute of 
 Production would have to extend its technical and 
 social activities in widely different directions. 
 
 Industrial standards can be worked out in prac- 
 tically every branch of modem production. .Much 
 in the same way every industrial Country, by pay- 
 ing proper attention to technical research, is in a 
 position to bring economy in productive 'processes, 
 thus saving industrial efforts for other social purposes. 
 
 With reference to the United States, it must be 
 said that although industrial development in this 
 coimtry has made considerable headway, neverthe- 
 less there remain many fields in which further re- 
 search is very much needed. Here we wish to men- 
 tion but several branches of industry which could 
 be considerably improved were systematic research 
 appUed to them. 
 
 In the first place, coal-mining methods could be 
 developed to a much higher degree than at present 
 by converting bituminous coal into liquid fuel or 
 coal-gas. This would also help to conserve fuel, 
 
266 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 which in turn would eventually decrease coal prices. 
 Coal-mining experts- have suggested the develop- 
 ment of furnaces for burning low-grade fuels under 
 boilers, as well as for the gasification and carboniza- 
 tion of the fuels which are at present wasted. 
 
 During the late war American industrial concerns 
 sometimes experienced the greatest difficulties in 
 executing European orders for various commodi- 
 ties, solely because the manufacture of gauges in the 
 United States still remains in a very low stage of 
 development. And yet the gauge has a tremendous 
 significance in modem industry. The interchange- 
 ability of component parts can be achieved by one 
 of two methods: first, by means of gradual experi- 
 ments costing millions of dollars and delaying the 
 final delivery of goods, and resulting only in waste. 
 For instance, if the bolt for a rifle does not fit in the 
 first one hundred rifles submitted for inspection, 
 then the technical personnel gives orders for a new 
 corrected bolt, which again is tried in each of the 
 one htmdred rifles. Such experiments sometimes 
 are repeated over and over again, and still the final 
 result frequently proves unsuccessful. The second 
 method for the achievement of interchangeability 
 is based upon the proper and extensive use of gauges. 
 In this case the manufacture of the gauge precedes 
 the manufacture of the required commodities. The 
 gauge bfeing correct, it is an easy matter to lay a 
 firm foundation for future manufacturing processes 
 as well as for mass production. 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 267 
 
 Due to war conditions and to the scarcity of coal, 
 several European countries have already largely de- 
 veloped hydroelectric power. In this respect Swit- 
 zerland' is leading European industries. In the 
 United States hydroelectricity remains practically 
 undeveloped, especially in the South, and in this 
 field also systematic technical research carried out 
 -by a National Institute of Production could produce 
 most effective results. 
 
 In agriculture, even more than in industry, tech- 
 nical research is urgently needed both in Europe and 
 in the United States. 
 
 With reference to America, it must be stated that , 
 the lands under cultivation constitute approximately 
 fifty per cent of the total acreage. While it is true 
 that not aU of the remaining fifty per cent is suit- 
 able for agricultural purposes, nevertheless at least 
 twenty-five per cent cotild be adapted to agriculture. 
 Again the figures pertaining to the annual average 
 37ield of wheat per acre in bushels proved that the 
 United States is not the leading cottntry. During 
 the period of 1907 to 19 13 this annual average in the 
 United States was 14.4; in Roumania, 16.8, and in 
 Canada, 19.2.' This comparatively low output of 
 wheat in the United States can scarcely be explained 
 as being entirely due to the chemical qualities of 
 the soil. 
 
 Mechanical methods in American agriculture have 
 not been developed to an adequate degree. A 
 
 * Doctor J. Goldstein, Russia, Her Economic Past and Future, p. i6. 
 
268 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 more extensive use of trax^tors in many agricultural 
 operations, improved thrashing-machines, the sci- 
 entific fertilizing of the soil, further irrigation on a 
 large scale, improved means of communication in 
 agricultural districts, a broadly developed system of 
 cheap credit, an increase in the number of experi- 
 mental stations for agricultural purposes, all these 
 and similar measures would greatly improve agri- 
 cultural conditions throughout the United States. 
 
 War experience has shown that the chemical in- 
 dustry in the United States is still very imperfect. 
 Many chemicals are either unobtainable or their 
 quality is much lower than that of Etuopean chemi- 
 cal industries. This applies especially to dye-stuffs 
 and certain kinds of drugs. 
 
 Considerable progress could be made in the pe- 
 troleum industry. In this connection Mr. A. A. 
 Potter, in his article "Technical Research," remarks 
 as follows: , 
 
 In the petroleum industry new processes will have to be 
 perfected for the manufacture of gasolene in greater quanti- 
 ties, and new uses will be found for the products which are 
 now in less demand. More gasolene will have to be pro- 
 duced from natural gas by the absorption and compression 
 processes and from petroleum by improved cracking proc- 
 esses. Greater use will also have to be made of other com- 
 bustible oils, such as shale-oil, lignite-oil, and tar-oil. The 
 petroleum technologist and the mechanical engineer should 
 co-operate in the design of carburetors suitable for low- 
 grade petroleum fuels and for other combustible oils.' 
 
 » American ProhUms (tf Reconstruction, p. 113, 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 269 
 
 ; 
 
 If we add to this short enumeration of industrial 
 branches, in which technical research promises the 
 greatest achievements, such items as a systematic 
 development on an adequate scale of the means of 
 transportation, including airplane freight and mail 
 service, we shall come to understand that there is 
 really an unlimited work to be performed. In fact, 
 no limit can be set for technical progress and tech- 
 nical research. Every new improvement in tech- 
 nology widens the field of technical conquest, which 
 in turn increases production and accumulates na- 
 tional wealth. 
 
 It is, of course, true that the various existing de- 
 partments of the Federal and Stat© Governments 
 are constantly extending the field of their work, 
 particularly in respect to research and statistics. 
 Nevertheless, there is a big gap to be filled, and it is 
 not likely that it will be filled without the vitalizing 
 influence of the genius of the people at large which 
 has so often outstripped the agencies of the govern- 
 ment in almost every sphere of endeavor. 
 
 Technical research alone, however, does not cover 
 the solution of the problems of reconstruction. 
 While it is obvious that creative and technical minds 
 must take a leading part in the organization and 
 performance of new business methods with regard 
 to production, yet the problems of reconstruction 
 cannot be solved without proper assistance on the 
 part of finance on the one hand and labor on the 
 other. We have already stated that present finan- 
 
270 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 cial methods are in contradiction to the urgent so- 
 cial problems, upon the proper solution of which 
 depends the very existence of modem society. In 
 this connection it may be stated also that a new 
 form of credit must be established in order to link 
 up financial activities with technical and social re- 
 search. Europe, especially, must find new methods 
 of financial reconstruction, since depreciated cur- 
 rency in all European countries is a factor which 
 cannot be overcome by ordinary financial measures 
 hitherto considered valid. Because of the enormous 
 mutual indebtedness of all European countries, it 
 might perhaps become necessary to work out a gen- 
 eral readjustment of financial matters leading to a 
 partial cancellation of international debts, and at 
 the same time reaching some kind of agreement 
 with regard to foreign debts and a general extension 
 of time for their liquidation. Measures of this kind, 
 however, cannot be accomplished without finance 
 adopting a new course, which would be substantially 
 in harmony with the new methods of production and 
 social research. It is an undeniable fact that if 
 financial activities remain confined to international 
 juggling with foreign currencies, the results cannot 
 be other than catastrophic. 
 
 General financial conditions in America are, it is 
 true, better than in Europe; but the American banker 
 apparently is not yet fully aware of the urgent neces- 
 sity of investing capital in foreign countries. Ex- 
 port of American capital is the logical consequence 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 271 
 
 both of America's industrial development and of 
 Etiropean needs for reconstruction. Now or never 
 is the opportunity for American finance to become a 
 real power in international financial matters. The 
 Federal Reserve Act has responded to a certain 
 extent to the imperative demand of the actual mo- 
 ment by allowing any foreign bank with a capital 
 of $1,000,000 or over to establish branch offices 
 throughout the United States. Nevertheless, there 
 remains a distinct lack of initiative on the part of 
 American finance at large in taking a leading and 
 constructive part in social, industrial, and financial 
 reconstruction in European countries. The financ- 
 ing of European industries destroyed by the war and 
 adequate investments in foreign trade will prove to 
 be beneficial both for American finance and the 
 commercial regeneration of Europe. 
 
 The time has come when it must be realized that 
 in order to secure the full development of American 
 industry and trade, Europe must regain its economic 
 health and thus become a market for American goods. 
 
 Turning to the question of how the labor situation 
 should be dealt with and what measures should be 
 taken to appease the present unrest, it would seem 
 that it is more a matter of a series of readjustments 
 than of any one radical change. Manual labor will 
 always remain nothing but manual labor. Its rdle' 
 in the processes of production will always remain 
 limited and it will always remain indispensable, no 
 matter what achievements are made in technical 
 
272 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION / 
 
 fields. Therefore, the problem in regard to labor 
 consists in a(;Jopting such measures as will convert 
 labor into a social power instead of allowing it to 
 assiune an antisocial character, as at present. 
 
 There is, however, one great principle which 
 should guide those responsible for the labor policy, 
 namely, the principle of harmonious co-operation 
 between labor and capital, between the employer 
 and the employee, between technical management 
 and the manual laborer. 
 
 We merely suggest certain measures which, if 
 carried to their logical end, might help to bring 
 about better relations between the two social groups 
 which now face each other as hostile elements. 
 
 System of Bonuses 
 
 There is a general tendency to attach the greatest 
 importance to labor having a share in the profits 
 made by capital. While labor is normally paid the 
 full value of its service, theoretically profit-sharing 
 on the part of labor can be justified provided la- 
 bor contributes something additional to production 
 which it has not contributed heretofore in the form 
 of increased efficiency. From this point of view 
 profit-sharing gives labor a stimulus to work better 
 and to avoid constant disturbances. If a workman 
 knows that his personal welfare is partly dependent 
 upon the financial results of the business concern in 
 which he is employed, he certainly will display more 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 273 
 
 energy in his work and will justly associate in his 
 mind the fate of the business concern with his own 
 fate. Whether a bonus is given in the form adopted 
 by the United States Steel Company, namely, in 
 the form of transferring shares of the company's 
 stock to the workman after he has been employed 
 by the company for a given period of time, or the 
 bonus is paid every year to every employee in a 
 certain proportion to the wages received, is a ques- 
 tion of detail, and, therefore, it is a matter to be 
 considered in each individual case. The difficulty, 
 however, lies in the fact that new concerns which 
 are in a formative stage can scarcely afford to pay 
 out of their profits bonuses to their employees. 
 Usually a new concern is indebted, the debt must be 
 paid, and th^re is no other source of payment but 
 the profit. With the bonus system adopted as a 
 general measure, it might hamper industrial devel- 
 opment instead of increasing productivity. For 
 an old concern, however, which has been financially 
 stabilized, it should be easy to put the bonus system 
 into effect in one way or another. 
 
 It must also be said that from the point of view 
 of social policy the method of premium reward 
 paid to each workman, regardless of the length of 
 time he has been employed, seems to be rational 
 because it makes every workman feel that hp is en- 
 titled to a certain reward after the termination of 
 every financial year. The bonus system which pro- 
 vides profit-sharing for those workmen who have 
 
274 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 been employed for a longer period of time is apt to 
 create unpleasant relations between the workmen 
 themselves, so that one part of the laborers enjoys 
 privileges which are not granted to the remainder. 
 In consequence there is always a restless element 
 among the laborers which brings about disturbances, 
 although the older employees are satisfied. Owing 
 to the fact that in modem industry the work per- 
 formed by one group of laborers is closely interre- 
 lated with the work performed by the others, a con- 
 dition as above described sometimes causes radical 
 interruptions in the industrial process notwith- 
 standing, the fact that a large group of laborers is 
 earnestly desirous of continuing the work. 
 
 Those opposed to the bonus system usually argue 
 that if labor has a right to share the profits, it must 
 be its duty to share eventually the financial losses. 
 From a limited legal point of view this argument is 
 perhaps correct. The Roman formula of liability, 
 "I give in order that you may give" ("do ut des, 
 facio ut facias"), which is adopted by modem civil 
 law, seems to justify the argument thus presented. 
 In reality, however, legal theories are not always 
 applicable to social matters. While it is obvious 
 that labor does not possess the capital required to 
 share the possible financial losses, yet there is every 
 reason to advocate labor's share in the profits be- 
 cause this measure leads to the stabilization of rela- 
 tions between capital and labor, and this is a social 
 asset in itself. 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 275 
 
 Moreover, very often financial losses are not due 
 to the neglect of labor, being caused by general con- 
 ditions of the market, difficulties in transportation, 
 and by similar factors; but it is scarcely possible to 
 imagine a successful financial issue of a business 
 enterprise if laborers do not properly perform their 
 work. Therefore, it seems practically impossible to 
 expect that a stable agreement with labor can be 
 reached on the basis of its share both in th6 profits 
 and losses, whereas the sharing of the profits only 
 might become instrumental in keeping the work- 
 men from continuously seeking new jobs. With 
 the ever-changing personnel of employees, industry 
 is always subjected to the danger of labor disturb- 
 ances and excessive demands. 
 
 Conciliation 
 
 Among measures which can greatly help in bring- 
 ing about industrial peace, the establishment of 
 conciliatory boards may be mentioned. This mea- 
 sure has assumed different forms in different coun- 
 tries. In the United States the so-called shop 
 ' committee is regarded as a promising attempt to 
 settle in a friendly way the disturbances arising be- 
 tween capital and labor at the very first stage of the 
 conflict. We have already emphasized that in in- 
 dustrial life minor causes sometimes lead to very 
 grave consequences. Everything must be done in 
 order to settle the conflict before it spreads among 
 
276 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 those laborers who are not immediately affected by 
 the controversy. The purpose of the shop com- 
 mittee is to guarantee fair dealing both for the labor- 
 ers and the employers. There are many forms of 
 the shop committee. One of the most typical is 
 the so-called Lynn Plan, which was adopted by the 
 Lynn Works of the General Electric Company. 
 The following is a definition of the purposes of this 
 'committee: 
 
 "The employees' representatives of each section 
 shall constitute a committee on fair dealing to co- 
 operate with the management in fostering just and 
 harmonious relations between the management and 
 employees. Any matter requiring adjustment may, 
 in the first instance, be referred by the employee 
 affected, either personally or with one or both of the 
 representatives of his section, to the foreman of the 
 work on which the employee is engaged. If the 
 foreman fails to adjust satisfactorily any matter re- 
 ferred to him, it shall then be reduced in writing 
 and taken up by the joint shop committee." In 
 other words, the committee on fair dealing is prac- 
 tically the lowest degree of mediation. In fact, this 
 committee is established for the purpose of settling 
 grievances of a personal character and which, as a 
 general rule, do not affect the status of all the work- 
 men of the shop. 
 
 The shop committee covers a, group of sections 
 belonging to the particular industrial enterprise. 
 Mr. W. L. Stoddard in his book entitled The Shop 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 277 
 
 Committee gives a very detailed description of the 
 Lynn Plan and of the shop committee organiza- 
 tion. According to his statement the shop com- 
 mittee is a joint committee representing several sec- 
 tions in which sometimes more than 300 workmen 
 are employed. Each of the shop committee groups 
 elects three representatives and three representatives 
 are appointed by the management. The shop com- 
 mittee offers a second opportunity for the settle- 
 ment of a dispute. The duties of the shop com- 
 mittee are defined as follows: 
 
 If the foreman fails to adjust satisfactorily any matter 
 referred to him, it shall then be reduced to writing and taken 
 up by the joint shop committee. This committee shall en- . 
 deavor finally to dispose of the matter, and shall be at lib- 
 erty to adopt such measures as are necessary, including the 
 calling of witnesses by either side, adequately to ascertain 
 the facts and render a fair decision. Should the committee 
 reach a decision satisfactory to the employees originating 
 the matter, or should the committee reach a unanimous 
 decision on this subject, this decision shall be regarded as 
 terminating the matter. 
 
 Finally, the Lynn Plan provides for the so-called 
 general committees, of which the General Com- 
 mittee on Adjustment is the most important. This 
 body represents the entire plant. The employees 
 elect their representatives on the general com- 
 mittee through their sectional representatives. The 
 managerial staff is represented by appointees. If 
 the general committee fails to adjust the differences 
 
2 78 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 which have arisen between the managerial staff 
 and the employees, the matter can be referred to the 
 manager of the plant. ^ 
 
 The significant r61e of the shop committees, re- 
 gardless of their particular organization, consists in 
 that a practical endeavor is made to settle the differ- 
 ences between capital and labor by methods which 
 guarantee a careful study of each individual case. 
 In fact, the mediation procedure resembles the pro- 
 cedure adopted by the courts. Witnesses may be 
 summoned, documents, examined, and a final de- 
 cision is rendered after an impartial consideration 
 of the whole matter. Under these circumstances a 
 dispute between capital and labor is directed into a 
 channel of quiet analysis and impartial investigation. 
 There is or should be no place for outside agitators, be- 
 cause the shop committees must not include outsiders. 
 Only those laborers who are actively engaged in a 
 certain technical work and who, therefqre, are com- 
 petent to render sotmd judgment on its specific nature 
 should be allowed to take part in the election to shop 
 committee organizations. The shop committee is 
 only one form of conciliation. There are many others. 
 It is the principle, however, which is important. 
 
 Constructive labor leaders have always pointed 
 out that coimcils of mediation in one form or an- 
 other are not only desirable but indispensable in 
 modem industry. 
 
 1 Compare with data given, in W. L. Stoddard's book The Shop 
 Committee, pp. 40-54 (New York, 1919}. 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 270 
 
 Industry must find means for a reasonable and 
 friendly settlement of its internal controversies, and 
 it is only a patient and constructive attitude on the 
 part of both capital and labor that will help to 
 solve the grave social problems in a manner which 
 will eliminate the very idea of rstdical Socialism, ac- 
 companied by dynamite, wholesale destruction, and 
 anarchy. 
 
 Co-operative Movement 
 
 Among other constructive meastu-es which would 
 be instrumental in bringing about industrial peace 
 and further achievements in the life of modem so- 
 ciety is the co-operative movement. In some Euro- 
 pean countries, especially in Belgium and Russia, 
 this movement reached aliigh mark before the war. 
 While war conditions have hampered to a certain 
 extent the full development of labor co-operatives, 
 there is every reason to believe that in the near future 
 this movement will make considerable headway in 
 Europe because of its constructive nature and far- 
 reaching advantages. 
 
 Co-operative activities are a real school for labor 
 in the sphere of management. In a co-operative 
 organization labor itself undertakes both the man- 
 agement and the actual manual work. Undoubt- 
 edly, a co-operative reflects the most democratic 
 aims of the labor movement and it gives the labor- 
 ers the opportunity to work out the specific form of 
 
28o SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 management which is the most desirable at any 
 given moment. 
 
 The history of the Belgian co-operative movement 
 proves that it possesses in a high degree the gift of 
 adaptability, which is so essential in modem eco- 
 nomic life. The Belgian baker co-operatives, who 
 commenced business on a very limited scale, have 
 finally won a complete victory by a gradual develop- 
 ment of their activities through a series of improve- 
 ments in their managerial rnethods and also by un- 
 dertaking the joint operation of production, distribu- 
 tion, and purchase of needed supplies. After several 
 years of steady and constant experiments the Bel- 
 gian bakers achieved wonderful results both in the 
 technique of their business and in the financial 
 stabilization of their enterprise. 
 
 Similar results were achieved by the co-operatives 
 in Russia. Before the war the butter-producing co- 
 operatives in Siberia won not only the Russian 
 market but also the European market in general. 
 At the same time the co-operatives in Siberia and 
 European Russia assumed a new form of wholesale 
 purchase and sale of various goods needed by the 
 population at large, such as leather, cotton and 
 woollen goods, hardware, etc. The co-operative so- 
 ciety under the title "Zakoupsbyt" at present pos- 
 sesses a capital amounting to many million roubles 
 and its purchasing activities are enormous. 
 
 Agricultural life in Russia becar^e largely de- 
 pendent upon the co-operative movement among 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 381 
 
 the farmers, and at the beginning of 19 14 there were 
 not less than fifteen hundred co-operative agricul- 
 tural associations, among which the co-operative 
 society for the purchase and use of agricultural ma- 
 chinery played a very progressive r61e in the devel- 
 opment of agricultural technique. 
 
 In the United States the co-operative movement 
 has been little developed, perhaps because of strong 
 individualistic tendencies among American labor. 
 Nevertheless, quite recently some of the Eastern 
 labor organizations have manifested an interest in 
 the methods of the European co-operative move- 
 ment. 
 
 Some time ago an attempt was made by a group 
 of Russian mechanics in New York City to organize 
 a co-operative for the manufacture of gauges. The 
 organization is composed of eighty men who them- 
 selves are both the owners and employees. Up to 
 the present time this co-operative has proved very 
 successful. It must be said, however, that in 
 America, with the high development of her indus- 
 tries, producing co-operatives will scarcely be able 
 to compete with strong industrial concerns. There- 
 fore, the American co-operative movement ought 
 perhaps to pay more attention to the purchase and 
 sale co-operative organizations. In a cotmtry where 
 commercial profiteering is accentuated, as in the 
 United States, purchase and sale coToperatives are 
 likely to prove a real success. In fact, several at- 
 tempts have been made already to establish work* 
 
282 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 men's purchasing societies, the immediate aim of 
 which is to eliminate the commercial intermediary 
 and to establish direct trade relations ^ith the pro- 
 ducer of the goods. This applies mainly to^ food 
 stores. 
 
 A group of Polish workmen succeeded in estab- 
 lishing direct business relations with PoKsh farmers 
 in the State of Pennsylvania. By this means food 
 prices in the Polish co-operative store were consider- 
 ably reduced. Similar attempts are under consid- 
 eration with respect to clothing stores and dairies. 
 
 As a general rule the producer is not concerned as 
 to whom he sells the goods as long as he knows that 
 there will be no delay in the payment. Therefore, 
 if a co-operative organization possesses sufficient 
 managerial ability, it can easily establish direct re- 
 lations with the producer, and this in itself is an 
 achievement. Furthermore, a co-operative organiza- 
 tion is based upon a principle which is in distinct 
 contradiction to the motive of gain, which is the 
 key-note of modem commerce. The co-operative 
 organization declares as its first aim the rendering 
 of practical assistance to its members. Naturally, 
 co-operative societies must operate at a profit and 
 pay dividends to their members, but profit is a sec- 
 ondary consideration and, therefore, it can be re- 
 duced to a minimum. 
 
 The essential point in the co-operative movement 
 is that it is very flexible and that it can assume 
 many different forms or modes in harmony with the 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 283 
 
 development of social life. Primitive co-operatives, 
 established for the purpose of purchasing supplies 
 and selling them to the members of the society at 
 prices lower than the market, are easily developed 
 in wholesale business concerns, which in turn almost 
 necessitate the establishment of co-operative credit 
 institutions or banking concerns. The aim of the 
 latter is to facilitate the activities of the co-operative 
 organizations themselves. 
 
 The purchasing co-operatives manifest a tendency 
 to connect their activities with those of the pro- 
 ducing co-operatives, the banking co-operatives 
 serving as a link between the two. In other words, 
 the co-operative movement is in no way confined to 
 any exclusive economic category but, on the con- 
 trary, it is adapted to spread over a wide field of 
 business activities with labor remaining always in 
 control of the whole business machine. Therefore, 
 the educational r61e of the co-operative movement 
 cannot be underestimated. 
 
 In the course of business transactions the members 
 of co-operative organizations come to realize how 
 difficult it is to manage business concerns, no matter 
 what their nature may be, and how much patience 
 is required to achieve successful results. The very 
 idea of strikes and deliberate disturbances is ex- 
 cluded in the realm of the co-operative movement. 
 The laborers begin to realize that the welfare of their 
 common cause is dependent upon the diligence, 
 thrift, and patience of each individual member of the 
 
284 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 organization. Self-confidence and obedience to the 
 duly elected leaders become the factors which con- 
 stitute the basis of success in the co-operative move- 
 ment. 
 
 Moreover, contrary to the prophecies of Marx, 
 the laborers belonging to co-operative societies are 
 steadily raising their standard of life instead of be- 
 coming paupers. Gradually they succeed in build- 
 ing up a strong business of their own, and yet they 
 remain workmen, both manual laborers and mem- 
 bers of the managerial staff. 
 
 It is a peculiar thing that Communism, or So- 
 cialism, as a rule/ either openly opposes the co- 
 operative movement or gives it but insincere sup- 
 port. Wherever it achieves a wide development 
 the Socialists come out with statements disapprov- 
 ing the co-operative movement at large and attack- 
 ing it on the ground that it deceives the workmen 
 by making believe that they are able to improve 
 their cqndition under the existing capitalistic system 
 of production. Fortunately, Belgian labor leaders ' 
 have refrained from criticism of this kind. On the 
 contrary, some of them have manifested a deep in- 
 terest in the nature and far-reaching possibiUties of 
 this movement. 
 
 As to the Socialists in general, their support of the 
 co-operative movement is very evasive. The So- 
 cialists, feeling that it would be a dangerous policy 
 for them to declare open war against the co-operative 
 movement, since it is distinctly a labor movement^ 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 285 
 
 endeavor to subject it to their exclusive control. 
 In so far as the co-operatives work in harmony with 
 Socialism, they are tolerated by radical leaders, 
 and even sometimes given moderate support; but 
 the moment the co-operative movement chooses its 
 own way, the Socialists begin to feel uneasy about 
 its growth. 
 
 Strange as it may seem, during the war the co- 
 operative movement developed mainly in war- 
 stricken coimtries. Thus, in Germany, in 191 5, 
 the total increase of individual members in the 
 central tmion of the German distribution societies 
 was 130,000, and during the war it was over 300,000, 
 making a membership of over 2,000,000. In Ger- 
 many, as also in many other countries, there is a 
 tendency to amalgamate the sectional co-operatives 
 with the larger organizations in order to secure a 
 bigger co-ordination of the various co-operative 
 organizations. There is also a distinct tendency to 
 affiliate the agricultural co-operatives with co- 
 operative banking institutions. Thus, in Belgium, 
 in 1915, 437 rural societies were affiliated with a 
 co-operative bank known tmder the title "Caisse 
 Centrale de Credit." The Caisse Centrale had a 
 capital of $2,000,000, with a yearly turnover of 
 more than $12,000,000. 
 
 Likewise, in Finland, the amalgamation of sec- 
 tional co-operative units with the "Finnish Co- 
 operative Wholesale" led to a distinct increase in 
 capital of the ceiltral organization, with the result 
 
286 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 that in 1915 the capital of the Co-operative Whole- 
 sale amounted to $2,000,000; whereas, in 1916, it 
 increased to $2,750,000, with a yearly turnover of 
 $17,000,000. The net profit for the same year 
 amounted to $2,000,000.* 
 
 The growing success of the co-operative move- 
 ment is largely due to its impartial attitude toward 
 all political movements. As stated before, the 
 average workman is mainly interested in improving 
 his condition of life, and he is but little concerned 
 about Marxian or any other theories or abstract 
 dogmas. Furthermore, the average workman un- 
 derstands that it is not by putting into effect fan- 
 tastic schemes that he will be able to make his life 
 more comfortable and less exposed to the dangers 
 of industrial pauperism. In the co-operative move- 
 ment the laborers find a wide field for constructive 
 work, the aim of which is their own welfare. 
 
 In the final analysis, the welfare of the laboring 
 class means a general social improvement and, 
 therefore, an undoubted social advantage to the 
 community at large. 
 
 We have referred briefly to several constructive 
 measures which, in our opinion, can be instrumental 
 in removing social unrest. But social research, 
 much in the same way as technical research, is un- 
 limited. Every country has its own problems to 
 
 ' Compare the above data with that given in the American Labor 
 Year Book, igiz-rgiS, pp. 318-334. 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 287 
 
 solve. It is scarcely possible to outline a complete 
 programme of such social measures as should be 
 adopted in the near future. The great need for 
 central research boards is quite obvious. Whether 
 the question of State Insurance for laborers is brought 
 up, or the problem of women's work, or any other 
 matter pertaining to social legislation, it should be 
 carefully studied by an impartial body of citizens 
 before it is put into effect as an actual law. The 
 old-fashioned legislative committees have proved 
 to be inadequate for such a task. A permanent so- 
 cial research board, amply supplied with funds, com- 
 posed of men whose social record is beyond re- 
 proach and whose knowledge of social conditions 
 would guarantee sound judgment, ought to be estab- 
 lished without delay. 
 
 The solution of social problems cannot be post- 
 poned indefinitely. The growing unrest throughout 
 the world clearly indicates that the social structure 
 of modem society is imdergoing serious changes. 
 The radical groups throughout the world have made 
 a definite endeavor to take advantage of the dis- 
 turbed condition of the social organism. They have 
 made an attempt to bring one part of the organism 
 in opposition to the other. They have proclaimed 
 a theory which in biology would be rejected without 
 hesitation, namely, that in order to cure the hand 
 it is necessary to cut off the head; but, fortunately 
 for Western civilization, this theory was first put 
 into practice in Russia, where it has proved a colossal 
 
288 SOCIALISM VS. CIVILIZATION 
 
 failure. Western European countries and the United 
 States have witnessed the great Socialistic experi- 
 ment in Russia, and there is every reason to believe 
 that they will not wish to repeat it. 
 
 A negative policy toward Socialism does not, how- 
 ever, solve the outstanding social problems. The 
 international enemy of civilization is at work, 
 spreading its venomous germs throughout the civi- 
 lized countries, fomenting social hysteria, attacking 
 the vital organs of modem society, weakening it by 
 artificial discord, appealing to the base instincts of 
 the half-educated mobs, and subjecting^ the very 
 existence of civilization to the mortal dangers of 
 anarchy and destruction. 
 
 At the very moment when only one principle can 
 save civilization from these mortal dangers— one 
 great principle which was formulated by Clemenceau 
 in a single word — "Work ! " — the international enemy 
 exclaims: "Strike!" But Clemenceau's battle-cry 
 appHes by no means to labor alone. Doubtless, 
 labor must work. Labor without work is a social 
 nuisance. Labor in a state of constant strikes is no 
 more labor. But all the other social groups are use- 
 less and harmful in the same degree provided they 
 do not exert their energies and their social ability to 
 the fullest extent. Now is not the time for medita- 
 tion. The technical man, the financier, the work- 
 man, the legislator, the merchant, the scientist — all of 
 them must exert their energies and must find a way, 
 first, to counteract the growing danger of interna- 
 
REVOLUTION OR RECONSTRUCTION 289 
 
 ^tional Socialism arid, secondly, to work out, by mu- 
 tual consent, a social scheme which will result in a 
 general readjustment and in a general social peace. 
 
 Now is the time for technical and social engineer- 
 ing, with the ability of the -expert in every line qf 
 social life as a commanding factor. 
 
 Ibsen, the great Norwegian dramatist, deeply 
 grasped the nature of future society in his Master 
 Builder. It is true that destruction can be Buccess- 
 fully overcome by construction only. The world 
 has to choose between the social engineer and the 
 social agitator. 
 
 It is quite evident, however, that if modem civiliza- 
 tion is going to last, the future will belong to the 
 constructive power of engineers in the broad sense 
 and not to those who advocate social hatred and 
 social madness.