that are vain, done by one and the other, both at home and abroad.

Abroad, at the International Socialist Conference, at Stuttgart, where there were so many warring "voices," it was argued that one more from America should be enough. But as both the "Kangaroos'' and the "Skunks" were at home on foreign soil, once more Hillquit was pitted against De Leon, as in the old time when their wrath was heated hot at the Massachusetts Convention (1899), where these animal factions first made the fur fly. Indeed, it was quite appropriate that an animal philosophy should descend to animal manners. So, by an admirable villainy, with which each charged the other, both cis-Atlantic voices were heard, notwithstanding the proof from one and the other that both the Socialist Labor Party and the Socialist Party were without a "scientific" foundation upon the one and only "Class-Struggle."

At One Anothers' Throats. Hence, officially, the "organized masses"-the S. L. P. and the S. P.have, by vivid example, been instructing an unjust world as to how Socialism would eradicate all sorts and kinds of animosities from the nature of the race. For, all the while at one anothers' throats, they strenuously cultivate their philosophical contradictions, not alone to the Beatitudes, but to the Ten Commandments also. In this, they truly have been successful; for nobody, pointing, to their devotion ever cried out: "See how they love one another."

Yes, Socialism has devoluted quite to the opposite pole. Under their centuries of persecutions, the early Christians.

cherished and nourished one another as their own flesh. Now, while assaulting Christian civilization, the Socialists, fostering as their foundation the "inherent principle" of the "Class Struggle," love one another most becomingly, after the manner of cats and dogs.

Besides this double-headed party's voice, the dumb proletarian masses have others many others. There is Rev. Edward Ellis Carr-who loves Socialism as he himself has made it with so robust a voice that other voices-National voices-determined he should no longer speak as one from within about the row at the Socialist Party Headquarters.

No "Capitalist Morality."

At the "Harem," loving comrades should be guarded from the traitorous attacks of "Capitalist morality". Indeed, why not wine and whisky, graft and, for that matter, double "wives" or treble "wives'? They shall flow in and flow out, but comrade Carr at low tide shall be stranded because his preposterous and impossible capitalism, taking the form of religious scruples, is a hindrance to the "open organization of the proletarian masses." And he was. You may be sure that comrade Barnes-J. Mahlon, of course is not the only one who knows very well that "under Socialism there will be no morals", and the Secretary of the National Committee was neither afraid nor ashamed to say that "Christian Socialism, being a contradiction in terms, is ridiculous".

Tommy, too, is a "Voice". His Provoker so provokes other of the climbing proletarians, not all in Chicago, that "I-I-I-Tommy Morgan" is now having the turbulent time of his life-which

began its agitation with the Haymarket riots to love and live together within the "organized proletarian masses".

Tommy has, indeed, been in his Provoker quite too provoking for anything. The Provoker has told, right out of school, oft and many a time, and in detail, how Socialists love one another. One after another of the most luminous lights, guiding the destinies of the "organized proletarian masses" to destruction, may, in the columns of The Provoker, see himself and herself done into the English tongue with ever so many very unusual words vividly worked in.

No, I should not care to use the scandalous language of The Provoker, although I am sure that very much of it applies fittingly to those who should love Tommy, for he is one of their own, tried and true.

When Comrade Lashes Comrade.

For the novice in these matters, the blood-red tongue of the comrades, as they mutually express their feelings, is, without doubt, difficult to understand. The lashings they give one another are expressed in terms of outraged virtue, and they would appear to be entirely disinterested. The offense is against the "Class-Struggle," and the offended are the "Class-conscious, “abetting the Evolution in terms of outraged virtue.

But, since virtue and vice are mere terms of "Capitalist superstition," what force should condemnation have, coming from those who hold to the philosophy of moral negation? Logically, none whatsoever. For righteous anger were a thing unknown to Socialist philosophy -a thing misapplied to those who act, perforce, as their class interests prompt. Even allowing for the lingering traces of

an out-worn habit upon the "Socialist mind," one should greatly discount the sharpness of the sting, the brutality of the gouge of one comrade's criticism of another, for one who is irresponsible is surely blameless. Hence, while Socialist philosophy utterly scorns the Christian Revelation of the fall of man, by which alone the explanation of a good God and a bad world becomes rationally valid, it sets up the claim that the vicious qualities seen in human nature are due to the animal origin of man. Men want plenty of food, clothing and shelter, and not until then will they be good. Of course, "our philosophers' do not see that these two positions are as logically associated as a silk purse and a sow's ear; nor, that a mutual lashing of Socialist by Socialist is a splendid example of "double crossing" a phrase which they are fondly, fond of using. It is this way: moral responsibility is first crossed off, and the seven deadly sins are ruled out, together with religious tribunals. Then, over the first, a heavier cross is laid upon man than by original sin. According to human nature, as Socialists have made it, no such thing as moral repugnance to evil is known. One may gain his ends by whatsoever reprehensible means and not be sorry for it. Hence, being neither good nor bad, a man has no chance of climbing up the ladder of light. Great is Diana! "Gods" are made by the trade, and set forth in the love of Socialists for one another.

No Need for Alarm.

So long as these philosphers were in a negligible minority and their pranks confined to the world of intellectual speculation, no need to sound the alarm. But now, since so many mediocre men are

practising the power which the masses, by their numerical strength, give, and, since the advocacy of both "ballots and bullets" is put into deeds, the logic of the love which one demagogue has for other comrades should turn the laugh upon their infallible confidence in their cock-sure cure-all.

These bombastic gentlemen have never an axe of their own to grind. Perish the thought! They have only devotion to the proletariat and the proletarian. What should they do with personal ambition? Having "Socialist minds," Socialist thoughts and Socialist hearts, what should a mere "cell" of the "Social organism" be doing with anything but an issue? Under the red flag, these "cells" are the one-self. So within the scope of Socialist logic, there is not this one and another, but merely one, and the one is nowhere for want of location, just as when a man confesses the whole world as his country he has no country. Behold, then, the exit at once of individual and of place!

What Still Remains.

But the issue remaineth! Happily, in the issue, the atavism of individual comrades still persists. The Socialist issue is like Banquo's ghost. It will never lie still in its grave. Yet, after all, this is not a good analogy, for Banquo was buried but once; while each one of the several Socialist issues has been killed and buried at many places and on many occasions.

Just now Direct Action versus Political Action-an issue a long time. "dead," but ever alive-is exceedingly active in the Socialist movement. It furnishes with great impartiality splendid occasion to bring out both the sci

ence and the art of comradeship. Incidentally, quite so, the national offices. are involved. Besides, the profit from the sale of Socialist literature, and the financial returns from bogus mining schemes are alluded to. So loving letters, hot with hate, show to perfection, but in miniature, the future society. Hunter, Berger, Spargo, Hillquit, Haywood, Bohn, Kerr, Boudin, Untermann and others thus promote their cause by showing themselves to be fit subjects for disorder and riot-or, perhaps, for the insane asylum-for, however scanty their economic funds may be, it is certain that these propagandists have a valuable vocabulary, a redundant imagery and an intellectual intensity quite over-topping the ordinary man of letters. Then, too, words are easy things to build a reputation with, for they may defy all judgment, and scorn all responsibilities.

Many Other Issues.

However, it must not be supposed that this is the only issue now in debate by those consciously aiding Evolution in evolving the ideal society. This, indeed, were a grave error-very grave. Other issues, both national and local, are vital; the Fusionists, the Opportunists, the Reformists, the Organizationists, the Destructionists, the Constructionists, and the Industrial Unionists all work together for The Revolution. Upon an issue, one may certainly prefer his own. candidacy to that of another. One may show the strength of the opposing comrade to be strong-so strong that "you who support him in this election please hold your noses for sanitary protection.' As for myself, "I refuse to follow him any further in his double crossing, evading, compromising, four-flushing, bulldogging trickery."

HE Socialist Party in this country

Thas grown to such proportions that

it is now assuming a position where it might become a potent power for good were the politicians who control its destinies willing that it should play this. part. Predictions, as a rule, are profitless, yet it cannot be denied that a glance at the past history of the Socialist Party should enable us to predict the future actions of the organization with some degree of accuracy, especially with regard to its attitude toward the questions in which people are most interested.

A Heresy Charge.

A member of the Socialist Party-a friend of the writer-was once accused of heresy by his "comrades," because he had expressed himself in a way that to them seemed objectionable. When brought before the investigating committee to defend himself, he said:

"It is not a question of whether I am right or wrong. It is simply a question whether a member of this party shall, or shall not, be allowed free expression of thought. Fortunately, at the present time the party controls its own mem

bers only, and if a 'comrade' does or says something with which the other members do not agree, the most they can do is to expel him from the party. If this spirit should prevail when the party controls the earth-as it hopes to do what is to prevent the majority from commanding him to get off the earth?"

Socialists Oppose Reforms.

This expresses the attitude of a number of men who were once in the party, but who, because of the narrow and 'incompromising spirit shown by the party leaders, have been compelled to drop out. The fact is that the Socialist Party in the United States is unalterably opposed to all reforms that do not bear a Socialist label, and to all reformers who do not carry the red card that testifies to their membership in the party. The probable reason for this oppositon to reform measures is that Socialists try to apply in practice. what is possible only in theory; they attempt to make a clean-cut distinction between the capitalist class and the working class, when such distinctions, if

they exist at all, are anything but welldefined.

Few writers who are not Socialists are more friendly to Socialism than Prof. Richard T. Ely, yet, in a recent work, he said:

"Finally we may call attention to certain objections which do not apply to Socialism itself but do apply to ordinary Socialistic modes of agitation. While Socialistic agitation has had a beneficent influence in drawing the wage earning class together and creating among them a feeling of fraternal solidarity, it has, on the other hand, tended to separate them from other classes in society, depriving them of the help which they could derive from the other classes and giving them an unwarranted confidence in their capacity for political and industrial leadership. This has been the inevitable outcome of the Marxist Socialism, which treats Socialism as a class problem, telling the workers that their emancipation must come entirely from their own efforts, and employing the war cry 'Workmen of all Countries, Unite!' Socialism will become stronger when it loses its class character and looks for leadership to men of superior intelligence and wide experience.'

Close Distinction Impossible.

A close distinction between classes is possible as an academic proposition-it may stand out conspicuously in works. on political economy-but in this country, where the classes are constantly merging into one another, where there are radical Democrats and insurgent Republicans-progressives who believe in national ownership of inter-state industries and municipal ownership of local industries-it is suicidal for a party to stand by a platform that may not be realized for centuries, at the best, and so set its face uncompromisingly against

It is true that, since Berger carried Milwaukee, the party in other sections

has shown a willingness to imitate his tactics, and fusions of the most striking description have been sanctioned, in the hope that Milwaukee's success might be duplicated. In many places this hope was realized last November; but that the fusing represented a temporary measure inspired by tactical reasons is shown by the prompt denial, on the part of party leaders, that any such fusions had existed-denials that, in the face of the accumulated evidence, made the spokesmen for the party appear very silly.

The "Stand-Pat" Position.

From the philosophical point of view, the "stand-pat" position seems logical; it is when it is viewed in the light of the party platform that it shows its absurdity. According to the platform of 1908, the Socialist Party aims at the relief of existing conditions in all directions-not centuries from now, when the Co-operative Commonwealth has been established, but-now! Yet, let this relief be offered from a different direction, and instantly it is antagonized by the Socialists.

Until comparatively recently, the platform of the Socialist Party consisted of