What does this mean? Simply that we are not accountable for the evil things we do that we are driven forward at the mercy of a blind force that can not be controlled-and that the motive power behind this force is that purely impersonal factor, the bread and butter question. In others words, it was "our modern industrial conditions," that were responsible for the act of the Massachusetts Massachusetts clergyman, who, after betraying the girl to whom he was engaged, murdered her that he might wed her rival. If Messrs Blatchford and Darrow are right, this man should not be blamed for his deeds, damnable though they were. Instead of locking him up, and, possibly, putting him to death, we should take him into our home, coddle him, and nurse him with all the tenderness that should be displayed toward the victim of the capitalistic system. A nice doctrine, this! But, tell me if this is not the lesson that we must read into Darrow's words to the criminals in the Chicago. jail: Kidnapping a "Profession." "Kidnapping is not a crime, it is a profession. It has been developed with the times. It has been developed with our modern industrial conditions. There are many ways of making moneymany new ways that Our ancestors knew nothing about. Our ancestors knew nothing about a billion dollar trust; and here comes some poor fellow who has no other trade and he discovers the profession of kidnapping children. This crime is born, not because people are bad; people don't kidnap other people's children because they want the children or because they are devilish, but because they see a chance to get some money out of it. . There is one way to cure all these offenses, and that is to give the people a chance to live." . In developing this theme, Darrow presented a view of life that must have been highly edifying to the company of criminals listening to him. Undoubtedly many of them then and there determined to reform their evil ways. For example, take this picture of life: "The people up and down the Lake Shore have not committed crime, still they have so much property they don't know what to do with it. It is perfectly plain why these people have not committed crimes against property; they make the laws and therefore do not need to break them. And, in order for you to get some property you are obliged to break the rules of the game. I don't know but what some of you may have had a very nice chance to get rich by carrying the hod for one dollar a day, twelve hour. Instead of taking that nice, easy profession, you are a burglar. If you had been given a chance to be a banker you would rather follow that. Some of you may have had a chance to work as a switchman on a railroad where you know, according to statistics, that you cannot live and keep all your limbs more than seven years, and you get fifty dollars or seventy-five dollars a month for taking your lives in your hands, and instead of taking that lucrative position you choose to be a sneak thief, or something like that. Some of you made that sort of choice. I don't know what I would take if I was reduced to this choice. I have an easier choice." The Gospel of Determinism. Thus Darrow rambled on, preaching his gospel of determinism with all the skill of the ancient Sophist, and we cannot resist the temptation to suggest that the prosecuting attorney, now in charge of the case against Darrow ought to keep this little pamphlet by his side during the court proceedings. Passages read from it from time to time might enable the jurors to obtain an interesting sidelight upon the real character of the lawyer on trial before them. Of course, the Socialist will deny that Marxian determinism embodies such dangerous doctrines as Darrow and Blatchford have read into it, but let us see what ground there is in support of these denials. I have before me a copy of The Socialist Primer, an illuminating little work issued by The Appeal to Reason crowd. Here we have the fundamentals of Socialism presented in the simplest form possible, for the lessons are designed for the instruction of children-the boys and girls who are to fill the ranks of the Revolutionists tomor row. Accordingly, that the inspiring truths of class-hatred may be imbibed at as early an age as possible the, simple lessons are nothing more or less than blatent appeals to the sympathies of the little ones; so we are not surprised to find the theory of determinism. set forth attractively that the childish mind need find no difficulty in absorbing it. Read the lesson, which appears on another page of this magazine, and you will see how insiduously the doctrine of irresponsibility is taught in The Socialist Primer. No mention is made. of the word, "fatalism," of course; no reference is made to "determinism," but where is there any difference between the horrible doctrine of moral irresponsibility, as it is advocated by Darrow and Blatchford, and the principles which the Socialist child is taught by "Lesson XXI"? "If you put the rose in a nice place and give it air, rain and sun, will it grow?" asks the author of the primer. "Why, to be sure it will! Then it will be a nice rose, and smell sweet. It is just so with men, my dears. Put men in a bad house with few good things, no love, joy or good clothes, and they will be bad men. But if you give them all the good things they need to real life, they will be nice, good men. and they will bloom like the nice rose." Isn't this Blatchford and Darrow reduced to words of one syllable! "Vive La Revolution" "Our government is a republic in name only; it is a failure. Hence it must be overthrown by a revolution. VIVE LA REVOLUTION! The most heroic word in all languages is REVOLUTION. It thrills and vibrates, it cheers and inspires. The throne trembles when this throbbing word is lisped. glorify the revolutions of the past and hail the Greater Revolution yet to come." -Eugene V. Debs, in "Writings and Speeches." Berger on "Bullets" By Walter K. French The fact that there is but one kind of Socialism-that the Conservatives like Berger and Hillquit and the Radicals like Debs and Haywood are marked with the same brand when you get right down to the skin-is being exemplified every day. Mr. Berger does not talk "The Revolution" to-day. He is now a Conserv ative, but, as Mr. French suggests in this article, the knowledge of what he has said in the past should tend to make us a trifle careful in guarding against a possible relapse into the rifle-and-bullet fever from which he suffered a few years ago.-The Editors. HE Honorable Victor Berger, who helps to represent the State of Wisconsin in the United States Congress, seldom loses an opportunity to declare that he is a "conservative" Socialist. By resorting to this term, "conservatism," in defining, or qualifying, his Socialism, he apparently means to imply that he is in no sympathy with men like Debs and Haywood. They may advocate the "general strike" to their heart's content-they may declare themselves for "direct action" in words that fairly sizzle with class-hatred, but, so far as he himself is concerned, he is much too sane and sensible a Constructionist to wish to inspire any revolutionary movement that would resort to other weapons than the peaceful methods of the ballot-box. What We Can't Forget. Herald over his own signature. If he is sincere in his present attitude of conservatism, many a time and oft he must have wished that he had eaten his words, instead of printed them, even at the risk of more serious stomachical disturbances. As it is, however, nothing that the Honorable Victor can do or say will make the American people forget that there was once a day when he got so riled up with the sense of class-hatred that he spoke right out in meeting, regardless of consequences. A Revolutionary Explosion. article The original editorial-the which caused so much comment-the Victor revolutionary explosion that wants us to overlook-appeared in the Herald, July 31, 1909-just think of it! and less than four years ago!-under the title "Should Be Prepared to Fight for Liberty at All Hazards," and here are some of the sentiments that this Con structive Socialist expressed: If this is anything more than a pose, adopted for tactical reasons, Berger must deplore the day when-suffering from an attack of indigestion, perhaps--he penned the editorial on "bullets." and printed it in the Social Democratic CRATIC LAW-MAKING OF THE "IN VIEW OF THE PLUTO PRESENT DAY, IT IS EASY TO are dealing in this country, the outcome can ever be peaceable or that any reasonable change can ever be brought about by the ballot in the end. "I predict that a large part of the capitalist class will be wiped out for much smaller things than the settling of the social question. That before any settlement is possible, most of the plutocratic class, together with the politicians, will have to disappear as completely as the feudal lords and their retinue disappeared during the French revolution. "THEREFORE, I SAY, EACH OF ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION IN At first thought, as Mr. Berger himself suggests, "this may look like a startling statement." At sober second thought, and after time has yellowed the paper from which I make this quotation, the statement appears dangerously near the boundary line of sedition, especially in view of the fact that the writer plods right along with the same kind of revolt-inciting expletives. No Hope for Worker. "There is now no hope for any protection for the working class in this country, "he asserts. "Protection for the plutocrat, the exploiter, and big thief-is the watchword in Washington, D. C., and in every legislature and court of record in the United States "Now, I deny that dealing with a blind and greedy plutocratic class as we "This cannot be done by the ballot, or "The ballot may not count for much in a pinch. "And in order to be prepared for all emergencies, Socialists and workingmen. should make it their duty to have rifles and the necessary rounds of ammunition. at their homes, and be prepared to back up their ballots with their bullets if necessary." Apparently the full force of this longpent-up venom was not exhausted in this single outpouring of Berger's soul, for -on September 6, 1909-we again find him applauding the power of "blood and iron"-this time in the columns of the Chicago Daily Socialist. Not By Ballot Alone. "Do not misunderstand me," he said, "I know right well that the 'social question' can no more be solved by street riots, insurrections, and shotguns than by bomb and dynamite. "Yet by the ballot alone, it will also scarcely ever be solved. "Up to this time men have always solved great questions by blood and iron." What are we to think of this man, Berger, who is now entrusted with the duty of helping to make the laws of this nation? Has he experienced a change of heart since the votes of his fellows sent him to sit in one of the seats of the mighty? Was he a revolutionist for a day or two only, or is his vaunted "Constructionism" a mask, concealing a destructive, direct-actionary tendency that is likely to break the bounds again when next he makes the mistake of eating too many cucumbers? "Washington, Liar and Perjurer." "Not only was he (Washington) guilty of trying to beat the English crown, whose subject he was, but he was proven a liar and a tax dodger by a jury of twelve men of his own country. No wonder he was willing to go to war against the crown, for his dealings were about to be discovered; and, if it had not been for the war, he would have had to answer to the crown for his crooked deals."-Indianapolis, Ind., Socialist Register. Socialist "Justice." Suppose that two farmers have worked side by side, raising potatoes on the same kind of land, and each having equal opportunity to make good. One, because of his greater attention, or better judgment, produces a finer grade of potatoes, and more to the acre, than the other farmer, yet works the same number of hours. Is each to have the same income? Socialism says "yes!" Can you call that "justice"? |