HELENA,MONTANA, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1905.
AnswerMade^To R^ev. Poland
Inreply to Rev. Wm. Poland's^attack on Socialism, I will admit he^has put up an argument that looks^good to me, who has not made a^thorough study of the industrial^question. And I believe he has^written in good faith, sincerily be^^lieving the points he has made, to^be the facts as he has stated them.
Inthis reply I shall endeavor to^treat him in an honorable way, and^as a brother which we Socialists be^^lieve all men would, beonce class^distinction was abolished. Now^brother, you lay the three following^things down; you say a highly^civilized community would not be^willing to dispense with namely;^freedom of individual demand; a^more or less determinate unite of^value for the purpose of exchange;^freedom of the individual to choose^occupation and to qualify for the^the same. The first condition you^lay down, is rather vague and un^^defined and I don't believe the bro^^ther expressed the thing he had in^mind, when laying this rule down.^Looking back in the historical past^of the human race, we find that right^and justice in individual demand,^has never been the same in an earlier^period of time as it had in the later^period. For instance; the earlier^period of human existence that we^have any history of, the individual^demand stood for slavery, for^poligmy; to fight and kill each^other in duels, now it stands for^men to poison and corrupt their^lives with the alchol habit, and for^houses of prostitution and for^prostitutes. Brother have you^been supporting the freedom of in^^dividual demand in these last men^^tioned things. Going deeper into^your discussion, I am convinced^that vou meant this freedom of in^^dividual demand to be limited in^accordance to the rights, and justice^toward society, for you go on to say^take first the supply for every in^^dividual demand: there you go on^and describe what an enormous^enterprise the government would^have to deal with in order to sup^^ply the things for this individual^demand, then you go on further^and explain as accurately as any^well read Socialist could, prove by^this same explanation that the^government could supply this de^^mand a great deal more economi^^cally than the private individual^can. Yes, brother, we admit that^the enormous labor saving, would^occur along the line of every industry^that your argument proves would^occur, by substituting collective^ownership of stores, newspapers,^and politics for private ownership.
Butthen you wail, people would^have nothing to do. But they^would,and the answer is simple.
Theindividual demand is ever^growing greater for things that is^better, better food, better shelter,^better clothing, better and higher^morals, better things for the mental^man as well as the physical. If it^was not for this individual demand^we would still be occupying cave or^cliff. Now brother, hunt up the^number of the News, July 19, and^read over very carefully your whole^discription of the change in the^methods of owning stores and news-^gapers, and especially politics.^Then let your mind run along and^apply the same rules to all lines of^industry and see if you have not^a satisfactory answer to your doubts^of a collective state supplying the^individual demand; far better than^the individual is supplying the col^^lective demand, by collective pro^^duction under this system, as the^number of people who are starving^to death proves, and which our^daily papers are filled with. Now I^will return to your discussion in^regard to the way you can get the
machinesto supply your wants or^fancies as the case might be. Bro^^ther I am greatly interested in this^part of your discussion, because^there are two sides to it and you^have evidently not seen more than^one. Now in the first place you^can not get the mechanic to take^your job, or if you could, he could^not complete it and furnish you with^the thing you want, for the simple^reason that the mechanic has went^out of business long ago unless you^call the factory or mill owner a^mechanic. This is so interesting^a subject to me. I invite you to sit^down and make out a list of things^that comes to your mind that you^can get the mechanic to make for^you and send it to the Mon^^tana News for publication, and in^case you are able to stumble onto^something the mechanic can sup^^ply you with, it will open up an^opportunity to discuss the other^side of the question that I referred^to above, and which you just merely^touched, where you say 1 can al^^ways have my demand supplied^where there is an individual per^^sonal profit to be made, etc. Vou^did not explain what this personal^profit consisted of, which is some^labor product and, which in your^especial case would be preaching^a sermon on the Christian religion.
Nowsuppose your mechanic would^say to you, ^it don't make any^difference what kind of a sermon^you preach me in payment for this^thing you have received from me in^exchange for it. You may not be^^lieve in it, in fact you may believe^just the contrary. For instance he^might ask you to preach a sermon^in favor of Socialism. Oh, no, you^would say, this is a horse of an^^other color. My congregation is a^collective body, and I am supposed^to preach sermons that will not^outrage the feelings of any mem^ber of this collective body. Now^brother what becomes of your free^^dom of individual demand argument^in this case, and I will go still further^and ask you if this case is in strict^accordance to the golden rule.^Are you not asking just a little^more of the mechanic, than you are^willing to return to him
NowI will take up the thing you^state as the second requisite in^this discussion, some approximately^fixed and determinable unit meas^^ure of value for the purpose of ex^^change, and you go on to quote the^old farce; that the dictionary mak^^ers have defined as to money being^the measure of value and medium^of exchange, money as a medium of^exchange and a representation of^wealth is all correct brother. But^money as a measure of value is nit.
Laboris the true basic measure^of value at all times, past, present^and future, it not only measures the^value of all wealth, but it measures^the value of money which in its self^is not wealth. When you refer to^the use of the labor check being^used as a medium of exchange un^der a collective commonwealth, you^have about the Socialist idea. But^when you say that Socialism stands^for the return to the individual the^exact amount that the individual^produced; you are a little off. It^demands an equal individual dis^^tribution of the products of col^^lective labor now produces nearly^all of the products of the world^under the capitalist system. All^that the workers demand is a change^of ownership and an equal distri^bution.
Websterdefines Socialism as a^theory of society that advocates a^more precise, orderly, and har^monous arrangements of the social^relations of mankind than that which^has hitherto prevailed. The above^is a good definition of Socialism
undercapitalism, no degree of^equity prevails in the payment of^wages to labor. As an instance, a^cashier of a bank may get t^n dol^^lars per day for six hours work^while the man in the ditch gets two^dollars for ten hours work. So the^ditch digger under this system ex^^changes over 8 days of ten hours^work, for the bank cashier, 6 hour^day. Now does the ditch digger^quit work because he knows he is^putting in ten times more work than^the cashier^ Not on your life.^That freedom of individual demand^must be satisfied. Now if he will^work under the above unequal con^^ditions, do you think he will quit^work because there is a trifling dis^^parity between his own and some^other man's work. And now I am^going to straighten out this question^of ratios which you seem to be^worse mixed up in, than anything^else and it will also explain to you^my former assertion that labor is the^only true measure of value. We^will first take the variable ratio of^gold and silver. This has always^been caused by the variable labor^cost of mining and reducing the re^^spective metals to bullion. If it^cost less labor time to produce an^ounce of silver, that metal fell and^if it cost more to produce an ounce^of gold without an equal rise in^producing an ounce of silver the^ratio became more separated. The^same rule will apply to your potato^and glove contest. If it would take^on hours time, under this present^system to produce one bushell of^potatoes, and one hour to produce^one pair of gloves as long as they^were on a parity with each other,^say one dollar for each there would^not likely be any noticeable change^from one occupation to the other by^the workers of the respective call^^ings, but if there was a fall in the^price of potatoes fifty cents per^bushell and a corresponding rise in^the the price gloves, the potato^raiser would not be long subject to^this unequal exchange but would go^to making gloves which would again^restore the parity between the two^articles and in time make as much^disparity the other way. And this^is the sole cause of the fluctuations^in prices of commodities where all^other things are equal. That is
wouldbe given in the potato and^glove contest as to any special edu^^cation which you seem to think^could only be dealt to the few,^there would be more of it. All^would have an equal chance to^reach into the highest studies. I^admit that we can't place brains in^an empty scull. Therefore there^would be some that would never^reach a high grade of education in^the professions. Those would cer^^tainly be compelled from lack of abi^^lity to chose some other calling just^as they do now. As to your as^^sertions in regard to the lazy and^shiftless. I answer that the per cent^of that class is very few compared to^the whole class of workers. I do^not believe it would reach one^half of one per cent. I am now at^work in a ditch camp where 50 men^are employed, and out of the whole^number there is not a single shirker.^Their wages are about $2 per day.^This is a special illustration of col^^lective labor. I cannot believe that^these men would take any less in^^terest in their work if they receiv^^ed the full benefit of their collective^toil which would be ten dollars per^day instead of two. I also fully^believe the work would be better^managed by an elected forman than^it is now managed by the parasite^boss.
Inconclusion brother, I think you^have commenced your study of So^^cialism on the wrong end of it if^you would commence in the prim^^ary class instead of trying to take^the graduating course I think you^would understand it better; the first^great Bassic truth that a student of^Socialism must learn is that labor^broduces all wealth. After he gets^this great truth fully established in^his mind, he is then prepared to^branch out into the higher studies,^such as measure of value, cau^e of^variable ratios, division of labor, etc.^1 or instance when he fully under^^stands that labor is the creator of^all wealth, he is then in a position^to learn that there is no true meas^^ure of this wealth only by its crea^^tor, labor. Then he will go on^further and learn that nearly all the^labor that is applied to producing^wealth today is co-operative labor.^This will bring him to a point where^he can commence to understand the
LavSson Shows^Up Fritz Heinze
(Continuedfrom last week.)^Terrifying as the complication^was, we looked it in the pupil ^^here was dynamite enough to blow^financial Boston to smithereens^reach over into Wall street, and^spread throughout the country.^The possibilities^probabilities^of^distruction were incalculable. Out^^side of hamstringing Hein/e, only^one influence could possibly avert
oftheir own juggles had miscarried;^so it cannot be the loss of monev.^My conclusion, after studying the^symptoms, is that the crooked^gambler who habitually eliminates^adverse odds is mentally and mor^^ally unfitted to participate in plays
wherehe may lose.
Thenthere was but one hope,^^I said. ^You have all tried to trick
wherethe trust has no monoply on ] Justice in the demand of labor to^the commodity.| own the means of production.
Thisillustration also proves that Now brother just one more werd^labor is the only true measure of I and this is in regard to ratios. Did^value. Now under Socialism, where i you ever know of a time that our^there was an under supply for the government had any trouble in^demand for a certain commodity 1 maintaining the ratio between post-^say for gloves, and an over produr | age stamps^ Which are simply a^tion of potatoes, the number of a labor check, and barring our pri-^hours in a labor day for the glove vate profits made by carriers. Which^makers would be lowered which | would be eliminated by the govern-^would be equivalent to a rise in ment carrying its own mail and^wages under this system. And the! the stealing or postal feuds which
numberof hours in the labor day^for the potato raiser, would be^equivalent to a fall in wages for^potato raisers under this system.^That would take enough men out of^the potato business and put them in^the glove factory to supply the de^^mand for both articles. When^once this parity was fully established^there would be very little fluctua^^tions in the supply, as their parity^womld prove that the workers were^satisfied with this arraignment of^labor. This argument is merely^Illustrative as both potato raising^and glove making is mostly done by^machinery which is also collective^labor.
Thissame illustration disproves^your assertions in regard to being^compelled to regulate supply and^demand by bureaus, but on the other^hand, supply and demand would^control the action of our bureaus^and this also answers your ques^^tions on right of choice of occupa^tion, including doctors.
UnderSocialism there would be^apt to be a larger supply of doctors^according to the demand educated^than there is under this system as^under a proper medical system there^probably would not he need for as^many doctors as now^ Then in^case of an over supply of doctors, the^same incentive would be given to en-
wouldbe impossible under So^^cialism these postage stamps not^only gives a true record of the labor^cost of carrying on our postoffice^department but it also proves that^labor is the measure of value; by^first paying for these stamps which^was then put into circulation by the^use of our medium of exchange,^money.
ComradeHogstatz, formerly of^Basin, but who moved to Florence^last spring, has returned to Basin to^reside. During his sojourn at^Florence, Mrs. Hogstatz was killed^while riding a horse. It may truth^fully be said that Mrs. Hogstatz^was one of the most devoted So^cialists in America. Her entire^life was given up to the cause and^where ever she travelled she made^a hole in the ranks of capitalism^The Hogstatzs lived in Coeur d' Alene^during the bull-pen period and manv^an anxious hour she caused the^capital murderers.
TheNews is publishing, this week^the entire preamble and constitu^tion of the Industrial Workers of^of the World ant' we advise our
readersto put it away for future^ter some other calling, as I showed reference.
thecoming cyclone^if ^Standard^Oil^ would throw itself into the gap^it could turn the tide. It^might require many millions. 1^knew ^Standard Oil^ and Mr.^Rogers. However brave and fear^^less they were with winning cards in^their hands, I knew that they were^veritable cowards when the game^was in the open. However, I said:^^Mr. Rogers, are you and Mr.^Rockefeller willing to stand in the^breach tomorrow, stop the decline,^and chase Heinze out of the mar^ket^ It may take millions, but we^can turn the tables if you will.
Notfor a dollar, Lawson. The^man who starts to stop the decline^tomorrow, must stop it^he cannot^try, change his mind if it is too^dangerous, and quit. You know we^never put ourselves in a position of^that kind, and we will not begin^now. Mr. Rockfeller would not^listen to the idea for an instant,^even if I thought favorably of it.^^^ ^
Theworld of finance, hypnotized^by the great name of ^Standard^Oil,^ imagines it omnipotent in the^stock market. The truth is that^Mr. Rogers and Mr. Rockefeller,^with all their millions, are the ver^^iest cravens in a open stock gamble.^^Standard Oil^ is a ^sure thing^^operator. It never enters a deal on^even terms. Its cards are always^^stacked^ its dice ^cogged,^ and^its boxes ^fixed.^ I can put my^hand on at least a score of traders^on Wall street, men not worth half^to a single million, who, in a play in^which the chances were even, would^risk more and go farther than the^w hole corterie at 26 Broadway.^I have seen men of the Rogers type^turn pale at the calamitous issue ^t^chance and meet it like the butcher's^mongrel who, in full chase after a^sheep, is confronted by the farm^collie; and again I have observed^the same individuals stand up smil^^ing to a staggering loss when one
Heinze^ I will now take a hack at
Itwill do no good, Lawson,^^Mr. Rogers expostulated. ^The^man is impossible, and now that^we know what he has behind him,^he will be more insolent than ever.
'Ican't help it. It's all there is^left.^ And I bolted for Heinze's^office a few blocks up the street.
HithertoI had avoided Heinze^for I had taken a most violent dis^^like to the man and his methods.^Though we had never even seen^one another, we had exchanged^public lambastings, and it is a con^^firmed habit of mine under no cir^^cumstances to treat my enemies^save as enemies. The fine Italian^art of the cordial handshake and the^pleasent smile for the man I hate is^one I have never been able to learn,^and I realized on my way to his^office that if we got together it was^99 chances out of a hundred that^our encounter would end in a quick^knockdown and drag-out scrap^rather than a settlement However^it was our one chance to save the^day a forlorn hope, indeed and^it behooved me to tackle it for all^I was worth.
Thirtyminutes after he had left^the ^standard Oil^ building, I was^outside Hein/e's big barn of an^office. The man's career had been^one bold, plate glass bluff, and his^surroundings were in vociferous ac^^cord with is character. The door^bore the pretentious names of enter^^prises high-sounding but echoless.^I entered a huge, barren waiting^room paneled in ground glass, from^which other large offices opened,^the largest marked Augustus^Hein/e. Private.^ A few queer^looking men stood about, (ireat,^empty desks, portentious chairs, an^over-thick carpet supplied all the^fimiliar signs of a confidence outfit.^One instinctivelv felt for one's
(Continuedon page 2.)
xml | txt